If opportunity is provided, they will prosper

Written on Monday, May 26th, 2008 at 9:47 am | by benign0

Interesting observation Benj made about how the idealistic but naive mind sees the plight of the poor in his recent blog entry:

[…] it was that easy to romanticize [the poor] as the people who want change and would grab the opportunity the moment that they could […]

Let’s call the above statement X and set it aside for a moment and introduce the following statement for consideration:

If the opportunity is provided, they will prosper.

If there ever was a single common-denominator philosophy that underpins just about every altruistic, philantrophic, and volunteerist initiative aimed at the poor, that single statement probably encapsulates it the most neatly. What E=mc^2 is for nuclear physics, the above statement is for the field of non-profit poverty alleviation. If we are to pitch this as the grand unifying principle for the field of non-profit poverty alleviation, it may help to shrinkwrap this concept into the following form for easy reference:

—–
O=>P

Where:
O = opportunity
P = prosperity-for-the-poor; and,
The symbol “=>” denotes a one-way causal relationship between O and P.
—–

Having defined all this, we can then show how Benj’s statement X suddenly becomes eye-poppingly relevant.

The axiom that makes E=mc^2 valid and universally applicable is that the velocity of light c is an absolute constant across time and space (i.e. the entire universe).

The assumption that makes O=>P valid would be Statement X; specifically that the poor would “grab the opportunity [to prosper] the moment that they could”.

Which brings up the interesting question:

Is Statement X true?

That is, do poor people in general grab (internalise, appreciate, and capitalise on) opportunity provided to them? Is Statement X true enough to make the O=>P Theorem a practical theorem to apply in real life?

The answer to that question has ramifications on generally-accepted thinking around what needs to be done to alleviate or elminate poverty in our society, specifically because if we find that it is false then O=>P is rendered invalid.

Just some food for thought.

Tags:
Add to del.icio.us | Digg this! | Yahoo MyWeb | Google Bookmark It! | Stumble It!
About The Author: benign0 is the Webmaster of GetRealPhilippines.COM and has once been described as "one of the most enthusiastic hecklers of the politically-passionate" by a respected journalist.

Filed Under Society

Related Entries:

Comments

13 Responses to “If opportunity is provided, they will prosper”

  1. cvj on May 26th, 2008 11:51 am

    I don’t think it’s appropriate to model society in the same way as the physical world since the laws of physics (i.e. its equations) are immutable while contingency is a basic feature of Society and Social Systems. To do so would be an oversimplification.

  2. Jon Limjap on May 26th, 2008 12:13 pm

    cvj,

    That benign0’s argument is mechanical does not diminish the fact that the argument is valid.

    However, I’m not entirely comfortable with the premise of using just “the poor” here. I would posit that for any given person, the opportunity provided may or may not lead to prosperity.

    What makes the premises even more flawed is the question as to whether a person, or indulging benign0’s penchant for Filipino-bashing, a racial group, has the ability to seek and/or create opportunity or if it’s just an opportunity waiting game for them.

    I think that’s the more important argument here.

  3. cvj on May 26th, 2008 12:19 pm

    Jon, i agree. It’s his couching of the argument in terms of the language of physics (i.e. e=mc^2) which i object as it gives whatever conclusion an air of inevitability and generality that is not there since ‘the poor’ is made up of different individuals who can (and do) choose differently.

  4. benign0 on May 26th, 2008 3:33 pm

    You know what, guys? Rather than quibble about definitions and the soundness of the analogies I used, didn’t it occur to any of you that the more productive thing to do is to figure out HOW to make Statement X true?

    My aim was to highlight these points:

    (1) Maybe the traditional poverty alleviation challenge — delivering opportunity to the poor — is flawed (there is no lack of such initiatives).

    (2) Maybe the challenge should be re-framed in the context of Statement X; which is,

    (3) Take a new approach to poverty alleviation and understand WHY Filipinos seem incapable of capitalising on available opportunity to prosper.

    Item 3 seems to be a source of frustration and disillusionment amongst those who are in a position to GIVE. Common complaints amongst the jaded (some of which Benj described in his own blog entry) include:

    Pinoys were given “the Vote” in 1986 but then proceeded to sell their votes to the highest bidder.

    Pinoys were given useful information delivered over a “free” Media, but then preferred to tune in to Wowowee and Pinoy Big Brother.

    Pinoys were initiated into the concept of “peaceful street revolution” and we turned it into a bi-annual circus.

    Pinoys get $$ overseas to the tune of 10% of the value of our economy, but we choose to spend it on celphone trinkets and Starbucks Lattes.

    Kung baga, all the opportunity is there. The list reads out like one of those corny ‘100-things-About-Being-Pinoy-to-be-Proud-Of’ emails that infest ou Inboxes. All of it just gets squandered. Try to name even ONE opportunity to climb out of our economic shithole that was used wisely. I can already hear heads being scratched…

    Compare that to the rise of the Chinoy. There weren’t any of these initiatives to alleviate Pinoy-Chinese poverty in the islands back in the 50’s at the scale we see today being directed towards today’s crop of Pinoy poor. And yet the Chinoy prospered. Yesterday’s taho/balut vendors are now today’s captains of Pinoy industry.

  5. supersepoy on May 26th, 2008 4:25 pm

    As in any mathematical equation, a solution can only be reached if we could break down the equation such that there is only one unknown.
    O=>P would be meaningless if both O and P were unknowns.

    Translating this into the real world, people must first be made aware that Opportunities available, before they can start using those opportunities to find their Prosperity. Also, based on the opportunity given, they must be able to derive their own individual formulas to prosperity.

    But how to do all these? Education. Education. Education…

    And not just the formal kinds of education.

    Media is already an effective tool for educating whole communities of poor Filipinos. It has already taught most poor people that Wowowee is an “Opportunity” for getting quick, easy money (never mind that you can die while waiting in line). People know the cast of all the Pinoy Big brother seasons by heart. Imagine if they would cut down on half the crap that they’re showing, and produced shows that actually stimulated the mind (while being entertaining, of course)…

  6. cvj on May 26th, 2008 5:17 pm

    Benign0, before you point a finger on those who sell their votes, you have to reflect on why you yourself have condoned wholesale cheating. Isn’t that as bad, if not worse than selling votes?

    I don’t know what your fixation is with cellphone trinkets. For your reference, here’s the expenditure based on the latest Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES):

    http://www.census.gov.ph/data/sectordata/2006/ie0605.htm

    If your issue (as i understand it) is on production capacity, rather than the contrast between the ‘Pinoy’ employee and the ‘Chinoy’ entrepreneurs, the more important question is why our leading business enterprises (including the Chinoys) compare poorly with their counterparts in our more prosperous neighbors.

    Why have our leading businessmen remained in trading, real estate and service industries rather than progress into manufacturing (for export) and other high value added activities which would have created more jobs and move us up the technology frontier? Why have our biggest oligarchs concentrated cultivating political connections and maintaining monopolies rather than investing on enhancing their capability to produce things of value?

    You have to get over your prejudices against the Filipino in general and the poor in particular, with their perceived individual or group traits, and take a Systems viewpoint to figure this out. Try to follow Schumey’s (and Benj’s)approach.

  7. Benj on May 26th, 2008 10:36 pm

    Nah. There’s an assumption that the poor would take advantage of the opportunity instead of clinging like barnacles to the culture of mendicancy and dependency to politicians. I don’t buy it.

  8. Dealing with the Poor | Filipino Voices on May 27th, 2008 3:44 am

    […] to form, Benign0 has once again given us fair warning on how the poor tend to abuse the kindness of their betters. It may therefore be instructive to see how the United States has dealt with such a threat during a […]

  9. benign0 on May 27th, 2008 4:27 am

    A bit of adhominem, if I may:

    Tsk tsk cvj. If all you needed to do was post a link to another article, you could have commented here instead of making a completely new blog entry.

    And if you wanted to post a completely new blog entry, you could have at least used more of your own words to support whatever opinion or interpretation you gleaned from whatever article you cited. :D

  10. chuck on May 27th, 2008 4:54 am

    I could understand why you have to resort to ad hominem.

  11. Jon Limjap on May 27th, 2008 5:15 am

    benign0,

    Agreed on the Chinoys. Forgive the bias if only because I’m part of that lineage (although we have lost too long ago all the traditionalisms the 50s-era migrants still hold).

    This is in fact what I was implying: that the Chinoys were capable of seeking and or creating opportunities where there is none or little instead of just waiting for them to come around.

    I’d even like to edit the tale of Juan Tamad here: whereas in the original Juan Tamad simply rested under the guava tree waiting for the fruit to fall, the Juans of today aren’t actually Tamad. However, instead of climbing the guava tree, or planting more seeds to create a guava tree plantation, they settle with scouring the ground for fallen guavas.

    They also complain a lot when there’s not enough. And blame the people who plant the trees for “exploiting them” or something.

    supersepoy,

    Obviously, the Chinoys got their education not from the media nor education (note that John Gokongwei, for example, did not even finish college) but through their parents.

    Unfortunately the average Pinoy parent is a wimp at talking to their children about risk taking and opportunity hunting.

  12. benign0 on May 27th, 2008 2:54 pm

    supersepoy, interesting that you’d make that observation about the Philippine Media. In one of my attempts to address the issue tabled in Statement X, I quoted in my book what Isagani Cruz wrote in an article a 2006 INQ7.net article:

    The Philippine entertainment industry is not only a vast wasteland, as television has been described in America, but a vicious instrument for the abatement of the nation’s intelligence. The shows it offers for the supposed recreation of the people are generally vulgar and smutty, usually with some little moral lesson inserted to make them look respectable, but offensive nonetheless. On the whole, they are obnoxious and unwholesome and deserve to be trashed.

    The indiscriminate audience eagerly laps them up because it has not been taught to be selective and more demanding of better quality shows for their pastime. In fact, the easily satisfied fans have been taught the exact opposite reaction — to accept whatever garbage the industry offers them and, to add insult to their injury, to pay for it too.

    I go on to mention how such a vast chunk of the Pinoy mind is within the control of so few — which ironically makes a potential solution to smarten up Pinoys a lot more straightforward. If only (a) the opportunity is widely recognised, (b) the political will to regulate the crap dished out by the media is mustered, and (c) the owners of media walk all their talk about being that heroic messenger of Truth and tool of Freedom that they’ve pitched themselves as.

    Jon, glad to see we’re on the same page again. Though I gotta admit that your challenges to come up with the How still leaves me scratching my head. Then again, isn’t this (thinking of the How’s) the whole point of FilipinoVoices? ;)

  13. Jon Limjap on May 27th, 2008 4:58 pm

    benign0,

    Indeed. If all of this were easy, we won’t be arguing, would we?

Leave a Reply