www.soriano-ph.com

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 3 August 2008 Issue

It is safe to assume that Filipinos, as a people, are among the ‘easily pleased’, as compared to the other nationalities of the world. This notwithstanding, they also get hurt very easily, very onion-skinned in a manner of speaking. Little things make Filipinos in general happy but even the slightest incident could also trigger their disappointments.

Thus, a typical Filipino would always have something to complain about. More likely, however, he will keep the matter to himself than openly express, confront or even directly settle his gripes.  A Filipino would rather open his heart to, and seek comfort from, people who are close and dear to him even if they do not have any stake in his concerns. Many times, complaints are settled, or even exacerbate, through the grape vine in the chain of gossips and rumors.

Nevertheless, Filipinos love to communicate and express themselves. The Philippines would not be the text capital of the world if it were otherwise. Filipinos are everywhere in the digital divide with their blogs. Internet social networks like ‘friendster’ in fact are dominated by Filipinos. Filipino passion for music as a form of human expression is simply amazing.

While Filipinos are generally expressive, it is wonder why they would rather endure for as long as they can perhaps up to boiling point, than break the status quo. Make no mistake about it but the average Filipino has the heart for change, and would always hope for it, but he will never stake his person on it, especially if it would put his immediate family in jeopardy. He would rather suffer and protest in silence in this case until the clamor for reform or change has put the bandwagon in locomotion, that is when the battle lines are drawn.

Filipinos would openly express their love for their country but judging from how they live their daily lives as citizens, it is a source of wonder whether in fact they do. What should have been good for the country more often than not has to take a back seat in favor of convenience and parochial personal satisfaction. Choosing between what is good for the country and what is good for his very own or even his family’s interests (a usual line to justify his actions), a typical Filipino would obviously take the latter.   

A typical Filipino would have big dreams, high ambitions and would love to idolize and look up at a role model in pursuing his direction. What is disturbing these days is the impatience of many Filipinos to embrace the dignity of labor and hard work to ensure their economic success. Many are easily lured to professions, false opportunities, and even criminal endeavors that offer a quick fix. No wonder that when times are hard, there are more Filipinos lining up lotto betting stations, the illegal number game of jueting continues to flourish, there are incidence of corruption both in the public and private sector, the news never get tired of reporting people being duped of investment and money scams, and many young people abandon their dreams in favor of the career fad of the times. Nowadays, the only perceived measure of true success is money, and more money. Of course, this country is not alone in today’s highly materialistic environment.

Filipinos are generally reactive than proactive. They do not anticipate, or maybe refuse to aniticpate, difficulties and problems before they arise.  And when things go wrong, finger pointing starts, there would always be somebody to blame, and seldom would someone actually take responsibility for the mess.

In good or bad times, what is striking about Filipinos is their ingrained nature of finding joy in simple things and putting humor even to the most catastrophic situation. A Filipino is usually affective and easily shed tears while at the same time laugh at the situation without being necessarily happy about it.

There is no mutual exclusivity in the psyche of the Filipino. Anything goes so to speak. Whether this is good or bad could be seen where this country is, right now.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 26 August 2007 Issue

Language is the basic norm that defines a society. It is the building block of every community. 

Language plays an important part in the evolution and consolidation of culture. And every time a sovereign nation is born, a common language ordinarily understood and spoken by the people becomes an integral part of the process that defines national identity. Just like the flag and other state symbols, language is always the source of national pride in most countries around the world.

Never mind if foreign visitors or travelers, who are unable to speak, read, or understand the language in country destinations like Japan, Korea, Germany, Italy, Arab states and all other countries that earnestly take pride of their own native tongue, are inconvenienced by the practice. If it is obligatory for foreigners to obey and respect the laws of country destinations, why cannot they oblige themselves to adapt to a foreign national language?   

First world countries like the United Kingdom and the United States have conquered the world efficaciously by consciously or unconsciously influencing people from all walks of life to use English as a standard medium of communication, in the same way that most Latin American counties are predominantly Spanish-speaking because of conquest and people of Chinese descent continue to use their native tongue wherever they are because of their affinity. The extension of these languages to foreign jurisdiction is surely a source of continuing pride to the country origin.

Except for France and its neighboring nations and former territories, the French language has not shown a similar type of dominance in present-day communication. But the French has managed to keep their language officially recognized in international bodies and proceedings like that of the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, and thus enable them to preserve French pride.

Perhaps it a mere coincidence that countries that do not adopt English as an official language but take significant pride of their own national language, like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Germany, France, Hong Kong, Greece, Israel, Sweden or Portugal, are considered and classified as nations with advanced economies. The only plausible conclusion that can be derived here is that embracing a national language even in a parochial sense is never a hindrance to development and progress.

The Philippine Constitution declares that the country’s national language is ‘Filipino’. But for purposes of communications and instructions, both Filipino and English are recognized as official languages, until such time that a law is passed limiting the official language to Filipino. The same constitution has tasked government to take steps to make of it as a medium of official communication and as a language of instructions in the educational system.

‘Filipino’ as a language has yet to attain a definitive direction. At the moment, Filipino is simply the usual standard version of Tagalog, one of the more than a dozen major regional languages or dialects used all over the country by over a million Filipinos.

The shortfall of the country’s policy and resolve on the eventual evolution of Filipino as a national language is that it is a false hope and a dream that would never come to fruition. 

Since the adoption of the Constitution in 1987, government never lifted a finger to take serious efforts to make Filipino as a medium of official communication and instruction in schools. There are also some misgivings and criticisms from various regional ethnic groups to make Filipino predominantly Tagalog based. In the meantime, Filipino workers are tasked to brush up on their English to land jobs abroad and in call centers. Meanwhile also, Filipino families adopt the language or dialect best suited to them within the comfort of their homes.

The net effect of the current scenario is to have more and more Filipinos who are poor in both English and Filipino. Hence, “taglish” (an informal mix of Tagalog and English) was born and has almost permanently evolved as the unofficial national language.

If language is a measure of national identity and pride, it is a source of great wonder how the Filipinos would fare. If the evolution of a national language is the product of a people’s way of life, the country might as well discard both English and Filipino as official languages and give way to ‘Taglish’. 

Right now, the Philippines is ‘neither here nor there’.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 8 July 2007 Issue

There are really a number of things that every Filipino should see in a positive light. These nature and norms are characteristically Filipino and in them may lie the strength of the country and its people if harnessed properly.

Family ties. Every Filipino would put his or her family above all things. It is even safe to assume that to an ordinary Filipino it is almost always a case of family first before country. Family members would always find a way to look after the welfare, well-being and future of family members at whatever cost or form of sacrifice. The influx of Filipinos abroad seeking greener pasture is actually a reflection of this motivation. Unlike in other culture, a Filipino could grow old or get bed-ridden without worries that no one would take good care of him or her. A typical Filipino would less likely avoid his or her obligations to the family or abandon them, especially in times of crisis, even in situations of marital conflict when the family is supposedly divided. To a Filipino, blood is always thicker than water. And the family is always worth dying for, to paraphrase the words of a great Filipino, Ninoy Aquino.

Friendship. Next to family, Filipinos value friendship. And there is a natural tendency for a Filipino to be friendly with anyone who comes along his or her way. A Filipino would always feel good to be there for a friend in good and bad times. A close friend is considered as an extension of the family and every opportunity to seal this affinity would be exerted on significant events like baptism, weddings, and similar occasions. For this reason, betrayal and infidelity among friends are deemed as grave sins and oftentimes irreparable.

Fun-loving. Filipinos are fun-loving people. They love to entertain themselves. They would always line up to watch a good movie, or spend time in the company of friends or family members over meals or a cup of coffee or a bottle or cases of beer, organize parties and gatherings*, or simply be glued to a favorite music or television program. People wonder why shopping malls, bars and food houses thrive and are always filled with people even at a time when the economy is bad.  It is simply because Filipinos know how to have fun even if they do not have money in their pockets. Filipinos love to deliver and exchange jokes even over a serious public concern. It is not that Filipinos do not treat problems seriously. It is simply because Filipinos love a vibrant life.

Flexibility.  Filipinos are capable of adjusting to every given situation. They can be in any territory, any situation or condition, or any person or group of people with a totally different orientation. Yet, they would always find themselves fit in a given environment notwithstanding language or cultural barriers. This shows how intuitive and cognitive Filipinos are. They are fast learners too.

Faith-centered.  Filipinos who do not belong to, or are not identified with, a religious sect are rare. And it does not even follow that those who do not are agnostics or atheists. Chances are, they too believe in the existence of a Supreme Being. To a typical Filipino, God is always the source of strength especially in times of need, desperation and ordeals.  The same faith keeps the Filipinos spirit constantly alive despite all the odds that may come along their way.

Some critics and social scientists have viewed this very nature and norms of the Filipino as the root causes of many of the evils and maladies that afflict the country. But should they be?

---

NOTE: *the modifier from the original text was changed because for some unexplainable reason the original word used by the author cannot be recognized by the write-post board.

---

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 20 May 2007 Issue

The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) reports that there are at least 370 million indigenous people scattered in 70 countries around the world.

There seems to be no standard definition of indigenous people. Almost always however indigenous people generally refer to a group of ethnic people bound by a unique, distinctive, and long-cherished culture, customs and tradition and who inhabited a particular region or territory of a country through some historic claim but were marginalized in the process by the prevailing or predominant culture of the general population constituting the state.

Indigenous people are also referred to as aborigines, natives or cultural minorities.

Indigenous people are considered as among the most disadvantaged communities in the world. Many of them have been dispossessed of their lands occupied through historic title. Others are at the forefront of conflict involving access to natural resources in the place where they live. Their population has been constantly dwindling, or is even threatened of extinction, because of diseases, poverty, extermination, or colonization. They do not usually benefit or refuse to take part in urbanization, economic progress and cultural development because of the natural tendency to protect or safeguard their culture, ethnic origin and traditions. Until today, some indigenous people are predominantly subsistence-based and dependent on farming, hunting or fishing for food.

They say that many indigenous people have accumulated important knowledge and biological resources openly used for generations. But with the patenting system, some multinational companies took advantage of this knowledge and resources and deprived these native people the right to use their very own indigenous resources. This is known as ‘biopiracy’.

Consequently, indigenous people all around the world suffer discrimination, marginalization, oppression, and/or exploitation.

They say that as early as 1923, Deskaheh (also known as the Levi General), a statesman of Haudenosaunee (a group of native Americans originally consisted of five tribes: the Mohawk, the Oneida, the Onondaga, the Cayuga, and the Seneca), in seeking recognition for his people went to Geneva, Switzerland in 1923 to speak to the League of Nations (the forerunner of the United Nations) and defend the right of his people to live in their own lands under their own faith. 

Tahupotiki Wiremu Ratana, founder of the Ratana religion in New Zealand in the early twentieth century, made a similar journey to Geneva in 1925 to protest the breaking of the Treaty of Waitangi concluded with the Maori in New Zealand in 1840 that gave Maori ownership of their lands. Like Deskaheh, Ratana was also denied access.

The United Nations Human Rights Council finally adopted on June 29, 2006 the draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which provides the right of indigenous peoples to maintain and strengthen their own institutions, cultures and traditions and to pursue their development in accordance with their aspirations and needs. Some reports said that some countries like the US, Australia and New Zealand have been opposed this declaration because “no government can accept the notion of creating different classes of citizens.”

The Philippines has its own share of indigenous people like the Ifugao, Ibaloi, Kalinga, Dumagat, Aeta, Mangyan, and Manobo and about a hundred other cultural communities. The National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) and the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997, or Republic Act 8371, are legally mandated to address their concerns and welfare.

In a speech before the Asian Development Bank on October 1, 2001, Atty. Evelyn S. Dunuan aptly said: “But today, when one speaks of indigenous peoples, it is not so much about their beautiful story as peace-loving communities bound to Mother Nature and Father Spirit of the Universe; nor their talents and skills and accomplishments. For the term indigenous peoples has been made synonymous to oppression, exploitation, discrimination and poverty. They, whose ancestors were once the proud rulers of this land, are now the scum of the earth, the so-called poorest of the poor in the Philippines.”

The perpetuation of a negative outlook of indigenous people is perhaps the worst form of ingratitude in a civilized society.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) – 18 February 2007 Issue

Apathy is defined as the psychological term for a state of indifference. It is a condition where a person lacks emotion or enthusiasm and becomes unresponsive to situations involving his physical, emotional or social life.

For some people, apathy is a given medical or pathological condition. But for others, it is a mental reaction towards helplessness or even to a lack of interest on matters that one does not consider really important even if they really are.

It is an alarming situation when people no longer show some concern to others or about the society and the environment in which they live.

In his speech The Perils of Indifference during the 1999 Millennium Lecture series at the White House, American-Jewish Eliezer ‘Elie’ Wiesel, a holocaust survivor, political activist, novelist and a recipient of the 1986 Nobel Peace Prize, made a point on the evils of apathy when he delivered these lines:

“Is it necessary at times to practice it (indifference) simply to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine, as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?

Of course, indifference can be tempting — more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims. It is so much easier to avoid such rude interruptions to our work, our dreams, our hopes. It is, after all, awkward, troublesome, to be involved in another person’s pain and despair. Yet, for the person who is indifferent, his or her neighbors are of no consequence. And, therefore, their lives are meaningless. Their hidden or even visible anguish is of no interest. Indifference reduces the other to an abstraction.”

“In a way, to be indifferent to that suffering is what makes the human being inhuman. Indifference, after all, is more dangerous than anger and hatred. Anger can at times be creative. One writes a great poem, a great symphony, one does something special for the sake of humanity because one is angry at the injustice that one witnesses. But indifference is never creative. Even hatred at times may elicit a response. You fight it. You denounce it. You disarm it. Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response.

Indifference is not a beginning, it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor — never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. The political prisoner in his cell, the hungry children, the homeless refugees — not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope is to exile them from human memory. And in denying their humanity we betray our own.

Indifference, then, is not only a sin, it is a punishment.”

There is a creeping culture of apathy in Philippine society. Many Filipinos no longer wish to take an open stand between good and evil, to get actively involved in good governance or in looking after the welfare of others, or to do or pursue what is right even if it hurts or is inconvenient.

Who would have the audacity to stand as a witness to a heinous crime? How many would have the kind heart to share to others the little that he has? In seeing a victim or an injured along the road, would there be more people truly rendering assistance or would there be more curious onlookers? How common is it for people to take a moral stand or challenge the status quo even if it meant punishment or losing a privilege?

There is certainly a way to break this vicious pattern of indifference. The question is – who has the resolve?