Malaysia vs. Philippines: The Story of Two Huan-a Countries
 |
| Bongbong Marcos |
Analyzing the huan-a heritage of Malaysians and Filipinos
The Philippine Genome Center shares this insight on the Filipino DNA:
What is ‘Filipino’?We are proud of our heritage at the rim of East Asia, the meeting point of the many Asian groups, as well as Europeans from Spain. Our culture even 100 years ago was already a mix —of Malay, Chinese, Hindu, Arab, Polynesian and Spanish, with maybe some English, Japanese and African thrown in. And it shows up in our genes.The genome is the complete set of DNA that carries the instructions on how to make a living being. Genomes change and these changes tell us how life evolves. The genome sequence —the strings of the 4 letters of the DNA code in our bodies— provides the instructions on how to build the organism, and as they evolve the organism also evolves, sometimes into new species.In the last few years, genome technologies have exploded to the point that it has become routine to sequence my genome or your genome or the genome of many different species looks like.
The bigger problem hasn't been the huan-a DN, it's the system that runs both huan-a countries
The Malaysian parliamentary system
Even if, hypothetically, Mahathir was elected president of a Malaysia under a presidential system, the man might not have accomplished what he did in a parliamentary setting. The legislature would have obstructed his most dramatic innovations. His team might have spent precious time and energy attending endless congressional investigations. Other aspirants to the top-post might have constantly conspired to cause his failure or smear him in the public eye as a means to undercut his base of public support.
The issue is that Mahathri was described as tough-talking, brutally frank, and often abrasive by Magno. It's a shame Filipinos have been somehow conditioned for long time, and it's not genetic, that they just need character change without thinking about how system change is what's badly needed. It's not programmed in the Filipino DNA. Instead, it's an intergenerational thing where Filipinos are taught stuff like, "Marcos ran a parliamentary system," or "It's the Filipino DNA that's the problem." They are indeed, terribly mistaken. Come on, we have Filipinos that actually excel where they're allowed to excel. We have more OFWs who are actually learning to be better in countries like Singapore or Great Britain, to the point if an OFW commits a crime, it's not something that gets buried in the newsfeeds. In contrast, when a Filipino commits a crime in one's own country, the news tends to get buried in the newsfeed, or two, people become "indifferent" because it's a common thing.
For starters, a parliamentary system has different demands from a presidential system. For example, we look at Malaysian politics vs. Filipino politics. The current Malaysian prime minister is Anwar Ibrahim, who some might compare to former senator Antonio Trillanes IV. Ibraham became controversial because of some moves he made that landed him in jail for a time. However, Ibraham has proven himself capable and somehow, he managed to serve his time. The parliamentary system offers no defined term limits, where a person's capacity is more important than limiting the term.
From the Malaysian Bar, we can read this about how to become prime minister:
Membership: Unlike in Australia where the PM can belong either to the House of Representatives or the Senate, our PM must be an MP in the Dewan Rakyat.
It is conceivable, however, that in some extreme circumstances we may follow the Douglas Home precedent from the UK.
In the 60s, Sir Alec Douglas Home, a peer in the House of Lords, was elected leader of the Conservative Party.
When his party won the elections, he resigned his peerage and was appointed PM. Soon thereafter, a vacancy was created in the Commons which he contested and won.
In Selangor in the 80s, Datuk Abu Hassan was similarly appointed Mentri Besar of Selangor even before he was elected to the State Assembly.
Confidence: The wording in Article 43(2) that the PM must be a person who, in the opinion of the monarch, enjoys the confidence of the majority of the members of the Dewan Rakyat, creates the impression that the King has a wide, subjective discretion to anoint any MP with the premier’s post. The truth is quite different.
If there is a party or coalition enjoying an absolute majority in the Dewan Rakyat, the King has no choice but to appoint its leader as the PM.
Unlike the Constitutions of nine states with Malay Rulers where the basic law explicitly mentions that the MB must be a Malay/Muslim, the Federal Constitution imposes no requirement of race, religion or region.
However, there is a constitutional convention in favour of a Malay appointee. Conventions are not rules of law and this convention may face pressure in the future from a bumiputra aspirant from Sabah or Sarawak. We must remember that the two states together possess 56 parliamentary seats.
The Philippines, on the other hand, has term limits. If we think about it, Mahathir Mohamad had a tenure from 1981 to 2003, and his second tenure (when he entered the 90s zone) was 2018-2020. It was also in 2018 when Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. indirect became an anti-thesis to Mahathir. As we look into it, Mahathir was one who understood the big difference between systems while Davide was still stuck with the "it's just the people" mentality.
The big difference in economic policy
"If you remove the Filipino citizenship requirement in the exploitation of natural resources, on the acquisition of public lands, or even in mass media, in education, you remove the solemnity of nationalism," he told ANC's Headstart.
Davide said lawmakers should be guaranteed to be incorruptible because Congress can be prevailed upon by foreign interests in order to favor exploitation of the country's natural resources."One country may have businessmen so strong because they have the money. If you are in Congress, there might be a temptation to agree to certain propositions, to reduce the limit, for instance, of Filipino participation and increase the participation of foreigners," he said."In the end, we will become a colony of businessmen of other countries," he added.
This became laughable because months later, Mahathir emerged as the grandfather who countered another grandfather indirectly. Mahathir spoke to the late Jose de Venecia back in 2009, giving the advice that Magno wrote at the Philippine Star. As we look into the data, Mahathir showed that the problem of the Philippines' lack of progress was with the system, not the huan-a DNA.
Mahathir also wrote these in his book A Doctor in the House, which effectively countered Davide before 2018:
From page 308:
Nevertheless the increase in foreign investments helped to create jobs and so lowered the unemployment rate, which was high at the time. Our approach differed from those of Japan and Korea, where the preference was for acquiring foreign technology for investment by the locals. We did not have local entrepreneurs with the money or the willingness to invest in industries they were not familiar with. It was only after many years that the Malaysians acquired the knowledge and industrial skills to invest in manufacturing. Thus it was through FDI that we succeeded in converting our agricultural economy into an industrial economy and eventually solving our unemployment problem.
From page 334:
Managing a manufacturing industry is very difficult and there was no substantial industry in Malaysia at that time that we could take our lessons from. We went for foreign investments because we did not have locals who were willing to take the leap. Locals wanted to stay within their comfort zones. When there is no competition in the mix, it is easy to get away with low quality, bad management, dirty processes and inefficiency. But in a competitive environment, you must always be on guard. You have to look for ways to improve your product and be more cost-efficient. If you do not, you can be very sure that your competitors will be doing exactly that. Tax protection may provide some comfort but it should not make things too easy and discourage effort. It should certainly not cultivate bad attitudes and habits.
From page 372:
Creating jobs, especially by implementing policies that encourage the creation of private sector work opportunities, is the proper role of government. That was why when Malaysia invited foreign investment, we did not insist on immediately collecting taxes. We were prepared to forgo taxes if the investors created jobs for our people. In our view, no one who was prepared to work should remain unemployed. In fact, the Government was so successful in creating jobs that there are now more than two million foreign workers in the country. We cannot ourselves meet the demand for labour that our economic development has generated.
The Philippines got stuck yelling "Pinoy Pride!" for so long. However, Mahathir as a leader, created the economic system that certainly became more stable than even what the late Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino III could've done. It's because the Malaysian system already made the country more FDI-friendly while sticking to restrictions that worked, not restrictions born out of "nationalistic pride".
Conclusion
The reality of the failure hasn't been about the huan-a DNA. The reality of the failure is that the Philippines has a bad system. Malaysia has a better system than Filipinos. Malaysia has a constitution fron 1957 and revised in 2007. The Philippines changed its constitution from 1935 to 1972 to 1987, and not much progress. The reality is the quality of the constitution as a school of thought. The Malaysian cosntitution has the parliamentary system and no economic restrictions within it.
Comments
Post a Comment