Big News! Big Announcement! Filipino Voices Goes Public!

Loud and Clear

Filipino Voices goes public today. It is a collaboration between bloggers from Tingog.com, The Philippine Experience, Jester In Exile, The Nutbox, Arbet @ AWB Holdings, New Philippine Revolution, Uniffors, Smoke, Big Mango (this blog), Philippine Commentary, Lester Cavestany, and The Warrior Lawyer. This new site is a collective voice on politics, news and social commentary.

With the launching of Filipino Voices, comes a writing project. You decide on the issue, in your own words, in your own style that everyone can participate in.

To find out more, visit Filipino Voices.

On What Gross National Product Measures

For too much and for too long, we seem to have surrendered personal excellence and community value in the pursuit of material wealth. Our Gross National Product grew over 7 percent in 2007, but that statistic, if we judge The Republic of the Philippines by that, counts air pollution, and gambling, and cigarettes and vices, and hospitals full of not just cancer patients, but of the impoverished sick and dying.

This GNP accounts for Military engagement in our far flung villages to fight our brothers and sisters of different faith, and jails to house rarely the drug lords but more the drug addicts, and not just petty criminals but juvenile delinquents who share the same fate as those rapists and murderers. It does not overlook the prison our airports, and malls seem to have become, with their often failing attempt at security.

This Gross National Product counts the destruction of our forests, our mountains, our corals, our seas and measures the lost of our nation's natural beauty long before our people can fully appreciate them.

This statistic valued in that attempt at stealing power through the taking of a five star hotel as hostage, and abuse of power and excessive force to quell such mindless rebellion. It counts the missing, who voice their opinion, but are silenced for their difference and the dead because of election violence all in the name of keeping a firm grip on Power.

Our Gross National Product include telenovelas, "news" and television programs and blogs that glorify gossip, and the excesses of the social elite in order to spread the gospel of schadenfreude that we may feel better about ourselves. Yet it does not allow for the health of neither our citizens nor our children, or an education that encourages our People to learn, to be creative, to be able synthesize various disciplines and their joys into something new, something unique, something constructive, something that raises the dignity in us all.

This pursuit of material wealth does not include the beauty of our poetry, the depth of our music, the strength of our marriages and the enduring force that is the Filipino family. This GNP does not imbue intelligence in our public discourse nor raise the integrity of our public officials. Neither does Gross National Product measure the deafness of our middle-class and theologians to the fundamental gospel that incapacity is the greater evil gripping our nation, more than our outrage about the true nature of our public officials. Nor does it measure the blindness of our leadership to see beyond their petty concerns and see what our people truly need.

This statistic does not by any standard tell us how mute and hopeless and incapacitated the poor really are.

Gross National Product can not fully quantify the perseverance and level of sacrifice of the Filipino diaspora. It can never weigh the joys of our children at simple play, at simple pleasure. It does not measure our wit, our laugh, our people's beautiful smile, nor the depth of our religious devotion and The Filipino's courage that is God's gift to our people.

Our Gross National Product measures everything in short except that which make life worth while. And it can tell us everything about Our Nation except why we ought to be proud of being Filipino.

This post was inspired and heavily influenced by this Robert Kennedy speech:

hat tip to @nicknich3 for the Kennedy video.

PAGASA's Got Linux Supercomputer!

Can i just shoutout, "Woot!!!" PC World Australia has a post on PAGASA (Philippine Weather Bureau) running a Debian Linux Cluster (PHP2 Million).

Apparently their old supercomputer, an SGI (PHP25 Million) was out computed by their new, more powerful and way cheaper built and operated gear. Cost per month to run their Debian Linux cluster was put at PHP10,000 as opposed to PHP200,000 month for their old SGI gear.

This is awesome news!

Designing Moving On

The fundamental question that has been asked time and time again is the question on what it means to move on in a society in which our very landscape is deadly terrain. Many have come up with steps--- appropriate responses to untangle the mess that Philippine Society has found itself in. Well and good those measures are, and many are laudable efforts and are worth our effort to make use of them, but in this landscape do we find ourselves in a prisoner's dilemma or a tragedy of commons, or perhaps in something different?

So let us be honest: we have on one side--- our "aristocracy" of politicians, then in another camp, we have the "elite" business industrialists and technocrats, and on a corner our working masses of academe, regular employees, overseas workers. We have the Artisans and the Warrior Caste (the military, the police, and the mercenaries) and then we have a caste called Poor, which is really a subset of the working masses and to a certain degree, our artisans and warrior caste.

Each of these groups have their individual aspirations, hopes and their own self-interests to preserve. The "Aristocracy" needs to protect the status quo, after all, who in their right mind would let go of power, influence and wealth? The "elite" protects the most important to them: profits. The working masses want what the elite have: profits, and the artisans and the warrior caste want wealth, influence and power. Lastly, the Clergy wishes to preserve their influence and remain very much involved in the moral and day-to-day lives of people.

Let us set that aside for a bit and for a moment look at our landscape. For the sake of discussion, let us shrink our archipelago into one city: our capital. It is not simply Manila, but a giant vast organism called Metro Manila that incorporates several cities. This sprawling metropolis represents every culture, every region and every province all in our perfect diversity. Yet look at our capital from the flying skyline of Makati, Bonifacio and Ortigas to the Old City of Manila and the suburb Quezon City and other surrounding cities--- its planning, its design which is mirrored across the entire country, is as disjointed as we are.

Thousands of blogs, millions of opinion, and endless analysis have given us picture after picture of what's life in the Philippines all about and it all goes down to this: what we have appears to be myriad stake holders with their own selfish intent and are individually maximizing their own good and the way we run things is that there is no intent, no focus, no "logic", in the way we run our national life. Our signal of intention is (wait for it, drum roll please)... there is none.

We can think of the Philippines as a place where the Prisoner's Dilemma exists. It can also be viewed as a Tragedy of Commons. Funny thing though, people will refuse to move past those notions.

Given our current predicament, there is a William Churchill quote that is most appropriate:

"The Era of Procrastination, of Half-Measures, of Soothing and Baffling Expedients, of Delays, is Coming to its Close. In its Place We are Entering a Period of Consequences."

As we measure the apathy and disdain of our people in our nation's political processes, it is like a speeding train. Perhaps it will not be a huge crash. Perhaps it would be a thunderous thud. It may even be a silent whisper. It can also be averted.

Our people in general are losing faith in government and as a whole the political processes. They're largely the working masses. They are quiet. They work for a living and they raise families, no matter the political environment. A lot of them work outside the country. A lot of them work nine to five and many are professionals and they are also doing the odd jobs.

Individual effort can positively make a great impact, so it must be asked, with all the half-measures of the powers that be, what if the consequence of which is the working masses, in the tradition of prisoner's dilemma, the ones who defect?

Old news, certainly.

In the same way there are myriad ideas on how "move on" is as disjointed as we are. Perhaps it's time to look at it from a different perspective like for instance, How Much Can We Give For All We Get? William McDonough and Michael Braugart wrote that piece and it was on regenerative commerce and the new entrepreneurial spirit. They asked questions like "What do I do?", "How can my work make a better world?" and "How much can I give for all that I get?" Here's a snippet:

When the legacy of an enterprise-its long-term value to the world-drives the business agenda, it unleashes the power of commerce to create a wide spectrum of positive effects. This is perhaps best understood by the new social entrepreneurs, whose value proposition is not "How much can I get for how little I give?"-the mantra of the old capitalism-but instead, "How much can we give for all we get?" Rather than focusing on the quarterly bottom line, this new question suggests a rich, inspiring pursuit of life-affirming wealth and productivity.

"How much can we give for all we get?" is fundamentally a design question. Asked throughout the design process it guides entrepreneurs toward products, facilities and business models that grow ecological and social revenue while generating economic health. The goal is good growth for all. Instead of simply seeking to reduce the negative impacts of economic activity-the reductivist's attempt to be "less bad"-we can develop businesses built on a wholly positive agenda that aims to enhance the human footprint, leaving behind wetlands and clean water, prosperity and nutrition, fertile farmland and healthy children.

We can begin mapping out building our future, planning for it honestly and unequivocally. It begins by actually implementing projects that will take us into a desired future. It means building and doing things right now and none of these half-measures and ideas that doesn't not take into account where the world is and where our competitors are in the world stage. When we do that we answer the question of incapacity.

Can the future be designed? If we are to face a future--- a sustainable future for every Filipino, we need to decide to take action now and none of our half-measures, these childish antics and shortsighted vision. We can begin by taking a hard look at our cities and actually getting into building for the future. We need to ensure adequate fresh water, for instance. we need to build affordable and useful transportation across the various parts of the Capital (and by extension the rest of the country). We need to provide adequate and cheap power. We need to find ecologically sound and viable means of waste management. All these things are being implemented, in China for instance in Cradle to Cradle design (the community is here), which isn't really a bad way of looking at the world.

We also need to honestly look at The Elephant in the Room and one that looks forward, rather than backwards.

These are just some of many myriad things that can be done, right now. If only people really look hard into it.

There is something to be learned from social entrepreneurs. It isn't simply locked into ecological ideas. It will inspire our people and get them to believe. It is a door into better design, which is a long way of saying "designing a nation that we want to live in".

The right way to "Move On" is all about small steps. It is about creating a nation of equal opportunity. It is about creating a nation of fairness. It is about creating a nation where we sustain abundance, development and growth. The right way of doing is leaving behind ancient capitalist ideas of profit margins and bottom line and asking each of ourselves, "how can my work make a better world?" The right way to move on, is actually, honestly doing, rather than talking.

Fighting Incapacity

Have you noticed that the common battle cry of fascists and a lot of conservatives (who turn to dictators) around the world are "peace" and "prosperity"? It would be funny, if wasn't for the fact that people around the world have been oppressed by leaders who've taken advantage of people's fears and has led to catastrophe after another.

One of the best fictional examples of leaders taking advantage of people's fears is V for Vendetta. Set in a post-apocalypse Britain, the British people allowed their government to subvert their freedoms, in exchange for "protection", "peace" and "prosperity". Their leaders preyed on their fears, and people let them. In the name of "fighting" Terrorism, haven't we in many ways subverted our freedoms? In effect, haven't the terrorists "won" when we've changed our way of life? In many respects this driving desire for "prosperity" and "peace" has led to the subverting of democratic processes in the Philippines.

This is old news and it has led us to this point in time.

The "result" of the election has been spun and is it a referendum or is it not a referendum? Of course, it is a spin. Is it any surprising the "facts" fit their "logic"? After all it was a foregone conclusion that in majority of those races, the Coalition Allies would win. John Nery aptly pointed out in his blog:

The Senate contest is not a referendum on the Arroyo presidency, because, well, the administration has lost the majority of seats at stake. But the congressional and local races? They are a referendum because the administration won most of the positions at stake.

Apart from the framing (another example: 2007 was “an election generally predicted as a referendum on the economic performance of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo” — nice, that subtle use of the dismal science), the advertisement is interesting for the lists it provides of the winning coalition candidates: 183 congressmen (including, ah, transplanted Bicolano Dato Arroyo); 64 governors (including Joey Salceda of Albay, who ran as an independent against an incumbent Lakas governor, another clear example of the “clear choice” the coalition offered the Filipino people); and 101 city mayors (including Charter change exponent Rep. Constantino Jaraula).

When you've looked at who were thrown out and who won in the local elections--- it was largely a matter of local politics. Once again, the Administration looks at it from what has transpired with Bush--- these two animals are so largely different. For one thing, the "opposition" fielded no candidates in many of the local races. In fact, in races for the Governorship of Batangas for example--- a voter rich province, it was coalition allies Kampi and Lakas who were fighting for the scraps. How can that be a measure of voter love for pGMA's government? When one looks at Nueva Ecija province--- it is in the same way: a political dynasty went out the door.

It is kind of stupid and uninspiring, really. The pGMA battle cry is "change" and "prosperity" and "peace" yet they corrupt the meaning of those words. In the process, our people are disgusted and disenfranchised. It is the difference between looking at our national life, glass half-empty or glass-full.

When you look at the violence and by extension the rampant electoral fraud being propagated, you can see it in the context of a feudal society. Actually you can look at the entire society in that context. When you look at it from that point of view it is not per se, an elitist society. When you look at it from the perspective of a feudal society, it explains perfectly how in this society the scales between meritocracy and who you know is skewed towards the latter and not in a balance as it should be.

Any intellectual honesty in "reading" the "will" and "intent" of our people in this last election needs to take into account Voter turnout. Why is this important? Because through it we can gauge how apathetic, and disenfranchised our people really are. A voter turnout of only 50% or even 60% is a greater chastisement not only of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, but more importantly of the entire political system.

This is ominous.

The only way to stem this tide is for politicians--- on both sides to get their act together. They may find themselves discussing their concern with only themselves as audience. You know what people say about a person who talk to themselves, don't we? Politicians may find themselves leaders of a nation that vastly ignores them. The hard part is the business of governing and for many Filipinos, the answer maybe governing ourselves and ignoring government and mediocrity of the political processes. Of course the future is not written in stone and the lesson of this election is this: the hard part is living up to expectations of the electorate and delivering the goods.

The problem with third world countries is the problem of incapacity. Filipinos can't seem to see that.

When you get a holistic and honest look at Philippine society today--- people largely are no longer subscribing or slowly moving away from political "spin" and thus are liberating themselves from incapacity. They're slowly waking up, simply because their wallets demand it. Philippine society is changing--- and becoming more like a suburb, where people grow families and build houses and they work elsewhere. This is what it means to move on (which a lot of our politicians simply don't get): people are, will and are beginning to leverage their own lives, vastly ignoring government, which isn't such a bad idea to begin with. They are liberating themselves. After all, what has government and politicians done for the rest of us? Private enterprise (i.e. individual effort) is the key to fighting incapacity.

The Leadership Agenda

Is apathy a great evil? There is a sense of indifference coming from people and a fatalism that no matter who wins in the Philippines' May 2007 elections, the status quo will remain. Who cares who wins? Some say it is because of frustration, perhaps it is a deeper underlying anger and disdain at the mediocrity being foisted upon us. who wouldn't after all the lies, all the successive failures and all the hidden and twisted agenda and backstabbing?

When Cory Aquino was ushered to power, it created a rebirth of democracy in the Philippines and in spite of the many trials that came during her day, democracy was perhaps her biggest legacy. The stabilization and the building of the seeds of institution around a nascent democracy, a minor second to her achievement of keeping its flame alive.

During the 1990s, poised to take off and riding on the wave of investments sweeping South East Asia, perhaps the greatest success of Fidel Ramos was to create a genuine sense of unity under the banner and vision of "Philippines 2000". Never mind that as the bubble collapsed, so too did much of the wealth but the seeds of growth and achievement remained there.

Erap Estrada, no matter what one can say against the man, he can claim that his majority, his electoral victory was unprecedented and untarnished. It was proof that no machine can subvert the overwhelming desire of the people. it was proof that democracy won that day of his election yet his greatest failing was perhaps throwing away an opportunity to change this nation and this squandering of an electoral mandate also spawned an even deadlier virus by a vigilante middle class and they in turn, was used as an instrument to usurp an election.

As they say, it is ancient history and now we are here. With our economic progress such as it is, and while it is nothing extraordinary, this economy is riding once more on the wave of global progress and its success or failure determined by the Global economy.

A few days ago, Rene Azurin wrote "Indifference is a Mistake" in his BusinessWorld Column:

"This is an agenda we can all act on. I suspect, though, that unless we can get a stirred up youth to direct their fire and passion to demanding changes that matter, not much will happen. The young need to supply the energy and enthusiasm that we who are older and tireder now appear sadly lacking. They cannot be indifferent just yet. It is their future that is at stake."

Given our people's ever growing desire to work beyond the country, and while their wealth is generated elsewhere, has this Republic become a mere suburb in the sprawling nation of the world? they work abroad, their kids grow up at home, study at home and at the appointed time leave the nest and work elsewhere. And thus, has the Philippines' national government been reduced to the effectiveness and level of a homeowner's association?

Put it in this way: a man gives everything to a woman, who he loves. she in turn leaves him, breaks his heart and not even because she has another man waiting in the wings. she just leaves for no apparent reason. she comes back and the man forgives. she leaves again, hurts him and he forgives. after so many times, is the man an idiot? the feminists would write it the other way around, which doesn't really matter because the story never changes: when you've been hurt one too many times, when then do you cross the line and become an idiot?

Politics is content. In the same way you attract people's attention like buying goods or services: it is a form of content and in a world where there are so many things vying for content there is no room for people who demand you to listen to theirs. The generation of the technology savvy is the generation that gives merit to content. it approves what benefits them or what interests them. in other words, they get something out of it. If your content is terrible, is it the fault of the consumer or the producer of the content if it doesn't click?

We've entered an age where technological achievement is ushered in from private enterprise. Rarely is it spawned anymore from government initiatives and even then it is private enterprise that really takes it off the ground. The Wright Brothers took it upon themselves to fly and their desire infected others and today, aircraft has made the world a much smaller place. On another hand, look at the Internet: a byproduct of the Cold War but it was only when private enterprise started using it and leveraging it, when it started to be productive.

So what use is government now? Balancing the playing field: an arbiter, an entity that sets up rules of the game for private enterprise and individuals to play in. It seeds infrastructure when private enterprise refuses to build one or isn't interested in building one. it provides an insurance: a safety net for disasters and issues of general importance.

What happens when justice takes too long to uphold for rich and poor alike, when crime is so prevalent you can't even walk the streets carrying a cheap mobile phone safely or ride a bus without thought of being a victim of crime? When the help needed to rebuild community victims of natural disasters can not be provided for, when the infrastructure so desperately needed to be built is non-existent or inefficient, what good is government for then?

On the other hand, this is an age where private enterprise-- private individuals can band together and build communities and provide services even at the time of disasters or when the common good is of importance. Filipinos around the world do it all the time. Non-government organizations do it all the time. Individuals banding together, forming communities to solve or answer a particular need is happening every single day.

Why do we need government for, when people even with limited resources that they have, can make a difference by themselves?

Perhaps another way of looking at it is this: people are looking for a leader. Which brings us to this question: what kind of leader is a good one?

Sun Tzu said[1] that these are the characteristics of a commander or in our case a good leader are these:

• wisdom,
• knowledge,
• credibility,
• strictness,
• benevolent,
• courageous,
• is a skillful analyst,
• is unconcerned by punishment,
• puts the army/nation/organization first,
• is tranquil, obscure, and upright,
• has self-discipline,
• is clever and inventive,
• has a wide array of encompassing talents

Do you have those qualities?

A good leader is not just in government (the cynic would say never from government) and is found in all walks of life and in all sorts of organizations and communities. In Great Men and Sacrifice, I wrote that a good leader is also obsessed about the future and our past traditions:

I have only one point in all this. Let me ask you this: in Philippine society today, how often do we obsess about our future and how often do we concern ourselves with our past/traditions?

Great men lay their lives down, sure. Often, is not the greater sacrifice living such unhappy lives, taking on risks and trials---- suffering so that others may have happy or at least better lives? Anti-Hero or Villain, Linderman has a point: "great men are willing to sacrifice to save the world." Do you have what it takes to be great?

Leaders, change, making a difference--- they're no longer a monopoly of governments anymore. Can the future be designed because everyday people, ordinary people are making a difference right now: bringing up families, creating communities, innovating business and technology, helping each other and standing together. People can create their own future, right here, right now and are doing it every single day.

Government has become a nuisance.

It isn't anymore a case of being indifferent. People from all walks of life are doing what they can to make their lives better, on their own as best they could. Government and politicians have made the whole political genre a form of entertainment, like one big massive soap opera. So in television parlance: it has jumped the shark. it is not a case of being indifferent, it is a case of making government and politicians irrelevant.

It is in the Politicians best interest to keep the status quo: the "for the boys" club, the same old ideas, the stifling of civil liberties and innovation, the "you are against us or with us" mentality and the oppression of those who have no voice (updated:) and of course employing tactics as Ricky Carandang wrote in pretzel logic:

If a cursory look at the partlists and their nominees can immediately raise questions like these, imagine what a more detailed examination could unearth. And yet the Comelec wanted the voter to simply trust their judgement and vote blindly for their partylist reps. By keeping the names under lock and key, Comelec facilitated the sale of partylist seats and exposed voters to the danger that they may actually be sending someone to Congress that did not represent them or their interests. (end of update)

Stating the obvious and the ridiculous: by what sign of good faith do politicians give us?

Kidding aside, will casting a vote now advance the greater good?

In this video from TED, BMW's Chris Bangle talked about building the next generation of SUV but what really struck me as even more important is the leadership lessons to be learned from his presentation:

download zip/mp4 here

Politicians and by politicians i mean the whole government establishment plus many of those who were there in EDSA, and a lot of the old crowd of middle-class believers are asking us to place our trust once more in the political system, in government. Seriously, it seem pointless really. We are way past indifference. If government becomes irrelevant, why bother dealing with it? "You are either against us, or with us," isn't that what the old boys taught us kids? The Everyman's leadership agenda is this: people are (and better off) leveraging their own success through their own hard work, sheer audaciousness and determination.

further reading:
[1] "Sun Tzu: Art of War", translated by Ralph D. Sawyer, p132-134.