Why are Filipinos so Poor?
In the ’50s and ’60s, the Philippines was the most envied country in Southeast Asia. What happened?
By F. Sionil Jose
What did South Korea look like after the Korean War in 1953? Battered, poor - but look at Korea now. In the Fifties, the traffic in Taipei was composed of bicycles and army trucks, the streets flanked by tile-roofed low buildings. Jakarta was a giant village and Kuala Lumpur a small village surrounded by jungle and rubber plantations. Bangkok was criss-crossed with canals, the tallest structure was the Wat Arun, the Temple of the Sun, and it dominated the city’s skyline. Ricefields all the way from Don Muang airport — then a huddle of galvanized iron-roofed bodegas, to the Victory monument.Visit these cities today and weep — for they are more beautiful, cleaner and prosperous than Manila. In the Fifties and Sixties we were the most envied country in Southeast Asia. Remember further that when Indonesia got its independence in 1949, it had only 114 university graduates compared with the hundreds of Ph.D.’s that were already in our universities. Why then were we left behind? The economic explanation is simple. We did not produce cheaper and better products.
The basic question really is why we did not modernize fast enough and thereby doomed our people to poverty. This is the harsh truth about us today. Just consider these: some 15 years ago a survey showed that half of all grade school pupils dropped out after grade 5 because they had no money to continue schooling.Thousands of young adults today are therefore unable to find jobs. Our natural resources have been ravaged and they are not renewable. Our tremendous population increase eats up all of our economic gains. There is hunger in this country now; our poorest eat only once a day.But this physical poverty is really not as serious as the greater poverty that afflicts us and this is the poverty of the spirit.
Why then are we poor? More than ten years ago, James Fallows, editor of the Atlantic Monthly, came to the Philippines and wrote about our damaged culture which, he asserted, impeded our development. Many disagreed with him but I do find a great deal of truth in his analysis.This is not to say that I blame our social and moral malaise on colonialism alone. But we did inherit from Spain a social system and an elite that, on purpose, exploited the masses. Then, too, in the Iberian peninsula, to work with one’s hands is frowned upon and we inherited that vice as well. Colonialism by foreigners may no longer be what it was, but we are now a colony of our own elite.
We are poor because we are poor — this is not a tautology. The culture of poverty is self-perpetuating. We are poor because our people are lazy. I pass by a slum area every morning - dozens of adults do nothing but idle, gossip and drink. We do not save. Look at the Japanese and how they save in spite of the fact that the interest given them by their banks is so little. They work very hard too.
We are great show-offs. Look at our women, how overdressed, over-coiffed they are, and Imelda epitomizes that extravagance. Look at our men, their manicured nails, their personal jewelry, their diamond rings. Yabang - that is what we are, and all that money expended on status symbols, on yabang. How much better if it were channeled into production.
We are poor because our nationalism is inward looking. Under its guise we protect inefficient industries and monopolies. We did not pursue agrarian reform like Japan and Taiwan. It is not so much the development of the rural sector, making it productive and a good market as well. Agrarian reform releases the energies of the landlords who, before the reform, merely waited for the harvest. They become entrepreneurs, the harbingers of change.
Our nationalist icons like Claro M. Recto and Lorenzo Tanada opposed agrarian reform, the single most important factor that would have altered the rural areas and lifted the peasant from poverty. Both of them were merely anti-American.
And finally, we are poor because we have lost our ethical moorings. We condone cronyism and corruption and we don’t ostracize or punish the crooks in our midst. Both cronyism and corruption are wasteful but we allow their practice because our loyalty is to family or friend, not to the larger good.
We can tackle our poverty in two very distinct ways. The first choice: a nationalist revolution, a continuation of the revolution in 1896. But even before we can use violence to change inequities in our society, we must first have a profound change in our way of thinking, in our culture. My regret about EDSA is that change would have been possible then with a minimum of bloodshed. In fact, a revolution may not be bloody at all if something like EDSA would present itself again. Or a dictator unlike Marcos.
The second is through education, perhaps a longer and more complex process. The only problem is that it may take so long and by the time conditions have changed, we may be back where we were, caught up with this tremendous population explosion which the Catholic Church exacerbates in its conformity with doctrinal purity.We are faced with a growing compulsion to violence, but even if the communists won, they will rule as badly because they will be hostage to the same obstructions in our culture, the barkada, the vaulting egos that sundered the revolution in 1896, the Huk revolt in 1949-53.
To repeat, neither education nor revolution can succeed if we do not internalize new attitudes, new ways of thinking. Let us go back to basics and remember those American slogans: A Ford in every garage. A chicken in every pot. Money is like fertilizer: to do any good it must be spread around.Some Filipinos, taunted wherever they are, are shamed to admit they are Filipinos. I have, myself, been embarrassed to explain, for instance, why Imelda, her children and the Marcos cronies are back, and in positions of power. Are there redeeming features in our country that we can be proud of? Of course, lots of them. When people say, for instance, that our corruption will never be banished, just remember that Arsenio Lacson as mayor of Manila and Ramon Magsaysay as president brought a clean government.We do not have the classical arts that brought Hinduism and Buddhism to continental and archipelagic Southeast Asia, but our artists have now ranged the world, showing what we have done with Western art forms, enriched with our own ethnic traditions. Our professionals, not just our domestics, are all over, showing how accomplished a people we are!
Look at our history. We are the first in Asia to rise against Western colonialism, the first to establish a republic. Recall the Battle of Tirad Pass and glory in the heroism of Gregorio del Pilar and the 48 Filipinos who died but stopped the Texas Rangers from capturing the president of that First Republic. Its equivalent in ancient history is the Battle of Thermopylae where the Spartans and their king Leonidas, died to a man, defending the pass against the invading Persians. Rizal — what nation on earth has produced a man like him? At 35, he was a novelist, a poet, an anthropologist, a sculptor, a medical doctor, a teacher and martyr.We are now 80 million and in another two decades we will pass the 100 million mark.
Eighty million — that is a mass market in any language, a mass market that should absorb our increased production in goods and services - a mass market which any entrepreneur can hope to exploit, like the proverbial oil for the lamps of China.
Japan was only 70 million when it had confidence enough and the wherewithal to challenge the United States and almost won. It is the same confidence that enabled Japan to flourish from the rubble of defeat in World War II.
I am not looking for a foreign power for us to challenge. But we have a real and insidious enemy that we must vanquish, and this enemy is worse than the intransigence of any foreign power. We are our own enemy. And we must have the courage, the will, to change ourselves.
+++++++++++++
Response:
“In the Fifties and Sixties we were the most envied country in Southeast Asia.”
I am not so sure about this. Were we envied because of our own accomplishments or is it because the Philippines still retained traces of American colonial economic, political, and bureaucratic infrastructure?
Maybe the better historical frame of reference is when the Philippines grew out of the shadow of American colonial infrastructure–the decade after most American holdings were transferred to Filipino hands: the mid to late 70s and beyond. What has been the pattern since then? Not very good. Monopoly economics and failed policies resulting in increasing poverty.
|
The culture of poverty is self-perpetuating. We are poor because our people are lazy.
|
If this is true then why do Filipinos suddenly excel and become very industrious once they migrate to foreign countries?
|
We are poor because our nationalism is inward looking. Under its guise we protect inefficient industries and monopolies.
|
This is the thesis of the article I mentioned earlier: Why is the Philippines Poor?
Quote:
|
We did not pursue agrarian reform like Japan and Taiwan.
|
We are pursuing agrarian reform and it is a failure due to
a) price collusion between some CARP elements and land owners. GMA mentioned this in her latest SONA speech
b) the farmer beneficiaries are given a small piece of land which they have no capital to develop resulting in subsistence farming that fails to lift rural poverty
c) very inefficient and wasteful use of a scarce resource leading to NO food security. Modern agriculture requires large scales and capital to increase yield. The CARP beneficiary has neither so the Philippines has one of the LOWEST YIELDS in Asia. Consequently, we have to import rice and food.
d) Inefficient or nonexistent food transport infrastructure. Regardless of the billions of wasted pesos in “farm to market roads”, the farmer still can’t produce for the mass market due to lack of transport and post harvest facility infrastructure.
Land reform failed, is failing, and will continue to fail. Do we really want to keep parcelling up land to a doomed production policy?
Look at the US, AU, and other countries–they produce tons of CHEAP FOOD because the farms are HUGE and allows farmers to get capital from banks.
|
Agrarian reform releases the energies of the landlords who, before the reform, merely waited for the harvest. They become entrepreneurs, the harbingers of change.
|
This may be true for Taiwan and Japan but it doesn’t happen and didn’t happen here. If anything, land reform just made farmers more subsistent and poorer instead of allowing for a transition from a majority smallholder agricultural base to a modern agricultural base.
|
And finally, we are poor because we have lost our ethical moorings. We condone cronyism and corruption and we don’t ostracize or punish the crooks in our midst. Both cronyism and corruption are wasteful but we allow their practice because our loyalty is to family or friend, not to the larger good.
|
http://www.forumcash.com/wordpress/why-is-the-philippines-poor/ agrees with the Cronyism explanation since it leads to monopolies.
However, the corruption claim may be a bit overblown. There’s many other countries with rising and high GDPs who are very corrupt. You’d think that if they were corrupt they wouldn’t attain those high growth and GDP rates. The explanation might lie in what is mixed with corruption.
|
The first choice: a nationalist revolution, a continuation of the revolution in 1896.
|
Nationalist revolution. Sounds good to the ear but it seems like another rehash of the failed “Filipino First” project of the 60s. Notice how our GDP has tanked since then.
Grave warning: Argentina had one of the highest GDPs in the early 1900s. Many Europeans emigrated to Argentina for a better life. Due to “nationalist revolutions” and populism under Juan Peron, Argentina, by the 2000s was an economic dwarf compared to its former self. People are migrating out. It has become an economic basketbase (although recovering slightly recently)
Talks of nationalistic revolutions when paired with economic redistribution lead only to one thing: POVERTY
|
The second is through education, perhaps a longer and more complex process.
|
This is true. However, the traditional education route will take many many years. There is a way to expedite the process: SCHOOL CHOICE through a voucher system. Give parents the choice on where to send their child and give private industry this open market incentive to open better schools which produce better results. Crappy public schools will go out of business and better schools will take their place.
|
To repeat, neither education nor revolution can succeed if we do not internalize new attitudes, new ways of thinking.
|
Can’t argue with this but external structures like economic policies also play a role. Internal attitudes don’t stand alone–they influence and are influenced by external structures. It’s hard to change internal attitudes but we can control external structures. By building external structures and reward systems, internal changes might happen.
Quote:
|
Let us go back to basics and remember those American slogans: A Ford in every garage. A chicken in every pot. Money is like fertilizer: to do any good it must be spread around.
|
More populist pie in the sky talk. Who is going to pay for this? Whose money? F. Sionil Jose sounds like a typical trapo’s supporter–he wants the benefits but doesn’t look a the cost.
The truth of the matter is that the only SUSTAINABLE way to economic growth is the open market (sustained by rule of law and a level playing field–external structures which we must the political will to erect)
TO GET EMAIL NOTIFICATION OF NEW DATA ENTRY JOBS — EMAIL hjig-subscribe@yahoogroups.com to join our mailing list
Email This Post
Everyone can earn money using social networking sites like blackplanet.com. With the free services for photo, blog, video and music uploads, you can attract visitors who might like to see your products or other websites. Below is how you can have your own free account, place links and info and invite people.
Social networking sites are one of the places online where you can make money. Numerous social networking sites are available to users, although a website’s popularity varies in every country. Nevertheless, it is easy to create a profile page, put links and get others to see your page in websites like bebo.com.
Earning extra cash should be fun. If working as a part time barista is not your thing, sit by your PC and promote your Bahu.com account. You can make a lot of money by participating in social networking sites. You just have to socialize with a lot of people online and sell your personal page.
You can make money out of social networking sites like badoo.com. You can advertise products you want to sell by posting pictures, links, songs, and videos for free. All you have to do is to create your own account, input links and information, and get people to see your profile page. Below are steps on how you can promote your page.
It’s pretty difficult to make a poor country rich. A lot of factors and energy need to be pooled together and getting a solid cooperation from political leaders and industries takes much time. But when it comes to making a rich country poor, there are several ways to do so and in such a short time. Three ways are to:
