The Philippines’ Hydra Problem: Why We Keep Fighting the Same Wars
By Karl Garcia
The Philippines does not suffer from a single dominant crisis. It is trapped in a self-reinforcing system of failure—a governance hydra where every problem we cut down regenerates in another form.
Crime. Human rights abuses. Weak innovation. Environmental collapse. Debt anxiety. Policy reversals. Electoral volatility. Institutional decay. Military politicization. Privatization without accountability. Digital promises without implementation. Education reform without structural change. Infrastructure breakdowns with no preventive maintenance.
These are not separate issues. They are nodes of the same system.
The country does not fail because it lacks plans, laws, or ideas. It fails because it lacks institutions that endure long enough to finish what they start.
What we experience is not incompetence. It is a national pattern: whack-a-mole governance.
1. The Circuit of Failure
Philippine governance operates in episodes.
A crisis becomes a headline.
A task force is formed.
A policy is announced.
Enforcement is staged.
The public applauds.
Then attention fades—and the problem returns, often stronger.
This is not merely poor execution. It is systemic instability.
When institutions are weak, force substitutes for capacity. When enforcement is inconsistent, criminal economies adapt and thrive. When innovation is praised but unsupported, ideas die after the pilot phase. When public spaces are reclaimed but not protected, they vanish with the next administration.
We do not suffer from many isolated failures. We suffer from one incomplete system that never closes its loops.
2. Weak Institutions Breed Coercive Shortcuts
When courts are slow, prosecutors understaffed, regulators captured, and police undertrained, the state reaches for shortcuts.
Violence becomes policy—not because the state is strong, but because it is incapable of sustained legality.
This is not a cultural preference for brutality. It is a governance failure.
Force replaces process. Fear replaces certainty. And legality becomes optional.
3. Rights Without Capacity Collapse
Human rights do not fail because they are excessive. They fail because the institutions meant to uphold them are unfinished.
Rights that exist only on paper create public cynicism. That cynicism opens political space for authoritarian solutions—completing the loop back to coercive governance.
Rights without enforcement capacity are not protections. They are promises the system cannot keep.
4. Policy Whiplash Strengthens Criminal Economies
Criminal syndicates do not defeat the Philippine state. They outlast it.
Crackdowns appear, disappear, and reappear—never long enough to dismantle networks or change incentives. Illicit actors learn to arbitrage inconsistency.
This instability does more than enable crime. It corrodes institutions, normalizes corruption, and reinforces public distrust.
Enforcement becomes performance. Not policy.
5. Privatization Without Governance is Privatization of Failure
Privatization and PPPs are often presented as solutions to the Philippines’ chronic problems.
But the Philippine experience shows a harsh truth:
Private capital can build and operate.
Only the state can regulate and enforce.
When the state cannot enforce contracts, maintain infrastructure, or protect the public interest, privatization becomes a privatized monopoly. PPPs become a political spectacle.
In water, transport, and infrastructure, the Philippines has learned a lesson that should be obvious:
The private sector can deliver—if the state can discipline itself.
But the state rarely does.
6. E-Governance: A Digital State Built on Paper
The Philippines has had computerization since 1971. Over half a century of digital state-building.
Yet the lived experience remains analog.
Forms printed. Records duplicated. Signatures chased. Systems built and abandoned.
This is not a technology problem. It is a governance problem.
E-governance fails because:
- The state is fragmented
- Institutions are reorganized every administration
- Data is treated as private property
- Vendors become political instruments
- Citizens become collateral damage
Digitization without governance simply digitizes failure.
7. Education Reform: Where Reform Goes to Die
Every year, the same story repeats:
Low test scores.
Public blame.
Political theater.
But the problem is structural.
Education in the Philippines is designed around:
- top-down control
- uniform governance
- budget rituals
- contractualization
- weak accountability
- politicized oversight
The system punishes innovation and rewards compliance. It produces students who can memorize but not comprehend.
The problem is not children. It is a system misaligned with how children learn.
8. Preventive Maintenance: The Hidden Engine of State Failure
The Philippines treats maintenance as an expense, not an investment.
When infrastructure breaks, we treat the symptoms, not the cause. Reactive repairs cost 5–10x preventive maintenance.
In public transport, this creates a cycle:
Aging assets.
High ridership.
Reactive maintenance.
System failure.
Political blame.
Short-term fixes.
The state never builds the systems that keep systems alive.
9. Gambling: A Governance Stress Test
Gambling is not a vice. It is a stress test for institutions.
From jueteng to casinos to online platforms, gambling reveals the same problem:
- fragmented oversight
- blurred roles between regulator and operator
- weak enforcement
- political incentives misaligned with discipline
When the state itself becomes an operator, governance failures carry double cost: lost trust and weakened authority.
10. Private Armies: The State’s Monopoly on Violence is Broken
Private armies are not a trope. They are a symptom.
They exist because:
- the state does not enforce the law equally
- political power is protected by force
- courts are slow
- prosecution is weak
- the wealthy can buy protection
This is why action dramas feel real.
The hero is not the institution. The hero is the lone man.
That is not justice. That is feudalism with better lighting.
11. Militics: A Top-Heavy Military That Undermines Security and Democracy
Militics is the fusion of military influence and politics.
A top-heavy military:
- increases pension costs
- weakens operational readiness
- incentivizes rank inflation
- turns the military into a political class
When promotions reward loyalty rather than merit, the military becomes a tool for politics.
This is not just a security problem. It is a democracy problem.
A top-heavy military becomes a shadow power that governs without governing.
12. The Real Problem Is Not the People
In the Philippines, compliance often feels like losing.
Dishonesty is rewarded. Patience is punished. Circumvention is called “diskarte.”
This is not moral failure. It is rational response to a broken incentive structure.
13. Clean Governance Comes After Prosperity — But Prosperity Needs Governance
Countries tend to clean up after they get rich.
But the Philippines cannot wait for prosperity to solve governance.
Prosperity itself depends on governance:
- enforcement
- accountability
- rule of law
- predictable systems
- long-term investment
14. The “Failed State” Lie
Calling the Philippines a failed state is not diagnosis. It is surrender.
The country still functions.
The real danger is normalizing decay and teaching the next generation to escape instead of build.
15. The Youth Will Decide the Outcome
States do not fail when they are poor. They fail when people disengage.
Protest matters—but construction matters more.
Institutions, not heroes, save countries.
Breaking the Hydra
The hydra is not defeated by sequencing reforms or waiting for perfect leaders.
It is defeated by simultaneous reinforcement:
- governance
- institutions
- accountability
- continuity
- capacity
The Philippines is not broken.
It is incompletely built.
The real question is not whether we can remove fishpens again.
The question is whether we can finally build a system that does not let them return.
The Society of Honor by Joe America 
“The Philippines is not broken.It is incompletely built.
The real question is not whether we can remove fishpens again.
The question is whether we can finally build a system that does not let them return.” – Karl G., “Philippines Hydra Problem”
Good point, Karl. I’ve shared with you what I learned about Estonia.
After the Soviet Union fell, Estonia didn’t just tell its people not to be corrupt. They deleted the opportunity for it. By introducing the Flat Tax and E-Government, they removed the “discretionary power” of the bureaucrat. If a computer handles the permit based on binary rules, there is no “fishpen” to bargain over. It is very difficult to bribe a computer.
Young Estonians after 50 years of Soviet rule, identified that corruption occurred at the point of human contact. So they created a government infrastructure that brought to almost zero any point of human contact with the government. Weird, eh?
Karl points out that the Philippines has had computerization since 1971. That is correct, but we used it to help bureaucrats do the same old patronage. The Estonians used computerization to make bureaucrats unnecessary. The question is, can we do the same? Don’t forget Robert Kennedy’s speech: “My brother said some people see things as they are and say why? I see things as they never were and say WHY NOT?”
To my kababayans I would say “why not?”
Of course I would get an answer….which I probably won’t like, hehehe
I’ve been watching this Estonia thread and can’t help but shake my head. IMHO it is another instance of focusing on minutia without taking in root causes and how to effect changed outcomes — missing the forest for the trees.
Yes, “relatively young” Estonians rebuilt Estonia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the population of the Baltics in 1991 was overall “young.” The population of the Philippines in 1986 was also overall “young.”
I’ve found that Filipino thinking often favors underestimating hard things while at the same time overcomplicating relatively easier things. This causes overconfidence when tackling hard issues leading to inevitable failure due to lack of adequate understanding and preparation. This causes fear of easier to fix problems even when solutions are presented leading to paralysis and inaction. After all, the vague is less scary compared to the concrete that is front and center.
Estonian (and Baltic) history, which amusingly is an area of the world I’m also intimately familiar with, would be too long to explain, but Estonia and the Baltics in general moving to good governance after the collapse of the Soviet Union was hundreds of years in the making, and would’ve happened earlier if not for Soviet oppression and domination. Let’s just say Estonia long had the building blocks necessary for the rapid transformation to happen after 1991.
Just briefly:
1.) The Estonians were one of the last pagan civilizations in Northern Europe, but the Romans observed that the Aestii (Estonians) had organized confederations of counties led by local nobles and petty kings as of the 1st century AD.
2.) The Northern Crusades brought German governance via the Teutonic and Livonian Orders in the 12th century AD.
3.) The Hanseatic League created a stable economy with port cities, trade posts, connections between resources and craftsmen; 13th to 15th centuries AD.
4.) Swedish, Polish-Lithuanian domination continued building on the improvements of the former Hanseatic League; 15th to 18th century centuries AD.
5.) First Russian domination was a regression, but Baltic German nobility kept governance practices at a local level; 18th to early 20th centuries AD.
6.) Estophile Enlightenment was Baltic German nobility led, introducing Enlightenment ideas, a Prussian model of government, integrating ideas from France to the wider Napoleonic Empire, promoting Estonian culture and language during the First Russian domination; 18th to 19th centuries AD.
7.) Estonian Awakening was again led by Baltic German nobility led, forming a sense of an Estonian nation first among Baltic Germans who adopted Estonian identity, followed by native Estonians; 19th century AD.
8.) First Republic of Estonia; 1918-1939.
9.) Second Russian domination under Soviet Union was another regression, with collaborators working with the Russians in a communist keptocracy, but again Estonians kept the ideas of the Enlightenment and Awakening alive; 1944-1991.
10.) Having never forgotten what was learned before, Estonians had the foundation from which to rebuild their country, adopting best practices and ideals from the US and successful EU countries to update what they already knew of previously integrated Germanic governance, so it is no surprise the Baltic states overall are the best governed countries in Europe.
Back in the Philippines, the Philippines outside of Sulu never had organized states, aside from quite minor city states in Maynila, Tondo, Cebu, Butuan. Filipino peoples had plenty of opportunity to adopt the best ideas from a multitude of visitors, traders, conquerors, the Tamils, the Arabs, Han Chinese, Hokkien Chinese, Malay, Indonesian, Spanish, American, Japanese and so on, yet integration was mostly superficial or in the area of culinary influence or changing religion. There is too much emphasis on copying *exactly* others perceived as successful, which reminds me of Filipino schoolchildren copying answers from each other even if the answer was totally wrong (and then often the teacher doesn’t even check the answers lol). Too little emphasis is placed on understanding one’s current state, how one came into that state, what ways one can impart action to get out of a negative state, etc. etc.
Now this might come off as an anti-Pinoy screed, but it is not. It is a wake up call. In fact the Philippines is in a better position to change into whatever they want, good or bad, because there are so few foundations to begin with. There are plenty of examples from the peoples that influenced the Philippines alone; even more examples elsewhere in the world. One just needs to slow down, stop for a moment to take a deep breath, and solve the simple problems which constitute 80% of overall problems in my personal experience, then work hard on systematically chipping away at the remaining 20% harder problems.
Three words: glad you’re here.
“I’ve been watching this Estonia thread and can’t help but shake my head. IMHO it is another instance of focusing on minutia without taking in root causes and how to effect changed outcomes — missing the forest for the trees.” – Joey
Karl Garcia has posted numerous essays in just the last 30 days dealing with problems that face the Philippines. Are his posts about “minutia?” They have been dizzying reports as he visits the Maritime scene, our abundance of knowledge, plans and laws but absence of integration and continuity. He visits our re-setting with every new Administration every six years, re-visiting the same problems over and over, lack of accountability, lack of transparency, patronage politics, corruption, lack of IRRs (implementing rules and regulations) etc. etc.
Are these all minutia or minutiae?
The Estonia experience actually deals with at least 80% of what Karl has written about by my estimation. And someone is missing the forest for the trees? I think you need to expand on that, Joey…give us your critical thoughts.
Joey reminds us that Estonia had an impressive foundation upon which to come out of Soviet mis-governance and build a practically bankrupt Soviet satellite into a first world country (“Having never forgotten what was learned before, Estonians had the foundation from which to rebuild their country,…”). He follows that up that the Philippines has a better chance than Estonia had BECAUSE IT (the Philippines) HAS NO GOOD FOUNDATION (“ In fact the Philippines is in a better position to change into whatever they want, good or bad, because there are so few foundations to begin with.”) I dare say that may be missing the forest AND the trees!
“There is too much emphasis on copying *exactly* others perceived as successful,…” – Joey
Personally I think that there is too much misconception that recommending something like the Estonia experience means “copying *exactly*” the Estonia experience. I was a young student when Lee Kuan Yew offered to Marcos, Sr. to give advice on how to get the Philippines back on track to progress. Fellow adult Filipinos, I recall, smugly compared the size of the Philippines vs. that of Singapore and ASSUMED that LKY would recommend the SAME STEPS for the Philippines. They basically thought “What relevant advice could come out of such a tiny country?”
As an adult, and with an opportunity to learn more about the man LKY, I realized that any advice he would have had for Filipinos would likely have likely been very different from what he and his team implemented in Singapore. The man was incredibly intelligent, and such intelligence would not make the wrong assumption that what works in a tiny state like Singapore would work in a much more different country like the Philippines. It probably would have been an easier challenge for LKY because the Philippines had a lot more to work with than Singapore had back in the 60s, including a special financial and military relationship with Super Power United States.
If I were Filipinos today, and PBBM specifically, I would send a delegation of smart Filipinos to Estonia to study their system. I would then invite a delegation from Estonia to the Philippines to look at our situation and possibly make recommendations. This of course ASSUMES that PBBM has good intentions for the country. Take away that assumption and all bets are off, at the national level at least. Maybe Vico Sotto could do something similar but on a much smaller scale.
“One just needs to slow down, stop for a moment to take a deep breath, and solve the simple problems which constitute 80% of overall problems in my personal experience,…” – Joey
Ah yes….kinda like what Leni Robredo did and went from being VP of the country to going back to Angat Buhay and mayor of Naga. Simpler problems indeed.
I have a request of Karl Garcia: Can you give us a list of the problems you addressed in your excellent essays in the last 30 days and we can examine which are simple and which are not? I suspect most if not all will be in that 20% bracket that Joey is talking about.
I can’t decide what I resent more, you trying to set up a fight between Karl and I instead of saying *you* disagree with *me,* or the degradation of Leni Robredo’s service to the Philippines from a Filipino who chose to leave.
Here’s a suggestion: If you have the solutions, you may go to the Philippines and offer your service in government or humanitarian work.
hehehe
“Here’s a suggestion: If you have the solutions, you may go to the Philippines and offer your service in government or humanitarian work.” – Joey
Thanks for the suggestion. You don’t seem to like my recommendation that government caretaker PBBM send a delegation to Estonia and study their system, then invite an Estonian delegation to the Philippines to look at our situation and see what they can recommend? I had made that recommendation somewhere in the blog very recently.
Why not?
Sure, let’s study more completely different systems that have little compatibility with the Philippine one, realize incompatibility makes it hard, then study more systems until the end of time. For starters Estonia is a parliamentary republic of government with a unitary parliament where MPs can be replaced in snap elections if the government fails, while the Philippines is a unitary presidential republic with a bicameral congress with fixed elected terms. I can go on and on about differences in governmental systems and why a parliamentary system can be more responsive in *some* instances due to snap elections, while it is of *utmost* importance for governmental systems with fixed elections to have an educated and informed electorate but hard details are inconvenient compared to watching the shiny results of others.
I get it that “elites” have a penchant for wanting to throw the baby out with the bath water and just “buy new,” but I’m sorry the average Filipino makes due with fixing what’s broken as any tito who somehow can fix any broken appliance despite having no training can tell you. Let’s stick with reality here. Start with fixing what exists but needs fixing.
as a systems person, if I look at the “digital ID”, one of the prerequisites would be a centralized database of inhabitants.
I happen to know from the group chat with Karl and Gian from the latter that many especially in the E classes have their births registered LATE.
I also shake my head at how the national ID project in the Philippines barely got implemented properly, Karl might know the current status better.
It took DFA Secretary Locsin to finally waive the inane requirement to keep showing one’s birth certificate for passport renewal.
I do recognize that NCSO has been a beacon of automation since the 1990s – I recall how CENOMAR was before, it was a “rat’s nest” as Joe would say.
straightening out requirements for a lot of government stuff would be a first step FOR THE PHILIPPINES.
What can I say about Estonia (I have heard similar stuff about Poland recently) and their digitalization?
THEY ARE AHEAD OF GERMANY. The German bureacracy is complex but at least works. The Philippine bureacracy has to WORK PROPERLY first.
Joe’s old article about fixing the mess of land titling in the Philippines is an example for an improvement (in IT lingo, upgrade) of what is already there.
Surprise, maybe my card version of the ID got burned together with the Post office(2 to 3 years ago), I just laminated my supposedly temporary ID. But others have their card IDs already.
what I did see recently on my feed was that NAIA3 has electronic/biometric gates, so I guess the Philippine passport already is highly modern.
Does the Philippine national ID have e-government features built in? Is your identity stored somewhere for example at NCSO – or whatever it is called now?
As I read it , like a gateway to sss pagibig philihealth but not redundant. Maybe you can verify it is the case.Thanks.
I know you hate long ai outputs, just close your eyes while reading. Just kidding.
You’re basically reading it correctly, with one important caveat between design and reality.
Short answer
Yes — the Philippine National ID (PhilSys) is intended to act as a single, foundational ID and gateway to agencies like SSS, Pag-IBIG, PhilHealth, not as a redundant replacement for them.
No — it does not eliminate those agencies’ own IDs or databases (at least not yet).
—
What PhilSys is meant to be
Under the PhilSys law and PSA design documents, the National ID is a foundational identity system, meaning:
One unique lifetime ID number (PSN) per person
One standardized identity dataset (name, birth, biometrics)
A trusted reference layer that other agencies can hook into
Think of it as:
> “This person exists, is unique, and is verified.”
Not:
> “This replaces SSS / PhilHealth / Pag-IBIG.”
—
How it’s supposed to work with SSS, Pag-IBIG, PhilHealth
In theory (and partially in practice):
PhilSys verifies identity
SSS / Pag-IBIG / PhilHealth manage entitlements, contributions, benefits
So:
Your PSN links your records across agencies
Agencies no longer need to re-verify who you are from scratch
Fewer duplicate records, fewer fake or ghost beneficiaries
Faster onboarding and benefit claims
This is why it’s described as a gateway, not a super-ID.
—
Why it feels redundant right now
Because integration is uneven and incomplete.
Current reality:
Many agencies still issue their own IDs
Some only accept PhilSys as secondary ID
Backend systems are not fully interoperable
Legacy databases + bureaucratic inertia = slow rollout
So citizens experience:
> “Another ID, another card, another process”
Which is a failure of execution, not of concept.
—
What PhilSys is not
❌ Not a replacement for SSS / Pag-IBIG / PhilHealth numbers
❌ Not a benefits database
❌ Not a “one card rules all” system (yet)
Those agencies still legally control:
Contributions
Eligibility
Benefit rules
Dispute resolution
—
Why this still matters (especially for PH governance)
If properly implemented, PhilSys enables:
Less fraud (ghost pensioners, fake dependents)
Faster disaster aid and social protection
Financial inclusion (bank KYC with one ID)
Evidence-based governance (clean population data)
It’s a quiet but foundational reform — boring on the surface, powerful underneath.
—
The real risk
The danger isn’t surveillance hype.
The danger is this:
> A half-built identity system that exists on paper but isn’t fully trusted or used.
That leads to:
Redundancy without efficiency
Cost without payoff
Public cynicism (“wala rin namang silbi”)
—
Bottom line
Your interpretation is sound:
✔ Gateway, not replacement
✔ Foundational ID, not redundant by design
✖ Redundant in practice — for now
If you want, I can:
Map what full integration should look like (best-practice model)
Break down what’s blocking integration (legal, tech, political)
Or write a policy/oped take on why PhilSys feels underwhelming but is actually critical
Just tell me where you want to take it.
the summary is that it is still patchy but can reach the goal of full integration. Like it also takes time to implement SSO (single-sign on) in IT landscapes.
I do see other issues like more control of weak entry points into the system (think of Alice Guo’s Philippine birth certificate) but that is another topic.
How to replace the cedula at barangay level 130 years after Bonifacio tore up cedulas is another topic. Or streamlining NBI clearance issuance.
Like Joey wrote, small steps but don’t lose momentum. Or like Gian said better upgrade and keep learnings than build new systems all the time.
Now apply approaches like that to every aspect of Philippine governance, keeping momentum and things will gradually improve, I guess.
All sound suggestons.
Thanks, Irineo. Since you are a systems person, maybe you can explain to us better this concept of the X-Road that Estonia put in place to control corruption AND create jobs.
Joey has been doing a lot of explaining already.
I am actually not as patient as he is. Maybe later.
Joey told me that I have more patience than he.
Thank you, Irineo.
“My people perish for lack of knowledge.” – Hosea 4:6
Would Estonia’s X-Road technology have prevented the Flood Control Project scandal that went on for about a decade?
Short answer: Most probably yes.
The X-Road system makes government much more transparent than anything the Philippines has now. When did Ghost Projects get discovered? Years after they were created. Why? Because of a lack of transparency in the current system. Remember the strategy of the big time crooks: “Treat the people like mushrooms – keep them in the dark and piss on them.”
The X-Road system brings light into transactions and would likely have exposed the crime by year 2.
There is a caveat, however. While the X-Road system may make it easy to expose the crime AND the criminal, the criminals still have to be exposed and tried and convicted. That is where a Free Press and independent Judiciary come in.
The work never ends!
Ah the Philippines, where there are requirements getting the prerequisites of getting a requirement, sometimes 3-5 layers deep. The most prominent example that affects Filipinos are the numerous clearances needed for what would be in another country a simple citizen-government interaction.
I think the question of identity systems can be a complicated one. In smaller unitary countries it would theoretically be easier to institute a national ID. In a big federal system such as the US with multiple layers of federal-state-tribal-local sovereignty substates issue identity documents, which are then recognized and accepted by other substates as doing so would be mutually beneficial.
I have done a lot of work on identity and access management (IAM) and identity management (IdM) systems, as I’m sure you have as well. *Well designed* IAM/IdM systems have clearly defined identity, roles, permissions, and who may grant or protect that identity, roles, permissions. As IAM/IdM is roughly an IT analogue of governmental identity systems. PhilSys (National ID) was designed upon sound principles, it seems to me the two biggest issues are: 1.) Slow rollout, necessitating retention of legacy documents which in turn exacerbates 2.) opposition to sunsetting legacy documents. In the end even a relatively well-designed PhilSys got stymied. How many systems have I worked on where there was resistance to sunsetting legacy systems that the stakeholders were used to? Too many.
Something to consider is adding layers of superfluous requirements increases opacity, which beyond injecting confusion and inefficiencies, also creates room for corruption or simple incompetence. From the Estonian experience my takeaway would be not that X-Road created transparency; rather streamlining requirements allows less from for opacity. Less opaque systems are inherently more transparent. Citizens also do not like dealing with the citizen-government interaction that takes too long. Here in California the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) was famous for being Byzantine. The CA DMV is the issuer of the California governmental ID. After CA DMV digitized their services citizens spent much less time interfacing and got their services faster, increasing citizen satisfaction by a lot.
**What can I say about Estonia (I have heard similar stuff about Poland recently) and their digitalization?
THEY ARE AHEAD OF GERMANY. The German bureacracy is complex but at least works. The Philippine bureacracy has to WORK PROPERLY first.** – Irineo
Estonia used the X-Road system to get their bureaucracy to work properly. I think it would be wise for a Philippine government, assuming it has good intentions for the country, look into it.
I agree with the point that the Philippines is unique, as it can’t be another Estonia or Singapore. We can take gross lessons like E-government or paying government people well so corruption is not a “necessity” (Singapore), but buy-in and execution are singular Philippine challenges.
“I agree with the point that the Philippines is unique, as it can’t be another Estonia or Singapore.” – JoeAm
The good news is that the Philippines can be much much more than another Estonia or Singapore. The motherland has demographic, geographic, and natural advantages/endowments that Estonia and Singapore can only envy. Another easily overlooked advantage is centuries-long unbroken historical ties to Europe (thanks to Spain) and over a century of engagement with the United States.
Just look in the area of maritime advantages – fisheries, ports, shipping, tourism, naval and maritime relevance. Karl Garcia can feed us volumes in this field alone, not to mention other areas like large, educated, and young population, geography, climate, diaspora networks, even cultural adaptability. Was it Kasambahay who said there are about 240 Filipino expats in Estonia? A doctor acquaintance of mine told me there are just about 900 in Greenland! I know there are Filipino expats in Iceland.
Given its endowments and its unusually globalized population, the Philippines is one of the few countries for which the world can genuinely be an oyster.
I’m surprised that so many in the Society seem down on the Philippines.
What I especially like about Estonia is that it is not likely to be a competitor.
A little more critical thinking guys. We can’t be “happy fools” all the time. The country needs us…and 30,000 are reading this blog.
No, contributors here are for the most part not “down on the Philippines” or Filipinos. They are well-read realists who see the good, the bad, and the potential and seek to understand why things are as they are and how that potential can address poverty, opportunity, security, efficiency, economic development, politics, fairness, and other aspects of life here.
Readership today is not 30,000. That was before a lot of readers moved to short-form media. On good days it is a thousand or two. On normal days it is several hundred.
And it is not your position to demand others write to your tastes. You seem not to grasp the most basic rule of good discussion etiquette here. Discuss issues not contributors. Assume others are here in good faith, as you are, and respect that they are earnest in their contributions, and different in their history and perspctive. Leave the policing of editorial content to me and other editors.
Noted, JoeAm.
“and how that potential can address poverty, opportunity, security, efficiency, economic development, politics, fairness, and other aspects of life here.” – JoeAm
Any comments on the POTENTIALS I point out in my post? I think 95% of my post was about the potentials.
I think your post touches on some important opportunities and the spirit, to see the Philippines more for it’s potential than it’s flaws, is an excellent platform from which to comment. Others may focus on flaws, which is legitimate, too, as long it does not become the racist shit that GRP deals out.
Integrating best practices learned elsewhere adapted to Philippines conditions is right. Trying to “buy a complete system” without understanding it first is not. I think too often decision maker thinking in the Philippines is too fixated on the superficial, which probably contributes to a lot of good faith efforts failing. I do not see a problem with the Filipino experts recruited to conduct studies. In fact I think a lot of government commissioned studies (at least the ones I’ve read) are quite excellent.
This is a failure of leadership problem mostly, and as you may recall from your time in corporate management, projects and initiatives rise and fall based on the competence of the leader. That’s why I think sticking with the basics like attracting new and better jobs is a more immediately doable action. Once progress is made, one can move onto harder things such as reforming corroded governmental institutions.
Yes. I’m fascinated by the concept of “good faith failure” which reflects the lack of rigor and knowledge that goes into the sincere efforts. It’s a cousin of “you don’t know what you don’t know”.
You’re right here. I consider the incuriosity to know to be more dangerous than “you don’t know what you don’t know” though.
I guess to put it more simply: Every successful result can look easy when the hard steps it took to get to a solution are not considered.
*Integrating best practices learned elsewhere adapted to Philippines conditions is right. Trying to “buy a complete system” without understanding it first is not. – Joey N.
Totally agree. My recommendation was that a president with good intent (i.e. loves our country and wants to serve) send a delegation to Estonia and see if they like it. If they do, then invite a delegation from Estonia to the Philippines to see what we have (which is quite different from what Estonia had/has) and then see if something can be done to solve the broken system of the Philippines. I doubt if there is a “canned” X-Road system that you can purchase off the shelf and install in the Philippines. That would be ridiculous to expect.
Hard for one to become more self sufficient when one is 1.) Not self sufficient but thinks one is equal (going there as if others should entertain) 2.) Does not approach problems from a position of humility (expecting others to come to oneself) 3.) Wants an easy solution but not recognizing that Estonians put a lot of work into revamping their government.
Not speaking of you CV, but the a Filipino elite senyorito attitude over there as a general matter of expecting someone else to do one’s dirty work.
But as with most things the Philippines thinkers “don’t understand,” it is how something is *implemented* that is the solution, not the results one can see others doing correctly. So using X-Road alone would not fix anything as X-Road is simply a data exchange API, not some magic product.
In any case X-Road is completely open-source on the MIT license. The Philippines government is free to use X-Road to make a “PH-Road” with proper open-source attribution.
https://github.com/nordic-institute/X-Road
Malaysia’s DIY stores are now in Pinas maybe senyoritos would eventually DIY, but nah.
They might send their helpers to DIY for them? Haha
Hahaha
there are already filipinos working and living in estonia.
AI Overview
Yes, Filipinos work and live in Estonia, with an estimated population of around 230 Filipino nationals residing there, a number that is growing. They are often employed in sectors like technology (e.g., at firms like Bolt) and skilled professional roles. While the community is small, it is active, with Filipinos living in cities like Tallinn and areas like Rakvere.
Key Details for Filipinos in Estonia:
Although not a top-tier destination like Italy or Spain, Estonia is attracting Filipino professionals looking for opportunities in the booming digital/tech sector.
Thanks for this info, Kasambahay. Here is some feedback about Filipino expats in Estonia thanks to AI:
**The “X-Road” and the Filipino Experience:
The X-Road system is the backbone of Estonia’s e-government. It’s a decentralized data exchange layer that allows different public and private sector databases to “talk” to each other securely. For a Filipino expat, the transition from a paper-heavy, “contact-full” bureaucracy to Estonia’s “zero-contact” governance is often described as “culture shock in the best way possible.”
Here is how Filipinos and other expats generally describe the system:
Notable Perspectives
Filipino vloggers and professionals living in Tallinn often highlight:
Should we ask balikbayans from Estonia to “teach” the locals what they learn over there about fighting corruption and making their residents rich AT THE SAME TIME?
haha, I think, they should shut up and keep their advice to themselves. them balikbayans coming here had better enough money to fund their stay and not uberly haggle about prices like they do in old parnu markets. and pay and tip our hard working wait staff here. and enjoy their stay and not do anything insensitive that maybe taken as sedition. we can be unkind to visitors like that nasty estonian blogger. and most of all to observe niceties and display good manners. else the local will drive them out of town! minus their limbs!
You know, k, you cause me to reflect that I have never been treated rudely face to face here. Well, two people shot at me but one was drunk and the other political. The drunk was ejected from the community and the political guy and I had a delightful chat in his beach cottage, his three PNP goons sitting with him not once reaching for the M-16s on the table. The point is that Filipinos are absolutely welcoming unless you cross them. Then it’s “go directly to murder without passing forgiveness”.
“haha, I think, they should shut up and keep their advice to themselves.” – Kasambahay
Joey N. take note. That was Joey’s advice, that Pinoys in the Diaspora come back to the Philippines and do some teaching based on what they learned overseas. He even suggested that I do it.
That’s a twisted misunderstanding of what I suggested.
One cannot teach others without first having the humility to learn something from who is to be taught. One-way “teaching” is the fatal flaw of the educated Filipino who now fancies himself “superior.”
One cannot teach a farmer better practices without oneself being willing to dirty one’s hands with the dirt and the soil; one cannot be respected to prescribe without having the necessary experience. One cannot say “that is not allowed” when one does not follow one’s own rules; one cannot proscribe and expect the proscribed law to be followed if one is a hypocrite.
Hope that helps.
“That’s a twisted misunderstanding of what I suggested.” – Joey
Thanks for clarifying. Kasambahay take note.
Is your goal to play people off of each other?
hehe playing people off each other is called sabong in Pinoy slang.
for all we know, CV was a real sabongero with roosters before he migrated to the USA.
Maybe of tupada, judging by the unorganized ever changing rules.
“..for all we know, CV was a real sabongero with roosters…” – Irineo
Wow, I’ll take that as a compliment, Irineo. Thanks! 🙂
I sense a hint of truth in the sabungero thing, an enthusiast perhaps?
Sorry to disappoint, Karl. But the closest I’ve come to a cockpit experience is from Rizal’s El Filibusterismo:
“The cockpit was crowded. There the people assembled from all parts, attracted by the instinct of cruelty, by the hope of winning, or by the mere habit of going there. The shouts, the oaths, the disputes, the gestures, the bets, all mingled together in a confused uproar. One would have said that the whole country was there represented: the rich man and the poor, the educated and the ignorant, the peaceful and the turbulent, the honest man and the sharper, all elbowing one another, all animated by the same passion, all shouting and gesticulating over a miserable cock that was tearing out the feathers of another miserable cock.”
“In the cockpit there was no laziness, no apathy, no sleepiness. Everyone was alert, animated, eager. There was action everywhere, movement, life. Money passed rapidly from hand to hand with astonishing confidence; no one doubted another’s word, no one demanded receipts or documents. A nod, a gesture, sufficed. There were no lawsuits, no delays, no trickery suspected. Honesty reigned there, for everyone knew that dishonesty would be punished at once. The poor man staked his last centavo beside the rich man’s gold, and both trusted alike in the result. The government itself trusted them, content with collecting its tax at the door.”
I hope it touches you as much as it has touched me.
It did thanks for sharing.
karlG, is this true? john patrick died on 26 jan 2026, a filipino mercenary fighting for russia and died in ukraine.
https://www.facebook.com/ukrnewsfeed/posts/-filipinos-are-fighting-in-the-ranks-of-the-russian-army-one-such-mercenary-has-/122156377112654935/
Yes, I follow HUR’s Telegram channel and they posted about John Patrick today there. Unfortunate for him, but that is the price of falling for Russian and CCP propaganda.
https://english.nv.ua/nation/filipino-john-patrick-fought-for-russia-and-died-in-battles-near-novoselivka-50578581.html
https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/01/26/filipino-mercenary-killed-in-russian-army-meat-assault-after-just-one-week-of-training-ukrainian-intelligence-says/
“Data retrieved from Patrick’s electronic devices revealed a grim picture of Russia’s recruitment practices. The Filipino national underwent only one week of basic basic training before Russian commanders sent him directly to the front line, according to HUR. After he sustained a wound, his unit left him to die slowly in a forest belt. No evacuation was planned or provided.”
thanks, joey, that is so sad, he died alone. had he fought for ukraine, the ukranians would have done something. it must be demoralizing for soldiers to leave their wounded comrade behind without making efforts to extract him. lest in ukraine, the ukrainians use drones for extraction and retrieval.
AI Overview * * *
In a notable combat rescue from July-August 2025, a wounded Ukrainian soldier nicknamed “Tankist” (Tanker), who was trapped behind enemy lines, was saved by an electric bike (e-bike) dropped by a heavy-lift drone. The soldier, from the 4th Operational Battalion of the National Guard’s “Rubizh” Brigade, had been trapped for five days, surrounded by Russian forces, and was unable to walk to safety due to a leg injury.
The Rescue Mission
This method is part of a growing trend of Ukrainian drone operators utilizing “self-rescue” tactics to assist soldiers in high-risk zones, such as sending drones with food, water, or medical supplies, or using drones to guide wounded soldiers to safe positions.
The Russians just leave their dead scattered around and make no effort save the wounded. They are barbarians.
If you recall the story of USMC Capt. (ret) Grady Kurpasi LCPX and I talked about a few times, Kurpasi sacrificed himself to save his unit in Kherson, the Ukrainians never forgot his sacrifice, spent over a year finding his last location and executing a plan to retrieve his remains far behind enemy lines. The Ukrainians really care for their own soldiers.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/grady-krupasi-marine-ukraine-disappeared-1234765816/
the filipino mercenary was fighting for the wrong side.
Thanks Joey, I was just looking it up.