Challenges and Chances of Liberalism

(October 24, 2004 – November 04, 2004)
By Essa C. Remoquillo

Essa Remoquillo

I attended an interesting seminar entitled “Challenges and Chances of Liberalism” from 24 October to 04 November 2004 in the Theodor-Heuss-Akademie in Gummersbach, Germany. Set against the backdrop of the wonderful autumn season, amidst amazing colors not found in this part of the world, the training already made a good first impression and promised to be memorable. Participants came from 23 countries, and from liberal political parties, non-governmental organizations, business, the media, and government service.

I had found the title of the seminar appropriate, because liberalism as an idea and as a movement is not without its opponents. Increasingly, in various examples around the world, it is facing important challenges and tough questions.

As a civil servant who works to advance liberal policies and one who desires to strengthen liberal institutions in the Philippines, I believe this topic was best suited to my needs. More than that, it is we who have the task of communicating the liberal message and winning people to our side, so to speak, who need to be most familiar with these challenges.

When I think of liberalism, what comes to my mind are images of the first EDSA, the February 1986 People Power – a moment in history that, while I was very young at that time, fills me with great pride, and one which I hope today’s young generation will not forget. Many Filipinos do have some understanding of the concept of liberalism, especially as we further examine our colonial past, the struggle for independence and the eventual birth of democracy. Liberalism is associated mainly with our nation’s quest for independence from imperialism or dictatorship – a common trait among many other countries, as I later found out.

As an ideology, liberalism initially struck me as a “Western import” that had no deep connections to Asia. I also felt that, even as I was affiliated with a liberal organization in the Philippines, my own political education was limited, and therefore I could not fully appreciate how liberalism could create real and practical solutions to the problems of our people. I believe having meager understanding of liberalism is common even among some Filipino liberal political leaders.

Finally, I saw some disarticulation in a theory espoused by the ideology, and its actual usefulness in my country. For example, the liberal idea of smaller or less government did not sit well with me because of my experience – and certainly the experience of a great majority of Filipinos – with a government that barely lifts a finger and is hardly able to provide for its citizens in the first place.

More than a deepening of understanding, perhaps what I also needed was some convincing.

The seminar tackled the very basics, and in a methodical and comprehensive manner, took on doubts and misgivings – even misunderstandings – about liberalism. The entire two weeks, spent in dynamic small-group discussions and exercises, and in lively plenary sessions with the whole group, was devoted basically to answering questions that, to experienced liberals, would appear fundamental or elementary. Certainly, they were a starting point or a building block for those such as myself who sought to have a better understanding of this ideology.

I was impressed by the energy and the inquisitiveness of the group, and what I can only describe as a genuine interest to learn more. Topics such as human rights, property, rule of law, and market economy, were held up for the scrutiny of 25 participants, who then proceed to turn these ideas upside-down, examine them with a looking glass, argue about them exhaustively, and, finally – with much effort and debate – attempted to attach definitions to them. It was almost a routine we kept up for two weeks, and one that drew out from the group our interpretations of these concepts, and in so doing, a comparison of our experiences.

Seeking definitions was almost a pastime of the participants. In retrospect I believe it was because we had faith in the universality of these values, that even across continents and experiences, perhaps the definitions we strove to make would still hold. Even labels such as “left” or “right” brought about waves of serious discussions, and I appreciated that there was no subject too unimportant for us not to bring out into the open and talk about avidly.

One observation I made is that liberals prefer state intervention or participation only in aspects that citizens themselves cannot handle or take care of. In the Filipino context, however, the public’s expectation on government is for it to perennially be occupied in doing something for the citizens. It is not enough for government to be efficient, which is hardly the case in the Philippines; it should also be thinking up new projects and initiatives – just something to be busy with. And this is all the time! I would attribute this to the people’s weariness with numerous instances of neglect or inaction by branches or agencies of government, and hence some movement would actually be a refreshing departure.

On the other hand, I believe expectations should be managed on the part of citizens as well. In the Philippines we have a sheer abundance of people who can very clearly pinpoint how problems on the local level can be solved, and yet exert no initiative whatsoever to contribute to these solutions. This attitude only results in disappointment, and indeed what we have is a people robbed of imagination, stymied by their own inaction, and almost completely dependent on a government that is failing.

Clearly governments all over the world cannot succeed entirely on their own efforts, and those that seem to, sacrifice many freedoms of their citizens, as shown in socialist examples where the state provides and takes care, it seems, of all the nation’s needs.

When these points were raised, I believe it brought to our attention the need for objectivity. In the same measure we demand from government we should also educate our citizens and compel civil society to step up to take on a bigger role in our communities. In the same vein, even as we limit that which government should interfere in, government must do more with whatever it is charged, especially in this day and age of real threats to security brought about by terrorism, pressing problems of poverty and environmental degradation, among others.

The interaction with other delegates was an integral part of the learning process. Discussing the history and current situation of liberalism in Asia among fellow participants from the region, for example, I had the opportunity to hear their thoughts on the so-called Asian Values debate, where liberalism is said to have no place or chance in Asian societies, where traditions emphasize more on the value of social harmony and the common good, than that of the individual. It fascinated me to learn that the concept of democracy, for example, has very deep roots in Asia, even long before John Locke, as found in the teachings and writings of Chinese and Korean philosophers. The world has truly a lot to learn from the Asian example, and unique approaches to democracy may yet come from this part of the world.

What fascinated me more was to find out about the conditions of liberalism in other countries. As we compared notes, I felt mixed emotions. On the one hand, the Philippines has a thriving movement and a 58-year-old political organization that actually has the potential to lead and steer the country. I grew optimistic and proud of what we have accomplished.

On the other hand, there was a glaring lack of solid ideological foundation, and I could only aspire Filipino liberals, especially those who hold positions of influence, could benefit from a training such as mine, because indeed, in order to make a convincing appeal on behalf of liberalism, one needs a grounding in the values that characterize the ideology. Otherwise, all we have are hollow sound-bytes, and we are all the worse for thinking this good enough.

A memorable discussion for me was one on the universality of liberal values, where we talked about homosexual rights. Most participants viewed same-sex marriages as perfectly acceptable. Some drew the line, however, when it came to rights to adoption of children. This led to a very interesting discussion among us.

Personally I believe homosexuals should have the right to build a family and become parents. Families as we typically know them are changing, and the traditional, though ideal, structure of a mother and a father as parents is evolving as well. It was argued that heterosexual parents are needed for a child to better learn his or her gender role, and so in terms of gender orientation these models are crucial to a child’s identity and development. But this argument completely neglects the fact that today’s homosexuals are themselves products of heterosexual parents, and so, now who is to say who can do a better job at gender orientation?

The flimsy argument that homosexuals are unable to hold lasting relationships that are a source of stability for any family, also paints heterosexual couples as completely devoted, if not perfect, unions. But heterosexuals, who until recently were the only ones allowed to be married or to formalize their unions, have experienced challenges as well, and can be rightfully said to be single-handedly responsible for divorce and what the Church calls the breakdown of the family.

It became an even more interesting debate when the facilitator asked us to consider a situation where, as a parent, we were to pass away unexpectedly, and had to leave our children to the care of other people – would we entrust their future to, for example, a homosexual friend or relative? Considerably, some of those who had objectively granted homosexuals the chance to be parents started to think twice. This reveals so much about the way we think, and perhaps that we are not in all cases and at all times as liberal as we want to be, especially when it comes to what is most important to us.

The seminar itinerary also included an excursion to Weimar and Dresden which I enjoyed as it gave the opportunity to see more of the German countryside, architecture, culture and the arts.

The visit to the former concentration camp in Buchenwald was revealing in that it showed Germany as a country that continues to seek to understand how it behaved in the early part of the last century, and one that strives to avoid a repeat of history. Hence there is a focus on non-governmental organizations, foundations, and societies that want to better educate German citizens about this dark aspect of its past. It is still an uphill climb, as even educators admit today’s young Germans know and care little about the lessons of their country’s past, and some are incredulous that the Holocaust even actually took place. This underscored the need for both government and civil society to work harder in advocacy and education.

It also struck a chord with those of us whose countries also went through turbulent, painful chapters in their history and whose younger generations are starting to forget the lessons learned from these.

Dresden, a beautiful and historic city, was also where we visited an academy for military officers. I noted the German military commands a great deal of respect and enjoys the support of the citizens it serves. This starkly contrasts with the mistrust that marks the Filipino’s relationship with his soldiers and generals. The German military enjoys a high degree of credibility and public approval. Asked how their Filipino counterparts could possibly turn their image around and perhaps regain the trust of the citizenry, our resource person, an officer himself, shared one simple piece of advice: Stay away from politics. I could not agree more.

One important aspect, from which we could have benefited more, is to have tackled how to better communicate liberalism in our respective audiences. The challenges of communicating beset liberals everywhere, and in competing alongside other ideological or political groups, it is often necessary to prescribe a “liberal solution” to every worthwhile issue. Liberal approaches tend to focus on long-term solutions, and opponents of liberalism capitalize on this as they themselves promote popular but short-term relief. A session on communicating the liberal agenda might have given useful insights on this.

I believe I learned a great deal from the seminar itself, with its comprehensive program and methodology. I also attribute this in part to the work of our excellent facilitators, who, while allowing the participants to speak their minds freely, also had several valuable insights of their own, some of which counted among the most memorable of the seminar. Suggestions for reading materials and new techniques of participation also left us with new ideas on how to impart lessons of liberalism to others. The hard work of the interpreters made us appreciate the brilliance of thought of the non-English speakers, and language proved to be no big hurdle in the seminar. However, communicating in the dining hall or in the bar was a different but amusing challenge.

The carefully selected composition of our group led to a dynamic and diverse exchange of ideas, and for the most part, the delegates were open-minded individuals and independent thinkers. Emphasis on respect for others’ views and opinions created a friendly environment for debates, that, while often being very charged, was marked by sparks as one can only get from a meeting of minds.

It was also my pleasure to have met a few young people working in liberal political parties who want to pursue a project together after the seminar, and that is to study one successful liberal example in the world. This is manifested through a political party in power, whose policies have been successfully implemented in the same country. We would like to find out exactly how the young wing was able to contribute to the success of the party and how it was able to influence or contribute to these liberal policies. As young people who are engaged in party work, we desire to focus on the nitty-gritty and the bare framework behind this success. And while realizing there is no fixed immutable process applicable to all parts of the world, we believe it is important to take advantage of the opportunity to learn where we can, given that, in an honest assessment, there are only a few successful liberal governments in the world today. A small working group has been formed and we are actively discussing the prospects for this project.

The Theodor-Heuss-Akademie is an impressive and comfortable facility, and the hospitality of the staff made it a pleasurable two weeks. Germany was postcard-pretty and while the weather was cool, the Germans were friendly and warm.

I am grateful for the friendships formed, and even more for the knowledge that many other young people are dealing with the same important ideological issues and striving to find practical ways to translate these principles into action that will benefit our countries. Meeting them affirms the work that I do. And as in the most memorable of trips, one’s lasting thoughts are not of buildings and fountains, or sights and places. It is always but always of people.