I have come to the conclusion that in this modern day and age, that scruple is dying. Technology may be partly to blame, in the manner that it has made relationships less personal. People seem less concerned now with values and morality and propriety — with the strong motivation for profit or gain seemingly weakening the sense of right and wrong.
And this “change” or transition appears to have become more apparent through the generations. Certain “codes” or traditions are no longer generally observed — like getting “dressed” for going out, or keeping proper decorum when in public, or, following rules even when no one is looking, or keeping one’s word no matter what.
“Scruple” is a word not so often used nowadays, the same goes for “decorum” or “etiquette.” In fact, the use of these words can quickly remind particularly the younger generation of old stories of “strict parents,” of “conservative” ways, of not-so-gentle reminders from a leather belt of the importance of “good manners,” and of curtailed pubescent and teenage freedoms.
Invariably, liberal thinking or the emphasis on individual freedom, and encouraging the practice of democracy in homes, in the last 40 years have helped produce “enlightened” generations. But, I am also inclined to think that for some reason, we have diminished our sense of honor, integrity, discipline, and fortitude in the face of pain and adversity.
We have become less scandalized by reports of corruption and thievery, of rape, and murder. We have come to expect our politicians and bureaucrats to be corrupt, and to serve themselves first before their publics. And, we are no longer surprised when we hear of collusion between politicians and criminals, and of policemen being hired as assassins or hitmen.
Where have we gone wrong?
Can we not bring back the old days, the old values, the old traditions that somehow remain relevant to present lives? What will it take for our children and our children’s children revive some of the “old ways” that have kept us on the side of what is good and right, and mindful of others?
The former South Korean president Park Chung-hee comes to mind. One can say a lot of negative things about Park, but despite all his shortcomings as a leader, he was never a crook. Several reports have noted that at the time he was assassinated by his own intelligence people in 1979, he actually owned only one piece of property, which was an old apartment that he had bought before he became president in 1961. He was president for 18 years, and yet he never enriched himself.
Closer to home, we can think of Jesse Robredo, the former Interior secretary who died in a plane crash.
Before joining the Aquino II Cabinet, he was mayor of Naga City in Camarines Sur for several terms. He lived a relatively modest life as a local official and as a Cabinet member. He never enriched himself while in office, and his constituents loved and remember him for that.
And, of course, there is our very own president Ramon Magsaysay, who also died in a plane crash, in Cebu in 1957. He was president for almost four years, and had been in Congress and in the Cabinet prior to winning the presidential race in 1953.
At the time of his death, he reportedly owned only one piece of property as well — his old house in Singalong, Manila that was built before the World War II.
There are many stories about how Magsaysay conducted himself as a public official, including how he had instructed the Malacañang kitchen staff to religiously tally all the food expenses incurred by his three children — who were all in school then — and their friends who would occasionally visit the Palace.
According to Jun Magsaysay, the president’s son, his father had considered such family expenses as “personal” and had them deducted instead from his monthly paychecks. They were never charged against regular Palace expenses. This went on, says Jun, without the family’s knowledge, and they were made aware of it only after his father’s death.
Jun noted that his father, as president, received a monthly salary of P5,000. But, his last paycheck, for March in 1957 and released after his plane crash, was for only P2,000. This was after deductions had been made to it. Jun added that even the gasoline for the second-hand Ford car he was using at the time were charged against his father’s paycheck.
And when the president’s daughter, Mila, invited friends over, or even when she celebrated her debut party at the Palace, all the expenses were deemed by her father as personal, and thus charged against his salary. Jun said his father “scrupulously” delineated personal or private from public expenses.
And then there was the story of how Magsaysay’s wife and children could not even move back into their 24-year old house in Singalong, Manila after his death.
Built in 1933 by Magsaysay while he was still a young manager at Try-Tran transport, the house was rented out at the time, and the Magsaysays did not want to displace the tenant.
So, with the family’s sole breadwinner lost to the tragic plane crash, the Magsaysays ended up borrowing someone else’s house for about a year while they put up a new home on a lot donated by the Ortigases in Mandaluyong City.
The construction of the house was financed by the proceeds of Magsaysay’s personal accident insurance, a coverage that was unknown to the family until after his death, while architectural services and some construction materials were donated by the late president’s friends. The president’s widow lived in the same house for almost 50 years, until her death in 2004.
And it was largely through scholarships as well as a modest pension from the Philippine government that Luz Magsaysay managed to see her two daughters and her son through their studies in good universities.
This was the kind of world, the kind of Philippines, and the kind of politics that our people lived through 60 years ago. I am certain many others in government at that time lived just as simply as Magsaysay and his family did, while adhering to a high moral standard.
I have found myself retelling this story to any one who would care to read or listen since Jun shared it with us. Because I believe one need not be wealthy or influential to have good taste, or to be correct, or to be courteous. Taste, decency, and sense of propriety do not come from money, not even from education. These all start from having a strong sense of right and wrong, from having a sense of modesty, from respecting one’s self and others, and from having dignity and recognizing that in others.
It also comes from having scruples, or that feeling of doubt or hesitation or reluctance or uneasiness to do something that one thinks or feels may be wrong. I believe we must resurrect scruples, and encourage the thinking that one must always deliberate the morality or propriety of a course of action before actually doing anything. “Just do it” just don’t cut it, anymore.
Marvin A. Tort is a former managing editor of BusinessWorld, and a former chairman of the Philippines Press Council.
matort@yahoo.com
