Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [RP-Rizal] F. Sionil Jose Article

Expand Messages
  • C V
    ***[Edgar] The only difference is that I don t subscribe to his idea that Filipinos are a hopeless bunch.*** As I recall, Edgar used the term seemingly
    Message 1 of 56 , Nov 24, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      ***[Edgar] The only difference is that I don't subscribe to his idea that Filipinos are a hopeless bunch.***

      As I recall, Edgar used the term "seemingly hopeless."

      ***[Edgar] That we are unworthy of our liberties. ***

      Rizal gave his opinion on what we must do to become worthy. I haven't avoided that.

      ***[Edgar] If only Carl will rethink that, then we can move on and tackle the next steps on how to change the situation.***

      I have of course suggested we discuss Rizal's recommendations (study/hard work/etc.). Edgar has shown a preference to discuss me.

      CV

      --- On Wed, 11/24/10, Edgar Millan <egadong@...> wrote:

      From: Edgar Millan <egadong@...>
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] F. Sionil Jose Article
      To: "RP-Rizal" <rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com>
      Cc: "Carlos Tapang" <ctapang@...>, "C V" <cdvictory21@...>
      Date: Wednesday, November 24, 2010, 10:16 AM

      Hi, Carlos
       
      I can see from your response that you're still bent on pursuing your position that it is only our ideas of progress that needs to be change and nothing else. I respect that. On one hand, perhaps Filipinos don't really need changing because those who move to other countries easily adapt and eventually excel in their individual pursuits.
       
      Besides, there are many other exemplary and outstanding citizens back home who didn't have to get out of the country to prove that they can succeed as well. Thanks for sharing the links. I will explore them and see what they say.
       
      I'm not an economist so I don't know exactly what is the best way for the government to pursue at this point in order to advance the economic progress of the land. I believe that the export of human labor happened long before Marcos instituted it in the 1970s.
       
      During the Spanish era, the natives had already been utilized in the form of slave labor in their travels to other places and proof was the earliest recorded presence of Filipinos in the US in 1587 when mariners under Spanish command landed in Morro Bay, California. The earliest permanent Filipinos to arrive landed in 1763, later creating settlements such as Saint Malo, Louisiana and Manila Village in Barataria Bay.
       
      These early settlements were composed of formerly oppressed sailors escaping from the arduous duties aboard Spanish galleons and were "discovered" in America in 1883 by a Harper's Weekly journalist.
       
      The situation in the Philippines is no different from other countries with similar histories and geographies like Mexico for instance where its also their export of people who are the major source of economic progress. And like the Philippines, their next source of national income is tourism.
       
      If you have read Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" (1997) you will realize that not all countries were blessed with the resources that made others more competetive and progressive although countries now like China and India are redefining those boundaries although in limited parameters.
       
      But his point is that the reason countries like ours is more geared towards exporting our people rather than developing our resources is precisely because of our geographic limitations.
       
      For one, we are a fractured archipelago comprised of thousands of islands. Second, we belong to the typhoon belt where we are visited a minimum of 20 typhoons per year and each one leaves so much devastation that cripples whatever progress and development we've built prior.
       
      So, with all these, who in his right mind would want to invest in our country? We need foreign investors and they're all going to China and India. Our local business investors are fighting among themselves according to F. Sionil Jose and eventually accepting the blame for the economic woes our country is facing.
       
      What other options do we have aside from developing our tourist industry and projecting a positive image of our country to the world when all they hear from us whenever we got broadcasted in news all over the world are death toll from the recent typhoon or earthquake or more recently, that August 23 hostage tragedy that killed 8 Chinese nationals. I know it appears hopeless and the odds are against Filipinos but that is the sad reality.
       
      And still, you skirt the issue of Filipino accountability which to me is a big issue. I think Carl and I agree on this one.
       
      The only difference is that I don't subscribe to his idea that Filipinos are a hopeless bunch. That we are unworthy of our liberties. If only Carl will rethink that, then we can move on and tackle the next steps on how to change the situation.
       
       
      My thoughts,
      Edgar 

       

      To: rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com
      From: ctapang@...
      Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:36:27 -0800
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article

       
      FROM THE MODERATOR: The only real statement that is Rizal related is the one that says, "[T]he school of Salamanca, [is] the same school of ideas that influenced Rizal (in my humble opinion, not being a Rizal expert)." I would like to challenge Carlos to defend that. I am unaware that Rizal had any contact. I do know that his strongest opponants in the Philippines were the Dominicans. What is found below is brief description. IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN RIZAL AND A SET OF ECONOMIC OR OTHER IDEAS WE NEED TO PRESENT SOME KIND OF PROOF TO BACK THIS UP. This is a Rizal site, nothing else.

      =====

      The University of Salamanca, one of the oldest universities in the world (founded 1218), was a prominent Dominican bastion in the late Scholastic period. It was one of the homes of Thomistic theology, even after the doctrines of St. Thomas Aquinas were disintegrating elsewhere in Europe first under the Scotist and Nominalist onslaughts, and then from the Reformation. The "School of Salamanca" was initiated by Francisco de Vitoria around 1536 and counted Navarrus and de Soto as its most prominent theoreticians. The Jesuit trio, Lessius, de Lugo and the remarkable Luis Molina adhered to and further developed the Salamanca position. During the inflationary 16th century, theologians were appealed to repeatedly on economic affairs, particularly the status of contracts in those confusing economic times. In an effort to lay down guidelines for commercial practice and focusing on practical notions of the public good, they moved away from past dogma and approached their questions in the spirit of natural law philosophy. The result was reversal of centuries of Scholastic thinking on economic matters. It was the Salamanca school that defined the just price as no more and no less than the naturally exchange-established price. Their analysis led them to trace a scarcity theory of value and employed supply-and-demand with dexterity. They rejected Duns Scotus's "cost of production" conception of the just price, arguing that there was no objective way of determining price. Before Bodin, but after Copernicus, the Salamanca School independently uncovered the essential properties of the Quantity Theory of Money, using it to explain the inflation of the 1500s arising from the influx of precious metals from Spanish America. They also providing a resounding defense of usury. The accomplishments of the Salamanca theorists have led scholars such as Friedrich von Hayek to note that, contrary to Max Weber's thesis, it is the religion of the Jesuits and not the Calvinists, that set the grounds for capitalism.

      Source: "The School of Salamanca"

      http://homepage.newschool.edu/het//schools/salamanca.htm



      =====

      A "benevolent dictator" is a contradiction in terms. That's how the Chinese communists justify their stranglehold on Chinese political power. That's how we Filipinos fell in love with Marcos at first. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely", as Lord Acton said. We should feel blessed that we are a democracy. Rizal in his two novels expressed the idea that it is the Filipino people themselves who should redeem themselves through education and honest examination of ideas, not through some "benevolent dictator". That is the essence of democracy.
       
      The key is changing the intellectual climate, changing the source of our ideas. Ideas move mountains, and unless one's ideas are truly revolutionary and original, it comes from or is in fact ideas already formulated in the past. We are all influenced by one fundamental school of ideas or another, and it is passed on down from the intellectuals. Most of our intellectuals (movie producers, script writers, columnists, TV commentators, TV newscasters, bloggers, people who read this forum, etc) are influenced by neo-liberal ideas, most without even realizing it. That is the problem, as I see it. (And as Rizal would see it, as I understand him.)
       
      Most of our intellectuals are influenced by socialist ideas, and that has to change. Your tentative idea of a benevolent dictator is no different from "dictatorship of the proletariat" that Maoists espouse. There are so many ideas prevalent among Pinas intellectuals that are wrong:
      1. Price control
      2. Minimum wage
      3. Market-rate lending is bad (the idea that 5-6 lending is bad)
      4. Property rights as "stewardship" (land reform)
      5. A benevolent government (another version of your "benevolent dictator" idea)
      6. Freedom as encompassing freedom from want (over-extending rights to the "right" to healthcare, "right" to unearned wealth, the whole social justice system of ideas)
      etc.
       
      I assume you are a Christian, and if so, I would suggest that you study the school of Salamanca, the same school of ideas that influenced Rizal (in my humble opinion, not being a Rizal expert). You can read an introduction here: http://www.economictheories.org/2008/08/definition-of-scholasticism-scholastics.html. (The scholastics' single error was their idea that there is no time value of money, hence their stubborn resistance to lending with market interest, their insistence on anti-usury laws.) A more modern Christian defense of capitalism or the free markets can be found in Acton Institute's website: http://www.acton.org/about/acton-institute-core-principles.
       
      --Carlos

      http://ctapang.wordpress.com


       

      To: rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com
      CC: ctapang@...
      From: egadong@...
      Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 02:11:06 -0500
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article

       
      >>>There is nothing wrong with the Filipino people: nothing wrong with our desires, nothing fundamentally wrong with our habits, nothing wrong with our will to change either. My proof to you is all the Filipinos who live and work outside of Pinas.<<<

      Herein lies the clue to the Filipinos' dilemma. Yes, I agree that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with them nor their will to change. If its not them especially when they move to a foreign land then it only means its the environment that surrounds them that is the cause of the gradual decay and stagnancy that also leads to contaminating others. And yet, even the migrant and overseas Filipinos will attest that despite being successful in other countries, once they come home they revert back to their old ways and easily get swallowed by the corrupt system. This is exactly my point where the iron will to change comes into the picture. Perhaps the solution needed is a benevolent dictator with an iron fist since we cannot go around our lame democratic system. What are your other ideas to get around this? 

      >>>In our case, all we need to do is change our ideas of progress.<<<

      In my own personal opinion, we can change our ideas of progress, our system of government, and the like but if the attitude and behavior of the people remain the same then it won't make a difference. This is specifically addressed by James Fallows and called it our "damaged culture." Is it real or simply imagined? What do you think?

      Edgar


      From: ctapang@...
      To: rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com
      CC: egadong@...
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article
      Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:30:19 -0800

      You and I both want Pinas to progress. We may not agree on the exact destination, but I think we can both agree that the current state of the country is deplorable. I have visited Malaysia and Indonesia, and have lived in both Japan and the U.S. We are way behind in terms of modernization, and by that I mean the same kind of modernization that Mahbubani in his book "The New Asian Hemisphere" meant: abundant jobs, sanitary toilet bowls, clean and peaceful cities, a government that does its job, etc.
       
      For me, the question to ask is "what is the way to progress?" Not "what should we change in the Filipino people (so they can march towards progress)?" The first question does not imply that the Filipino people needs to change first before progress happens, the second certainly does. There is nothing wrong with the Filipino people: nothing wrong with our desires, nothing fundamentally wrong with our habits, nothing wrong with our will to change either. My proof to you is all the Filipinos who live and work outside of Pinas. Most of the millions of us who live and work outside are working hard to improve the lives of our families back home. We do not depend on dole-outs, we do not depend on anybody else to sustain us, we depend on ourselves to earn our living. Why is it that we have to go outside of Pinas in order to progress (in some cases, in order to survive)?
       
      What is there in other countries that we lack in Pinas that we have to get out and get? The answer is simply: jobs. We do not have enough jobs in Pinas. Why is this? Why is there not enough jobs in Pinas? Is it because we are overpopulated? The answer is not as simple as that, and in fact, my position on population is that we are in no way overpopulated. We are smaller than Japan in terms of population per hectare of arable land.
       
      Jobs do not come from governments, although in Pinas a government job is certainly desirable for its stability. Only a very tiny proportion of jobs are government jobs, and to increase it by more than its proper share would not be good for the economy (because a government job is not a job that produces, by definition). Jobs come from the private sector. And this is where I think a large part of our problem lies: our private sector is weak. Our laws mostly discourage business and the emergence of new business. We do not have enough capitalization, which can mostly only come from the outside for we do not have Korea's chaebols nor Japan's industrial conglomerates.
       
      You wrote below:
      I say you have lofty ideas because they are truly ideal and not that easy to implement. Otherwise, governments both past and present would have done so already.

      In fact, China started changing its ways in the 1980's. We were ahead of them in the 1980's, and look where we are now compared to them. They instituted free market principles then, while we enacted a socialist constitution in 1987. Our 1987 constitution has constrained our progress, while China's reforms have catapulted them from a languishing giant to the second biggest economy in the world.
       
      Now China can change its course so easily because they are a dictatorship. I agree with you that it won't be so easy for us, not because my ideas are lofty, but because we are a democracy. Now I am not saying that democracy is bad. In fact, democracy is one thing that China does not have that they now need badly. It won't be easy for China to be truly democratic, and I'm sure that it would be easier for us to institute free market principles than for them to turn democratic overnight. In our case, all we need to do is change our ideas of progress. In their case, they have a mountain of a job to dismantle the stranglehold of the communist party in their government. It may require a bloody revolution in their case; in our case, all it requires is decades of planting seeds in intellectuals like you.
       
      --Carlos

      http://ctapang.wordpress.com


       

      From: egadong@...
      To: ctapang@...
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article
      Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:27:24 -0500

      Thanks again, Carlos, for your prompt response and additional explanations.

      >>>Our topic here was F Sionil Jose's article. I do not agree with you that his conclusion is that Filipinos don't have the iron will to change.<<<

      Okay, since you have stated your position that Filipinos (in general, that is) have the iron will to change, cite proofs based on history and perhaps your own experience that they do. You should be able to show that they are willing enough to change so much that when they transact business, like paying bills for instance, they don't look for people who'll undercut rules and make the process quick for them by paying under the table so they don't have to wait in line, speed up the process, jump the queue, get preferential treatment, etc. Let's just focus on one specific point to simplify this discussion.

      Having a good opinion of one's self and seeing reality for what it is are two different things. 

      I do not see F. Sionil Jose's article, by the way, as a demoralizing denigration of his people. His assessment is based on his own observations of how Filipinos behaved for a good half century. And that is not something to scoff about. If he appears to be negative in his views then its because he hasn't seen enough positive changes to have a good opinion about us and not sell Filipinos short.

      For what is the use of telling Filipinos how great they are, that they are modern heroes of our generation, that they are at par with the best and are world class, etc. when it doesn't change an iota about their attitudes and behaviors? His grim observations are not far off the more damaging assessments of James Fallows' classic 1987 commentary on the country's damaged culture. You probably consider his views as trash as well. I respect that. But ignoring or dismissing the problem doesn't make it necessarily go away.

      I say you have lofty ideas because they are truly ideal and not that easy to implement. Otherwise, governments both past and present would have done so already. But there might be hope yet with P-Noy's administration. For one, he's willing to listen for public input. He has set up a website (facebook and twitter) for the common people to give their ideas. You should put forth those ideas and let's hope they will listen. 

      I respect the fact that you only want what's good for the Philippines. I think we are on the same boat there. What I'm against are those who want to sabotage that boat by inflicting mental harm on the psyche of Filipinos and saddling them with an unearned guilt that says they and their offspring and any future generation they will have aren't worthy of having liberties because of their defects and weaknesses. That to me will keep Filipinos off the tracks and condemn them to a hopeless future. That's not what Dr. Rizal envisioned for his people.

      Regards,
      Edgar
       

      --- In RP-Rizal@yahoogroups.com, Carlos Tapang <ctapang@...> wrote:

      I agree with most of what you say below. Noynoy is showing a good example of equality for all before the law, which is a very important component of the general maxim "rule of law" as practiced in most Western countries. No one is exempt from common law, not even the president himself.
       
      I also like what Noynoy is saying about business, that we need to relax rules that only serve to slow down progress. A good example of this is all the red tape that one has to go through just to start a legal business in Pinas. I have setup a corporation in both the U.S. and Pinas, and the contrast is stark: whereas it took me only an hour to setup a corporation in the U.S. (through a Washington state web site set up for that purpose), it took me more than three months to setup the same type of corporation in Pinas! (For more on this topic, please see: http://ctapang.wordpress.com/2010/06/14/osmosis/.)
       
      Our topic here was F Sionil Jose's article. I do not agree with you that his conclusion is that Filipinos don't have the iron will to change.
       
      ***[F Sionil Jose] ... we often fail because we don't think long and hard enough about what we do.
       
      Which to me means we are stupid, to put it very bluntly. He even gave the example of a business man who failed because that businessman did not listen to him [F Sionil Jose] that his idea of selling milk in Pinas is bunk. (I would bet that that businessman failed not because of lack of merits of his idea, but because of the bureacracy and all the taxes he had to deal with, but that's not my point.) The reason I think the article is trash (and you should too, in light of what you say below) is that it is a classic example of how we sell ourselves short, almost consistently. 
       
      We do not have a good opinion of our own selves. Come on, people, this is what Rizal is trying to say with his novels: we are worthy of the freedoms that we now enjoy! This is not some "lofty" idea: it is a very practical idea. We have exceptional individuals in our midst: from the simplicity of Pacquiao to the high-tech success of Dado Banatao, we can achieve what Rizal has shown us can be achieved. 
       
      In the spirit of Rizal, we need more freedoms, not less. Instead of our generational mistrust of business and those of us who are business-minded (like the Chinese), let's streamline our laws. By simplifying our laws we can get rid of a lot of bureacracy and corruption. Just as another example, we have a Section in our Constitution that prohibits people from suing the government. What this means is that only the government can police its own self. The result of this is one of the craziest bureacracies of all, the dark world of the Ombudsmen, who are supposed to be the only ones who can prosecute government officials.
       
      --Carlos

      http://ctapang.wordpress.com


       

      To: rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com
      From: egadong@...
      Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:24:39 -0500
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article

       
      Thanks for sharing, Carlos. I did read your blog and it contains some lofty ideas about how to get around our seemingly hopeless situation. 
       
      But I still agree with F. Sionil Jose's conclusion: Filipinos don't have the iron will to change. 
       
      Having said that, all hope is not lost though. Change takes time. Culture evolves and it also takes time. Notice how it is starting now with Noynoy's presidency. Mind you, this are but small baby steps but they are nevertheless a start. 
       
      For instance, there's his "no wang-wang" policy. For those not familiar, this refers to the blaring sirens used by VIPs to skirt Manila's notorious traffic. So what happened? Suddenly, the streets in Manila were free of  wang-wangs as citizens , with their cell phone cameras, took pictures of cars violating this policy, uploads them on the internet and alerts media and journalists. 
       
      Another example, which by the way is all about style and personal preference but has a huge influence on the people, is the way Noynoy observed traffic signals, queues and line-ups and his general policy of no preferential treatment, even to him as president of the republic. 
       
      This is most highlighted in the airports where no one is exempt from lining up to check in bags and during security checks. Noynoy's down-to-earth lifestyle and frugality is slowly but surely seeping down on the consciousness of all Filipinos who are all watching his actions. 
       
      Slowly but surely, our culture is changing. Even Manny Pacquaio is being noticed for his humility and magnanimity -- characteristics that are being reflected on all Filipinos. So in essence, there is hope. But not so long as Filipinos are branded as lazy and unworthy of their liberties by some people who put words into Dr. Rizal's mouth and make him look bad to others. 
       
      Edgar
       

      To: rp-rizal@yahoogroups.com
      From: ctapang@...
      Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:07:22 -0800
      Subject: RE: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article

       
      I would classify this article as trash. My full response is a blog that I wrote sometime ago:http://ctapang.wordpress.com/2008/04/19/ideals-of-good-citizenship-and-economic-progress/.
       
      --Carlos

      http://ctapang.wordpress.com





    • cdvictory21
      ***[Edgar] CV, however, is now claiming that the natives were actually indolent even before the Spaniards came.*** Not really...what I present is that the
      Message 56 of 56 , Dec 17, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        ***[Edgar] CV, however, is now claiming that the natives were actually indolent even before the Spaniards came.***

        Not really...what I present is that the causes of indolence that Rizal points to (tropical heat and insufficient rewards for hard work) pre-dated the arrival of the Spanish. We had alipins and no system of private property as in ownership of real estate. We had a datu system where he was the big boss, much like the Spaniards were the new big bosses who lorded it over the datus who continued to lord it over the masses.

        That is the point I argued. It is up to anyone to conclude that indolence was the result, since the causes are the same.

        ***[Edgar] This is his own personal opinion and not backed by any solid historical evidence.***

        Of course not true. Morga documents how are population was quite satisfied with simply getting by. By the standards of other societies (like the Chinese and of course the Europeans) we set our goals pretty low.

        ***[Edgar] What he wanted to accomplish is to destroy Rizal's credibilitiy by claiming that what he wrote in his essay about the indolence attibuted to Filipinos was completely false.***

        Destroy Rizal's credibility? How silly.

        I was just presenting Rizal with a counter argument. I am open to a counter argument to my counter argument.

        CV

        --- In RP-Rizal@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Millan <egadong@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Rody,
        >
        > I think Carl's tactic this time is to completely blow away your valid arguments for fear of answering point by point the issues you have raised which were not a product of your imagination, by the way, but based on previous allegations he made and your line of thinking is definitely not off base as the rest of us here who are arguing against those same things.
        >
        > The indolence issue has been the crutch that Carl has held on for so long because it is the one topic that is the most flimsy excuse to defend like in the days of Dr. Rizal himself when he had to gather everything at his disposal to dispel such misguided allegation.
        >
        > He went to great lenghts, in fact, of going to England which was not accidental. It was part of his plan and campaign to right the wrongs thrown at his race. More than once it had occured to ask himself why the Filipino was snubbed by the Spaniards in his own country. Was he fundamentally of an inferior race, as they alleged?
        >
        > In Ateneo and in other colleges where there were sons of Spaniards, the latter had not proven their intellectual superiority over the Filipinos in acquiring knowledge. The Filipinos had always put themselves among the first in competitions. What then was the reason for them to be treated differently from the Spaniards? This prodded him to study the remote history of the Philippines from impartial and authoritative sources.
        >
        > He had learned in his previous travels that in the British Museum there existed one of the rare copies of Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas written by Morga who without passion or prejudice described the conditions of the country and of its native inhabitants at the time of the conquest. Rizal also read other history books written by missionaries like Gaspar de San Agustin, Colin, Chirino, Martin de Rada, etc. but concluded all of them were written with slant or bias against the indios/natives unlike Morga's.
        >
        > And Morga not only painted the natives he observed during his time as not averse to hard work but were actually very resourceful people. Yes, the harsh environmental conditions of heat and sun can cause any person who toil under it to work less effectively but they found a way to get around it by working early at dawn even before the sun rose and finish their work at noon just when the sun was the most intense. Aside from their farming, they also went into other trades including fishing, mining, weaving, hunting, etc. Most importantly, they were not under the yoke of imposed slavery nor oppression and therefore were free to do as they please without fear of coercion.
        >
        > There is no contradiction at all with Morga's observations about the natives. Carl, however, is now claiming that the natives were actually indolent even before the Spaniards came. This is his own personal opinion and not backed by any solid historical evidence. What he wanted to accomplish is to destroy Rizal's credibilitiy by claiming that what he wrote in his essay about the indolence attibuted to Filipinos was completely false.
        >
        > Therefore I invite Carl to now present his proofs to back up his claim that prehispanic Filipinos are already indolent and continues to be so up to the present day.
        >
        > Edgar
        >
        >
        >
        > To: RP-Rizal@yahoogroups.com
        > From: rodyvera@...
        > Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:11:00 +0800
        > Subject: Re: [RP-Rizal] Re: F. Sionil Jose Article
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > On 12 5, 10, at 4:21 PM, cdvictory21 wrote:
        > In my opinion, if you are indolent, regardless of how you got that way, it would be good for you to deal with it...else you might end up with a country in a "deplorable" state.
        >
        >
        >
        > The logical fallacies master of Rizal yahoogroups is at it again!!!! I don't know where Mr CDV got the idea that indolence accounts for the deplorable state any country is in. His line of reasoning seems to be:
        >
        >
        > The Philippines is in a deplorable state, therefore its people are indolent because they do not do anything (unlike the Americans, and all the other colonial masters that came before them who have become rich nations). But rich nations have their share of indolent citizens as well. Some of them not mere exceptions but rather a large percentage of social welfare dependents. But still no normal person would accuse rich nations of being indolent and end up in deplorable states. Because the rich nations, despite some of their citizens' "indolence" is the proof that disputes CDV's opinion.
        >
        >
        > Mr. CDV equates the wealth of nations to their people being industrious. That is the inference. And that an indolent nation therefore leads to a nation in a deplorable state! Something which Rizal's Indolence of the Filipinos clearly and successfully disputed! In fact no one, as in NOBODY in the modern and post-modern world could ever say that the indolence of a people would lead its society to a deplorable state. Except of course for Mr. CDV.
        >
        >
        > F. Sionil Jose cites yabang, greed, power-hungry Filipinos. Carlos Tapang cites lack of economic freedom, etc. Rizal cited ass-licking Pinoys, Pinoys who have a colonial mentality that many times even surpasses the racist and prejudiced attitudes of their colonial masters. Others cite Corruption, exploitation, land-grabbing, apathy to the social conditions... but INDOLENCE?
        >
        >
        > No well-meaning philosopher or genuine Rizalista ever claimed that the reason for a country's deplorable state is because its people are lazy. Maybe the Calvinists who regard idleness as a sin. Or the Nazis whose motto in front of the concentration camps reads "Arbeit macht frei".
        >
        >
        > Indolence per se doesn't really imply anything other than one just doesn't want to make the effort, period. Bertrand Russell even wrote a brilliant essay In Praise of Idleness. If there's anyone who thinks indolence is a sin it can only be one of two minds: those who live in the harshest conditions that to NOT work is to grow hungry OR, the greedy master who tells his minions to stop being indolent and keep working their asses off, which should mean more profits for himself.
        >
        >
        > The Spanish friars were the first to say that the reason indios are good for nothings is because they are lazy. Rizal stood up and turned it upside down by practically implying that the friars are the indolent ones because they keep asking for more from tenants etc. There was a time when these indios worked for themselves. And when their work was finished then it was time to stop. When the Spanish colonizers saw this they immediately said these people were indolent. Why? because it did not fit their standards of greed. Suddenly standards of progress changed. And those who did not live up to those standards of progress were INDOLENT.
        >
        >
        > But here's the thing: indolence is perceived everywhere. Rich Americans accuse poor Americans of indolence because they depend too much on social welfare when unemployment is high. Rich people accuse poor people everywhere of indolence because they keep depending on doleouts. But so far, no rich nation today has ever accused poor "deplorable" nations of indolence and blamed it as the cause for the state they're in. Why? Because to turn a nation into a deplorable state REQUIRES HARD WORK AND SKILL! it takes a perverse kind of talent, charm, industriousness to tyrranize a country, to plunder its resources, and to keep its people silent and "behaved", fearful, blind and submissive. Turning a nation into a deplorable state can keep the plunderer sleepless as Shakespeare's Macbeth would have shown us. AND EVERY COLONIAL MASTER knows that.
        >
        >
        > It takes the same amount of hard work to do evil and good. Evil people, when they are indolent, are just as incapable as the good ones.
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.