Sturdy mindset

How do we teach ourselves – my generation and Juan de la Cruz, too – new tricks?

Consider: “We – the Baby Boomers and Generation X – failed to accomplish [for the Philippines] to achieve the status of an advanced economy.” [“2050 take me there,” (Part 4), Bernardo M. Villegas, The Human Side of Economics, BusinessWorld, 19th Oct 2021]

That’s why the blog is recycling the above title, “Sturdy mindset.”

Those familiar with the blog will remember the 3C’s of a sturdy mindset: Challenge, Commitment, Control.

What science says is that a sturdy mindset is crucial if we are to overcome life’s challenges.

First off, we must accept the challenge. And then make a personal commitment to step up to the plate. Control is trickier because it says that we have no control over others; we can only control ourselves.

And that’s doubly hard in a caste system like ours, and we assume we control those lower in the hierarchy.

Of course, in US politics, polarization makes progress brutal. One side can’t control the other and so why not just hate them.

Let’s digress a bit to build on “hating those from opposing tribes.”

Recall that US politics completely turned me off. And so when a family friend invited us to hear a mayoral candidate in our suburban New York town, his spiel was to intrigue me:

“He is unaffiliated. He is not beholden to either side. He is not a politician. I grew up with him in this town. He is a famous sports personality and has managed world-caliber teams, including Japanese. As important, he has organized and successfully run businesses too. He can build teams, consensus and is a change agent. Every undertaking he pursued was supposedly a ‘mission impossible.’ Think of the Japanese embracing an American manager.” 

And he conveyed more when he spoke to a group of neighbors over cocktails:

“I grew up with my mother telling me not to hate anyone. How can even young Americans hate people they don’t know because they are either a Red or a Blue?

“It’s a long shot. But aren’t we going to be proud if we can upend polarization in America? Do you know that when people realized who I am, they came to endorse me? The Republican candidate even pulled out of the race and supported me. We know ours is a Democratic bastion, and to win, you must be a Democrat. But I always embrace the impossible.

“I challenged my Democratic opponent to sign a pact that we shall only debate issues; no negative campaigning. She did not immediately sign the agreement, and on the day she signed it, she threw a couple of negative ads against me. But I take things in stride; I cannot hate anyone.

[There was a question about why an old-dilapidated bridge has remained so for ages.] “Do you know why? There has been an approved appropriation to fix that bridge for over ten years, but both sides can’t agree on the purpose and design.

“My term starts on 1st Dec, and the first thing I will do is speak to both sides of the aisle. I am neither of you, and you cannot hate me. But you and I are here running our town because we want this town to move forward, which is our reason for being. And I want to make sure the media gets that and reports that instead of adding fuel to the political divide.

“And so everyone will be focused on making progress for this town, not hating each other.”

Isn’t that a great example of the 3C’s of a hardy mindset? He (1) accepts the challenge of his town; (2) commits to step up to the plate; and (3) recognizes that he “controls” only himself that he must not hate anyone.

Consider: Because of the survival instinct, humans would point the finger away from ourselves. How many would blame their parents for their failings in life? What about the case of Juan de la Cruz? Our colonizers lorded it over us.

And while we like to give credit to the Catholic Church for our positives, the reality is that our caste system mirrors that of the Church.

“In her autobiography, Dorothy Day (1897–1980; the Church has opened the cause for her possible canonization, which was accepted by the Holy See for investigation. For that reason, the Church refers to her with the title of Servant of God) paraphrased theologian Romano Guardini by lamenting, ‘the Church is the Cross on which Christ died.’ Doesn’t that hurt? And yet, maybe it’s true. In many ways, the institutional Church does not seem to believe its own Gospel.

“It wasn’t always this way, but starting in 313 CE, Christianity gradually became the imperial religion of the Roman Empire. It was mostly top-down and hierarchical for the next 1700 years. As the ‘imperial mind’ took over, religion had less to do with Jesus’ teachings on nonviolence, inclusivity, forgiveness, and simplicity. Instead, it became fully complicit in the world of domination, power, war, and greed itself.

“Lay theologian and educator Verna Dozier (1917–2006) highlights some of the significant shifts that took place when Christianity became an imperial religion:

“It is hard for us to understand what happened to the people of God under Constantine. Indeed the Church got a breathing space from persecution. Constantine dreamed of restoring the ancient glory of the empire, and he believed that Christianity was the way. Constantine himself was not changed; the Church was. It became the imperial Church. Christian worship began to be influenced by imperial protocol. Incense, the sign of respect for the emperor, began to appear in Christian churches. Ministers began dressing in more luxurious garments, processions and choirs developed, and eventually, the congregation became less active in the worship.

“More important than any of this, however, was the kind of theology that developed. The Gospel of good news to the poor now saw riches and pomp as signs of divine favor. The coming kingdom of God was no longer a fundamental theme. In the view of Eusebius [c. 260–c. 340; the father of church history], Constantine and his successors fulfilled the plan of God. Beyond the current political order, all that Christians can hope for is their transference into the heavenly kingdom.” [Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, Center for Action and Contemplation, 17th Oct 2021]

The bottom line: Before Big Bad Wolf America conquered us, the Church already resided in Juan de la Cruz. Unsurprisingly, Rizal called us out for loving and embracing tyranny.

Yet, as the Vietnamese demonstrated, nothing can stop them from moving forward as a nation. And so, Vietnam is the latest Asian Tiger. It’s sickening to keep hearing that the US military dropped more bombs on Vietnam than all the wars combined.

But how do we wake up Juan Tamad or Bondying or Padre Damaso?

Recall 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.

If Juan de la Cruz does not have our capacity to navigate the binary and relative thinking continuum, doesn’t it fall upon us – the Philippine elite and chattering classes – to demonstrate a hardy mindset: Challenge, Commitment, Control?

That’s why the blog keeps raising the following:

“Democracy comes with the imperative of leadership, a critical element in self-government that presupposes personal responsibility and an egalitarian ethos.

“An egalitarian ethos is a virtue, and paternalism is not. That explains why we love tyranny and submit to it.

“To recap: The $200 billion in additional GDP [we must seek] comes from mapping back from the concept of traversing poverty to prosperity rapidly.

“Why? To leapfrog the economic output of our neighbors and match their ability to invest in education, health care – to name just two.

[Consider: We want to raise the (percentage) tax revenues allocated to education, but an equation has two sides. Even if we match Thailand and Malaysia, given our national income per capita, Thailand will still invest over two times more and Malaysia over three times more. That represents how much wealthier their GDP is per capita-wise, and my mother cannot figure that out. What is surprising is that even our quants indulge in this insanity. And that is what we’re doing as we get deeper into propping up LGUs. LGUs need money, but the crab mentality is not the answer.

[Or take Davao or Bhutan as best-practice models so that we don’t think about national income. That is worse than insanity. Recall that I called out the CFO of my old MNC-company for falling into the trap of Wall Street metrics, i.e., ratios. That is too academic, which comes in handy in the absence of experience – as in “cognitive development.”

[Or take democracy as the culprit behind our poverty. That is worse than the worst. Why not talk about the Asian Tigers. What is their common denominator? Begging for Western money and technology; not this or that “ism.”

[Because we’re the Philippine elite, we want to talk about a sophisticated nation like America. But America is in its post-industrialization age. We can’t even get “Arangkada” going. We keep comparing apples and oranges. Why? Because we are Juan Tamad, Bondying, and Padre Damaso rolled into one?]

“And if we drill down on the $200 billion, that must be the aggregate revenues we want from (1) FDIs and foreign technology; (2) the eight top companies; (3) the priority industries from the scores of roadmaps we are working on, and that will include agribusiness and the top MSMEs.

“In all cases, the exercise will mirror the agenda of the newly elected president: To preside over Philippine Inc. by doggedly pursuing commercial success, innovation and be a paragon of good governance, not a culture of impunity.

“For example, export products – agri or not – must satisfy the competitiveness and marketability metrics (aka “outcome” — see above; Theory of Change). Even Steve Jobs did his homework by figuring out how innovative companies can create a continual portfolio of winning products globally.

“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”

How do we teach ourselves – my generation and Juan de la Cruz, too – new tricks?

Consider: “We – the Baby Boomers and Generation X – failed to accomplish [for the Philippines] to achieve the status of an advanced economy.” [“2050 take me there,” (Part 4), Bernardo M. Villegas, The Human Side of Economics, BusinessWorld, 19th Oct 2021]

That’s why the blog is recycling the above title, “Sturdy mindset.”

Those familiar with the blog will remember the 3C’s of a sturdy mindset: Challenge, Commitment, Control.

What science says is that a sturdy mindset is crucial if we are to overcome life's challenges.

First off, we must accept the challenge. And then make a personal commitment to step up to the plate. Control is trickier because it says that we have no control over others; we can only control ourselves.

And that’s doubly hard in a caste system like ours, and we assume we control those lower in the hierarchy.

Gising bayan!