Professional Documents
Culture Documents
"It's all very Filipino". He even stated that "...the existing public administration is
faithfully Filipino.". I must agree with his statement because indeed, a Philippine public
Brillantes, Jr. and Maricel Fernandez on their statement. "Yes we have basic public
procedures. It is within this context that we argue that indeed, we have a Philippine
processes operating within a unique Philippine context." But the funny thing is, and I
would like to stress out this statement by Corpuz that "The government had been run
independently for just the last four decades, managing most of public affairs in a
language that is not native to its citizens.". Considering more than three centuries of
Spanish rule and decades of American occupation, the period that was ruled by foreigners
surpassed the period ruled by our own native people. I agree with Corpuz with this.
Although they had spread many of the fundamental values of the West through the
proselytizing of the Catholic religion, the Spanish had nevertheless done little to advance
the development of science or the spread of economic growth in the Philippines (partly
reflecting the scientific and economic backwardness of Spain itself in the nineteenth
century).
On the author's statement on "The old (colonial) and the new political ethics have
beginning of the century. The victorious elites affirm the triumph of democracy, the
victory of the people; and the latter listen to finely crafted speeches on nationalism,
social justice, and the popular welfare." This is very reflective of the famous platform
speeches of candidates during elections, with their vague but "for masses promises" to
their almost impossible action plans - which in the end, always fail to be implemented.
This is reality in Phlippine politics. Though it is very hard on my part, I have to agree
with Corpuz on his statement that "But the archetypal lider (leader)in Filipino politics is
still he who gets the most jobs for his followers, increases his income when his faction is
in power (while paying less in income taxes), and gives the most help in various forms to
his followers’ families. This is the relationship between a Mafia don and his soldiers.
What is Filipino in this is: that the rewards distributed by politicians are public
resources; the politicians who are out of power regard their counterparts in power with
envy and admiration; and no practitioner of this highly developed Filipino art has ever
been accused of anything but success.” This reflects the bureaupathology deeply
embedded in Philippine politics. That's why politicians only do what the Filipino wants,
Religion also plays a major role in shaping the mindset of the people, thus affecting the
cultural dimension as well. In the case of the Philippines according to Corpuz, Philippine
politics is greatly influenced by more than three decades of Spanish colonization and
decades of American occupation. In that very long period of time, our Western colonizers
have instigated certain norms, beliefs and practices that were adopted by the Filipino
people. One testament to this was his statement that The Spanish regime made
Christians, not citizens...". True though, for one of the lasting contributions of the
Spanish regime is Christianity whose values are clearly evident and deeply embedded in
our Filipino culture. In terms of politics, it was only the pueblo elites, as what Corpuz
calls them, who had the opportunity to grab hold of positions such as gobernadorcillos.
This reflected the traditional public administration that was present during the Spanish
era. But they were just mere symbols of the friars during that time, leading them to
another kind of politics in fiesta. Local principlias contested each other for personal
glory by being the hermano mayor. Such post was only limited to the pueblo elites and
only cared for their personal gains and not for the general welfare of the people. Corpuz
stated that this "pueblo elites became the basis of Philippine politcs into the American
colonial period." I must disagree with him in that in some parts. Why? Because such
system was not only adapted during the American period because such practices are
translated into the Philippine public administration itself. It may be seen that majority of
the people who actually participate every election are those who belong to the upper
strata of the society. Their economic wealth gives them a political leverage. There's
nothing wrong with this, unless they use their money and "connections" to advance their
self interest in ways deemed unfair for the other parties. University of the Philippines
economist Raul Fabella, commenting on the weaknesses of the Estrada presidency from
1999 to 2002, notes that a failure to address them would add to a long and “dubious list
economic management. As Fabella notes, “in the Philippines, the institutions, even the
courts of law, are so weak and so compromised by corruption that the rule-of-law, or its
figment, clings for dear life on the inaugural oath of the sitting president to uphold the
law” – and this has often proved a fragile basis. In the Philippines the democratic
process has often resulted in poorly qualified individuals being elected president, the
office upon whom so much depends. One of the many pathlogies presented in the paper
was Civil Service's Commission which was compared to the Pasig River: once a source
of life but now a reflection of government's inefficiencies and "dirty ways".If the
government could not properly address environmental situations such as in Pasig river,
and even maintain the cleanliness of their workplace, (please do forgive my term) how on
earth could they fix and improve the public administration system per se? To prove
Merton's theory of bureaupathology, I would like to share an excerpt that says, Philippine
multiple set of independently operating corruption seekers whose collective actions may
be damaging not only to the whole national economy but even to the corrupt actors
themselves (reducing the total money pools to be tapped). As de Dios and Esfahani
comment, the Philippine political system has been particularly notable for its “apparent
Rallies, protests and been part of every presidency. It had been an "annoying
trend" indeed. And this why Corpuz had arrived to such statement that “...it will take the
space of at least two generations to discipline and wisen people, in order to have a
public administration that will not be an unforgiving mirror of frailties, but an image of
higher ideals and virtues". Because in the first place, who elected those people in power?
It is nobody else but the Filipinos themselves. We cannot always put all the blame to the
government. Corruption may be rampant and expensive in the Philippines but it's not the
only factor that "feeds" the pathologies of Philippine bureaucracy. Corruption does not
only happen in the Philippine government, it cannot be denied that it is also practiced in
real life, in businesses, in schools. Well basically, in our everyday living. It just differs on
the degree or extent of this corruption. In the end, we just get what we deserve from the
government. I strongly believe that the Filipino citizens have to power, either to stop or
contribute to the growing pathologies in the Philippine bureaucracy. That's why, I can say
that the moment Filipinos aspire and act for the "right things",then there's still hope for
the Filipino people. But the most important thing here is the changing of mindset and
culture that had locked us in our dire situation. This best describes the challenge that must
be met. "The country was poorly integrated linguistically and socially.” After
democracy did not work” there, which then led Filipinos in desperation to the “political
disaster” of the Marcos dictatorship. Overall, since 1946, “the Philippine evolution is
Americans who came to the country on a mission of ‘manifest destiny.” Philippines are
archipelagic in nature. And due to large differences in culture, it had contributed to the