Trust, healing and democracy

WITH elections just a few days away, I thought of sharing a modified version of the A. G. Sison Memorial Lecture that I delivered on Thursday at the annual convention of the Philippine College of Physicians:

There is a growing body of social science research showing the pivotal role of trust within societies. Trust, according to the political scientist Francis Fukuyama, is the lubricant that makes any group or organization run efficiently. High levels of trust have been found to help stabilize democratic institutions, which in turn encourage economic growth and "subjective well being," better known to many of us as happiness.

In studies such as the World Values Survey, the Philippines has been found to be a low-trust society. Similar findings have been made by psychologists, who describe Filipinos as tending toward "small-group affiliation," mainly the family and peer groups, or "barkada." Beyond those domains, we tend to be more mistrustful, with many negative consequences such as nepotism and corruption, even our weak sense of nationhood.

Low trust endangers the already weak democratic institutions that we have. For example, as trust deteriorates, societies become more difficult to govern. The usual response is to pass more laws with more severe penalties, which only fuels more mistrust, especially if the laws are not enforced uniformly. As societies become less governable, authoritarian politicians become more appealing with their promises of peace and order, usually by dispensing with human rights. The sad reality, though, is that in authoritarian societies trust levels sink even more, dictators and despots staying in power by keeping people suspicious of each other.

Our low levels of mistrust are not accidental. They are the products of a whole historical heritage, brought about by many factors ranging from geography to social institutions. In the Philippine context, colonialism benefited from keeping us divided, bound by narrow family and regionalistic loyalties rather than dangerous nationalism. Feudalism also played an important role, emphasizing absolute loyalty to landlords and political warlords by keeping people dependent.

There is a relationship between our low levels of trust and the state of our politics today. We vote based on loyalties for relatives, for a town mate, for someone of the same ethnicity or the same political dynasty. Over time, we have become more distrustful of traditional politicians but rather than moving toward issue-based politics, we have merely shifted our choices toward new players such as movie stars and media personalities. The fact is that our trust remains limited to people we can see, and unfortunately, it is these larger-than-life personalities who literally invade our living rooms and bedrooms several times each day.

The elections actually offer us opportunities for trust-building, especially with younger people.

First and most importantly, get out and vote on May 10. Despite the circus atmosphere, high voter turnout suggests we still have some trust in our political processes.

Second, trust the young to make wise choices. The worst that could happen is for parents to dictate to their children who they should vote for, especially if the choices are made because the candidate is dad's buddy or mom's classmate. Any parent who endorses candidates simply because of personal ties has no right to talk about making "educated" or "wise" choices. Worse, such endorsements tell our young people that they should only trust the small networks prescribed to them.

Explain what criteria we should use to select whom we vote for. Help the young (and the not so young) to see through the glitter, the empty rhetoric, the inanities of politicians. Do not be afraid to show how upset you are with candidates like Senator John Osmeña, with his claim that it was his legislation that brought cellular phones to Filipinos and whose position on family planning is given as: "Let's have more people and 20 more million Filipinos to export."

Third, take time out to explain governance and why it is important to look into the positions taken by the candidates on various issues. Explain that campaigns are meant to build trust: candidates are saying, "Trust in me, vote for me and I will deliver on my promises." The positions of presidential and senatorial candidates can be found in two Internet sites: www.20-questions.com and eleksyon2004/issues/index.htm.

Fourth, demonstrate your trust in principled politicians. Teach the young (and remind ourselves) to vote for whoever you think is best qualified, even if the public opinion surveys show him or her trailing far behind. We cannot learn to trust other people if we can't trust our own convictions.

Fifth, understand that trust-building will be a slow process, filled with disappointment and frustrations. After the elections, perform a postmortem (sorry about the grim metaphor) and explain why certain people still won despite their lack of clear stands on issues. I'm afraid there will be all too many examples of how people will win based simply on glitter and name recognition. Explain why we need to work harder so that in the future, we can choose from women and men of substance.

Actively monitor the people we elect into office, holding them accountable to the positions they stated on various issues. No doubt, we will regret some of our choices, but as we see more good ones assuming public office, we will begin to appreciate the power of collective action to put women and men of integrity into public office. Then, and only then will we understand the axiom about public office being a public trust.

I will end by using a medical metaphor. Our levels of trust can be compared to the integrity of our bodies' defense and immune systems. A low-trust society is like a patient whose defenses are compromised, which makes him or her more vulnerable to diseases and complications. A low-trust society is assaulted by many vicious cycles, of people unwilling to invest in businesses, which leads to more unemployment and poverty, which further intensifies mistrust, driving investors away and our doctors into nursing schools so they can migrate.

Building trust can be compared to building up a patient's own defense system. We know that the best of medicines and technologies are useless without that defense system being mobilized. In the same way that the prognosis for a patient depends to a large extent on the evaluation of his or her immune system, we will find that it is high levels of trust that allow us to present a good prognosis for our country as it tries to overcome its many problems. Trust is not just a lubricant for efficiency; it is a powerful force that brings people together, emboldening them to transform dreams into visions, and visions into reality.

Comments to miguel@pinoykasi.net