Country =/= Corporation (Among Other Things)

I actually have no idea what photo to put here, so I settled for
something related to comments. (Credit: AttorneyMarketingProfits.com)

I promised a friend that I'd expound on a general thought I commented on a Facebook post of hers. She originally shared a post from some other guy (see here) where the latter was pretty fed up about how Filipinos were becoming belligerent and disrespectful with their complaints and suggestions, not to mention how they seemed to know better than the president (more on this later). He offered up an analogy in doing so, painting a picture of a company wherein the hypothetical president said the same Aquino catchphrase "kayo ang boss ko" and was now subject to suggestions from every worker under him.

The analogy falls flat for me. In trying to make the scenario more accessible to the poster's audience (I think), he oversimplifies, if not misses, the relationship between a democratic country's government and its citizens.

In a company, the biggest decisions are done by the company bigwigs. A rank-and-file employee knows that any suggestion he/she makes is merely that, a suggestion, and no one is beholden to heed it, especially not the bigwigs who actually get paid huge sums to steer a company to profitability. As long as the rank-and-filer does what his job contract asks him to do, the company is happy, the bigwigs are happy, and the employee gets paid. As a bonus, if the employee is miffed that his/her suggestions aren't heeded, then he/she is free to leave the company any time he/she so chooses and work elsewhere.

On the other hand, generally, a citizen who isn't happy with the direction his/her country is headed cannot simply up and move elsewhere. Well, perhaps it's not so difficult if you're a first-worlder, but law-abiding Filipinos in general can't easily change passports (even getting a foreigner spouse has its share of legal processes to go through, which doesn't always end up successful).

The gravity of a CEO's erroneous decision pales in comparison to the wide-ranging effects of a government official's erroneous move. For example, if a CEO embezzles money, worst case is that the company folds, but employees can find work elsewhere. Pilfering billions out of the country's coffers, though, leads to lower budgets for education, public works, and healthcare, which results in poorly-educated masses (if at all), non-existent infrastructure, and possibly avoidable deaths because public hospitals are poorly-equipped. A single misdeed can have hundreds of thousands of lives riding on it, and we're not talking about mere unemployment here. We're talking about lost potential, lost dreams, and lost lives here.

The dynamic between state and citizen also isn't as cut-and-dried as a company's work-for-us-get-paid system. Citizens are mandated to pay taxes (even when they're not working - VAT, sales tax, realty tax, road tax, etc), and the idea is that by giving the government a constant stream of money, the latter will assure them that they won't ever have to do without basic needs such as education, security, and healthcare, to name a few. And that government officials will always do the best thing with the citizens well-being in mind.

That is the ideal, of course. But the reality is so different than the ideal that frustrated citizens have no other recourse than to voice out their concerns, because the alternative is accepting mediocrity and retaining the status quo in this country (which, if we're being honest, is crappy). Why the tone of some is seemingly becoming more belligerent and disrespectful (not that I condone rudeness, mind) is because the government itself is being somewhat disrespectful in not acknowledging the mistakes they make (in the current administration, it's almost always someone else's fault, usually Arroyo's) and the many ages-old problems the country faces that they do nothing about (the public transport system is forever a mess, for one).

The poster goes on to remark: "Grabe, what we have become. Everyone thinks he can do a better job than the President. After all… Im the Boss!" [sic] By saying as much, he makes the inherent, and flawed, assumption that we always vote the best people into power. A democracy is only as effective as its worst elected officials (there are plenty of them, otherwise we'd be numero uno in the Southeast Asian region at least, with all the resources available to us). In a country where celebrity status and name politics are king come election time instead of actual, proven competence, we will definitely have our share of clunkers. Heck, the mere fact that we have the term trapo says a lot about our own shortcomings as voters, that our traditional politicians (i.e. people who get voted often) are implied to be no better than dirty dish rags. Also, just because someone's an elected official doesn't mean he/she is immune to making questionable decisions (nor should the Yolanda tragedy and ongoing relief effort spare government from legitimate criticisms).

And yes, there are times when the general populace can do a better job than government officials. You sometimes only need common sense and a sincere desire to improve this country instead of lining your pockets and/or perpetuating your own political machinery to propose better solutions.

Unfortunately, Occam's Razor doesn't do the trick in explaining the supposed "belligerence" here. Focusing on the catchphrase and assuming that it alone caused an avalanche of smugness and "know-it-alls" doesn't even scratch the surface of the real reason why people are more vocal nowadays - the increasing penetration of the internet (easier, cheaper, and faster access to more news content) and social media (i.e. cheap soapbox/platform for everyone), coupled with general government inaction and/or apathy (to be fair, something that existed even before this administration). Even without the made-for-tremendous-approval-ratings catchphrase, the elements are already in place for this sort of thing to occur.

Granted, there really are bad suggestions thrown around. In no way am I saying that all suggestions thrown out there are good. Regardless, people are and should be free to speak their mind on how things should be done. That's something guaranteed by this thing called "freedom" that our forefathers fought for and not because some cheesy catchphrase suddenly gave them powers of commentary they never had before (which they totally did). Please, we're giving that catchphrase too much credit.

Oh, and we really are the bosses. Democracy, as beautifully described by the esteemed Abraham Lincoln 150 years ago, is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Implying that the president is the real boss assumes a form of government known as a monarchy - ironically, something we fought against 117 years ago.

P.S.: Food for thought - the president must be doing a horrible job if *everyone* thinks he/she can do better (the everyone part is hyperbole, though, as there are will always be stalwart Aquino defenders on everything he does).