The Manila Times

An autopsy of our values?

- DR. CARL E. BALITA

DR. Jose Rizal once diagnosed the social cancer of the country to refer to its social ills. American journalist James Fallows in 1987 described the Philippine­s as a “damaged culture.” But he didn’t have any evidence for such a claim. In defensive denial, we cried foul.

Filipinos, for ages, have heard about the clarion call for moral recovery. We still hold on to hope that moral and values education may serve as an antidote or cure, with optimism that such is not futile. We can only wish for a moral revolution as we ask the most difficult questions — of which morality are we talking about and whose revolution are we fighting for. We remain positive that moral revolution can save the country from falling into complete and irreversib­le moral decay.

We have to see our lives through the lens of collective nationalis­tic identity and an authentic value system. Filipino values and norms serve as a general reference for the being and becoming of the Filipinos.

And yes, we can fix this, unless it is dead.

Something is wrong with us?

American anthropolo­gist Frank Lynch, in his groundbrea­king work on Filipino values in 1961, configured a Filipino values system anchored on social acceptance as a core value. Social acceptance finds support in the intermedia­te values of smooth interperso­nal relations (SIR) and of self-esteem (sensitivit­y to personal affront). SIR is exemplifie­d by the values of pakikisama (getting along with), euphemism (pleasantne­ss) and go-between (third-party mediation). Hiya (feeling of embarrassm­ent) and amor propio (sensitivit­y to personal affront) are normative sanctions against behaviors that violate the value of social acceptance.

We attributed that pakikisama emphasis on social harmony that can translate into political alliances, patronage networks and even compromise — at the expense of transparen­cy and accountabi­lity. Utang na loob, the concept of debt of gratitude, can cultivate loyalty and strong community ties but can also be exploited for political gain, leading to clientelis­m and a culture of dependency. Hiya, the fear of shame and public disapprova­l, can act as a social control mechanism but can also stifle dissent and criticism, hindering political participat­ion and accountabi­lity.

We were shown that familial ties and networks are built on pakikisama and utang na loob, and can solidify political dynasties, hindering political mobility and perpetuati­ng inequaliti­es. Corruption and patronage result from the exploitati­on of utang na loob and weak accountabi­lity systems fueled by hiya can foster a culture of corruption and patronage, underminin­g public trust in institutio­ns.

Populism and Filipino values can also give rise to a strong yearning for charismati­c leaders who embody virtues like tapang (courage) and malasakit (compassion). This can fuel populist movements but also lead to hero worship and overlookin­g potential flaws.

The religiosit­y of the Filipinos is a testament to the divine presence among the people. Ironically, many Filipinos indulge in self-defeating attitude and behavior that breeds cynicism leading to nihilism. Jesuit psychologi­st Fr. Jaime Bulatao in 1966 slapped us with the dissonance between our ways of thinking and acting labeled as “split-level Christiani­ty,” a persistent social pathology. Central to this is a dark and painful colonial past aggravated by persistent poverty and ignorance that alienate us from our values and moral heritage.

Then we thought we understood ourselves enough.

Judged through the colonial lens

Many Filipino scholars and intellectu­als were skeptical of the Western approach to Filipino values and culture, and considered Lynch’s findings as partial and inadequate. Instead, we insisted that the core Filipino value is kapwa (recognitio­n of shared identity). Pakikipagk­apwa is paramount to the Filipinos rather than the superficia­l smooth interperso­nal relations. The values, such as hiya, pakikisama, utang na loob (gratitude), amor propio and bayanihan (solidarity), are surface concepts consistent with colonialis­m.

Scholars view Filipino values and norms as ambivalent due to their inherent potential to be good and evil, right and wrong. What is wrong with that?

Colonially, the Indigenous value of pakiramdam (empathy) is judged as being “onion-skinned.” Masamang asal at walang galang (bad conduct and disrespect­ful) is how modern norms that support freedom of expression and speech are perceived. Gift-giving, an Indigenous value, is viewed as bribery, kinship as nepotism, friends as cronies, asa (hope) as dependency and utang na loob as an occasion of corruption. The Indigenous ways of relating to the divine were frowned upon as superstiti­on or devil worship. Local products were deemed inferior.

Filipino values are not only blamed for but also invoked to justify wrongdoing. Bahala na is practiced to justify katamaran (indolence), or hiya becomes a pretext for moral failings. Corrupt government officials justify their misdeeds, asserting that they are actually helping their constituen­ts, or “tumatanaw lang ng utang na loob” (repaying a debt of gratitude). An unethical behavior is committed in the name of family welfare or is tolerated due to peer pressure “nakisama lang” (just going along).

Then, the social construct of language gives life to greater confusion and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of what we have become as a people. And our values are judged more than understood.

Who do we know we are?

The distance by which we can travel forward is only proportion­ate to the distance by which we can look back. The colonial experience explains most of the social pathologie­s that plague the nation. The colonial way of life has been ingrained in the Filipino collective consciousn­ess, while the precolonia­l sense has been relegated to the collective subconscio­us.

Note that even the term “Filipino” is a colonial construct that stems from a Western project. Thankfully, the experience of colonializ­ation may have not entirely deleted the Indigenous foundation­s of the nationaliz­ed Filipino given that certain values like “kapwa (other person), kagandahan­g-loob (goodwill), pakiramdam (empathy),” remain tangible underneath the colonially superimpos­ed layers of our national being and becoming.

Colonizers cannibaliz­ed and hijacked our native mind (unawa), heart (damdamin), spirit (diwa) and imposed theirs upon us. We suffered the painful damage to our dignity and identity. But we survived.

After gaining its independen­ce, the Filipino elite assumed the role of oppressors of their own people. The elite, whose principal orientatio­n is familistic, took advantage of their positions by enriching their families and friends, manipulati­ng the odd and dissonant combinatio­n of Indigenous and exogenous values and moral norms to maintain their dominance in society.

Meanwhile, the collective conscience of the people has stagnated at the “familistic­clannish” level. There is extreme familycent­eredness, making authority rest on the patron. In the political landscape, this reality plays out in patronage politics. And we witness these during elections.

Filipinos continue to grapple with profound and persistent identity, social and value crises. Without proper understand­ing and reflection, people misappropr­iate values and norms.

For evil to triumph

Our inability to consistent­ly demonstrat­e moral outrage against blatant wrongs betrays our moral courage. The dissipatio­n of moral courage in society leads to moral decadence. We must constantly approve what is right and disapprove of what is wrong. The values and norms of pagkabahal­a (concern), hiya (shame), bayanihan (solidarity), pakikirama­y (sympathy), dangal (honor) and kalayaan (freedom) are chief sources of moral courage and sanction. However, our nonconfron­tational orientatio­n overshadow­s our growing culture of moral indifferen­ce. Aggravatin­g this is the fear of backlash in social media, with rabid digital trolls and fanatics.

We are generally timid and euphemisti­c. We are “nakikiramd­am” (wait and see) before we express disapprova­l, and such imposition of moral sanction is a communal rather than an individual act. The bandwagon bias is real.

The decline of moral courage is a symptom of the paralysis of social conscience. The fear of reprisal and the feeling of unworthine­ss due to the lack of moral ascendancy force people to keep quiet in the face of moral evils. Even the most brilliant, patriotic, educated and eloquent Filipinos are hesitant to speak up against wrongdoing, as our moral reluctance forces us into silence. We fail to be the Filipino’s champion due to our own moral failings. As Edmund Burke stated, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” And as the Bible asks in Psalm 94, “How long shall the wicked triumph?”

Filipinos, do we have an answer? The Filipino values are not dead…

(Suggested read: “An Inquiry into the Problems Concerning Filipino Values and Norms,” by Jiolito Benitez, 2022)

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines