Thomas Pogge Global Justice in view of the Philippine Values Education System
Introduction
Thomas Pogge’s influential ingenious theory of global justice asserts the principles of justice like difference principle. Alternatively, a universal criterion of human rights consisting of a subset of social justice principles applies towards the basic global structure or the economic order. The proposals and ideas of Thomas Pogge have stimulated much debate both from the public and specialists concerning the need to ensure responsible institutions that can create inclusion over time and those which can improve the lives of the most impoverished communities within the short-term. In the Philippines, the primary goal of providing values education system is to develop people who are effectively committed to building a free, peaceful, democratic, and progressive nation[1]. The program aims at developing Filipinos who have different traits and values aimed at changing the nation and initiating development. Through the system, Filipinos are expected to pose different traits and values, including self-actualization with persons filled with human dignity and a sense of responsibility for the environment and community. Additionally, the system should produce nationalists who are productive in a positive means and who can contribute to economic development and are committed to the full progress of the nation coupled with a deep sense of global solidarity values which are all aimed towards the development of the nation and reduction of poverty to most of the Filipinos[2]. Thomas Pogge advocates for the improvement of the community through different proposals. His proposal has had strong relevance for political philosophers concerned with examining diverse possibilities for the daily changing institutions structures which produce social inequalities. Though with the same theme of improving communities and initiating development, the two systems have different methods of the approach of achieving the goals[3]. With the application, the following literature effectively reviews different literature related to Thomas Pogge Global Justice, given the Philippine Values Education System.
Literature Review
A significant difference in contemporary political philosophy is the one between positive and negative duties. Thomas Pogge argues that different principles of distributive justice like the difference principle or a more ecumenical and universal criterion of human rights which apply to international economic or structure order[4]. Thiis precisely the case today; the extent to which the global structure does not meet these criteria is unjust. Thomas has done enough work to defend further and articulate his general position towards world poverty and global justice. A key feature in his proposals and arguments is that it promises highly increase the economic incentive and the development. In light of development in different sectors within a community, it seems proper to undertake a type of stock-taking exercise where the Pogge position’s main components are based. Negative duties refer to duties not to harm other persons where positive duties are duties that offer help to the worse-off communities. The affirmative duties are essential for the understanding of Pogge’s position in the world of poverty and global justice. This is a common argument towards the view that people of high and well-developed citizens have no duty towards eradicating poverty in those nations in two premises, one being factual and the other being normative. The concept of that well-off citizens have no responsibility to play towards eradicating poverty, and the initiation of development processes goes in contrast to what the Philippine education system and Thomas Pogge have advocated for in a long time. Thomas Pogge argues that institutions have a working mechanism aimed at transforming the community in the right direction with the right initiation of development, which is right with the Philippine Education Value System[5]. The normative premise is in the view that while it might be harmful and wrong to harm foreigners through actively causing severe poverty, it is not wrong at all to fail to benefit foreigners through not preventing much poverty internationally as we might. The second premise is in the view of people who concern poverty abroad and which we are not actively causing it but fail to prevent it as much as we might need to prevent it.
Thomas actively opposes the second premise that people from well off nations are seriously and actively causing poverty within the developing nations. The factor of people causing poverty through the virtue of imposing burdensome global order to the poor, which might significantly lower the reduced income potential and through imposing unimportant and unnecessary costs on them. As a result, the poor access to objects of basic human needs like education, water, food, shelter, and other basic needs are made insecure by the international order. Now, if the object of this argument is correct and successful, the mere conclusion of the latter argument might be rejected. It hence can be argued that the conclusion might follow from the above premises. Still, since one of the objections is false, people are under no objection to accept the conclusion effectively. The exciting and distinctive feature of Thomas Pogge’s position is now apparent. He argues that as a community, we have an opportunity to eradicate poverty in communities of developing nations. The Philippine Education Values System has the set objectives of developing Filipinos with qualities that eradicate poverty in the nation and initiate development[6]. With this argument, both the education values system and Thomas Pogge are on the same par though Pogge rests his argument on the view of negative duty. It is our duty as a community to eradicate global poverty. However, the duty as human beings to eradicate poverty comes from people having primarily harmed the poor[7]. In his arguments, Pogge does not reject the idea that people have positive duties towards eradicating poverty. Of course, people have positive duties to help and rescue other people from different life-threatening poverty in communities with different duties to shield them from the different harms they would actively be responsible for.
According to Thomas Pogge, the increased expression of global justice marks a significant change in proper disclosure structure. International and traditional relations are seen as a sharp difference from domestic justice. Social institutions are made, created, perpetuated, and changed by human beings who might bear some responsibility to any flaw which happens within the institution[8]. Many social institutions have been argued to have a crucial responsibility for ensuring global justice and are believed to play a key role in ensuring that equality is ensured. Morality within these institutions might demand the well-off to treat the oppressed with improved charity and kindness. It needs more efforts to be initiated towards institutional efforts[9]. Justice should be served as the first virtue for social institutions. A conception of justice like this allows people to spell out across the personality morality effectively. The main goal of human beings is to apply methods within these institutions to eliminate injustice and insert guide towards immediate change to a good underlying structure. This is not directed at mitigating the different effects of corrupt and injustice institutions. Still, they are installed as a matter of unjust institutions’ changing actions towards justice, which would ensure a just institution. What justice needs from the most privileged within the community is not that they should use their powers in the wrong way through abusing their powers and privileges as a superior weapon in bargaining power against those who lack proper basic needs, opportunities, rights, and economic power. This forms of demand for personality mortality.
Justice calls for the application of different reforms within the nation and across the globe to be feasible so that they can work towards reforming social institutions that establish or engender such deprivations in excessive inequalities in opportunities, rights, and within the bargaining positions. Equality needs to be established globally in almost every sector, mostly within the Philippines education sector, which aims to create a nation filled with literate Filipinos with justice and equality[10]. As brought out and explained by Thomas Pogge, the point of global justice is a point that needs a lot of emphases, implementation, and monitoring[11]. The question on who has the responsibility to ensure that fundamental human rights are ensured has ruled the globe for many years now. The answer to this question has been within present Global justice debate and is a question which Thomas Pogge tries to answer in the best manner possible. The discussion and eventual disagreement on global justice is an old-time issue[12]. However, different debates concerning global Justice are of a more increased theme in most recent days and have been increased by the Current debate on the Rawls’ Theory of Justice as the starting point of the debate. The most crucial ant section of these debates has been centered on the eradication of poverty in most nations. Millions of persons across the globe have limited access to necessities ranging from safe waters and food, shelter, clothing, primary medical care, and quality education. According to Thomas Pogge, most of the participants of these debates have concluded that such dire poverty is a significant violation of basic human rights. They are also against the Philippines Education Values, which aim at producing quality people within then nation who would possibly do away with the human rights violation through reducing poverty[13]. According to Thomas Pogge, “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care and necessary social services”[14].
The question has remained towards which duties which correspond to these human rights and the person who has the remedial role and responsibility to stop the different human rights violations. In explanations, the phrase remedial responsibility refers to an actor’s special obligation to change a specific worse situation, which is not shared among the other actors in the acting. Such type of remedial roles should effectively be based on some essential principles of justice, which adequately distributes the duties and rights within the global sphere[15]. Thomas Pogge has all these answers for the provided questions, for he us one of the most prominent participants within the global justice debate.
In his arguments, Pogge situates the critical determinants of poverty within the global institutional order. He ascertains that most global communities interact effectively in one international institutional order, which severely drives the globe worst-off from its necessities through unfairly considering and favoring the affluent communities only. Through his arguments towards the development of the worst community through institutions, he explicitly explains the importance of a unified global institutional order in two strong arguments were he claims that all states across the globe with the Philippine included are connected through a robust global network of diplomacy and market trade. The second argument is that the global institutional order is arranged and well-shaped by the better-trade off and kept on worse off. In one of the famous quotes he argues that “Our new global economic order is so harsh on the global poor, then, because it is shaped in negotiations where our representatives ruthlessly exploit their vastly superior bargaining power and expertise, as well as any weakness, ignorance, or corruptibility they may find in their counterpart negotiators, to shape each agreement for our greatest benefit”[16]
However, he does not argue that the global institutional order is inherently unjust. What he tries to mean is that the current version of the global institution is thereof designed and made unjustly. Pogge’s claim on institutions can be cemented by the fact that the Western administrations have included and pushed their self-interest to adequately examine and manage these institutions in a manner that their communities benefit more than other communities. Additionally, global institutions order impacts the position of global worst-off indirectly and directly. Pogge by understanding how global institutions work and operate towards the development of a community, he pinpoints that everyone well-off and privileged has a role to play within the community to ensure that those who are not well-off benefit and grow. Joining hands through different means would mean that communities receive all necessities, including education, food, and shelter.
In the Philippines, the main goal of providing the values of education is to create an education and school system to develop a person who is actively committed into building a free, peaceful, just, democratic and progressive nation to eradicate the severe poverty placed on humans through unfair and just means of global institutions. Just as Pogge argues, every person has a role to play in doing away with poverty. To make every individual play his role according, the Values of Education System in the Philippines aims to make around a person who can equally apply different traits towards the building of a just society[17]. The values of education are the method through which attitudes, values, and habits are developed to a student as he interacts with the environment under the proper guidance of instructors. It is essential to understand that for learners studying the values will not influence the development of their behaviors for behaviors that can only be influenced when a value is adequately experienced, and commitment is made to it in attitude and belief.
The increasing rates of crime, corruption in different institutions, and violence are causing a public alarm to the Philippines. Government institutions seem to do nothing towards reducing these crimes, so citizens have been left to blame them[18]. Most concerned citizens in the nation from time to time demanded different governmental institutions to take any action against the breakdown and increased mortality rates in the Philippines. The values of the Education System launched in 1988 are seen as the route towards a just community and institutions which would provide a better way towards the eradication of poverty in the Philippines. The DECS Values Education System emphasizes on social reforming of an individual through transforming him towards just means of transforming the community. It is important to note that values of measurement rely heavily on the non-quantitative indicators and through observing community and individual behaviors.
Additionally, it is essential to note that these behaviors do not change within a predictable period. On point to note before embarking on the application of the program is that the Geographical composition of the Philippine is made up of more than 7000 Islands[19]. Additionally, in the Philippines, there are more than eight major languages. With this type of mixture, designing the Values education system acceptable to all these communities was not easy. The new system had to be flexible enough to differentiate the communities’ expression, priorities, and behavior. To attain its goals, the program had to strengthen the commonalities between the systems while respecting the differences between them to effectively develop a spirit of tolerance, mutual acceptance, and appreciation.
Teaching the correct and desirable values intertwined in a responsible behavior needs educating the whole community in any community. It is a fact which many educators discourage many to do. Additionally, integrating different education values into school teachings has not been easy in the nation due to the moral, spiritual and different religious values and thoughts which arise due to the availability of free choice, acceptance and the internalization of persons[20]. Pogge argued that the primary vehicle towards the development of ethical values in young persons is a role model. It translates to the point that teachers’ example set to students in learning institutions is a significant component of the development of quality values to students. Teachers in learning institutions are role models of students. It is one of the best ways of creating a just society that can eradicate poverty through developing compound Filipinos[21]. Pogge, in his arguments towards dealing with poverty caused by unjust institutions, argued that every privileged person has a role to play towards the development of a compound community. At this point, the teachers in the Philippines education system being privileged to know to understand the different dynamics of human development in different aspects have the responsibility of acting as role models to students in most learning institutions within the Philippines.
According to Pogge, the privileged within the community should not oppress the less fortunate, but instead, they should look for means through which they can develop them. The Values Education System takes into consideration the social nature of human beings. Nevertheless, the values cannot be studied in isolation, for they all correlate to human dignity values. For the Values Education System, developing a just community that can slowly do away with the increasing poverty rates in the community can only be achieved by developing individuals in the nation. Developing an individual can only be achieved in three main stages: affective, cognitive, and behavioral. In reality, human beings perceive what is right, cherish, and seek what they see desirable but behave in correspondence to their perceptions. This method can be influenced by a person living environment (school, family, social groups, world community, nation and neighborhoods)[22]. As persons grow within the self-awareness system, they all become aware of the social responsibilities towards the society around them. The Values Education System provides the correct parameters of developing programs at regional, national, school, and district levels. However, these values teaching and learning contexts vary with each situation. Human beings have the Responsibility of deciding for strategies and priorities rests on the leadership at each level.
Pogge sees learning as a view of moral behavior, which comes from three types of mechanisms: imitation or modeling, rewards and reinforcement, and the threat of punishment. All these models are connected with Pogge patterns of modification, which can be achieved through reinforcement. Pogge argued that every well-set and developed person within the community has a role to play towards the development of the nation through uplifting the less fortunate. In this category, Filipinos need to be developed with the correct traits which can help build a just community and institutions. Teachers are the most privileged persons in the Values Education program. Hence, they are the main factor in infusing desirable habits and attitudes in a child either through indirect or direct teaching. In elementary and secondary schools, the Values Education System has been accepted as the official basis for systematic, comprehensive, and values of education. The system can be distributed in almost all publications under the title Values Education for Filipinos.
Additionally, it served as the leading guide for different administrators, students, and teachers[23]. Under the Values, Education should acquire and demonstrate social responsibility, love, and economic efficiency. Just as Pogge highlighted in his arguments, getting the community ready in a specific direction is the best way to eradicate the unjust institutions, doing away with extreme poverty in the communities and initiating a better method of development. The Values Education System is one of the best processes through which values can be fused into the Filipinos and act towards forming a just community.
Examples of indirect impacts of international institutions’ order towards global poverty are the global borrowing resource privileges[24]. According to Pogge, any group within a nation which effectively exercises powers of development, regardless of the manner of how they came to power. It gives people the power and privilege to borrow with the nation’s name while selling the nation’s natural resources. Just as Pogge puts it across, Values Education System is an excellent example of these institutions exercising its power within the nation to make the national community to grow through just means. The merits give any potential oppressors give a strong incentive which tries to get up the power through force. In nations, institutions of this type improve the oppressive and corrupt administrations in developing nations in this way. Pogge argues that “The current global order shapes the national culture and policies of the poorer and weaker countries […] it affects what sorts of persons exercise political power in these countries, what incentives these people face, what options they have, and what impact the implementation of any of their options would have on their most disadvantaged compatriots.”
The institutions and rules of the international order effectively affect the international poor indirectly through affecting the international institutional orders under which people live calling for encouraging for non-democratic oppressive regimes through reducing the components of worst of communities. In developing the argument, Pogge has developed it as a critique argument, and an alternative for Rawls’s work towards global justice. Through his theory, Rawls denies people the normative significance of global institutional order and conclusively argues that the increased poverty within communities to be majorly caused by corruption, incompetence, tyranny entrenched within governments, cultures, and institutions of more significant developing nations[25]. Pogge argues that poverty in most nations to be caused by local factors. This implies that most of the affluent communities do not have the role of poverty internationally. Rawls stresses the remedial role of domestic administrations in most developing nations. According to Pogge, though the affluent communities might have the responsibility of assisting the burdened communities towards the overcoming of poverty and particularly unfavorable conditions. They are also supposed to have a structural role for poverty eradication in most developing nations[26]. As a critique to Pogge theory, the principles towards justice within the international institutions as Rawls highlight include minimal duty towards the developed nations towards fighting of the international poverty with limited assistance for the burdened communities overcoming the different unfavorable conditions through lifting them above the minimum threshold which can effectively manage their affairs rationally and reasonably. It means that the assistance should primarily be focused on the initiation and building of a well-functioning and correct domestic core structure of the community and its core political and social institutions. This aspect might indicate that the dispensing funds but also should emphasize human rights and towards effective regimes that take full responsibility for the human well-being of all their citizens. As a result, the principles of Justice as highlighted by Rawl for an international community includes only a small and limited duty towards developed nations into fighting international poverty, limited assistance for the heavily burdened communities into overcoming their pressing and unfavorable conditions which are limited towards lifting them above the minimum threshold to be able to manage their reasonable personal affairs rationally. This concept translates to that any assistance provided should majorly be focused on initiating and building a collective and well operating internal structure within the community and its core political and social institutional[27]. Of course, this concept might imply dispersing the funds while also emphasizing mostly on human rights towards forcing the ineffective regimes to take away the well-being of all citizens into a current account.
According to both accounts, on the causes of poverty within the communities, they argue that there are almost the same causes of poverty across the globe. Though they have different views concerning what might be the leading cause of poverty within the community, they both argue towards the different methods which can be applied effectively to solve poverty in communities. Pogge’s argument through globalism emphasizes that the global institutional order as the core explanatory of the increased treads of poverty in most developing nations[28]. On the other hand, Rawls’s arguments towards the development of poverty are all tilted towards the explanation of nationalism, which adequately focuses on quality services offered by domestic institutions[29]. It is sequential that they locate the responsibilities of remedy through fluent governments by creating unjust institutional order. At the same time, the Rawls emphasizes domestic administrations’ role for the plight of their citizens. The international institutional order is not whole monolithic but includes different institutions. Some of these institutions might be of great benefit to the global poor, while others might be detrimental.
Bibliography
Go, J. C. “Critical thinking and Catholic religious education: an empirical research report from the Philippines.” International Studies in Catholic Education 10, no. 2 (2018): 184-202.
Gomez, Ma Arsenia C., Zainul Asmawi, Maftuh Bunyamin, and Helius Sjamsuddin. “The Politics of Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education in Selected Philippine Schools.” In the 3rd Asian Education Symposium (AES 2018). Atlantis Press, 2019.
Gulen, Marlon Pontino, Razaleigh Muhamat, and Zulkefli Aini. “Issues on Islamic Education in The Philippines.” al-Irsyad: Journal of Islamic and Contemporary Issues (2017): 1-12.
Labrador, Jake M. “Work Values of Maritime Students in one Private Higher Education Institution in the Philippines.” Asia Pacific Journal of Maritime Education 5 (2019).
Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
Pogge, Thomas. “Fighting global poverty.” International Journal of Law in Context 13, no. 4 (2017): 512-526.
Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
Quisumbing, Lourdes R. “A Study of the Philippine Values Education Programme (1986-1993).” (1994).
[1] Guleng, Marlon Pontino, Razaleigh Muhamat, and Zulkefli Aini. “Issues on Islamic Education in The Philippines.” al-Irsyad: Journal of Islamic and Contemporary Issues (2017): 1-12.
[2] Go, J. C. “Critical thinking and Catholic religious education: an empirical research report from the Philippines.” International Studies in Catholic Education 10, no. 2 (2018): 184-202.
[3] Pogge, Thomas. “Fighting global poverty.” International Journal of Law in Context 13, no. 4 (2017): 512-526.
[4] Guleng, Marlon Pontino, Razaleigh Muhamat, and Zulkefli Aini. “Issues on Islamic Education in The Philippines.” al-Irsyad: Journal of Islamic and Contemporary Issues (2017): 1-12.
[5] Pogge, Thomas. “Fighting global poverty.” International Journal of Law in Context 13, no. 4 (2017): 512-526.
[6] Pogge, Thomas. “Fighting global poverty.” International Journal of Law in Context 13, no. 4 (2017): 512-526.
[7] Go, J. C. “Critical thinking and Catholic religious education: an empirical research report from the Philippines.” International Studies in Catholic Education 10, no. 2 (2018): 184-202.
[8] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[9]. Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[10]. Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[11]Quisumbing, Lourdes R. “A Study of the Philippine Values Education Programme (1986-1993).” (1994).
[12] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[13] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[14] Pogge, Thomas. “Fighting global poverty.” International Journal of Law in Context 13, no. 4 (2017): 512-526.
[15] Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[16] Gomez, Ma Arsenia C., Zainul Asmawi, Maftuh Bunyamin, and Helius Sjamsuddin. “The Politics of Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education in Selected Philippine Schools.” In the 3rd Asian Education Symposium (AES 2018). Atlantis Press, 2019.
[17] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[18], Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[19] Gomez, Ma Arsenia C., Zainul Asmawi, Maftuh Bunyamin, and Helius Sjamsuddin. “The Politics of Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education in Selected Philippine Schools.” In the 3rd Asian Education Symposium (AES 2018). Atlantis Press, 2019.
[20] Gomez, Ma Arsenia C., Zainul Asmawi, Maftuh Bunyamin, and Helius Sjamsuddin. “The Politics of Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education in Selected Philippine Schools.” In the 3rd Asian Education Symposium (AES 2018). Atlantis Press, 2019.
[21] Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[22] Gomez, Ma Arsenia C., Zainul Asmawi, Maftuh Bunyamin, and Helius Sjamsuddin. “The Politics of Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education in Selected Philippine Schools.” In the 3rd Asian Education Symposium (AES 2018). Atlantis Press, 2019.
[23] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[24] Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[25] Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[26] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[27] Pierik, Roland. “Do we have a negative duty towards the global poor? Thomas Pogge on Global Justice.” In Spheres of Global Justice, pp. 595-609. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013.
[28] Pogge, Thomas. “World poverty and human rights.” Ethics & international affairs, 19, no. 1 (2005): 1-7.
[29] Laguador, Jake M. “Work Values of Maritime Students in one Private Higher Education Institution in the Philippines.” Asia Pacific Journal of Maritime Education 5 (2019).