“I’d ask the governor to rethink his agenda.”

That’s from the Fort Lauderdale mayor, Dean Trantalis, calling out Governor Ron DeSantis.

“New confirmed cases of COVID-19 and resulting hospitalizations are skyrocketing in Florida, and the mayor of Fort Lauderdale would like Governor Ron DeSantis to rethink some of the policies contributing to elevated transmission.

“If there’s an ultimate political agenda trying to appeal to some outlier group thinking that’s going to advance a person politically, I think they’re misjudging what people want.

“And I think that it’s OK to step back. It’s OK to say, ‘all right, maybe we should change course.’

“DeSantis, a staunch Republican who is eyeing a 2024 election bid, enacted policies banning masks in schools and downplayed the latest Delta variant-driven surge while newly confirmed cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rose to new pandemic highs in the state.

‘No one is going to blame anybody for doing the wrong thing because look, in government, we don’t always make the right choices,’ said Trantalis, a Democrat. ‘But we do know that if we do make a wrong choice, we need to live by it, and we need to accept the wrong choice and try to do the right thing. I’d ask the governor to rethink his agenda and try to work with all of the local communities in trying to keep people safe here.” [“Florida mayor: ‘I’d ask the governor to rethink his agenda,’ Adriana Belmonte, Yahoo Finance, 23rd Aug 2021]

Can we Filipinos relate to the above?

Consider: “Manila trails Asean-5 peers in safe cities index, ranks 51st of 60,” Cai Ordinario, BusinessMirror, 23rd Aug 2021.

“WEAK personal and health security made Manila the least safe city compared to other Asian-5 metropolis included in the 2021 Safe Cities Index (SCI) released by the Economist Intelligence Unit (The EIU).

“Based on the data, Manila ranked 51st out of 60 cities in the 2021 SCI with an overall score of 52.5 out of 100. That is below the average score of 66.1 out of 100."

The reality is, Manila can’t even compare to Fort Lauderdale. And we must not.

But shouldn’t we wake up to our reality, not only Manila but the nation?

Consider: “The government can no longer rely on the protectionist instruments of the past and must now muster more positive, enabling measures.

“The focus on industrial catch-up is motivated by the prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry and its profound impact on the country’s labor market.

“Unlike developed countries whose workers have primarily transitioned away from agriculture to industrial and high-skilled services employment, workers in developing countries such as the Philippines have been moving out of low-productivity agriculture towards low-skilled jobs.

“The services sector account for 61% of gross domestic product and six out of 10 workers, but a third in low-paying jobs.

“Meanwhile, elements of its exports sector with a competitive advantage and the number of exporting companies have been declining, making the Philippines a ‘market of consumer goods rather than a hub for manufacturing exports.’

“The country can explore several paths towards economic diversification and upgrading, which includes ‘leapfrogging’ to high-productivity and aiming for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.” [Diversification, Jobs and the COVID-19 Recovery.pdf (un.org)]

That’s why the blog has called out Juan de la Cruz – especially us in the Philippine elite and chattering classes – to reinvent ourselves.

Isn’t the Fort Lauderdale mayor instructive? “No one is going to blame anybody for doing the wrong thing because look, in government, we don’t always make the right choices.”

And we’ve been doing it for decades! Shouldn’t we wake up to our reality?

Our task, compared to the referenced mayor, is more daunting.

It takes a village to pursue freedom and the free market – and traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly.

In other words, how can we move mountains despite no track record – unlike our neighbors?

It takes a village.

Yet, we can’t seem to internalize the premise of freedom and democracy: It is self-government.

But it is not dependent on – nor constrained by – a human construct we call a system.

Our tendency to blame or champion a system falls flat in the face of the dynamism of reality.

“No human formulation of ‘reality,’ no philosophical explanation of human experience can say: ‘I have grasped its entirety and meaning.’ Reality is too rich and is continuously changing; it can’t fall under a set of categories.”

It’s not an American who postulated the above. Those familiar with the blog will recall George, Fr. George Gorospe, a Filipino Jesuit from Ateneo de Manila. It took ages for me to internalize George’s message – despite being close and personal during our “Friday Club’s” cocktails.

Should we be surprised that Juan de la Cruz – our economic managers, our legislators, our economists, us in the chattering classes – can’t grasp the dynamism of reality.

Do we wonder why we haven’t internalized “innovation?”

Innovation is not technology per se – or prescribed mechanics. It comes from the science of “thinking.”

And it explains the 1-% phenomenon. It is not about Wall Street, but the great minds of Einstein and company.

“No one is going to blame anybody for doing the wrong thing.” Because daily life demands logic and incremental thinking – not forward- and lateral thinking, aka creative thinking. Even higher education keeps to “logic” and “incremental” thinking.

On the other hand, if we keep beating a dead horse, Einstein calls it “insanity.” That’s why the blog often brings up Juan Tamad and Bondying.

Of course, even the best and brightest can fall into the “insanity” trap.

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “How the ‘Bobos’ [bourgeois bohemians] Broke America.” [David Brooks, The Atlantic, Sep 2021]

“The bobos didn’t set out to be an elite, dominating class. We just fit ourselves into a system that rewarded a certain type of achievement and then gave our children the resources that would allow them to prosper in that system too. But blind to our power, we have created enormous inequalities—financial inequalities and more painful inequalities of respect. The task before us is to dismantle the system that raised us.”

“Here’s to paraphrase David Brooks, the task before us is to toss our caste system. Yes, the system that raised us.”

Innovation is not technology per se – or prescribed mechanics. It comes from the science of “thinking.”

And the blog often speaks to Steve Jobs. He was a natural when it comes to forward- and lateral thinking. He wanted to make a dent in the universe. How does the universe connect to Apple products? That’s why Jobs defined “creativity” as connecting the dots.

Recall how Japan Inc. upended American manufacturing prowess. They were even ahead in digital technology.

And the family witnessed it in a small Japanese restaurant – before the age of the iPod – when the waiter pulled out his PDA to punch our orders. We were enthralled as we were the first time we saw a sensor-activated faucet in a train station in Switzerland. Both had not yet reached the US of A then.

Yet, the Japanese were held back by the dynamism of reality. And that explains why South Korean electronic brands today dominate the market – no longer Japanese.

Recall the blog related how Steve Jobs tapped a Japanese technology – a hard disc the size of a dollar coin – to create the iPod and killed the Walkman in the process.

Innovation is not technology per se – or prescribed mechanics. It comes from the science of “thinking.” Take connecting the dots.

Otherwise, the Japanese would have been ahead of Apple’s iPod.

Let’s get back to the Philippines and speak to our inability to drive economic growth and development.

We may have invented the equivalent of the hard disc – as the Japanese did – in terms of economic development planning. For example, we like to talk about how Thailand borrowed our economic blueprint – which they successfully implemented while we failed.

In other words, if we Pinoys personify the Walkman, do the Thais represent the iPod?

We can’t even provide the basics of “tubig” and “kuryente.” Think about it.

Recall my Eastern European friends: “The European Business Awards takes great pleasure in congratulating you and your team on your amazing success. Every year the European Business Awards research team spends six months analyzing over 15,000 companies across Europe to seek out the very best businesses that demonstrate the guiding principles of the Awards: Commercial success, Innovation, Business Ethics. You demonstrated them in your drive for growth – and the impact is across the business.”

In the short span of eight years, an MSME with very little capital that was a losing proposition – not a surprise since they’re unfamiliar with the free market but born and raised as socialists – bested over 15,000 companies across Europe. Beyond commercial success, they demonstrated the knack for innovation plus the discipline implicit in business ethics.

How did they do it? Forward- and lateral thinking. That’s why a Western bank extended them a facility. The bank saw through their unique ability – which they had to develop rapidly.

And that can be a lesson for Philippine MSMEs: How does an MSME even imagine becoming a one-hundred-million-dollar enterprise competing against Western behemoths? Today, they are way beyond that supposedly unimaginable goal.

Consider: They did not think of innovation as technology per se – or prescribed mechanics.

They had set a one-hundred-million-dollar revenue goal because that was then the median size of a typical Fortune 500 subsidiary – i.e., they had to be of equal “size” to stand toe-to-toe and succeed. And then they figured the product categories and specific products that will get them to nirvana in a flash – and deliver healthy margins to boot.

But that presupposes they had to develop a keen understanding of human needs and quickly develop an innovation sense – i.e., innovation is not for “innovation’s” sake.

In other words, if economic development is beyond economics, innovation is beyond R&D. It is multidisciplinary and multidimensional. It is a grand display of the egalitarian ethos.

Sadly, in the Philippines, because of our caste system, we can’t think out-of-the-box. We pull rank instinctively. Recall the late Anacleto del Rosario. “If that’s how much knowledge you have in your brain, everything else just goes to waste.”

There is no free lunch. We must sweat it out to learn forward- and lateral thinking.

But we’re too “smart” for our “own good” that we won’t learn from others – even our neighbors.

Here’s again a quote from an earlier posting.

“We must generate much more economic output. 

“And we need it in a hurry, like yesterday. That is why the blog has raised the imperative to raise Philippine GDP by $200 billion rapidly. That is what the IRR for CREATE and SIPP must deliver.

“Why? To leapfrog the economic output of our neighbors — which is why they were able to put poverty in the rearview mirror.”

“Question: Do we have to amend the Constitution to leverage CREATE and SIPP to (1) put us on equal footing with our neighbors; (2) attract the suitable foreign money and technology; (3) that will aggressively drive our export receipts – i.e., benchmark against Samsung Vietnam because Vietnam arrested poverty?

“That must be the debate amongst our economic managers and legislators, not to keep to a 6%-7% GDP growth rate mantra. “Recall the GPS model: Where are we; Where do we want to be; How do we get there.

“We must free ourselves from this prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry. Not sing hosanna to our top companies. 

“We haven’t cut it!”

“How do we learn from Mahathir? How can we be both tactical and strategic?

“For example, setting our goal “To raise Philippine GDP by $200 billion rapidly” will clear the cobwebs in our heads.

“Let’s toss our ‘sabog’ instinct for now. 

But can we? Or is parochial and insular dominant in Juan de la Cruz’s makeup that we don’t need a Machiavelli to divide us? And why do we love tyranny?

Look at how we celebrate LGUs and the Mandanas law. Do they confirm that we can’t define and forge a “common good”? 

And that makes the following exercise beyond our reach as Filipinos — i.e., it presupposes a collective will?

“Do we have to amend the Constitution to leverage CREATE and SIPP to (1) put us on equal footing with our neighbors; (2) attract the suitable foreign money and technology; (3) that will aggressively drive our export receipts – i.e., benchmark against Samsung Vietnam because Vietnam arrested poverty?

“If we are brainstorming, we would ask: What products will aggressively drive our export receipts? Think of Samsung Vietnam and how they deliver more economic benefits than our top eight companies combined.

“That is also what the UN policy brief is saying. We must leapfrog to high productivity and aim for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.

“And Vietnam translated that by luring Samsung smartphones and then Apple AirPods.

“That is how we must rack our brains – not doing 50 or so industry road maps.

“Once we figure out the products that will deliver us $200 billion, we must plot how to attract suitable foreign money and technology.

“And if we stack the products that will generate the $200-billion number together with our current GDP drivers, we should be able to figure out (1) what we need infrastructure-wise and (2) where we need them, and (3) including the power-source profile. 

“But why do we struggle to think out-of-the-box?

“Consider our instincts: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.”

As Rizal said, we submit to tyranny because we love it.

Let’s hold it right there.

The following, a contemporary concept, confirms what Rizal articulated over a hundred years ago. That’s how brilliant this Filipino was. Recall that it took humankind over a hundred years to demonstrate Einstein’s relativity theory.

Enter: Karen Stenner, a behavioral economist. “She postulates that about a third of the population in any country has an authoritarian predisposition. It favors homogeneity and order. Its opposite is libertarian predisposition – one that favors diversity and difference.

“Authoritarianism is not political, nor is it the same thing as conservatism. It simply appeals to people that cannot tolerate complexity.

“There is nothing intrinsically left-wing or right-wing; it is anti-pluralist. It is a frame of mind, not a set of ideas.

“But they need people who will give voice to grievances, manipulate discontent, channel anger, and fear, and imagine a different future.

“They need members of the intellectual and educated elite — who will help them launch a war on the rest of the intellectual and educated elite, even if that includes their university classmates, their colleagues, and their friends.” [“The twilight of democracy: The seductive allure of authoritarianism,” Anne Applebaum; Double Day, 2020]

Do we recognize why Trump continues to draw a big chunk of Americans?

What about us in the Philippines? Are we in the Philippine elite and chattering classes falling into the trap of authoritarianism? That we submit to tyranny? Have we unwittingly aided and abetted authoritarian predisposition? 

He who submits to tyranny loves it.

Does that apply to us in the Philippine elite and chattering classes? Given our caste system, do we pull rank to reinforce our instincts and value system?

And where has it led us? The laughingstock of the region, if not the world? 

“No human formulation of ‘reality,’ no philosophical explanation of human experience can say: ‘I have grasped its entirety and meaning.’ Reality is too rich and is continuously changing; it can’t fall under a set of categories.”

Sadly, we don’t have the predisposition to reinvent ourselves.

Gising bayan!