Philippine Star columnist William M. Esposo makes an interesting point about why we, as a nation, fail to eradicate corruption. He raised his idea in his column yesterday May 17, 2009.
Esposo sums up the reason why corruption remains a problem in the Philippines in the following paragraphs. Highlights are mine:
Not to suggest that we don’t convict corrupt public officials but the truth is – catching one will only stop one thief but it will not end corruption. Catching a hundred crooked public officials will stop those 100 thieves but that will not end corruption…
….Eradicating corruption is all about reforming values. No matter how many crooks we catch, the corruption will not stop because the culture that spawns it persists.
I wanted to post a comment on Mr. Esposo’s blog but I couldn’t find a way to do it so I’ll just post my reactions here.
First off, assuming that eradicating corruption is all about reforming values, the question is whose values are we talking about? The public’s, the officials’ or everyone’s?
Second, if Mr. Esposo and everyone else who strongly believe in the idea of eradicating corruption in this manner stressed the point ad infinitum will it result in a change in values on a national scale?
Third, how do we get people to reform their values exactly?
Fourth, do you honestly believe “reforming values” will stop the corrupt government official from stealing?
Fifth and last, do you honestly believe people — with the exception of very little children — will heed such calls for value reforms?
Usually when I pose a question I also try to answer it myself. But, in this case, I think it’s best to leave my questions unanswered. Hopefully, Mr. Esposo or anyone else who subscribes to this idea would care to provide some enlightenment.
I genuinely want to know if eradicating corruption is just all about reforming values. I’m afraid, without specifics to back it up, this whole idea is nothing more than just another motherhood statement.
In ANC’s Leadership Forum, it was Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro who said that institutions change behavior and Senator Richard Gordon said that leadership by example was needed.
Teodoro made a good start but then went on to say that changing institutions would mean having to change the constitution and so said that if elected, he would pursue constitutional change.
Gordon for his part didn’t layout specific actions that would lead to a change of values. Perhaps, if Gordon did try to outline specific actions, he’d go on about the effect his slogans had on the people of Olongapo — aim high, etcetera. Or point out that he had led his people in Olongapo in sweeping the streets, apprehending criminals as well as litterbugs himself, and all that jazz. He’d also perhaps point at education as a factor.
If Senator Panfilo Lacson had actually attended the forum, perhaps he would have been the one to cite actions that he had taken as PNP Chief that had resulted in cops stopping from taking bribes, returning carnapped vehicles, kidnappers from plying their trade, and drug dealers from selling drugs. Everyone hailed this as proof of his effectiveness as a leader, but then again, after Erap’s fall things returned to normal in the PNP.
[Reply]
But then again, I think I ought to give Gordon a point for Subic as a model for changing people’s behavior.
The thing is to decode the elements that went into it.
1) Educating and informing the people about rules to be followed within the former Naval Base.
2) Apprehending and punishing people who break the rules.
3) Making the rewards of following the rules visible.
But then, you basically have a small transient population in Subic. I’d wonder if such could be repeated in an densely populated urban area such as Metro Manila.
Bayani Fernando can make a claim of sorts of implementing behavioral modification as far as traffic is concerned. But look at the buses and jeeps, what behavioral change has happened? They are still as unruly as ever.
[Reply]
lpgd Reply:
May 19th, 2009 at 4:48 am
what you’re describing here is very different from what mr. esposo is saying. clearly, gordon provided the direction and because he was strict the subic volunteers had no choice but to follow. over time those volunteers got used to the system set up by gordon that it practically became their culture. of course gordon probably used the same “value reformation” line as well. but he did more than just say those lines. i’m sure you would agree.
but iwe’re a little off point. mr. esposo was talking about eradicating corruption.
i think his idea is for everyone to just take it upon themselves to change. you know it’s like that movie line “if you build it they will come.” in this case it’s like he’s saying “change your values first and corruption will just magically disappear.”
[Reply]
lpgd Reply:
May 19th, 2009 at 5:29 am
“Bayani Fernando can make a claim of sorts of implementing behavioral modification as far as traffic is concerned. But look at the buses and jeeps, what behavioral change has happened? They are still as unruly as ever.”
the key here is time i guess. it’s also interesting to see how singapore’s lee kwan yew did it. i’m not sure but i vaguely remember reading somewhere that lee kwan yew basically accepted that the older generations can no longer be changed so instead of wasting his time on them he focused on the younger generations.
so in the case fernando’s projects it may still be too early to say whether his attempts at behavioral modification failed or succeeded. it takes time. i’ll refer to the “no smoking” example we talked about earlier. smoking inside jeepneys used to be commonplace. but sometime in the early 90 a law or policy against it was strictly implemented. fast forward to the present… while there are still those who smoke inside jeepneys and other puvs, most people nowadays frown on the practice.
[Reply]
As motherhood statement, Esposo’s commentary on reforming values isn’t bad at all. However, once a politician pitches values reform to the electorate as if it could only happen with him/her elected into power, that’s when we should ready the rotten eggs and tomatoes.
Corruption remains the norm because it tends to go unpunished and perpetuated by the common expression “Hayaan mo na; ganyan talaga.” I’ve always hated that expression, btw. So this has its similarities with “Pwede na ‘yan,” that smidgen of the Pinoy psyche that poisons everything else. We’ve set our standards so low we even pray thanks at church every Sunday for our current situation, because it could have been much worse. If these continue to be the norm, we’ll never get anywhere.
So the big question is: How do you change the norm?
[Reply]
lpgd Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 2:56 am
i’ve been thinking about corruption for the longest time and i’ve come to the conclusion that the tendency to become corrupt is inherent in everyone. it all depends on one’s threshold or ability to resist temptation. in my case, i think my threshold is any amount P500,000
. anything lower than that “magmamalaki pa ko.”
but seriously i think corruption can only be stopped by making the system as fool-proof as possible. use of new technology comes to mind. i also came up with a rather unusual idea which i have since pitched to a lawyer/blogger but it’s not being picked up. here’s the link.
[Reply]