That is how much this nation wasted in human development and capital. How come?
Let’s hold it right there.
Because winners, on the other hand, gain an advantage – from a “positive spirit to disciplined focus to mutual respect among members to lots of practice on the details to lasting support systems,” among others. [“Ten reasons why winners keep on winning, aside from skill,” Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Harvard Business Review, 1st Aug 2012]
And here we are, the elite class, professing “absolute knowledge” to add insult to injury. How come? We don’t gain the advantage as winners do, yet we assume otherwise.
Ever wonder why the blog references Padre Damaso? As if on cue, a young journalist organized lunch at Pia y Damaso in Greenbelt 5 to meet up with the writer during the family’s annual homecoming a few years ago.
Consider: “Countries at UN should be bold, principled on PH,” Laila Matar, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14th Sep 2020; Laila Matar is the deputy United Nations director for Human Rights Watch, based in Geneva.
“The boldness of a small country with no ax to grind against the Philippine government — acting solely out of its commitment to human rights—elicited widespread admiration from rights advocates everywhere.
“Last year in Geneva, Iceland put the Philippines in the hot seat at the United Nations Human Rights Council for its murderous ‘war on drugs.’
“Iceland wasn’t fazed by President Duterte’s popularity or by Malacañang’s threats. It simply stood against the brutality of the ‘drug war’ and the deaths of thousands of Filipinos — and demanded international scrutiny. When the council convenes its session today, other countries will do well to follow Iceland’s principled example.”
Is this another reminder of Padre Damaso? That he is omnipotent?
“Padre Dámaso is a fictional character in Rizal’s novel, Noli Me Tángere (Touch Me Not or ‘Social Cancer’.)
“It is a controversial and anticlerical novel that exposed the Spanish friars’ abuses and the Spanish elite in the colonial Philippines during the 19th century.
“The novel, according to Rizal, represented the state of Philippine society under Spanish colonial rule. It was a liberal-nationalist wake-up call for the people of the Philippines.
"Dámaso was later revealed to be the biological father of María Clara. María Clara's mother, Doña Pía Alba, and Don Santiago de los Santos had been trying to conceive a child when Padre Dámaso raped Doña Pia." [Wikipedia]
Has Juan de la Cruz been desensitized that we cry “sovereignty and nationalism” against Iceland and the UNHRC?
And have we in the elite class, unwittingly become the present-day Padre Damaso?
How much more poverty can we accept just outside our gated communities? Or even inside. Those caddies are at our beck and call, on their toes the moment our cars pull by the “drop bag” area. To be treated like royalty is desensitizing, indeed.
Consider: “What do you see (?),” Gary Burnison, Korn Ferry CEO, email, 13th Sept 2020. “Is the world getting smaller, or is it our minds?
“Look at the photo on the right, what do you see? [In the original email, there is this photo.] Do you notice an ‘elderly’ man, ambling, carrying something in his right hand—a cane, perhaps? Narrow perceptions, though, can be far from reality.
“We need a corrective lens. I can remember when I was growing up in Kansas, and there was a solar eclipse. Every kid heard the same warning—at school, at home: don’t look at the sun!
“So, when my uncle told me he could show me the eclipse, I wasn’t sure what to expect. Then he took out a tall paper cup and used a small nail to punch a round hole in the bottom.
“Standing on the street, he turned the cup upside down, used the hole like an aperture in a camera to project the solar eclipse image on a piece of paper. I was amazed! That tiny pinhole was the gateway to the entire universe.
“It’s analogous to what we’re experiencing in today’s shrinking world—and we’re trying to peer through a pinhole. We need to adjust our lens—tapping Google Earth as we zoom out before zooming in. Otherwise, we’ll never imagine tomorrow’s promise when tomorrow, at first, might myopically appear like today.
“Over the past few months, the world hasn’t become smaller—but perhaps our perspective has.
“Look at the picture again. The man isn’t just walking down the street. He is a jazz saxophonist, making music for the benefit of others.
“To truly see the entire picture, we must escape the attic of our minds. As much as we hate to admit it, we are quick to judge and make assumptions. It takes about seven seconds for us to form an opinion about others—even in job interviews. Is it fair? Not. But it is a sad truth about human nature.
“To widen our lens, the starting point should be humility, which can serve as our guide. We see beyond our insularity into a bigger world—a world that’s not about us. It’s about others.”
On the other hand, consider: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism that we rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.
What do we see? Do we see Juan de la Cruz as impoverished given he makes a fraction of what we do? And so, do we view the world through our lenses – e.g., the need for self-actualization, as the desire for happiness – while Juan de la Cruz needs something more basic and physiological?
But his chances are next to none if we take our national income as “pwede na ‘yan” even if we assure him that the Philippines will be a middle-income economy sometime in the future. He will be no different from a malnourished adolescent.
How can we take the status quo as a given when we know full well over 10 million Filipinos had to choose the fate of an OFW?
Are we desensitized by the reality of Juan de la Cruz that we can brag about a strong economy driven by OFW remittances?
And because of this windfall, we can confidently look into the future because we in the elite class don’t have to suffer the social costs these families do?
Let’s pause once more.
Think about how our caste system rendered us blind to the poverty we claim we are fighting.
We cannot be an island unto ourselves and pretend to traverse the road from poverty to prosperity as our neighbors did. They begged for Western money and technology and then awed their benefactors with their tiger economies. In contrast, we perpetuate the oligarchy and political patronage.
As the blog has argued, this universe is one of dynamism and interdependence, and it applies even to wealthy nations. And that principles must define norms of conduct. The operative word is principles.
Unsurprisingly, The Economist (5th Sep 2020) asserts, while acknowledging Prime Minister Boris Johnson remains strong, his government has gained a dangerous reputation for incompetence.”
Meanwhile, “Tony Blair and John Major, former British prime ministers, castigated the current government for ‘embarrassing the UK’ with proposed Brexit legislation that would override parts of the withdrawal agreement struck with the European Union.” [The Economist, Espresso, 14th Sep 2020]
Why the concern? Because even with the recent UK-Japan trade deal, it remains imperative for the UK to win an EU pact post-Brexit. [The Editorial Board, Financial Times, 13th Sep 2020]
Translation: Even a wealthy nation isn’t exempt from interdependence, the very nature of this universe.
Let’s reprise the following spiel:
“Over the past few months, the world hasn’t become smaller—but perhaps our perspective has.
“To truly see the entire picture, we must escape the attic of our minds.
“To widen our lens, the starting point should be humility, which can serve as our guide. We see beyond our insularity into a bigger world—a world that’s not about us. It’s about others.”
The good news for Juan de la Cruz is the world doesn’t starve from wisdom and knowledge in how to traverse the road from poverty to prosperity.
But it presupposes that we stop to see the world through our prisms. Still, it is not a cakewalk.
Look at how we (1) set ourselves up to be the regional laggard and (2) at risk in the South China Sea.
We must question our instincts and world view and learn from others – that can show us the way forward development-wise – so that principles will define our conduct.
Parochialism and insularity have undermined this nation’s future, beyond Philippine trade and foreign relations. It can only get worse for succeeding generations.
And they include even those of ours in the elite class. What privileges are we preserving when the nation is a laughingstock, a pariah nation?
We live in a dynamic universe characterized by interdependence. Neither rich nor developing nations can be self-absorbed.
“Progress depends on openness, but this tends to create resistance that sets back the clock. [Point to human nature.]
“IT WAS NOT just roads that led to Rome. The shipping lanes did, too. By the first century BC, Rome had conquered the entire Mediterranean coastline.
“The Roman Empire prospered because it was open to trade, people, and ideas. Galleys (slaves rowing in a galley) brought all the crafts that exist or have existed. Foreigners could become citizens; a slave’s son could (occasionally) rise to become emperor.
“The Roman Empire ceased to prosper when it stopped to be open. Christianity became the established religion and sought to crush all others.
“This new intolerance led to vicious conflicts between Christians and pagans, who saw their old gods banned. And their temples were torn down. Persecuted pagans joined Rome’s enemies, even welcoming barbarian invaders as liberators.
“Human history is a cacophony of drawbridges being lowered and then raised.
“Mathematics and medicine flourished under the cosmopolitan Abbasid caliphate but froze when religious conservatives won control.
“By driving out Jews, Muslims, and heretics, the Inquisition helped impoverish Spain (between 1500 and 1750 the Spanish economy shrank).
“China’s Song dynasty, which welcomed Muslim traders, Indian monks, and Persians, developed paper money, water-powered textile machines, and the makings of an industrial revolution 400 years before the West.
“But later dynasties turned inward and stagnated. Ming officials smashed smart machines, banned overseas trade on pain of death, and curbed movement inside China. The Manchus were even worse: to prevent contact with the outside world, in 1661, they forced the whole population of the southern coast to move 30km inland.
“A century later, the Qianlong emperor banned or burned any books that seemed sympathetic to previous dynasties, including a great encyclopedia of economic and technical matters.
“Genghis Khan was a vicious warlord, but today’s domestic policies would open him up to accusations of being a politically correct, latte-drinking virtue signaler.’
“The Mongols practiced ethnic and religious tolerance, which is one reason why they were so effective. They promoted skilled fighters, engineers, and administrators of all backgrounds. Of the 150,000-strong horde that invaded Europe in 1241, only around a third were ethnic Mongols.
“Habsburg soldiers were surprised to find that one captured officer was a middle-aged literate Englishman, who had fled persecution for heresy at home and sought refuge among the more open-minded Mongols.
“All regions have had rulers who tried to preserve stability by shutting out foreign influence. The key to thwarting them has often been for the ruled to vote with their feet.
“Early modern Europe was no more advanced than China, but power was more dispersed, so thinkers who offended one prince could merely move.
“Hobbes wrote ‘Leviathan’ while in exile in Paris; Locke and Descartes went to Amsterdam. Their books could always see print somewhere, and so were impossible to suppress.
“Backlashes against openness are inevitable because they are rooted in human nature.
“Human brains evolved over millennia in which disruptive change often meant death; mutually beneficial exchanges with strangers were rare.
“If we compress the past 300,000 years of history into a single day, it would not be until the final minute that steady material “progress,” fueled by disruptive innovation, took off. Small wonder people’s instincts reflect conservative bias.
“When threatened, they seek shelter within their tribe, so demagogues try to scare them. Fear wins elections.
“Populist demagogues eventually lose power because they are hopeless at governing. Four in ten wind up indicted for corruption, by one count. Citizens get used to ‘change.’ Today, American Muslims are as tolerant of transgender people as in 2006. The open society ‘may yet be saved.’
“If America made both child-rearing and immigration easier, its population could in time swell to 1bn. It would thus remain the pre-eminent power, outstripping China and India. A bigger America would make for a more innovative and democratic world.
“But wouldn’t an America of 1bn people be crowded? No, it would be as sparse as France is now. Even popular cities could accommodate many more residents if building codes were less restrictive. Enlightened visa rules could revive declining towns. Congestion will ease with policies that have worked elsewhere, from road pricing to better railways.
“That is swimming against the tide. Consider: a recent immigration bill backed by Donald Trump is so restrictive that it would not let Kazuo Ishiguro, a British Nobel prizewinner, apply for a work visa unless his job paid at least $240,000.
“Yet, political tides can change.” [“Lowering the drawbridge: Two books expound the virtues of open societies,” The Economist, 12th Sep 2020; Johan Norberg sees openness as an engine of ‘progress.’ Matthew Yglesias wants to open up America.]
Recall the blog argues that moving from one age to another always confound humankind. However, ever since the banishment from the garden or the migration from Africa, it showed the capacity to adapt.
The Creator saw the creation story as good. Shooting for the moon was deemed an impossibility, yet humankind has already walked its grounds.
Translation: Juan de la Cruz can’t stay a pauper.
Gising bayan!
“Here is a land in which a few are spectacularly rich while the masses remain abjectly poor. And where freedom and its blessings are a reality for a minority and an illusion for the many. Here is a land consecrated to democracy but run by an entrenched plutocracy, dedicated to equality but mired in an archaic system of caste.
“But the fault was chiefly their own. Filipinos profess the love of country, but love themselves – individually – more.” [Ninoy Aquino, Foreign Affairs magazine, July 1968; Stanley Karnow, New York Times Magazine, “Cory Aquino’s Downhill Slide,” 19th Aug 1990.]
“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? Moreover, that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]
“True social reform has little to do with politics. To unmoor ourselves from the burdens of the past, we must be engaged in the act of continual and conscious self-renewal. All men are partially buried in the grave of custom. Even virtue is no longer such if it is stagnant.
“Change begins when we finally choose to examine critically and then recalibrate the ill-serving codes and conventions handed down to us, often unquestioned, by the past and its power structures. It is essentially an act of imagination first.” [David Henry Thoreau; American essayist, poet, and philosopher; 1817-1862]
“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists. [A] nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]
“You have to have a dream, whether big or small. Then plan, focus, work hard, and be very determined to achieve your goals.” [Henry Sy Sr., Chairman Emeritus and Founder, SM Group (1924 - 2019)]
“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]
“Development is informed by a people’s worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]
“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]
“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists, and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]
No comments:
Post a Comment