Philippine Daily Inquirer Digital Edition

In search of our nation’s soul

As the years went by, the spirit of Edsa seems to have increasingly dimmed in our collective memory

By Gil Yuzon @Inq_Lifestyle —CONTRIBUTED INQ

This early, a month before the next Edsa anniversary on Feb. 25, I’m wondering how this landmark event in our history will be celebrated by the Filipino people, if at all. I still remember how the area around the Edsa Shrine had to be closed to traffic to accommodate the huge number of people who thronged to the site every Edsa anniversary in the years immediately following the restoration of democracy in our land through a nonviolent people’s revolution. The Philippines became the toast of the free world and the model for many subsequent peaceful democratic movements in other countries around the world.

We thought then that People Power, manifested by millions at Edsa and around the country, was the defining expression of the Filipino people’s indomitable spirit and character—the essence of the nation’s soul.

But as the years went by, the spirit of Edsa seems to have increasingly dimmed in our collective memory, and with it, the core of what we thought was our unique national soul.

Sense of drift

Today, a mere 36 years after ousting the late dictator, the Filipino people have chosen once again to bring his son to power as our president. And while this event was a source of bewilderment among countries that have looked up to the Philippines, in all fairness and judging from what we see in the character of the present holder of the position, today we are probably far from a return to autocratic rule. Instead, people have been feeling a sense of drift, a lack of national purpose and a clear vision for our country.

Over many years and decades of ups and downs under various leaders (a few of whom did well), our nation has slipped from its eminent position in the Asian region in the 1950s and 1960s to the tail-ender or near tail-ender that it is today, especially among its peers in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). Let me give some examples.

Despite its limited area and almost total absence of natural resources, tiny Singapore’s clearly defined aspiration and determination to prosper economically has made it a first-world country, the most highly developed in Southeast Asia today. This has been achieved under visionary and consistent leadership and the active cooperation of its multiracial population since its inception as a self-governing, and subsequently an independent state in 1965.

Intolerance for corruption

Similarly, Vietnam, a nondemocratic country, has overtaken many of its Asean neighbors with its unification after a protracted, decades-long civil war complicated by foreign meddling. Despite its late start, today Vietnam is arguably the fastest-rising Asian economy, vaulting to second place in key developmental indices among the 10 Asean member nations. Besides strong leadership, I attribute its ongoing success to an effective, consistent policy of attracting foreign investment, a resolute intolerance for corruption and the industriousness of its hardy citizens steeled by the experience of war.

And then there is Taiwan (officially Republic of China) which only has 0.3 percent of the world’s population but accounts for seven times its size in the value of its exports relative to total world exports. It is a premier supplier of industrial and electronic products, such as integrated circuits and microassemblies, to the world’s advanced economies, managing to develop its technological expertise even under the constant threat of invasion by China, which has always claimed it as a breakaway province. In the face of this, Taiwan has remained a vibrant democratic state with nationalistic and independence-minded citizens.

Farther afield, South Korea has become a highly industrialized Asian economy, leaving far behind its northern counterpart which has obstinately remained totalitarian. A most admirable example of the cohesiveness and patriotism of the Korean people was demonstrated during the Asian economic crisis of 1998, in which Asian countries, including the Philippines severely suffered economically.

At the height of the crisis, upon the behest of their government, Korean citizens voluntarily turned over their gold holdings— gold certificates, gold jewelry and other accessories—to boost their country’s gold reserves in a national gold-collecting campaign. With this move, the country was able to repay the $19.5 billion in International Monetary Fundbacked debts, in a show of national solidarity and collective sacrifice (en.m.wikipedia.com), I don’t imagine this would happen in other countries, especially on such a huge scale.

Admirable qualities

Back to the Philippines, it is disheartening to note that all the countries mentioned above were far behind us—politically, economically, technically and in many social aspects (education, health, welfare, etc.) in the 1950s and ’60s when we were second only to Japan in overall standing. Today, we have fallen behind most countries in Asia, near last if not last in a number of key indices, including poverty rating, citizen nutrition, average IQ, quality of education, extent of corruption, etc. So what happened to us in the intervening seven-plus decades?

Looking at the positive side, we Filipinos have many admirable qualities—individually and collectively. In my view, these are the relevant ones that stand out: the capacity for hard work (e.g., our OFWs are widely known for their exceptional diligence and dedication in whatever jobs they hold in their host countries); resiliency and adaptability, even in the most challenging situations (e.g., surviving frequent disasters in our calamity-prone country, scraping through the pandemic, for the many who descended to below subsistence-level poverty at its height); close family ties and the bayanihan spirit (e.g., lending a helping hand to relatives and neighbors in need is a reliable support system in times of crisis). We have other positive traits, too many to mention, which are conducive to building a strong nation.

We also have traits that are counterproductive: procrastination (bukas na lang), tardiness (Filipino time), crab mentality (bringing others down), “everyone for himself” (kanya-kanya). Probably the most relevant today are: perennial endemic corruption, both bigtime and petty; continually electing unfit/inappropriate national and local officials (e.g., popular personalities with poor credentials, persons who have a known record for corruption, several members of family dynasties serving simultaneously)—recipes for mediocre and flawed governance. These latter traits are either reflective of collective amnesia, cluelessness or simply gross disregard for the lessons of the past. The result is a lack—on the part of both public leaders and citizens—of a consistent and persistent national vision and the moral and societal values needed to achieve it.

From the examples of the high-achieving countries cited, a nation’s collective character or “soul” is defined in the end by its most pervasive traits and values. We are still in search of ours.

LIFESTYLE

en-ph

2023-01-29T08:00:00.0000000Z

2023-01-29T08:00:00.0000000Z

https://philippinedailyinquirerplus.pressreader.com/article/282621741852181

Philippine Daily Inquirer