Again GabbyD asks the right questions here:
the real problem for a society is: given we are different, what brings us together? what makes us a group? whats common among us? and how is this commonality determined?
So you see, all roads of Pinoy discussion ultimately lead to these questions.
In summary:
What does the “Filipino” stand for?
What exactly are we other than a vast farm for breeding labourers?
Are we known for any significant collective achievement of consequence?
The concept of Filipino is a sand dune upon which we are trying to build a socio-politico-economic house of cards. As such, we discuss all these things about the technicalities of how the nation should be constituted — whether it be secular, Christianic, Islamic, El Shaddaic, democratic, autocratic, federalist, whatever; but at the end of the day, the underlying issue of what we collectively stand for remains unanswered — a poignant reminder to ALL OF US that NOTHING significant has been achieved as a people collectively.
Kinda makes one understand now why our deluded ha-ha attempts at self-actualisation keep falling apart year after year and why no political parties that stand for anything of consequence ever endures in our society, doesn’t it?
The only solid foundation of what “the Philippines” is can be found in a royal edict made 400 years ago (be a delight and tell us the exact date and year, Dean ;) ) — when a group of volcanic rocks and coral reefs were named after an evil (as the movie Elizabeth would have us believe) Spanish king.
We’d be fortunate enough to be footnotes in a detailed three-inch-thick Almanac of the 20th Century. But when pressed to condense the 20th Century into an Executive Summary, history writers will simply overlook our quaint lot.
The key word here is substance. And Pinoys utterly lack it. Trying to build a political shell around a philosophical void is like trying to build an economy around a non-existent capital base. All you need is a tiny pin to pop the pretty pink balloon.
It’s simple, really™
============
Join us on Facebook!
Popularity: 3% [?]
It is not my style to brag. That being said, i do receive some compliments about the Philippines and Filpinos from Singaporeans. One said that she enjoys working with her Filipino colleagues (whenever she visits the Philippine office) because while we [Filipinos] are serious about work, we still retain a measure of warmth and people-orientation. Another Singaporean a few years back appreciate our disposition towards music while another one marvelled on our courage to criticize our political leaders. That’s why i don’t give much weight to Benign0′s criticisms since he wants us to get rid of traits that others consider positive (i.e. compassion/warmth, love for music and political courage).
to rego: surely you could say four or five sentences if you were talking to a New Yorker or if you were to be interviewed by a reporter from Cuba or South Korea…
if you want to present the Philippines or the Filipino spirit in a positive light, what would you say?
—
That is why I want to hear from DJB and Abe Margallo. They are oldtimers — more years/more opportunities to hear comments from Americans and other foreigners.
————
And would you believe that Malaysia has won more Olympic event medals than the Philippines? Or is it the Philippines that has won more medals than Malaysia?
UPn,
Honestly nahihirapan ako sabihin kubg ano ang positive sa Pinoy. But most of my non Pinoy clients would ask referrals for a pinoy that can work in their house. I have this German freind who is a prefessor on Real Estate Development in NYU who one day ask me if I can get him some Pinoys to work him. I ask him why the preferrence for Pinoys. And he points at me. But I told him that I cannot guarantee that all Pinoys are like me.
I also have one client, a Scottish and Italian couple, He is a Princeton Grad and Professor In Columbia U and she is a designer. The both have nothing but good words for Pinoys that work with . One time over dinner, they were asking me what and how is Filipino food like whatr and where is the best Filipino restaurant in the City . I find it defiiclut to answer them. answer it and I was not able to reccomend one restaurant.
I have a feeling that we dont really have say much about our being Filipino. We just have to show them what and who we are.
So what does Filipino stand for? Each of us! How we deal with people, how we behave private and in public etc etc how with talked with other people , defines being Filipino. Rizal does not and cannot define being Filipino, neither do Leah Salonga, Many Pacquiao and Charice. Its EACH OF US who defines and will redefine being Filipino!
@ UPn
i think you were being constructive here on :[UP n grad on January 31st, 2009 1:21 am]
“I’ll re-print how this blogthread began, because I do want to hear a few folks to give their perspective (less on why benign0 is a jerk) but more on if they believe that benigno is either TOTALLY-wrong/ or GENERALLY-wrong or OCCASIONALLY-wrong.”
i think bening0′s posts (of this kind) are wrong generally. not because they arent in some sense factually correct. in fact he is trivially correct — in the strict materialist sense we are all breeding farms of labor.
he is wrong because he is focusing on the wrong thing.
serious self-reflection has two parts: 1) understanding the present and 2) working to change the future.
the first problem is that he looks at only one side of the present — the bad side, as noted by everyone here. hence, its not an honest appraisal of the good things and the bad.
but the problem is deeper than that. we can say something stronger about self-reflection: we do (1) to do (2) better. the reason is the future is always more important that the present, if only because, we can change the future.
Example:
when we are young, we don’t judge ourselves accomplishments or how other people view us. what we should do is ask: what kind of person do i want to be.
same with countries. america, at one point asks, what kind of country do i want to be. and then it goes and works on it.
and keeps on working on it, self-improvement is a going concern.
so i say that it doesn’t matter what people say, even though clearly we have good things going for us.
benj’s post on secular society is about self-reflection. it asks: what kind of society should we have (note the emphasis on the future!). it was a decent question because it wants to talk about what kind of a society we should have/should want to have, VS the society we have now.
i asked that question in benj’s post about a secular society to ask the questions needed to move forward. Why do want a secular society? what brings us together as a secular society? Who/What decides on the values needed to make social decisions?
but of course, because they were in a feel good campaign trail. geez. and so, if i say the japanese are generally honest, you will have to contest this perception because perhaps obama and clinton also used the term to feed the soul of the voting public.
question: saang bansa ka madalas makakakita ng komedya sa harap ng trahedya?
a turkish friend of mine often attends filipino gatherings because to her, the filipinos are happy people. the companionship is enough to uplift her spirit.
–rego
translation: the universe revolves around the pinoy. or should it be, pinoys are self-centred.
“I have this German freind who is a prefessor on Real Estate Development in NYU who one day ask me if I can get him some Pinoys to work him. I ask him why the preferrence for Pinoys. And he points at me. But I told him that I cannot guarantee that all Pinoys are like me.”-rego
Sayang! One rare chance that could have resulted to greater things for some kababayans and the country lost forever.
“Sayang! One rare chance that could have resulted to greater things for some kababayans and the country lost forever”.
O yeah sayang din talaga sa sayang, But if I recommend a pinoy to him and that pinoys messes up ako naman ang nalintikan. Sorry but how I belive and what I belive. Thats is the reason why I still have business with the Profesor until now.
But that’s one business opportunity you have missed because if the Pinoy you could have recommended turned out to be like yourself your business with the Profesor could have doubled, or perhaps tenfold, who knows.
But what if it turn-out that he isn’t like me? And I dont know any Pinoy then that do busisnes the way do that that professor like about me?. So I believe I just did the right thing when I advise him to advertise in a filipino newspaper and enterview people instead of me bringing people to him that he may or may not like.
I got to the professor becuase I answer his ad not becuase soem pinoy bring me to him. So any pinoy can bring himslf to him without using me as a padrino or reference.
Rego, that is extremely shortsighted and betrays a lack of self confidence in your abilities.
A lot of applicants for jobs are requested to show references.
You betray a fear of rejection and a low self esteem.
Do you use a skin whitening cream?
I have recommended many of people for jobs and have always advised the employers to make their own judgments.
Not to cast judgment but Rego’s choice does reveal the individualistic character of Filipinos. Other nationalities would probably have taken the communitarian approach.
Filipinos would have taken the communitarian approach. Rego is a rare case.
a vast farm for breeding not just laborers, but benign0s is what i suggested back in 2004 in “circle to circle”.
http://www.pcij.org/imag/Yearend2004/generations.html
in a sense its nice to know five years later, benigno sees it too.
but theres no such thing as an unstoppable trajectory. korea was a benignoesque basket case until modern industrialization was created through a combination of authoritarian repression and people power resistance.
collective achievements can be seen many ways too, an older generation of australians considered the survival of australia as a non-invaded bulwark of resistance to the japanese, an achievement of the filipinos.
i point out my article in the context of benignos minimum opus only insofar as his derivative point -that individually, experts and pundits whether self proclaimed or attributed as such by others, are more often than not, individually wrong , but taken collectively, are capable of hitting on the right qestion or solution or merely stumbling on the right track.
these are points pointed out and fetishized in the black swan and the wisdom of crowds and other highly influential books.
ayaw lang nang may kahati sa attensyon. ang pinoy, bow.
baga kasi mahihigitan. ang pinoy, bow.
It was, mlq. But Korea has a 1000-year-old underlying culture, just like Greater China, Japan, Thailand, and even the up-and-coming Indochinese states. The Korean war is just a blip in its history just like the last 100-200 or so years in China was. Viewed over such timescales, you will see how much these ancient cultures have achieved. Their equivalent of minor set backs and “down-turns” (decades of grief to younger countries such as ours and even the U.S.) are century-long dramas. So you can say the Korean War and its subsequent impoverishment of Korea (as is Japan’s own experience after WW2) is an even more minor blip from the perspective of such cultures.
I do of course agree that trajectories can be changed. Which is why said trajectory should be pointed out and highlighted ad infinitum until evidence of a change in said trajectory can be found.
Tell that to the North Koreans.
the culture you speak of so glowingly in such neo darwinian terms is not a culture compatible with your criticism of ours. where inequality nd corruption are taken for granted -and where confucianism might actually be retarding progress. again this is the criticism of southeast asia and the cronyism in malaysia and the oligarchy in singapore, but you’ve read “asian godfathers”. so im just curious whether you have decided to extoll confucianism or its singaporean variation, asian values, or still espouse western values, with its rule of law, etc. it would be interesting where you differ from either or are trying to create a hybrid of both.
because by purely asian values the philippines is on par with or even better than many of its neighbors as een by lucio tan investments in china, salim groups reliance on filipino managers, etc but those standards of success wouldnt give a rats ass about the hovels and such you use as an indictment of your former country.
mlq3, the best way I’d answer your question given the options you provide is to choose the latter — a hybrid of both.
If you had left the question open-ended, I’d say that what I’d extoll is setting a trajectory that is based on the nature and character of our people (kind of like the way LKY charted a course based on his own clear understanding of 1950′s Singapore’s unique circumstances).
The contrast I make is in the way we try to pull out shrinkwrapped and labelled packages from the ideology supermarket and try to apply it to our lot.
Lets say, for discussion’s sake, we decide to build upon the observation I make in this article — “a vast farm for breeding labourers”. If we accept this and decide to be guided by the reality of this circumstance when building solutions, then we avoid further waste in precious resources channeled towards initiatives that run contrary to this circumstance.
For example, our continued investment of public education resources on further instruction in Tagalog and other “native” languages” runs contrary to the reality that our strength as a people lies in breeding workers for deployment to overseas jobs and employment in companies run by foreign multinationals. If our ROI is employability in jobs created by foreign capital, then the choice becomes a lot clearer.
Instead of backward-engineering our solutions from established and labelled notions of what national development solutions are, we should be building our solutions from the ground-up based on a real understanding of our real character as a people.
benign0,
Contrary to the history that you speak of, one that was true when you left in 2001, today the educational system is back to its sometimes Draconian effort to teach in English, thanks in part to your favorite industries: call centers and human labor export.
Seriously, if something’s wrong with the educational system, it’s NOT the language. That discussion arc is already cliche. In fact, it’s becoming your cliche, along with your other koans.
If there’s anything wrong with our educational system, it’s the lack of encouragement for things like:
– innovation and out-of-the-box thinking
– calculated risk taking
– departure from norms and conventions
Our educational system and culture scares differentiation the hell out of our minds. Both of them teach us that going abroad is the only way we can be “fulfilled” in our lives. Both of them teach us that finding a “secure, stable job” is the only way to earn money. Both of them teach us that “selling perennial favorites” is the surefire way to succeed in business.
And that’s the only reason why we’re a “vast farm for breeding laborers”, the way you say it is.
That’s good news then if a focus on English instruction in our public schools has since gone ‘draconian’.
The next step then would be those three qualities you cite; if I may sum them up: an effort to eradicate mediocre thinking.
The fundamental underpinning of mediocre thinking is our non-existent sense of self-reliance; i.e., that We succeed by “God’s graces” and fail because it is “God’s will” crap.
what roi benigs? just because ofws send in remittances, that qualifies as wise investment? so ngayon filipinos stand for roi. and therefore you frown upon the accommodation of regional languages because this will diminish our roi. what about value-added production–create from within?
ano ba naman ang english na kailangan sa saudi o sa hongkong? am talking of the multitude of average filipinos abroad who have basic competencies in the king’s language, the level of which is not draconian.
iran just launched its satellite into space. i bet their engineers spoke nary in english. vast farm for breeding laborers is what hb 5619 is all about. no debate there, it’s written in the proposed bill.
If it’s still for the wrong reasons, and if it’s still producing people who have a shallow, non-functional ability to use it, then it’s not working. Clearly, something else has been amiss in all those years of forced English-feeding, which inhibits our students to think more critically than they ought to.