 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| In One Generation
By Antonio C. Abaya Written June 18, 2007 For the Standard Today, June 19, issue In reaction to my article Their Perfect Society (June 13, 2007), Rex C. Drilon II sent the following email: �The country owes you one for this excellent and courageous piece. We need more than ever a new generation of leaders who share this vision to help us build one nation, one community of responsible citizens who deeply love this country. Perhaps you can, in future articles, share your thoughts with the Filipino people on how we can bring this conversion about. In one generation.� In one generation? It sounds daunting and impossible. But the empirical evidence in this part of the world shows it has been done in the recent past, and therefore it can be done in the future, even in a fractious society like the Philippines . But only if we will accept some trade-offs. The man who transformed South Korea , from an underdeveloped Third World country to one of the world�s top industrial giants was Gen. Park Chung Hee. He rose to power in a military coup d�etat in 1961 as head of junta, was elected president in 1963, and re-elected to a series of six-year terms, but was assassinated by the chief of the Korean CIA in 1979. He was succeeded by another general until civilian rule was established in 1990. So it can be said that Gen. Park (and his successors) modernized South Korea in one generation. But this was accomplished under authoritarian rule. To this day, even under elected civilian presidents, the communists remain outlawed and suppressed, 54 years after the Korean War (with communist North Korea ) ended in a stalemate.. Taiwan was where the Kuomintang government of Chiang Kai-shek fled to in 1949, after being defeated in Mainland China by the communist armies of Mao Ze-dong. Taiwan remained under martial law (or authoritarian rule) until 1987 and Taiwan �s first presidential elections did not take place until 1996. It was under the martial law regime of Chiang�s son, Chiang Ching-kuo, who succeeded his father in 1978, that Taiwan was transformed, more or less in one generation, into the major industrial power that it is today. Needless to say, facing as it does the threat of imminent invasion from the mainland, Taiwan does not allow communists to befoul their political environment under any disguise. Singapore gained its independence from the British in 1963 as part of the Federation of Malaysia. Two years later, it separated itself from that federation and became a totally separate nation and state. Singapore was headed by Prime Minster Lee Kwan Yew even way back in 1959, when Singapore was still an autonomous state within the British Commonwealth, until he retired in 1990, by which time Singapore had already joined the ranks of First World countries. So it can be said that Lee Kwan Yew modernized Singapore in more or less one generation also. Unlike Gen. Park in South Korea and Gen. Chiang in Taiwan , Lee achieved that transformation with a civilian government subject to parliamentary elections every five years. Western liberals sneer that Singapore under Lee and his successors was/is not really liberal-democratic because a) the media is government-controlled; b) the opposition (meaning, essentially the communists) is suppressed by the Internal Security Act or ISA. The ISA was/is a legal and constitutional instrument inherited from the British colonial government. It gave the Singapore (and Malaysian) government the right to jail anyone suspected of being a �subversive,� initially indefinitely and without trial, now with a more liberal interpretation, the communists having been rendered irrelevant by the broad-based prosperity. The last communist �subversive� jailed in Singapore under the ISA was freed in 1998, after stewing in prison for 22 years.. Malaysia also used its ISA to break the back of the communist insurgency in the 50s and 60s, and to neutralize anyone who threatened the communal harmony in the multi-racial society that is Malaysia . Western liberals also sneer that Malaysia was/is not really democratic because a) the media is government-controlled; and b) the ISA is used to harass the political opposition, even those who are not communist. But it cannot be denied that Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, who was prime minister from 1981 to 2003, transformed Malaysia from a sleepy and inconsequential ho-hum country into a modern state, a regional power, and one of the most successful countries in the entire Muslim world. And he did it in one generation, with visionary leadership and strong will. Malaysia and Singapore can probably best be labeled as soft authoritarian states. Gen. Suharto rose to power in Indonesia in 1965 after a botched attempt by the Parti Komunis Indonesia to seize power: they machine-gunned to death the entire high command of the Indonesian military except one general, who escaped and led a military counter-coup. The ensuing bloodbath saw the extermination of communists and suspected communists estimated at from 300,000 to two million. Suharto was elected and re-elected in uncontested presidential elections until he was overthrown in a popular revolt in 1998. During his 33 years in power, Suharto sought to industrialize his country through his technology minister, B. J. Habibie, who started ambitious projects to fabricate aircraft and helicopters, maritime and naval ships, telecom equipment, electric generators, diesel engines, railway equipment, arms and munitions, etc. But all came to naught when public anger over corruption and nepotism forced Suharto out of office. See my article Villaruel�s Folly (Nov. 12, 2003).. On the other side of the ideological divide, Chairman Mao Ze-dong is credited with having unified China and given the Chinese people a sense of national honor and self-pride. But his economic strategies � including crude backyard furnaces to make steel ingots, agricultural communes - were a disaster, and his insistence on non-stop political ferment and anthill egalitarianism created chaos that stalled economic growth. It was the pragmatic Deng Xiao-ping, taking over when Mao died in 1976, who released the entrepreneurial spirit inherent in Chinese culture. Starting in 1979, Deng restored capitalism and the profit motive, at first in the rural areas, later in the cities as well. �It does not matter if the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.� �Get rich through hard work! To get rich is glorious!� These were the slogans that set the Chinese public on fire with the zeal to make and enjoy private profits, carrying the entire country on the road to prosperity and super-power status. And Deng, who died in 1997, did it in more or less one generation. But, it has to be pointed out, while economic liberalism was/is in, political liberalism was/is not. It was Deng who ordered the massacre on Tienanmen Square to silence student demonstrators demanding more political rights in China . His successors will not tolerate any similar demands now or in the near future. Like Park�s South Korea , Chiang�s Taiwan and Suharto�s Indonesia , China was and still is a hard authoritarian state. So, to summarize. Yes, countries, including fractious ones like the Philippines , can be transformed in one generation, provided there is visionary leadership with the correct economic and political priorities, and a willingness on the part of the public to accept some trade-offs. In a future article, I will explore if and how it can be achieved here. ***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org and in acabaya.blogspot.com OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �In One Generation� More Reactions to �Their Perfect Society� More Reactions to �Fidel Castro Trillanes� �Only Science can Solve Poverty� Dear Mr. Abaya, I believe social change can be achieved in one generation, although I might not be around to see it. As you have mentioned, empirical evidence has shown that it can be realized as exemplified by : South Korea , Taiwan , Singapore , Malaysia and Indonesia . Of course, there is a price to pay on the road to prosperity and in stamping out poverty for good. I'm willing to pay the price, that is, doing away with the liberal democracy of the US and adopting the Internal Security Act as requirements for social change. Yes, even the extreme Indonesian Solution, just to get us on the road to progress. Sincerely, Auggie Surtida, (by email), Tigbauan, Iloilo , June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya : Together with tens, maybe even hundreds, of thousands who cling desperately to some hope (no matter how irrationally this may seem) that our country is not doomed to remain the basket case of Asia for many generations to come, we shall await your future article on how that transformation may or can be achieved in one generation. Many like me have sadly resigned ourselves to the prognosis that perhaps even our grandchildren will not see that day. Most cordial regards. Tony Elica�o, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, This is a well laid-out article about the above subject. Based on our neighboring countries, they were able to do it. Why can't we ? As long we have the capabilities and self-determination to do it, we Filipinos can make it. This article of yours is a good eye-opener to all of us. Keep up the good work, my friend, and all of us will be benefited by it. Thank you and best regards, Agustin Bacalso, (by email), Canada , June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, You said it, our neighboring countries became successful and wealthy due to authoritarian rule. The Philippines had it and it did not work because it was clouded with greed, love of power, and personal preservation, instead of love for the people, personal sacrifice, and economic plans to achieve self sufficiency with a big surplus for the whole country and its people. Taiwan , Singapore , South Korea , and China succeeded because their leaders have sacrificed and planned their economic growth wisely, keeping the interest of their people above all else. They worked towards their production and set their sights to supply the world, because they knew that it's the only way to succeed. Money is the root of all evil, but money is still the commodity that will make their people survive and keep their dignity to stand proud with anybody else. Lee Kuan Yew, Chiang Kai Shek, Mao Tse Tung and Park Chung Hee did it for their country and their people, Marcos did it for himself and his family, they amassed wealth that they could not ever imagine and left only the bones to our people. 20 years in power and yet our country and our people's condition deteriorated. It gained an inch but all was lost and deteriorated even more when the new government took over. The economy kept going down and our people had to leave and work anywhere because there is none in our country. Our people had to work under worst conditions in other countries but they had to do it to feed their families back home. Filipinos have suffered so much humiliation abroad, getting their heads chopped off, being raped, beaten and maltreated but they still kept going because of need and the will to survive. Now, who do you think can be a Lee Kuan Yew for the Philippines , a Chiang Kai Shek, or a Park Chung Hee to save our country and our people? Only God can save us and only a miracle can make our people prosper. Alfredo Santos, (by email), San Ramon , California , June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, What was Marcos's contribution to the country and those who followed after him. I am interested. I need to see your views on them. Thanks. Dr. Nestor Baylan, (by email), New York City , June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear ACA, Excitedly waiting for your next article. Mr. Ding Lichauco is also calling for rapid industrialization to conquer mass poverty. AL Jose Leonidas, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hello, can you please add me to your mailing list? I would like to receive your articles on a regular basis. Best Regards, Reigner Faigao, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Great article, Tony. I am glad that Rex Drilon's remark got you to write it. IT CAN BE DONE, but it will take a person who is ready to buck the Oligarchy who, from the days of the Rajahs Tondo and Sulayman, have been principal influencers on the way we are governed or shall I say mis-governed. JayJay Calero, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya, Thank you for the acknowledgment. I remember in the first two years of martial law the Filipino learned to be disciplined. He queued at jeepney and bus stops, crime was down, streets were clean, people came home early, a drug dealer was executed, there was order and peace in our society. Things were headed in the same direction as Singapore and the other countries you mentioned. For a brief moment we were doing the right things right, even if there was loss of freedom and some human rights. But we lost steam and the rest is history. I agree it can be done because we have done it, albeit too briefly. Again thank you and please continue to fire away. Rex C. Drilon II, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I wonder what Mr. Drilon suggest we do with people like Benjie Abalos in relation to building a new nation in one generation. Should we prosecute him for misdeeds, to say the least, in the conduct of elections as Chairman/CEO of Comelec? Should we expose his "persona" to the public so we do not appoint a similar character to the Comelec? What does Mr. Drilon suggest we do to the other "pollutants" in this country so that we may build a new nation in one generation. John Salamat, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww You are not suggesting another dictatorship, are you? There are leaders who have a vision for the country, just as there are groups of people who deeply love the Philippines . However, they do not come to light as they are largely ignored by our media. I think as long as our media is as it is, we will never get anywhere. Serafin, Dudeo, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I once asked our friend Ely when the Philippines can attain the same level of nationhood and civility as Australia where he has lived for over a decade. His reply was intriguing. Given our history and the "normal" way we do things, he estimated it would take at least 10 generations or 200 years! So he suggests an intervention to shorten the process, such as a cultural revolution or something of that sort. I mentioned to you that I had a previous luncheon meeting with Ray at the Manila Polo Club. He told me that he is of the belief that we have abused our freedom or democracy and we might be better off with a strong authoritarian regime. Rick B. Ramos, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, The Philippines also had Marcos for 21 years from 1965-86 (although the authoritarian part was only from 1972-86). Unfortunately, Marcos and his government, military, and cronies abused power and were more interested in personal wealth creation. And what made it worse, ill-gotten wealth was brought out of the country. Nothing much has changed since then. We still have the same cast of leaders plus a more politicized Church and boisterous media adding to the chaos. I still cannot see anyone today who can inspire our nation � whether from leaders in both sides of the political fence, or leaders from the extreme right (military included) or left. But I am sure we can find a brilliant servant leader with the vision and courage to inspire and peacefully revolutionize this country. But the question is: Will the �squealing masa� or the noisy street parliamentarians or juntas put him or her in office? I don�t think so. Thus, we need to completely overhaul our constitution and laws to create opportunities for the emergence of our brilliant servant leaders with sufficient powers to revolutionize this country and sustain its development. The new constitution can also simplify and minimize government structure. I am looking at just two equal and independent branches of government � Executive and Judiciary. However, a small lawmaking body whose only function is to enact laws will be created to assist the Executive. The body shall be composed of both elected officials (at most two per region) and respected leaders from various main sectors of society (business, labor, church, environment, etc �) � but maybe close to just 50 individuals (the 1986 constitution was written by just 50). The Executive officials to be elected by the people will be the President, Vice-President, and local officials. The Head and members of the Judiciary will basically be chosen among and by peers, without interference from the President. Perhaps, under a simpler form, this country can be managed more efficiently and be transformed in one generation. Regards, Pachelo Lao, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony Abaya, Your articles and sharers have wonderful ideas. Hope they come to reality. Honestly, I believe, we can progress and enjoy a better Philippines if we are under an Authoritarian Government, where the laws are respected and followed. We need a good benevolent Dictator, well loved by the people, because he understand then and treat them equally, be they pauper or rich. Too much abuse of democracy, and freedom of the press to destroy reputation and name of people and project the negatives in us is working against a better Philippines . Most of our political leaders should be jailed, especially liars and cheats, if we have to bring back law and order in this land. This may be harsh, but if we do not do it soon enough, we will be suffering more. We have yet to see hoodlums in uniform and robe in jail. The problem is who will be these good leaders? Will they not be eaten up by the corrupt system? God save the Philippines . What do you think? Rex Rivera, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I fully agree with you on the subject stated above. My husband and I always talk about this, that we can be like Singapore , Malaysia , etc. We always vote for Ping Lacson because we know he can do it. Please forward your article to Sen. Ping Lacson and inspire and encourage him to take the lead in transforming our nation. Kudos to you. Flora R. Jurado, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww O.K. does that mean that you believe it�s achievable but under a dictator? Personally, I'm not against any system that will finally bring some equality for the many. Bambi Harper, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, The common denominator among these countries and states is authoritarianism. Marcos was on the right track after all. The cure-all in our country's transformation is to have a generation of authoritarian government. The trade-offs would be the temporary suspension of what is called our democratic ideals. I am no libertarian. But we can forget about these libertarian ideals which cannot fill the hunger in our stomach but fill the perception of being totally free. Vic del Fierro, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hello Tony, This is really interesting. I was wondering what went wrong with us and in one generation we deteriorated this much. I heard the same comment from Jun Urbano in one of his interviews. What went wrong? I hope you can write an article discussing the highlights of the past administrations, from Roxas to Macapagal (the first one). You mentioned Marcos made a wrong move during the martial law regime by focusing on cottage industry not export oriented economy. But I think there is much more on that. Is it the parity right the we granted to the Americans after the WWII? Or we do not have any visionary leaders like Lee Kuan Yew? C.P. Garcia promoted a Filipino First policy, how come it is a failure? Is it a lack of entrepreneurial spirit of Filipinos, hence we failed to develop our own industry? Or the treachery committed by Aguinaldo's men to Bonifacio during the revolution showed that we Filipinos are not capable of self-discipline and statesmanship. Mabuhay po kayo and sana you keep on coming up with tough provoking articles like this!!!! Regards, Marvin Valido, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Great article!!!!! With the Filipino mentality, it is the kind of government we need, not the �demcrazy� we are subjected to The question is how can we identify that leader? E. Q. Abellera, (by email), June 20, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Based in our current situation nowadays, we badly need an authoritarian form of government. The Marcos government would have been perfect government if only he and his cronies chose the correct path to righteousness and economic strategies. We could have been in the elite group of Asia's flying economies like Singapore and Japan . Did you hear any bad guys or gangs or big communist groups in the streets during Marcos time? Let alone in Congress. Winawalis lahat 'yon. If Marcos had wanted bloodshed during 1986 EDSA. Enrile and Ramos would have been dead. It was one of his few and last good deeds. It doesn't mean I like him and his family. I don't like them at all. All I'm saying is that, with his kind of discipline, we could have achieved something great economically if greed didn't come into play. Why is that that Chinese people from China crossed the ocean to settle in the Philippines ? Was it because of our Demo-crazy that China didn't have? Why is it that Koreans want to stay or study in the Philippines ? Low cost of living or good education? Why is it that all scholars in the neighboring nations study agriculture in the Philippines ? Yet, we can't feed our own people and must import rice and corn and others? Whatever it is, they must see something that we, Filipinos didn't see, don't see or refuse to see. Infrastructures, roads, bridges, ports, airports and communication are the key to faster transfer of goods and services and more investments will rain in the land especially if "peace and order" is enforced. To clear the traffic, more light or speedy rail or LRT should be running criss-crossing the city. Let's keep the people busy with jobs. Being idle and jobless mean that they become baby-making factories. Let the priests and bishops do their own chores (and tax them) so they can feel the pain. Also, media should be fair and balance, report the bad as well as the good things. Jatropha is a great fuel alternative (and can grow to any type of soil) since there's no competition between machines and human consumptions unlike corn, sugarcane and coconut oil. Imagine if we can do all these things with the right economic strategies (like you said, manufacturing and etc) under rightful authoritarian rule.. I'm a believer that we can achieve this in one generation. But let's wait and see what PGMA can do in three years time. We might shoot for 8%. Who knows, she may redeem herself with a leaping great economy! LF, [email protected], June 22, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I hope you get the message across, loud and clear. Cesar Sarino, (by email), June 25, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww\ I will wait for that future article, Tony. Congratulations for encouraging deep and incisive thinking. Why don't they get you in PDI or Star? You should be read by more people. Grace Zata, (by email), June 26, 2007 (Thank you. I was writing a column in the Philippine Star for several years, until I was fired by Max Soliven. In what turned out to be my last column in the Star, in November 1997, I referred to the Philippine Daily Inquirer as �the most widely circulated newspaper in the Philippines .� To Soliven, that was an act of disloyalty. (As for the Philippine Daily Inquirer, a minor stockholder in the corporation that owns the PDI actually tried to get me into the Inquirer several years ago, but he was rebuffed. Probably due to my being anti-communist. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Greetings! What things can be done in one generation are what politicians want to get undone. This is what appears to be in a country where politicians are very powerful, armed to the teeth with money taken from the impoverished people. What could be the reason for senatorial and congressional candidates to spend hundreds of millions of pesos in their desire to get elected if not the blood money they can milk later from the government and illegal connections. Going back to your article "In One Generation", you perfectly illustrated the kind of media or, better, "press" that we have here in the Philippines . The so-called vanguard of freedom is now full of licentious persons. One could not even imagine how rich some press people have become in using or manipulating the power of the pen. Your observation on the enormous influence of television, especially their garbage programs, upon our children has never been a concern for our government. The education department is keeping a blind eye on this. Its principle has gone in disarray. Their officials' promised oath to provide the best education to our youth has waned and dissipated day after day after day. Just looking at the emphases of textbook (error-filled or not) and you can discern how shallow is the focus on giving importance to the value of a human being. The mentality they imbibe today will be what could influence them when they become leaders in the future. Changing our country's position in one generation towards a progressive level could only be attained through a miracle, i.e., all the licentious, craven, insidious, lecherous, corrupt and insensible politicians, press people, and government officials will die from brain damage unless they will reform. I guess putting up a good authoritarian government to rein our country towards progress would take generations to be realized as potential oppositions have oodles of money to spend buying monkey wrench they would throw to a well running machine. Besides, who will be able to do it? No person with great power, influence and leadership is standing up right now. Sincerely, James Tanaka, (by email), June 27, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to �Their Perfect Society� (June 13, 2007) Dear Tony: Thanks for sending me a copy of your emails. I enjoyed reading them. Hope to receive more in the coming days. More power to you. Michael Alegre, (by email), June 26, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, Thanks for getting me in. I wanted to get the message across to unsuspecting fellow travelers. I had a look inside at some of the machinery and the people. The chief editor of the Daily Worker (the Communist front newspaper) was a man I got to know well along with his personal problems. He married and ended up a capitalist. Jack ( Sherman ), (by email), June 28, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to �Fidel Castro Trillanes� (June 10, 2007) Tony, Reading the contributions of your readers, I am pleased that many are raising questions from simple to rhetorical to skeptical. Maybe, our democracy can still be seen as in the process of becoming. I felt that the real culprits in our political situation are people's indifference and their lack of desire or ability to raise questions. Trillanes has laid his life and position on the line. Yes, he's young and idealistic, but I don't think, naive, opportunist and lots of name-calling that I hear, a trade-mark of GMA and her propagandists. I hope our people would keep in mind that our Armed Forces are supposed to serve our people and our Constitution, not a person, let alone a usurper of a Constitutional position. That, Trillanes has proved to be faithful to. He is that friend who was ready to sacrifice his life for his friends, the Filipino people, of which we, you readers, are only a few. But, par for the course, many of those friends he is committed to serve will prove to be thankless. Fortunately, as Our Lord had shown, there's no point in being disappointed for those who do not return the favor, nor appreciate, because after all, it is better to be paid by the Father. About Trillanes' program, it should be clear to us that he values our Constitution and our people more than GMA and the self-serving and subservient to GMA-officials, the Barabbas that is being freed as Trillanes is incarcerated and persecuted. If all he could contribute are legislations relating to the Armed Forces that would make the kind of generals we have now, extinct, the voters made an excellent choice. But, having been a victim of a lack of due process should enable him to see a need for improvement in the system and a good member of the Upper House. We seem to have laws in the books that need teeth for enforcement. Experience is still known to be a good teacher. Aurora Riel, (by email), Murfreesboro , North Carolina , June 27, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww COMMENTARY Only science can solve poverty By Flor Lacanilao Philippine Daily Inquirer Last updated 02:24am (Mla time) 06/21/2007 MANILA , Philippines -- Addressing the symptoms rather than the causes is our common approach to solving problems. Let�s take the problems of poverty and overpopulation discussed in a letter to the editor (Inquirer, 6/18/07). They are symptoms of underdevelopment, forming a vicious cycle, making economic growth more difficult. Dealing with symptoms is just like administering medicine to ease the pain instead of curing the disease. We must address the cause to achieve the objective. The basic cause of our underdevelopment is poor science and technology (S&T). While controlling population growth may facilitate economic progress, this cannot be achieved without S&T. We should learn from densely populated countries that have left us behind and the sparsely populated African countries, which have remained poor. When Singapore was developing its industrial base in the �60s and �70s, its population density was higher than that of the Philippines today; but its government relied much on the country�s scientists and focused on advancing science and technology. By 1995, the number of its scientific publications (the established measure of S&T performance) was six times more than that of the Philippines , even though we were 20 times bigger than Singapore . In India , which has 1 billion people and a high population density (368 persons per sq km against our 300), economic growth is in rapid progress. �Signs are accumulating that India is on course to becoming one of the world�s scientific and technological leaders ... more and more young scientists now are opting to stay or at least return to India . Not only are living conditions improving, but opportunities for exciting work are exploding owing to a growing roster of research and development centers that multinational companies have been establishing there in recent years.� African countries, however, have remained poor despite low population densities. For example, Zimbabwe , Congo , Mozambique , Sudan , Zambia and Angola have only 10 to 32 persons per sq km. Hence, it was said, �Whereas science alone cannot save Africa, Africa without science cannot be saved.� While our government, by its pronouncements, has long recognized the importance of S&T to economic growth, it has failed to institute programs to improve science. Poor science has been our major obstacle to economic growth. And it has led to the public�s confusion and difficulty in distinguishing between the causes and symptoms of national problems. Mainly to blame is the National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST), which is mandated �to advise the President and the Cabinet on matters related to science and technology.� Corruption in government and common crimes are also symptoms of underdevelopment. So are poor education and environment degradation. Like poverty and overpopulation, they are problems that largely disappear as a nation achieves real growth through S&T. The few crooks that remain in developed countries are for sociologists to explain. They are not development-related. �Development goals that do not recognize the importance of science and technology in economic transformation are likely to fail, especially those aimed at reducing poverty and raising income levels.� (Harvard Report: Meeting the needs of developing countries, 2001) ***** Flor Lacanilao, (by email), June 21, 2007 Flor Lacanilao is a retired professor of marine science at the University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City . His series of published articles on public understanding of science are now posted at www.philippinestoday.net (under SciTech Update). The articles discuss how science should be done and how the Filipino scientific community has failed in its social responsibility. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO If you wish to be unsubscribed from this newsletter, please send a blank email to [email protected], with the subject heading Unsubscribe, and you will be removed from our distribution list. Thank you. |