OUR government conducts surveys on poverty, of course. And when surveys emerge that it doesn't like, it actively disputes such non-government surveys. But in the end, government goes where public opinion leads it. The President imposed a deadline on curbing hunger, designated lead agencies, mobilized funds, and along the way decided to stop trying to counter public opinion, and instead, prove itself responsive to that opinion.
Yesterday, blogger Philippine Commentary essentially defended the President, who has been clobbered in the media for something she said. What she said is true, he said. The blogger's reaction reminded me of how often we debate our national characteristics, and how often we despair of what we consider our national character.
Charles de Gaulle once famously said of his fellow Frenchmen, "how can you be expected to govern a country that has 264 kinds of cheese?" The French are often described, and at times describe themselves, as impossible to govern, and impossibly quarrelsome; if you ever have a chance to read the book "Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong: Why We Love France but Not the French" (Jean-Benoit Nadeau, Julie Barlow), you would probably enjoy it. It reads in many respects, like a book about we, the Filipinos. How often have we heard something similar to what de Gaulle said? I even once heard a variation of de Gaulle's remark: "how can you govern a country with dozens of different kinds of kakanin?" And in our exasperation, we turn to what some would call "self-flagellation." In some cases, it comes close to either self-loathing, or a furious contempt for our countrymen.
It becomes ticklish when criticisms we aim at ourselves, are pointed out by our fellow countrymen as the statements of ignorant foreigners. Rizal's famous essay on the Indolence of the Filipino tried not only to examine the question, but how to approach it; as he put it, we should do so "without superciliousness or sensitiveness, without prejudice, without pessimism." and perhaps, with the realization that the things that disturb us, other people are disturbed about, too, or at the least, they try to understand and explain it.
Sometimes we can look for similarities between our own and the cultures of others. A criticism of our culture, and our national habits, might lead you to explore some things Luigi Barzini wrote this of the Italians (in his marvelous book, "The Italians" (Luigi Barzini):
One fundamental point which escapes most foreigners must be understood and remembered. Most Italians still obey a double standard. There is one code valid within the family circle, with relatives and honorary relatives, intimate friends and close associates, and there is another code regulating life outside. Within, they assiduously demonstrate all the qualities which are not usually attributed them by superficial observers: they are relatively reliable, honest, truthful, just, obedient, generous, disciplined, brave, and capable of self-sacrifices. They practice what virtues other men usually dedicate to the welfare of their country at large; the Italians’ family loyalty is their true patriotism. In the outside world, amidst the chaos and disorder of society, they often feel compelled to emply the wiles of underground fighters in enemy-occupied territory. All official and legal authority is considered hostile by them until proven friendly or harmless: if it cannot be ignored, it should be neutralized or deceived if need be.Barzini further observed,
The first source of power is the family. The Italian family is a stronghold in a hostile land: within its walls and among its members, the individual finds consolation, help, advice, provisions, loans, weapons, allies and accomplices to aid him in his pursuits. No Italian who has a family is ever alone… Scholars have always recognized the Italian family as the only fundamental institution in the country, a spontaneous creation of the national genius, adapted through the centuries to changing conditions, the real foundation of whichever social order prevails. In fact, the law, the State and society function only if they do not directly interfere with the family’s supreme interests... This is, of course, nothing new, surprising, or unique. In many countries and among many people, past and present, where legal authority is weak and the law is resented and resisted, the safety and welfare of the individual are mainly assured by the family. The Chinese, for instance, in their imperial days held the the cult of the family more praiseworthy than the love of country and the love of good. This is why the Communist regime of Ma Tse-tung tried to stamp out the family, recognizing it as its most powerful opponent. Similarly, wherever the Jews were allowed to settle in Europe, they outwardly conformed to the local laws and impositions, but in their hearts obeyed only their religious rules and the immemorial code of their family life, which allowed them precariously to survive persecutions. It is therefore not surprising that the Italians, living, as they have always done, in the insecurity and dangers of an unruly and unpredictable society, are among those who found their main refuge behind the walls of their houses, among their blood-relatives. Italians have, after all, many points of contact with the Chinese: the Chinese, too, love ceremonies, feasts, elaborate rites, deafening noise, fireworks, and good food; love children and produce many of them; their art is also highly decorative and ingenious but not always deep; they fashion lovely things by hand, and are astute negotiators and subtle merchants. The Italians are also, in many ways, similar to the Jews: the Jews have the same disenchanted and practical outlook; are among the few people who laugh at their own foibles; they entertain a wary diffidence for other people’s noble intentions and always look for the concrete motives hiding behind them. There is, however, this fundamental difference between the Italians and most other people who use the family as their private lifeboat in the stormy seas of anarchy. Anarchy in Italy is not simply a way of life, a spontaneous creation of society, a natural development: it is also the deliberate product of man’s will, the fruit of his choice; it has been assiduously cultivated and strengthened down the centuries. The strength of the family is not only, therefore, the bulwark against disorder, but, at the same time, one of its principal causes. It has actively fomented chaos in many ways especially by rendering useless the development of strong political institutions. This, of course, brings up a complex problem: do political institutions flourish only where the family is weak, or is it the other way around? Does the family become self-sufficient only where the political institutions are not strong enough? However it may be, political institutions never had much of a chance in Italy. The people gave birth to but a few of them: they had to import most of them ready-made from abroad, from time to time…the constitution, the bi-cameral system, liberalism, democracy… The family extracts everybody’s first loyalty. It must be defended, enriched, made powerful, respected and feared by the use of whatever means are necessary, legitimate means, if at all possible, or illegitimate…And it sounds like us! Doesn't it? There's a marvelous book, now sadly out of print, in which one of the leading Filipino minds of his generation tried to do what Rizal did, that is, explain us to ourselves and along the way, to others. That man was Leon Ma. Guerrero and his book was a collection of essays titled We Filipinos. If we take a cue from Barzini, then Guerrero has something similar to say (and he said it about a decade before Barzini wrote his book!), in his essay, What are Filipinos Like? In it he says Filipinos are extremely self-reliant -but only when they have to be, in crisis situations (for example, the Japanese Occupation). He goes on to say,
There is another aspect of self-reliance which has nothing to do with colonialism and its residue.... [Some Americans] cannot understand why grown-up sons and daughters keep living with their parents even after they have been married and begotten children of their own, or why we should feel obliged to feed and house even the most distant "cousins" who find themselves in want. This trait is not exclusively Filipino; it is common to all rudimentary societies. Modern man looks to his government for security but where the government, whether native or foreign, is still regarded as an alien, selfish force, the individual prefers to trust his bloodkin for what are in effect old-age pensions or unemployment insurance. The family is an indispensable institution in these circumstances, and one cannot be too sure that people are happier when it has been supplanted by the state as the center of society.Sounds like the Italians, doesn't it? And indeed just the other day someone told me, "we are like the Italians -it's not that we want better government, it's that we're happiest when there's no government." Which might just explain why public opinion tends to be skeptical of government-announced action plans and solutions -could it be, what we really want, is to solve our problems for ourselves? Any government initiative, taken from such a perspective, is just a hassle. And about government -more on what Guerrero had to say, next time.
Similarly, wherever the Jews were allowed to settle in Europe, they outwardly conformed to the local laws and impositions, but in their hearts obeyed only their religious rules and the immemorial code of their family life, which allowed them precariously to survive persecutions.It is therefore not surprising that the Italians, living, as they have always done, in the insecurity and dangers of an unruly and unpredictable society, are among those who found their main refuge behind the walls of their houses, among their blood-relatives. Italians have, after all, many points of contact with the Chinese: the Chinese, too, love ceremonies, feasts, elaborate rites, deafening noise, fireworks, and good food; love children and produce many of them; their art is also highly decorative and ingenious but not always deep; they fashion lovely things by hand, and are astute negotiators and subtle merchants. The Italians are also, in many ways, similar to the Jews: the Jews have the same disenchanted and practical outlook; are among the few people who laugh at their own foibles; they entertain a wary diffidence for other people’s noble intentions and always look for the concrete motives hiding behind them.There is, however, this fundamental difference between the Italians and most other people who use the family as their private lifeboat in the stormy seas of anarchy.
Wow! this exactly what topics about Filipinos i'd like to read.The identiy of the Filipinos is very unique.Family matters really stays strong in the Filipino society.i just hope it improves more.
Politics in the Philippines will never change. It will be a dream that will never come true. Poverty will be forever; it will be like a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and still no gold at all. Corruption will be like a cancer, it will never heal.
That is why I loved the book Noli Me Tangere. Even if the book was published years ago, every single word of Dr. Jose Rizal about our dear country, the reality of our poverty "will live forever". The worse realization is that "it’s not Spaniards anymore who put our country into poverty" it is "our Filipino politicians who abused our countrymen." and that will be "forever."
I'm glad I married a Filipina, sixteen years later I'm just about getting used to sharing my space and my life with FAMILY.
Richard C. Jones
Alberta
CANADA
We ought not dance around the issue. I was addressing the SWS survey and the fact that SWS itself, as well as most of the Media and punditocracy has leaped to the conclusion that abject poverty is the cause of the hunger incidence (or graft and corruption of the Arroyo administration). This interpretation is propagandistic, ideological and incomplete because it ignores what I believe to be an obvious major factor in the level of self-reported hunger incidences--expenditure by rich and poor on non-food vices.
The VALUES Filipinos have, how responsible they are for their own well-being is a substantial and determining factor in hunger incidence. ANY dysfunctional breadwinner or head of household is bound to create such hunger incidence. The vices I mention in my post account for billions upon billions of pesos wasted not by the govt but by the people themselves, and cannot be ignored or swept under the rug. It is hardly GMA's fault that such vices are widespread and a major cause of "hunger".
As you both know, I have always been concerned with the leap made even by the pollsters themselves from data to explanation of the causes for the data.
That is the window through which propaganda and ideology jump into the picture, and where journalistic ethics often goes out--because of ignorance about how the surveys actually work. Foisting ideological interpretations on the data is silly and unethical.
As a definite example, consider that every second of every day 22 bottles of 20 peso Ginebra San Miguel ("gin bulag") is consumed by Filipinos in the Philippines. It's the world's leading brand of gin, and we spend over 1.4 billion pesos a year on in, already more than the President's 1 billion peso anti hunger fund. But what will happen now? Most likely gin consumption will only increase since many families will suddenly find "extra income" at least in the food area. Will the hunger incidence decrease? I doubt it since gin is a poor man's drink. Better if she gave the fund to AA or anti alcoholism programs. Better yet, you folks ought to be beating the drums on FAMILY VALUES instead of wringing your wrists and bleeding your hearts for the "poor".
If globalization means anything, it is that there ain't nuthin' special about being any particular nationality.
What really matters is what really works for individual human beings. Whether it is American or Filipino exceptionalism, or French or Italian, it is all the thing we all disdain called tribalism in the age of nationalism.
In its turn, nationalism is tribalism in the age of what...?
Well it is the virtue greater than nationalism that I've called globalism, the realism that the human race is one nation under God, which is to say, Morality.
We cannot hide our faults under our uniqueness, which is the obsession of all nationalists. Nor should we, since it is in facing them that we also find our greatness -- not necessarily as Filipinos but as human beings.
If all one has read of Jose Rizal is the fictional roman-a-clef of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, that would be like having studied Albert Einstein's theory of Special Theory. You would understand electromagnetism and the Atom Bomb, but would have no notion of General Relativity and Gravitation. In Rizalist terms, it is useful to get to the epistolary with Pablo Pastells, where the First Filipino is not even recognizably a Filipino at all, but a man of the World.
We may be flattering ourselves by celebrating the similarities between the Italian and the Filipino family. But, alas, there is no escaping the yawning chasm in the totality of cultural achievements between the two nations.
Sadly, the former has far outstripped the latter.
you wrote: "It reads in many respects, like a book about we, the Filipinos."
i think it should be "...a book about us, the filipinos." 'we' kung subject of the sentence, 'us' pag object of preposition. of course it wouldn't have looked as good pang- title ;-)
re indolence of filipino. i'm not convinced we're indolent. the spaniards thought so though (and the ilustrados), but it could also have been just the indio’s mode of adjustment to the feudal / colonial arrangements that prevailed / persist between the poor and the rich — why work so hard when it only enriches the friar/landowner/capitalist/state . And surely there must be something to the theory that by nature, iba talaga ang physical temperament at value system natin, bilang tropical islanders. Being tamad could be just one side of being naturally laid-back and relaxed, ayaw nating ng padalusdalos, we like to take our time, maybe that’s why we’re always late…among other things. Kaya lang we’ve been colonized nga, imported ang values na pinapakatawanan sa atin, we’re molded by the school system and the media to be/live instead like our american idols -- who are so kanya-kanya (no bayanihan there), always nagmamadali, nakikipag-unahan, nanlalamang, matira ang matibay -- para yumaman din daw tayo. so talaga, schizoid/split personalities din tayo, like the italians. Ang pinagkaiba lang siguro, unlike us filipinos, tila mas aware sila that they’re schizoid, which must be why they have a kind of handle on things.
re djb’s (mis)take on hunger stats. like gma he is saying that if the poor were not spending too much on gin, cigarettes, drugs, jueteng, and sex, they wouldn’t be poor. hindi kaya that if we broke down the billions of pesos spent by filipinos in their “incessant pursuit of momentary pleasure” into the specific amounts spent by the rich, the middle-class and the poor, we would find that most of it comes from the big spenders -- the rich, the middle-class, the gainfully employed? That the poor who live a hand-to-mouth existence manage to squeeze out five or ten pesos or so now and then pantaya sa jueteng o pangambag pambili ng gin once twice a week is to me a good sign. they haven’t lost hope and they haven’t foregone pleasure, good for them.
stuart, mea culpa, thank you for correcting me.
I would like to say that, it is true that we are far behind from other countries in Asia. By the token, we have a good heritage and culture that we can be proud of. Also, we are still the most catholic people in Asia, and Korea next. At least, we tend to serve God first, before materialism. Remember, money and material things are come and go. So try not to envy other nations that was built upon stolen wealth, slavery, greed, deceit and so on.
Lea Hetherington,
A beautiful statement, it is indeed pointless to envy people or nations who had built their wealth from stealing, war, plunder, slavery, greed, deceit, abuse and death.
Serve God first, our fellowmen and protect nature and our environment.
i juz wanna ask if this is the essay of "what are filipinos like?"
We may be flattering ourselves by celebrating the similarities between the Italian and the Filipino family.
Best regards, Katya, CEO of easy cd dvd burner, install windows 7 iscsi
The identiy of the Filipinos is very unique.Family matters really stays strong in the Filipino society.i just hope it improves more.
Ginault Watches
Wow, great article. The survey gives a significant insight into filipino culture. very impressive. Huskies for Sale