Pacquiao as hero

It was in 1965 when I visited what was then known as East Berlin. I only heard from my guide that I must not leave Germany without visiting the Bertolt Brecht’s Berliner Ensemble Theater. Happily, the theater was not far from Checkpoint Charlie, then the only way to get from West Berlin to East Berlin. As a visitor, one does not immediately understand a native’s enthusiasms. And then I did not know much about theater either. But I went along to this visit that my guide called “indispensable.”

It is only now that I understand what he meant. Bertolt Brecht was not just for German theater but for everyone. One special Bertolt Brecht insight I love to quote comes from his play “The Life of Galileo.”

I think a conversation in the play describes the Filipinos’ situation today. Andrea, a character in the play says: “Unhappy is the land that breeds no hero.” To which Galileo replies: “No, Andrea. Unhappy is the land that needs a hero.” Since then that Brecht conversation assumed a life of its own and often quoted in different contexts with the same meaning Brecht wanted it to have: “Pity the country that needs heroes” and “Unhappy is the land that is in need of heroes.” The conversation reflects Brecht’s genius about using theater language to open a whole new world of thinking about politics just as Galileo did for astronomy.

* * *

That is where Filipinos are today with Manny Pacquiao winning yet another boxing victory. He is tops. There are even calls for him to become president. This is where we should draw the line. A little caution here will help us manage our enthusiasm.

We can learn from Bertolt Brecht’s insight that made him able to turn a common belief upside down. The common belief is that a country is unhappy when it is unable to create heroes. Not true says Galileo — it is unhappy because it is in need of a hero. What did he mean? I think Brecht was able to convey the originality of Galileo and his unwillingness to succumb to common beliefs even if he was persecuted for it.

I share every Filipino’s pride in Manny Pacquiao’s boxing victories, but I do not share the overkill that he should now be made President of the Philippines. This is no different from making the wife or the son of a hero the president of the country. If I did I would contradict a position that I have always held that a country cannot be run on theatrics or “golpe.” The presidency is a hard slug. He or she has to make decisions from day to day in pursuit of a vision for his countrymen. That vision comes from the inner man. Moreover, it does not depend on him alone.

Pacquiao is good at boxing. As his own promoter Arum had said, “I have never seen a fighter like Manny. Every time I see him fight, he keeps on getting better.” Arum adds it was Manny Pacquiao’s single-minded dedication to practice, and willingness to be prepared physically and psychologically that makes the difference. There was a time, Arum says, that he was worried that Pacquiao seemed to have faltered when Freddie Roach moved his training from Baguio to the Wild Card Gym in Hollywood.

It might be about practicing for a big boxing fight but it is the inner man that made it possible for him to simply win. I think that the inner man in Pacquiao comes from so much suffering when he was poor and struggling.

There have been other heroes before him with the same strength of mind and body but not necessarily good leaders. Lech Walesa is one of them. I write of him because I heard it from the Polish themselves who said they had pinned so much hope on him to administer their country well but he was a failure. Or closer to home, we placed so much hope on Cory as the widow of the late Senator Benigno Aquino. They are heroes, but can they govern a country?

Those wanting a boxing hero to lead the country reveal their own inadequacies, their own lack of qualities to make a country great. Unfortunately, it does not depend on a hero alone, but also on them as patriots. This is an unhappy land if it needs a hero. It is a cowardly way of passing on citizenry’s responsibilities to a single person when what is needed is a collective determination to see the country right.

* * *

This brings me to another essay that asks: “Does quality of leadership necessarily determine a society’s ability to prosper?” It was posted only by the name Benigno in GetReal. Philippines a few years ago.

“In the on-going debate around whether a shift in form of government will yield any significant change in our ability to prosper as a society over the foreseeable future (if there is such a thing), we have established that there is some validity in the assumption that quality of leadership has a strong causal relationship with system of governance. However, the second component that links prosperity to system of governance remains suspect; i.e. that quality of elected leaders determines ability of a society to prosper.”

The author cites the “Chinese Filipinos.”

Bad governance and lack of education are the top scapegoats, for example. They simply beg the question: the Chinese community was with us through countless corrupt and inept administrations, they had to register their businesses in the same public offices, and they paid taxes to the same government. Furthermore, they landed on our shores, speaking not a word of English or Tagalog. Now, their volunteer fire brigade is far more reliable (and honest) than the government-run force.”

I beg to differ with him. I think that the author fails to account for the differences in attitude of migrants and the locals. The guest communities are more determined, more ambitious to get ahead.

He adds that “no matter how much or how many instances of political change we have seen in the last 50 years, the condition of the average Filipino has not changed fundamentally.”

If he means superficial changes like the rigodon of presidential elections, I might agree with him. But we have avoided substantial political changes.

For too long Filipinos have depended on political leaders in a system skewed in favor of the rich and well connected. It is time to confront the situation that disables our country in achieving its potential.