The Self as a Danger to Others

The title of this entry made me think of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand Theory.” This particular theory says that everyone is inclined in satisfying self-interest. Hence, no one is what some called “selfless.” We all are selfish in our own ways. As Smith had said, it is not from the generosity of the baker that we get our bread, but from their own interest. As a business student myself, I really can understand. At the end of the day, we are for profit. Thus, we are guided by our self-interest.

Furthermore, this process of gratification of self-interest in the extreme could be very harmful. This I understand from the material. It is dangerous in the sense that it degrades others. We as selfish selves could just think of them as some kind of controllable commodity. We could manipulate them just to get what our selves want of them. Hence, committing violence and crimes.

That having said, I am somehow strengthened and enlightened at the same time. I am my own self. I won’t conform to others will that is against my own. I won’t allow myself to be manipulated to be at other’s benefit and to my expense. I will uphold my own being. I won’t allow myself to be abused, to be subjects of crime or violence. I will fight.

I too have my own needs. I’m not saying that I’m not selfish in my own ways. I also have needs that others only could satisfy. It’s just that others are also selves outside our own selves that need to be upheld. I won’t do what I don’t want others do to me.

Indeed, it’s true that we give the standard of measurement in judging others. Our own selves strive to be more of power than others. No one must be lowered down as well as to be stuck in it. We all struggle to be up there, higher and more powerful than others. In essence it’s very good. We are just optimizing our talents and abilities to be of benefit to our selves and to the community as a whole. It just goes bad when we get too engaged with it too much that we are stepping and looking down at others. How to avoid this? I don’t know. We all have different values. We grew at different environments. We all are our own selves. As for me, I think I was raised relying on my own abilities and not on others as stepping stone.

Perhaps, it really is very different from each of us. Some say that those who are criminals and inflicting harms against others are those who are kind of empty in a sense. Their emptiness in a way finds a way to be filled up through others. Thus, I believe, it’s a crucial job for the parents and the society as a whole to instil and promote good values. Families, as the basic unit of the society must be very keen as to raising their own children taking note of the needs of their children in every aspect. I am lucky to have been born to a good family. I’m not saying that my family is perfect though. I just have been taught of the things that actually matter.

Being in this kaleidoscope world, it is not inevitable that some persons would be better than others in various aspects. I think it’s just the job of the self to find its own talents. In this way, he won’t be feeling deprived that he would actually satisfy this in the most inhumane ways. I for instance have also my weaknesses. But I know my strengths. There are times that I feel insecure of others, but it just passes by. I am my own self. They are others. We are different. Perhaps, we are what they call diverse. Together, we make a world.

There are times that I think of being manipulative. There are times that I feel I am using my wit just to get what I want. I believe it’s inevitable for teenagers like me. We are not given all things that we want. We find ways. Sometimes these ways are wrong. But it is in a way, making us live our lives happily. A potential danger, isn’t it?

At the end, of this paper, I am making a pledge, not of being selfless because it’s impossible, but of controlling this potential in the lower concentration. I could use of it sometimes, but of minimum harm. At the end of the day, we have our own needs to satisfy, we have others to satisfy, we have others as hindrances for this satisfaction.

Marcos Regime on Macroeconomic Development of the Philippines: My Reflection

In all honesty, I actually do not care of what has happened in the Philippines on the years past my existence. But, having discussed and read some supplemental material about the Macroeconomic Development of the Philippines from almost past 40 years, it made me aware of how my Philippine history lessons actually have relevance to our nation’s economy then and now. Perhaps, this awareness has widened my understanding of the historical significance of those events, mainly the Marcos regime, assassination of Ninoy Aquino, among others. Of course, the significance is not only for me, but to the whole constituents of our nation as well.

Now, I am somehow enlightened as to why the Philippines is said to be buried in a heap of debt. I keep on hearing this description yet I really couldn’t explain. As said, history explains the present.

One of the most underscored and highlighted persons in Philippine history and macroeconomic development of the Philipiines for this matter is Ferdinand Marcos and his regime, which I could characterize as a period that is good at the start and terrible on the long run. I believe Marcos has truly these good intentions for the Philippines, taking into consideration his macroeconomic development strategic plans, i.e. the Green Revolution, Export Agriculture and forestry, and foreign borrowing. The vision was really good, brilliant I may say. But the execution went wrong along the way. This makes me really sad.

I’m not feeling angry with Marcos or anything. For all we know, he’s also not conscious that he’s doing the wrong thing. Like I said, for me has really good intentions. Maybe he just overlooked the process being very ambitious and mainly concentrating on the end goal. This is manifested through him declaring Proclamation No. 1081, effectively installing martial law in the Philippines, thus suspended civil rights and imposed military rule in the country. I credit him for his justification. He stressed that rebels must be impeded to uphold National Security. I think he just didn’t deal with the problem face on. He must’ve gone to the root of it. He must’ve solved the issue beyond the issue and not dealt with the manifestations of the problems.

Another thing I see that went wrong is him being very friendly. Well, “friendly” is a euphemism. It’s just on the process of the implementation of his macro-economic development strategies, he somehow has given most of the benefits to his cronies, people socially related with him. As a capitalist country, being under strict supervision and control of the government, it is but inevitable for this capitalists to be very powerful in the market to the point that they monopolize their respective industry. His cronies led the leading crops being exported during those times such as sugar, pineapples, coconuts, bananas etc. You see, instead of lifting up the Philippines as a whole, he just widened the gap between the rich and the poor. In fact, Poverty during the Marcos era deepened despite a modest increase in average national income. Additionally, income inequality increased.

Furthermore, I believe the main cause of the great amount of foreign debt of the Philippines is his move of loaning from other countries to finance government spending, aiming to push the economy up. I actually thought this as very risky if not extravagant, yet this really went well at first according to facts and figures. Expenditures on infrastructures have somehow succeeded in temporarily promoting tourism and economic growth. But, his being “friendly” surfaced again. According to Joseph Lim of the University of the Philippines, a businessman in 1981, a crony of Marcos, fled the country with $80 million worth of debt in international and local banks. Because of the gravity of the parties involved, the Central Bank, together with national banks like Philippine National Bank and Development Bank of the Philippines, formed a bailout package and rescued the banks and companies implicated, which paved way for “the expansion of the money supply from 1980 to 1983.” The outflow of capital, termed “capital flight", contributed to the foreign exchange depletion. Eventually, lavishness led the Philippines to default. Hello to debts for the Philippines.

It’s just very saddening that a President of one’s country would use the money of the public for the benefit of the private ones. In this move, I won’t credit him as having good intentions. Didn’t he learn from his Taxation class that taxes are exclusively for public use? I guess he became drowned by the thought that he is the president of the country, and he can help his “friends” in need because of this power. One word, “Pride.”

For me the main lesson here is for leaders to be good followers, not of their self-interests, but of the interests of his constituents as a whole. Every action that’ll be made must be in accordance to morality, ethics, and the value of beneficence.

Marcos regime is just a proof that a country democratic as we are, must be by the people, of the people and by the people. A move such as cronyism, and by a dictator/president for this matter, won’t totally succeed in enhancing macroeconomic situations of a country.

The good news is that these ripples of Marcos’ faults are now being stopped. Kudos to the current administrations. It’s good to learn and understand things like this. Marcos taught us many lessons, this he did. There is hope for the Philippines. I’m certain that we Filipino’s won’t let history repeat itself.