Can this country be a nation?

On Feb. 25, we celebrated a very important date in our recent history –the People Power Revolution of 1986. Yet, it was celebrated in only a small section of Edsa as if that portion were the only beneficiary of the restoration of democracy in the country.

This low level of consciousness goes a long way in explaining why we, as a country, fall short in our quest for development. And it begs the question:  “Can this country be a nation?”

Benedict Anderson wrote: “A nation is imagined as a community, because, regardless of the actual inequality and exploitation that may prevail in each, the nation is always conceived as a deep comradeship of people … coming together in fraternity not so much to kill, as to unwillingly die for such limited imaginings.”

The lack of an Edsa consciousness illustrates how we have so little sense of ourselves as a nation. We become a nation only when we begin to bridge certain fundamental divides in our societal makeup and build a set of shared commonalities that can bring all Filipinos together.

What are these societal divides?

1. The problem of endemic poverty.  We cannot continue to have positive economic growth yet leave more than a quarter (25+ percent) of our people in chronic poverty. Something is wrong with our development model and our political leadership if this continues to be the case. We need to build an economy that provides inclusive growth where the majority of our people can be middle-class and not just eke out livelihoods as barely surviving households. The key: decent full-time work for all.

2. The possibility of a national identity amidst linguistic diversity. We are a country of multiple languages. We shouldn’t insist on a single universal language or a centrally biased language as the foundation for a national identity. The diversity of our people as evidenced by the richness of regional languages should be viewed as a strength and not a weakness.

3. Synergy between regional and national history.  Too much of our political history and our national symbols are Tagalog in orientation. Unless our history and symbols become more inclusive, we will never attain a truly Filipino national identity. Regional histories that contribute to a shared national history should be encouraged, documented and taught in an unbiased and fair manner.

4. Religion as politics.  There is too much religious organization weighing in on the country’s political development. When church hierarchies think they can dictate on political appointments and the political choice of followers, this practice destroys the fabric of democracy. We need people who can discern and act for themselves, not people being told what to do or whom to vote for by church elders.

5. Politics as family business. To build a functioning democracy, electoral reforms must allow for better, more equitable representation at the national and local levels. Such reforms must take away the built-in advantages and the use of taxpayer money by incumbents who favor political families in order to make electoral representation more inclusive.

6. The miseducation of the Filipino.  Until the proposed K +12 education system is fully rolled out (and in a quality manner), education will continue to be a two-class system for those who can afford more ba`sic education and those who cannot.

7. Corruption in government. Corruption is the biggest risk to the economy. When the seemingly straightforward filing of a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth can be so grossly violated by the highest government official in the judiciary (and he is not alone in this practice), this undermines the credibility of government. To build a responsive government, corruption must be curbed and the government bureaucracy professionalized. The key: leadership with integrity and accountability.

8. Biases against Muslim Filipinos and Mindanao. To build a more equitable Philippines, Mindanao must become a driver of growth and Muslim Filipinos full partners in this growth. So long as Mindanao, particularly Muslim Mindanao, remains in a state of underdevelopment, it will be a drag on the economy and a major source of conflict in the country.

None of the above is a quick fix.  But the promise of Edsa was the promise of doing away with these divides. A quarter century later, we speak of Edsa as an unfinished revolution.

Today, we are a country “stuck in the middle.”  In management strategy, “stuck in the middle” is one of the worst positions to be in. Our short political cycles (i.e. 6-year presidencies) make bridging these social divides difficult to attain. But a nation is built not by a president but by a people. And the people’s voice starts with the conscious and subconscious: what we celebrate as important.

Edsa I is important, but not just in the shrine on Edsa but throughout the country. The Department of Education should be celebrating the spirit of Edsa more proactively in all our schools nationwide.

And it should celebrate these important dates every year in our schools to help build a stronger fabric for democracy. DepEd can start anew with the celebration of Independence Day on June 12 of this year.

Juan Miguel Luz (juanmiguel.luz@gmail.com) is dean of the Center for Development Management at the Asian Institute of Management.