How does the current system encourage the crybaby mentality? I could name some of them.
The current law enforcement is weak because it tends to despise discipline in the name of democracy
I remembered reading certain articles on Get Real Philippines about the Commission on Human Rights. Although my current stand has went from abolishing CHR to cleaning it up because the problem is usually the chairperson. The Congress should have understood that the problem right now is not CHR but Chito Gascon. Right now, I still want to keep the organization but it should be headed by someone who can tell the difference between discipline and abuse.
So what's wrong with the law enforcement agency you may ask? It's a sad fact but only a few Filipino authority figures over the years tend to be serious about law enforcement. How many times has it been that simple guidelines aren't enforced according to offense? Do you know why Japan is progressive and orderly? It's because that while it's currently a democratic state but it still believes in discipline. You can see how Japanese people have a high sense of honor. They value following rules even if the era of samurais and ninjas don't serve Modern Japan. The law enforcement agency works and does its job. But the problem in the Philippines is how often many law enforcers themselves don't even follow simple guidelines. That should be a frustration to every decent Filipino isn't it?
It's time to get serious about the dysfunctional viewpoint of democracy that is allowed by the current system. Here's something from Get Real Philippines on martial law phobia which really makes sense:
So what's wrong with the law enforcement agency you may ask? It's a sad fact but only a few Filipino authority figures over the years tend to be serious about law enforcement. How many times has it been that simple guidelines aren't enforced according to offense? Do you know why Japan is progressive and orderly? It's because that while it's currently a democratic state but it still believes in discipline. You can see how Japanese people have a high sense of honor. They value following rules even if the era of samurais and ninjas don't serve Modern Japan. The law enforcement agency works and does its job. But the problem in the Philippines is how often many law enforcers themselves don't even follow simple guidelines. That should be a frustration to every decent Filipino isn't it?
It's time to get serious about the dysfunctional viewpoint of democracy that is allowed by the current system. Here's something from Get Real Philippines on martial law phobia which really makes sense:
There is the only fear for martial law rather than the misuse of martial law. It's like how Mar Roxas analyzed the Martilyo Gang and how to deal with them. The problem is the 1987 Constitution may be encouraging paranoia at several levels. If it's not just paranoia against economic liberalization and foreign investors it's also paranoia against police and military. The only policemen and soldiers that should be feared are abusive ones. Martial law itself isn't bad unless if it were misused and abused like the martial law years during Marcos Sr.'s time. Declaring military law in an extreme state of emergency is needed. Also, many countries declared martial law during 1972. The difference is how martial law got carried out and it it's operated within the law.
What's worse is that this is also very true from the same article on martial law phobia:
In hindsight, it is now easy to see the folly in having national pride built upon “freedom”. Over the time Filipinos huffed and puffed over being the “only real democracy” in southeast Asia, relatively authoritarian societies like Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Korea surged ahead and left them in the dust. More importantly being proud of being “free” is an oxymoron. If merely being “free” were truly a singular achievement to be proud of, then any spoilt brat should be regarded as an accomplished adult and every trantrum she throws evidence of that adulthood. The Philippines, it seems, is a country measured by that oxymoronic standard. Its “thought leaders” gloss over the fact that it fails on every measure of adulthood: discipline, independence, reliability, and productivity yet they throw fiestas to commemorate their nation’s infantile behaviours: its “free” no-substance press, its extrajudicial changes in leadership, its chaotic no-rules no-accountability business practices, and its “cute” belief in superstition and mythology.
There is no pride in being a democracy if it's a democrazy. The problem is that the country is actually oppressed by the oligarchy. You want electricity? Then you only have a few options. You want Internet? You only have PLDT and Globe. You want this and that? You only have a few options. This is the tyranny of the oligarchy: offering you expensive services where the price isn't worth the payment. Worse, all the incompetence in the Philippine government offices is a tyranny to Filipinos. Think of how the average Filipino has to fall in line, wake up early in the morning only to discover that they couldn't get their necessary papers checked. Those examples should be a violation of the right of Filipinos to competency.
Philippine laws can be very prone to prioritizing trivial battles over real crimes
I'm not saying that libel and slander are good. I can be guilty of it myself especially when I'm flaming mad. But there's one problem: how often are we taking our fights in public and the law allows it? Shouldn't Kris Aquino's fight with Rufa Guiterrez be kept private? Shouldn't there be laws against publicizing otherwise private battles? Unfortunately, there are none.
From Get Real Philippines concerning the Pinoy ego, here's something that I can definitely agree on:
There seems to be something wrong with a psyche that makes us so vulnerable to getting upset or offended so easily. Most Filipinos get offended so easily from a perceived indiscretion and are often unable to move on to something bigger or higher than such trivial pursuits. We tend to be consumed with words that should mean nothing to us if they were untrue. This demonstrates a real sign of having an unhealthy ego and insecurity. As someone aptly put it, Filipinos can be onion skinned cry-babies.
The problem with libel cases is that it usually goes nowhere. They are mostly childish quarrels that could be remedied. This is different from lying in court under oath which could have sentenced an innocent person. But the problem is that we are allowing people to sue people when they are not threatening to somebody's welfare. Take for instance that the Internet is full of fan quarrels. For one, it would be a waste of time for me to sue somebody who tells me to go to Mandaluyong to have my brain checked because I like K-Pop. On the other hand, I have every right and duty to sue anyone only when there's damage to my physical and emotional well-being. Other than that, isn't there the option to ignore when it's not a life threatening or livelihood threatening situation? If people didn't believe that lie or certain people have zero credibility why bother suing?
I'm not saying that libel and slander are good. I can be guilty of it myself especially when I'm flaming mad. But there's one problem: how often are we taking our fights in public and the law allows it? Shouldn't Kris Aquino's fight with Rufa Guiterrez be kept private? Shouldn't there be laws against publicizing otherwise private battles? Unfortunately, there are none.
From Get Real Philippines concerning the Pinoy ego, here's something that I can definitely agree on:
There seems to be something wrong with a psyche that makes us so vulnerable to getting upset or offended so easily. Most Filipinos get offended so easily from a perceived indiscretion and are often unable to move on to something bigger or higher than such trivial pursuits. We tend to be consumed with words that should mean nothing to us if they were untrue. This demonstrates a real sign of having an unhealthy ego and insecurity. As someone aptly put it, Filipinos can be onion skinned cry-babies.
Yes, that's one of the biggest problems of society. Do you remember when the anti-cybercrime law was modified? The libel clause would cause jails to be overpopulated for the dumb reasons. Why should we care too much about Agot Isidro calling President Duterte a psychopath unless she is encouraging Filipinos to overthrow him? Why would we care about Leah Navarro's nonsense tweets when she isn't encouraging rebellion? The issue with #CocoyGate should focus on the blog whether or not they actually plan to mislead people on purpose. There is also the possibility that the network is guilty of inciting sedition.
The problem with libel cases is that it usually goes nowhere. They are mostly childish quarrels that could be remedied. This is different from lying in court under oath which could have sentenced an innocent person. But the problem is that we are allowing people to sue people when they are not threatening to somebody's welfare. Take for instance that the Internet is full of fan quarrels. For one, it would be a waste of time for me to sue somebody who tells me to go to Mandaluyong to have my brain checked because I like K-Pop. On the other hand, I have every right and duty to sue anyone only when there's damage to my physical and emotional well-being. Other than that, isn't there the option to ignore when it's not a life threatening or livelihood threatening situation? If people didn't believe that lie or certain people have zero credibility why bother suing?
The current education system allows crybabies to be bred
I still think of the really dumb incident where St. Scholastica gets its children students involved. Worse, you have Senator Risa Hontivirus-Baraquel who posed with the future "young activists". There is also the problem of St. Scholastica with what could be called as making activists out of youngsters. Worse, Rappler is already calling them the new heroes. But is it the new heroes or is this exploitation? I would dare say this is exploitation than heroism for this reason. Why should children be involved in rallying in the first place?
The problem isn't exclusive to St. Scholastica but you also have it with schools that are inclined to be Yellowtards. Ateneo De Manila gave Jover Laurio's malicious work an award. There's nothing pro-Filipino or pro-Pinoy about the Pinoy Ako Blog. I think it should be renamed as PNoy Ako Blog. It's really a shame how such shameless anti-intellectualism is awarded and honored in a school where only a few are qualified. It's a shame how the University of the Philippines which is one of the hardest schools to enter to still upholds the Liberal Party too much.
The problem isn't exclusive to St. Scholastica but you also have it with schools that are inclined to be Yellowtards. Ateneo De Manila gave Jover Laurio's malicious work an award. There's nothing pro-Filipino or pro-Pinoy about the Pinoy Ako Blog. I think it should be renamed as PNoy Ako Blog. It's really a shame how such shameless anti-intellectualism is awarded and honored in a school where only a few are qualified. It's a shame how the University of the Philippines which is one of the hardest schools to enter to still upholds the Liberal Party too much.
What has been taught in the Filipino schools while I was growing up? I remembered how often the books I studied kept highlighting how "great" Corazon C. Aquino was while she was still alive. It talked about how much of a "hero" Ninoy Aquino was. I grew up admiring Ninoy in his so-called heroism. Years later, I started realizing how things were so wrong especially during the Noynoying Years. I started reading Get Real Philippines and CoRRECT Philippines finding out a lot of stuff that I have missed.
The problem is that some schools today still have their PNoy Pride. It wouldn't do any good to have the K to12 program if the education system is still full of PNoy Pride. It's about time to revise writing the history books, have better textbooks and a lot of revision to improve K to 12. For starters, children should be taught about the benefits of an open economy and how first world countries succeeded to where they are today. It should also include lessons to why the Philippines didn't progress even after EDSA.
The current economic policy encourages local Filipino businessmen to be crybabies
Economic protectionism is an economic system that caters to crybabies. It operates under the guise of being patriotic or nationalistic. The whole 60/40 provision which has hit the 1987 Constitution allows foreigners to own only 40% and Filipinos to have 60%. This was done claiming that only foreigners will get rich if the economy were opened up. That is one of the biggest lies because if one went to South Korea, Singapore, China, Taiwan and Japan you can see how foreign investment caused those countries to thrive.
Economic protectionism is based on the loser mentality that if you allow foreigners to compete in the Philippines then all Filipino businesses will be out of business. This is the mentality that is catered on fear rather than opportunity. Everything in doing business is full of pros and cons. They only see weaknesses and threats in the SWOT analysis. They do not see strengths and opportunities to work with. They only see foreign investors as threats but never see there's the opportunity to get better services and more customers for local businessmen.
Economic protectionism is based on the loser mentality that if you allow foreigners to compete in the Philippines then all Filipino businesses will be out of business. This is the mentality that is catered on fear rather than opportunity. Everything in doing business is full of pros and cons. They only see weaknesses and threats in the SWOT analysis. They do not see strengths and opportunities to work with. They only see foreign investors as threats but never see there's the opportunity to get better services and more customers for local businessmen.
Lacking competition and pampering local Filipino businessmen can have them spoiled and not dream big for their businesses. If you pamper people and you don't let them face difficulties then how are they going to learn? A good example is learning Mathematics. Mathematics can be such a burden unless people are frequently drilled to do it. Another is the area of sciences. What is the use of studying science unless there is laboratory activity except if it were remedial science in College? Chemistry would just be a boring drag unless people see its wonders. I may not be good with chemistry but I still get fascinated by what chemists could do.
There is the principle of no competition equals no competitiveness. CoRRECT Philippines has an article called "It's all about Competition" which should be a good read especially if you want something better than what I offer. The issue of competition works this way. You have the Filipino businessman and the foreign businessman. The Filipino businessman sees the threat but also the opportunity. He sees how the competition goes and decides to be competitive. He starts to compete against foreign competitors all the while he starts catering to foreign investors as new customers. If there was no competition there would be no opportunity to grow.
How is not having competition a bad thing? If there's no competition then what's the use of innovation? None. But with a lot of competition you would be forced to innovate. I even think of how much friendly competition can change my mindset. I could think of how my blogging habits can change the moment I embrace this competition. This competition would mean that I would have to make sure I get customers. I have to make sure my spaces for rent or my services have their competitive advantage. Without competition I would have no reason to even seek to innovate because people have no choice. When people have choices then innovative thinking is a reality.
______
It's more than time to think about the reality of system change should come first. It's time to stop saying that people must change before system will change. No, it's all about changing the system so people will change. After all, would you wait for people to stop littering before you make laws against littering?
It's more than time to think about the reality of system change should come first. It's time to stop saying that people must change before system will change. No, it's all about changing the system so people will change. After all, would you wait for people to stop littering before you make laws against littering?
Comments
Post a Comment