'Mabuti nga kayo kakain na lang, samantalang ang iba nga riyan naghahagilap pa lang ng kakainin nila.' Does this expression seem familiar to you? Imagine yourself in the dining table with your entire family, you don't like what is served, and your mum takes the delight to yell the above wise words to you.
Such expression has been, like, a magic word to me that every time I hear it whenever I whine about our dish for the day (I was such a spoiled brat when I was younger, you see), I'd stop and tell myself, 'Hey, that's right. I'm still blessed to have something to eat today/tonight. I don't want to be like those hungry folks I see on the streets everyday'.
The mere fact that it attacks my mind's center of sympathy -- sympathy for those unfortunate folks, for this matter -- has long led me to believe that the proposition is absolutely correct and infallible.
Then, there goes my eyes. For some reasons, they opened wider. I was suddenly convinced that something is wrong with the sentence which once I thought was formidable.
From where I stand, I think the fallacy lies in the first clause of the argument.
May my mother forgive me for invalidating her favourite words during our meal time.
Close your eyes. Free your mind. Let it travel to the early years of the civilization, back to the days when they haven't even realized yet that there is, in fact, a society that they should participate in.
It is during these years that people were, obviously, in search for food. They were in direct contact with nature. Apparently, that being said, there is a fair shot to the prize (the food) or at least to the means of getting it. They just had to build their individual contraptions and craft their tools for them to effectively catch the prey on which they could seize the meat. The one who builds the best equipment gets the better nutriment.
Now this is a clear illustration to support my claim that the error in the statement rests in its first portion. Though you may immediately just shake it off because of the nature of the picture that I let you saw. The next series of paragraphs, however, might help you convince yourself more.
This is the part that we fastforward to the present time. After reading this, you will already (possibly) fully believe my conviction.
Today, though, we definitely have our own ways of manifesting it, we are still in search for the things we put in our dining table. Poor or rich, men or women regardless of social status are still on it even though it may not be as blunt as that of, say, the prehistoric times. The competition grew tougher by the years. The number of people boomed, so the demand is sky-rocketting.
The means just got sophisticated from barbaric. Today, the one who obtains the better meal is the one who has a better source of money. As I said, the competition to bag the prize (the food) is tighter because of the ever-growing population, and money plays a vital role in the resource allocation. It must be noted that the acquisition of money is not an end; it is merely just a means to get to the real end -- the attainment of the needs.
Although I understand why the mighty statement in our first paragraph is a common punchline in the households. Given the fact that they have the better source of money, perhaps, distorts their view that they have to earn it to give their home a good stomach-filler. We are, at some point, blind to the experiences of the others. It is the same thing that messes up the view of the beggar when he has to beg in the streets for a coin to buy his snack, or that of the businessman when he has to produce to gain profit and avail luxury. You see, we aim for almost the same thing but we have different lives -- that's why, different means -- to have it.
The quest continues for everyone. Rich people improve their businesses (in what way they tend to do so, I don't know) to eat the best.. Middle people works hard on the job they hold to eat enough and be not the poorest ones, who still have to brush their feet on the streets just to have a small crumb of bread. It may sound heartless but the latter sentences were true in the modern society.
To put it simply, we are all in the same game. We are just different characters, with different powers and weapons.
