I checked out mlq3′s latest blog entry A Federalist appeal and am again reminded of the remarkable amount of debate going on about forms of government in general — specifically what form is best for Pinoy society.
I maintain — consistent to my usual simplistic take on Pinoy society — that the key to Pinoy collective prosperity does not lie in politics, political structures, and certainly not in politicians themselves.
The core fundamental source of our inability to prosper lies at the very fabric of our cultural character.
Take the Chinese. They CONSISTENTLY PROSPER AS A CULTURAL AND ETHNIC GROUP (and I can’t emphasise the preceding phrase enough – even in all caps and in bold) in just about ANY environment save for the most extremely repressive hosts.
Like Einstein said — the most simple theories are usually the most sound ones.
So far, there is no theoretical framework that makes a SIMPLE and DETERMINISTIC link between form-of-government and prospect-for-prosperity in the Philippine setting. I dare say, there probably is none (contrary to what a lot of political “scientists” would like us to believe). This whole form-of-government-as-silver-bullet topic has been debated since time immemorial. To be able to debate about this for so long and accumulating such volumes of text on the subject without any semblance of a theoretical framework crystallising out of all this to this day is a testament to the futility of this exercise.
The late Teddy Benigno wrote way back in 2003 when talk about change to a parliamentary form of government was the fashion statement of the chattering classes:
We are now constantly being bamboozled with the argument that if the Philippines is far behind many of its neighbor countries in East and Southeast Asia, it is because they have a parliamentary system. And we Filipinos, imbeciles that we are, have stuck over the generations to an outmoded presidential system. This system, we are told, has brought us nothing but mass poverty, corruption on an unprecedented scale, crime and violence that could have only come from the lowest pits of Hades.
That was in 2003. Replace the word “parliamentary” in the excerpt above with the word “federal” and the same critique applies in today’s debate (maybe replace ‘neighbour countries’ with ‘Malaysia’ as well).
For that matter for a representative government to work, a society needs to posses a culture of ideas. Unforunately, Filipino culture possesses no such approach to thinking.
Again, the Teddyman observed in that year:
Stable, policy-oriented or program-oriented political parties [are an essential ingredient]. Without such parties as an ideological glue parliamentary government in the Philippines would be a colossal sham.
Do not tell me Lakas-NUCD is such a party, or Laban, or NPC. They are no more political parties in the European parliamentary tradition as a slut crossing herself is the reincarnation of Joan of Arc.
True even today. The party names he cited above meant no more than any of the party names being thrown around today (much less the latest moronic concept/label of “Genuine” Opposition).
But I am willing to bet that as 2010 rolls in, the media, the blogosphere, and the bangketas will again be abuzz — yet again about the coming incarnations of the various political parties and political personalities scrambling for the lucrative public offices up for auction.
ABS-CBN’s Bandila will be re-directing its noisy bells and whistles (the only news show I am aware of that uses lots of sound effects) from the food queues back to the halls of power to dish out its usual hearsay “news reports” on the subject of political intrigue.
Shopping for a new form of government is just a subset of the political debate that the Pinoy intelligentsia chatter about. It is no more productive than the whole debate about the who’s, what’s and where’s of Philippine politics. It’s kind of like how executives in big corporations focus their debate on what consulting firm to hire to fix a business problem rather than focus on understanding the nature of the business problem itself. The consultants always win — happily laughing all the way to the bank — at the end of the day.
Same approach, same expected outcome.
If we do something differently, MAYBE a different outcome may result.
We’ve dicked around around with politics for so long. Maybe it’s time we do something differently and toy with our culture and character instead.
Now that is a simple theory and as sound a theory as one can come up with.
Anyone who’s used a five-year-old build of Windows and skirted the option of an OS re-build or re-install knows well enough that there is only so much de-fragging that can be done to improve system performance. At some point you will have to bite the bullet and pull out the OS at its roots.
The above paragraph is geek-speak for the Teddyman’s more down-to-earth snippet of wisdom:
I have said my piece. I say again what we need is not regime change, or change to parliamentary, but a change in our culture, a change in our hearts and minds, in our nature, in our character.
And that is the Philippines’ Inconvenient Truth.
Popularity: 1% [?]
benign0, I think you’re absolutely spot on here. It’s a shame that this approach, along with Patricio’s post about revolution being an internal change, gets very little attention. Everyone hears the loud clarion calls for political revolution change. Many don’t realise that it’s all noise an no substance.
Filipinos, being passionate and sentimental folk, are easily distracted buy the grand heroic tales of storming castles. On the other hand, people seem less inclined to consider the details like finishing jobs to a high standard or investing in people and equipment.
While I do agree that “a change in our hearts and minds, in our nature, in our character” is as necessary as air to lungs, a change in a regime is never far behind.
Anthony,
The problem, of course, is perception. How do you know that an internal, “cultural” revolution is progressing? It’s very very difficult to measure as it’s more abstract than drastic, concrete courses of action.
Question becomes if we will just wait for such a “cultural” revolution to happen and trust individual wisdom by means of self-improvement to effect that revolution? Are there enough people to do this to achieve a greater effect within our lifetimes? How do we know if it works?
spliceanddice,
Problem with your ilk is, it’s JUST about changing regimes. Every other change is lip service. How many times did that work?
Jon,
Yes, I agree that a cultural shift is more difficult to perceive than something obvious like regime change. Nevertheless, the lasting transformations are those that build up over time and go almost unnoticed.
Think of it like the bad habits that we’ve developed since childhood. Simply deciding one day to stop almost always leads to failure. What’s more effective is to make small day-to-day adjustments in behaviour.
For proof, just observe the many dieters out there. What happens to those who suddenly declare their good intentions after the Christmas season? Initially they’re enthusiastic, outwardly showing everyone their new selves by going to the gym and trying the latest diet fad. Then comes a birthday party in February. The gym starts to get boring and that lechon is lookin’ goooood.
A key point I’d like to make is that we don’t just wait for a ‘cultural revolution’ to happen. We have to be part of it by changing what we do and how we interact with others. Sure, we may not see the country improve greatly in our lifetimes. However, we will see changes in our homes, workplaces, and neighbourhoods.
Singapore has proven that it is actually possible to engineer cultural change. Even Japan underwent such an orchestrated change in the late 19th Century and after World War II when it was rapidly industrialising.
So I think there are indeed viable alternatives to “waiting” for a ‘cultural revolution’ to happen. It takes vision and the collectivel wherewithal to make it happen rather than wait for it to happen.
Agreed! It’s possible to engineer cultural change on a national scale.
Just like my dieter example, those with enough will-power can make drastic transformations. Aren’t those exceptions though? Similarly, aren’t Singapore and Japan also exceptions?
For this to happen in the Philippines, don’t you need a strong dictator-style leader? Will the country tolerate someone like this coming to power?
[All genuine questions and not rhetorical. :) ]
@Jon
I still can’t figure why some people don’t want to oust this regime. Perhaps the idea of wasting away what has been established so far taunts one to hold back and maintain the status quo? Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not holding on to the idea of replacing this regime AND ALL the rest of the regimes to follow. There should be reasons of doing so. And if corruption in horrendous proportions isn’t reason enough, then I don’t know what else is.
I can sense the fear in others of having to rebuild something, or to build something, in place of a brazened regime. Yet that is what exactly is needed. We tolerate this regime, it’s as if we’re saying anybody can simply get away with corrupting the government.
So you want this regime to stay? Ah, and surely that must work.
@spliceanddice
What will replace it? Is a credible alternative immediately available?
I agree that a cultural shift is needed.
But quite frankly, I don’t know how to make it happen. We need a motivating factor.
And I also think that aside from cultural upbringing, the system- as opposed to a regime- must be changed.
I think cultural change can be futile if the same breed of elite oligarchs rule the country. These people aren’t even loyal to the Philippines. They don’t care about any social responsibility. They only care about their own interest at the expense of the interest of the nation.
spliceanddice,
Easy for pundits like you to say, because the responsibility of rebuilding does not rest on YOUR hands. Precisely why I hate leftists who always sport the “IBAGSAK!” banter. Pag naibagsak, anong ipapalit? They then start blabbering about ideals and delusions like a revolutionary government run by civil society or something as preposterous. They never manage to answer that question properly.
I am not saying that regime change is not needed, as what you want to believe I am saying. What I am saying is we need to find some other thing to do to accompany that regime change in order to make it effective and not as hollow and empty as the 1986 and 2001 regime changes we as a people effected.
It also appears to be a waste of time — if Gloria leaves on 2010. If she doesn’t, baka maunahan pa kita umakyat ng bundok.
@ Jon & Anthony
And who’s saying that a revolutionary government run by communists under sheep’s skin should take the place of a regime like what we have now once it gets brazened down?
Pag naibagsak, anong ipapalit? My position on that is to hold snap elections. That’s what a democracy is for, right? That being said, Noli de Castro should also sink with the anchor. Let’s start electing the top two positions right after Gloria is ejected from her illegitimate rule. Come to think of it, Gloria isn’t even the president!
God or Allah or Buddha or Garci forbid, if Gloria doesn’t yield after 2010, you won’t be seeing me in the mountains. You’ll be seeing me in the streets.
@spliceanddice I was questioning whether there’s a ready pool of credible replacements. By ‘credible’ I mean people who have the skills and experience to run a country of 90+ million people.
So, who would you suggest are the top three best candidates to take over?
As Gat Jose Rizal once said, “We can only serve our country by telling the naked truth, however bitter it may be.”
spliceanddice,
Funny, you don’t even understand what “mountains” meant.
You have much to learn, my friend. ;)
@ Jon
I’d be glad to take lessons from you, my friend :) Pardon me for my ignorance for I, too, have my own lapses which I am not fearful to admit.
spliceanddice,
“Mamundok” — to go up to the mountains — is the term used by those who chose to join the New People’s Army, and take up arms against the government in its camps — up in the mountains.
I’m not keen of joining *the* NPA though, because of late the NPA has become nothing but a group of bandits harassing and terrorizing private individuals and companies for revolutionary tax, but I am interested in movements which take civil disobedience to a much higher level than street protests.
He did speak the truth, that guy. He will forever be missed.