Fixing our country: Where did we go wrong?

[emow]

^^ If you haven't yet, perhaps you should read the parable of the ship. But never mind, really, you should instead read less and experience the real world yourself more.
Going through the posts in this thread, most see what is HERE and NOW, with suggestions on what to do to correct whatever is perceived to be wrong with the country. It is obvious that political inclinations of those who are here vary from libertarianism, marxism, to authoritarianism and even towards a dictatorial rule. I don't know if a 'middle ground' can be found to make it worthwhile for us to arrive at suggestions on 'fixing our country' that are indeed doable again, HERE and NOW. But perhaps that should be the focus rather than our philosophies.
Do you honestly think removing government regulations at the state where we are in now would improve our economy? That, in my honest opinion is wishful thinking.

study history, and you will find your answer... as societies depart from liberty, the lives of the people are degraded...as societies move towards liberty, the lives of ordinary men are uplifted...

I insist on talking about philosophies and principles as these are inseparable to the actions of man... Man behaves based on the principles he has, just like nature behaves upon the principles of physics.... To exclude principles in the intellectual discussion, might as well shut up...

[The_Child]

study history, and you will find your answer... as societies depart from liberty, the lives of the people are degraded...as societies move towards liberty, the lives of ordinary men are uplifted...

this is not always the case. We have to remember that one important reason for the establishment of the State is the regulation of its people and resources. Some Contractarians argue that prior to the establishment of the state was a life that is "nasty, short and brutish." It is a fact that equality is not a natural gift; there are those who are born handicapped, those who have different temperaments, different talents. If societies become too deregulated, then we will witness a modern savage garden, homo homine lupus, much that we see in societies like the US of Ah. "Upliftment" here seems to speak from a certain perspective that excludes those who were unlucky enough to be born with certain problems. They end up eaten by bigger fishes. What do we call this society? For sure, it is not Human, it cannot be.

[gareb]

this seems to be one simple question, but the problem that it asks about is multi-faceted, multi-layered and stretched out in history. often times (especially to the ill-prepared) describing, detailing and commenting on it would be like blind men arguing about the shape of the elephant while touching its different parts.

since each nation's experience is unique in its historical context (though you can find similar veins with other nations), the re-imagination of history in accordance to the question (where we succeeded, where we failed) should fit certain parameters. this is because we can re-imagine a history through different lenses.

i encountered this when i compared how history is taught in different schools and the silent ubiquity of politics as well as the intertwined relationship between economics, culture and politics.

understandably, a lot of us, coming from diverse backgrounds, can describe the situation (and prescribe solutions) coming from different perspectives. and like blind men groping at elephant parts, we need to understand as well that we are describing the exact same thing.

dare take the challenge to unify and account for all of these perspectives?

[chaleh]

Where did we go wrong? Katong panahon ni Marcos OK pa man ta diba? Aquino-Conjuangco: that's where we went wrong.

[eezychair]

study history, and you will find your answer... as societies depart from liberty, the lives of the people are degraded...as societies move towards liberty, the lives of ordinary men are uplifted...

I insist on talking about philosophies and principles as these are inseparable to the actions of man... Man behaves based on the principles he has, just like nature behaves upon the principles of physics.... To exclude principles in the intellectual discussion, might as well shut up...

How impertinently bold of you to think that i have not studied history. Is it perhaps that the history you read about is likened to just the tail of the elephant (as @gareb describes in an analogy)?

[Romeojin]

Where did we go wrong ? im sure it can be traced back to the WW2 era... we were second to the Japan in terms in economy in Asia but after WW2 when Manila had become the second most devastated city after Warsaw, thing fall down. Since then our recovery is slow cause of the many factors like poor political leaders, low political will, poor drafted constitution, lack of discipline, and many other factors. you name it lol

But dont worry in 40years time we will be number 16 daw hehe.

The only concrete solution i can come up right now is to introduced stricter fine/penalty for every violations and strict implementation of littering, jaywalking, non segregating of garbage, poor asphalting of road, etc. In time... we will be a fine country

[emow]

this seems to be one simple question, but the problem that it asks about is multi-faceted, multi-layered and stretched out in history. often times (especially to the ill-prepared) describing, detailing and commenting on it would be like blind men arguing about the shape of the elephant while touching its different parts.

since each nation's experience is unique in its historical context (though you can find similar veins with other nations), the re-imagination of history in accordance to the question (where we succeeded, where we failed) should fit certain parameters. this is because we can re-imagine a history through different lenses.

i encountered this when i compared how history is taught in different schools and the silent ubiquity of politics as well as the intertwined relationship between economics, culture and politics.

understandably, a lot of us, coming from diverse backgrounds, can describe the situation (and prescribe solutions) coming from different perspectives. and like blind men groping at elephant parts, we need to understand as well that we are describing the exact same thing.

dare take the challenge to unify and account for all of these perspectives?

Yes, you do have a point in your argument... but you must understand that the world is exchanging and adhering to different ideas to suit their very own systems of governance... I merely point out that those societies drifting apart from free market have the lives of its people degraded....

I am looking through history and current events upon the lense of the concept of liberty... What i cannot understand is people misconstruing liberty for anarchy! Is advocating for free market the same as advocating for no government role in the market? I think people should understand that under the free market system, the government still has a role... To enforce contracts, and to protect the natural rights of the consumers... If there is fraud, the government should act with force to remove that injustice... If there is damage, destruction, death brought about by unscrupulous business behaviors, then the government can step in to punish the violators of rights....

However, the free market should never be planned by any central agency such as the government. To do so is to adhere socialism and communism ideals. The Austrian Economists believe it is futile to even try to plan the production of labor and try to predict the demands of the people. Can anyone or any agency synthesize the infinite subjective actions of the people? The Austrian school believes that the free market will correct itself far more effective than any government intervention can accomplish? Would there be market failures? Yes, certainly. But there is also such thing as government failure and we have been having that one for a very long time. It is hard to correct the government failure because people often do not see it as a source of the problem.

The free market capitalism is the only economic system consistent with the concept of liberty.

this is not always the case. We have to remember that one important reason for the establishment of the State is the regulation of its people and resources. Some Contractarians argue that prior to the establishment of the state was a life that is "nasty, short and brutish." It is a fact that equality is not a natural gift; there are those who are born handicapped, those who have different temperaments, different talents. If societies become too deregulated, then we will witness a modern savage garden, homo homine lupus, much that we see in societies like the US of Ah. "Upliftment" here seems to speak from a certain perspective that excludes those who were unlucky enough to be born with certain problems. They end up eaten by bigger fishes. What do we call this society? For sure, it is not Human, it cannot be.

Yes, equality is not a natural gift, that's why i don't advocate for it. there are two types of equality that modern economists are debating about. Equality in Opportunity against Equality in Result. I am for the equality of opportunity for it respects the natural rights of life liberty and property. Equality in Result (what seems to be the trend of this world) in its basic foundation is an injustice committed against someone for the benefit of someone else.

My argument for liberty is this: We are all born with the right to life, and as such, we have two extensions of this right, right to liberty (to exercise our own conscious decisions to sustain our life), and right to property (to be able to exploit the rewards of our labor). These natural rights precedes any chartered law, formed government, or any contract agreement. All of us are afforded with these rights, and all of us will use force to defend these rights. The collective force to uphold these rights compelled man to form laws. Laws, therefore, are solely meant to protect rights, and remove injustices. No one has any right to violate another man's rights, and as such, whatever is prohibited between two people should also be applicable between the government and any one citizen.

How impertinently bold of you to think that i have not studied history. Is it perhaps that the history you read about is likened to just the tail of the elephant (as @gareb describes in an analogy)?

The same can be said of you... I am for intellectual discussion and it seems you have taken a condescending overtone in your posts... Wasn't it you who tried to discredit my stand by using ad hominim? How bold of you to suggest that the way i live is a ground for discredting my beliefs? Do you know how i live my life? You have the gutless mentality of trying to suggest to me that i should experience the world more... Who the hell are you? Do you know my life? If you cannot engage in a purely intellectual discussion and must resort to condescending overtones and ad hominim, its better to ignore my posts, and save us from unintelligible arguments...

[frozentime]

work harder ingon pa ni mama gloria.

[kimleeKINO_choi]

Sa ato self ta nasayup, sayop kai walay disiplina sayop pgpili sa mudala sa pinas.

[gareb]

@emow:

i understand your point of view and how you can see that the prescription of "Right-libertarianism" as advocated by the Austrian school can be very appealing to libertarian reformers, but also mainly to the pro-business lobby. i see that you have acquainted yourself well with the philosophy behind it and how it is suppose to work. personally, and as you might have already figured out, i do not subscribe to this school of thought for various reasons, foremost being the issue of accountability, and cannot agree with many of of its points especially those that deal with economics.

still, granting that we have our differences, the challenge is to find a common ground while we articulate on these differences. the main aim is to look at where, on the course of the nation's development, did it "go wrong", in a sense that there is this persistent impression (which is no doubt true) that we are being "left out" and even "over-run" by our neighbors.

this thread is rich with impressions, observations and insights as it is, most of which are valid. (corruption, government, self, culture being the supposed root of the problem) the more we can incorporate these into a system that purports to explain just exactly;

• where we went wrong in history,
• explains the current situation in a concise manner,
• offers steps and solutions on how we can get out of the quagmire,
  

the better explanation it would be.