Missing the Point On the Road to 2010: Election Automation and Mobilizing Young People to Vote
June 30th, 2009 by cocoy
I had a timely discussion with Norman Sison on twitter regarding automation. Let me say right now: that I am not against automation, at all. I’m just saying, automation and organizing young people to register and vote for 2010 is missing the point of what’s wrong with our politics.
The problem of Philippine democracy isn’t that during an election voters can be cheated. I’m not saying that isn’t happening or that it isn’t evil at all. I’m also not saying we shouldn’t go out of our way to ensure the sanctity of the ballot. For the same reason getting young people to vote isn’t the answer. I’m just saying neither is a magic bullet. Both solve entirely different problems. I’m saying is this: the problem facing Philippine-style democracy is the quality of candidates up for election isn’t exactly the best of the best.
Democracy is like a road. High quality paved highways are awesome: no pot holes to go through. The ride is smooth and great. Our Democracy is like EDSA. There are parts like those close to Makati where the roads are better (not perfect, just better). There are parts of EDSA where there are potholes and you just curse.
Now imagine the Philippines is like a car. And right now, the Philippines is a Kia. it is a car that gets us from point a to point b, just like any Toyota or Honda or Mitsubishi or Ford, etc. The Kia gives “decent speed and mileage”. It breaks down every so often but the parts are cheap and affordable and it is a car that Filipinos can afford to drive.
Since our analogy is a car, the politician is the driver. We the people sit behind as passengers while we pay our driver to shuttle us around. But our current crop of politician is just a lousy driver. He is reckless like EDSA bus drivers. More than that, the guy comes in late in the morning and is absent so often. When you ask the driver to get us to a location faster, he doesn’t think and make bad choices— so bad, we wind up in traffic.
You’ve been there right?
We can’t just fire the guy. Labour laws prohibit just firing someone without cause (i.e. Military take over, EDSA 4.0, etc). But it just so happen that the guy’s contract is up.
Your name is Joe: Joe Rizal. Your 18 year old daughter Maggie is so fed up with the guy that she’s now interested in helping you choose the next family driver (first time registered voter). Your wife, Sarah, is equally interested, as is your 21 year old son, John and your mother Jane and father, Adam who both live with you.
The current driver, Mike is also up in running to continue his service. You ask other people to submit resumes. You asked friends and co-workers to give you recommendations.
When everyone interested had submitted their intent, you call for a family meeting. Maggie likes Chiz because he is young and can sing and dance. Jane likes Manny, who is religious, is hardworking and has a family. Adam likes Mar, who is young, who he thinks gets him and is about to be married. John on the other hand doesn’t like the current crop of candidates so he says you should just retain Mike. And Sarah, wants to Anna the only female candidate.
Before Mike came into the Family’s service, you always voted. You wrote your choices in a piece of paper and your maid Esmaralda would count the votes.
There was an incident a few years ago that John, being so influential would look at the votes first and if he didn’t like the outcome would switch ballots to favor his choice.
When you and Jane found out— there was hell to pay. So the family, years later decided, to hire Charlie, the next door geek to write a piece of software that lets the family cast their vote in a secure and safe manner. And Charlie did. Since none of the family members were anything good in computing, it would take the hiring of another equally good hacker to game the system. [election automation, in case you weren't paying attention].
The night before the election, you (Joe) would pace back and forth. Majority rules, correct? and with one vote each, yours is the deciding vote.
Charlie’s software solves the problem of election cheating. Yet Joe thought, it doesn’t solve the problem that you have: you don’t know who to vote.
Joe doesn’t trust any of the candidates to drive his daughter to school safely.
Joe thinks Chiz and Mar are all sound and fury. They don’t check the break fluid, or if there is water in the radiator before they drive. They don’t care if the tires don’t have the right pressure. Certainly Chiz and Mar are at least half a degree better than the bus drivers in Edsa but they only know how to drive and not how to maintain.
Joe thinks Manny is so conservative and yet on the road he is as bad a driver as Mike. He is arrogant and judgmental. He drives like the bus drivers in Edsa, but yells at them for being bus drivers. On the other hand, he does know how to check the engine to make sure it is running. Every so often, at least.
Keeping Mike, Joe thought, would be disastrous. His health can’t stand another six years of Mike driving his family around. Mike is that stressful for Joe.
So Joe thought about it really deeply. All the candidates are really bad drivers. Some are slightly better than others, sure he really hasn’t found the candidate that he wants. Joe paced again. He was getting some money from work because of a promotion. Finally, he could sell the Kia and get a SUV. Would it matter if work gave him the money for an Expedition or money for a Mercedes Benz Stirling Moss or for that matter, keep driving a Kia if the man behind the wheel, was reckless?
Charlie’s software doesn’t help him get better candidates, right? It solves a different kind of problem: ensuring fair election. ensuring nobody gets cheated.
A car, new or old is just a mechanism to get his family gets from point a to point b. Safety because of good driving and day to day maintenance resides in the driver.
I think that’s the same problem the Philippines is facing in 2010 and beyond. That’s the point we’re missing with insisting first on automation or getting young people to vote.
Again: I’m not saying we shouldn’t automate. I’m not saying we shouldn’t get young people interested to vote. I’m saying those things are separate. I’m saying even if both threads are working properly that we get near absolute, no cheating in elections and that we get near majority of our young people to vote in an election, if the choices they have is garbage, and they can only elect garbage, we should still expect garbage. to put it simply: garbage in, garbage out.
In my humble opinion, the revolution that we need is to make political parties that mimic in some degree what the Internet is and what the social web is. That is, it should be be small pieces loosely joined.
Why small pieces?
Anyone willing should be a member should join. Its membership should include janitors as much as professional politicians. It should include teachers, as much as it includes athletes. It should include rich as much as the poor. It should include celebrities as much as university professors, as much as prima ballerinas and prostitutes. And their aggregate choice should determine who their candidate is for any given position. Their collective organization raises money for a campaign and vet candidates.
I am well aware it is strange and weird and totally left field. I am well aware of the cynicism we all know too well. I know it is easier said than done. I will admit, scary and stupid as it is: If you ask me how to kick it off— I wouldn’t know how or where to begin. I can only tell you that this is just what I know. It is in my most humble opinion that this, among all possible choices to begin to right this nation, even before we consider rewriting our constitution, and even before automation, even before we encourage young people to go out and vote, we must improve the choices we present our people. Taking the political party from the existing closed and elitist network that exist now and making it open, free, and engaging for people to participate in is disruptive, and more importantly a first, and a significant cog among many to get this country moving in the right direction. And then maybe, we can have a country that is liberal in what it receives and conservative in what it says.
June 30, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Cocoy,
Excellent piece! One of the best I’ve seen in my short time in FV.
Build. Build positively. There are many good people.
June 30, 2009 at 3:21 pm
“And then maybe, we can have a country that is liberal in what it receives and conservative in what it says.”
Great line. Aspirational. In the right direction.
June 30, 2009 at 3:45 pm
you’re so right, cocoy. automating elections and getting the youth to vote doesn’t solve the problem of who to vote for, given the crop of candidates we get election after election after election. the problem really is, wala kasing plataporma ang ating mga pulitiko except the same socioeconomic platfrom gma and before her erap and before him ramos and before him cory espoused, na bow to foreign interests first and globalization first and second and third, and never mind national interests, except for propaganda purposes. walang brave enough savvy enough visionary enough to speak up about how to break away from destructive patterns and solve systemic problems like poverty and runaway population and low-brow education. some may have ideas but are afraid to speak up because the good ideas that would have a chance of transforming the nation are ideas that threaten the status quo, i.e., the church, the establishment, the business community, even the fil-am community… so talaga, nakakatamad bumoto. for the youth to make a difference, they will simply have to apply their minds, do research, figure out what the roots of the problem are, and what our options are, craft an alternative program of government with a highly filipino bias, and find a leader who will fight the good fight. the internet, used smartly, can help make this happen.
June 30, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Thank you.
June 30, 2009 at 7:11 pm
To begin with, nowhere in my blog (www.lanuevaligafilipina.wordpress.com) did I say that we need to computerize the balloting first before making quality candidates. Please read it again.
What I proposed was a suggestion on how to automate the counting of votes. I wrote: “Modernizing our election system is only one of several solutions to strengthen our democratic institutions.”
Now about your argument: our democracy is plagued with so many problems that not one single solution can solve them. Election reforms alone aren’t even enough to put some sense in our elections. I’ll elaborate on that in my blog in the next few days.
Our electoral system is made up of three major parts: candidates running for office, voters and a balloting system. Unfortunately, we have low quality candidates, Filipinos who need to be educated on how to vote, and an antiquated balloting system that’s vulnerable to cheating.
Let’s say you have high quality candidates running for public office. How will they win if voters go for candidates merely on the basis of celebrity status? Joseph Estrada defeated Jose de Venecia and the rest of the pack by a landslide in 1998. Raul Roco – God bless his soul – was behind Gloria Arroyo and Fernando Poe in the opinion polls in the run-up to the 2004 elections.
Let’s say you have high caliber candidates and an intelligent electorate. How will they win if the balloting can be rigged in favor of the unfavorable? This happened in 1986 when Cory Aquino ran against Ferdinand Marcos.
Even having an intelligent enough electorate and a modern voting system don’t guarantee quality people in government. Case in point: George W. Bush’s victory in 2001 and his reelection in 2005.
Hence, the question: do we fix the country’s election system one problem at a time or all three simultaneously?
You argue that we need to improve candidate quality first because we end up electing thieves in public office. But can you guarantee – guarantee – that this certain candidate won’t turn out to be a thief once in public office?
In 1998, Gloria Arroyo handily won the vice presidency because of her high educational background. In 2001, we booted out the dull-witted Estrada and put Arroyo in office. Did you expect Arroyo then to become what she is now?
Let’s go with your argument and strive first to improve the quality of candidates to choose from. One, manufacturing mature political parties that can produce first class candidates and educating whole generations of Filipino voters will take a huge effort in social engineering and political science that can take years if not decades.
Let’s talk specifics: Do we wait for quality candidates running for the presidency only or for all posts down the barangay council level? Up to what point do we wait until we can start modernizing the election system and educating the electorate?
Educating the electorate means putting future generations of Filipinos through proper schooling so they can use their brains when they reach voting age.
But there is one necessity in order for democracy to survive: credible elections, which you can have if the electoral voting system is reliable. Read Amando Doronila’s columns on Inquirer on the subject. Doronila has seen it all even before the Marcos years.
Look at Arroyo, she was doing fine until we heard the Garci tapes. It was all downhill after that.
Democracies can dispense with quality candidates and intelligent voters – but it cannot survive without credible elections, automated or manual. Any political science professor will tell you that. Having quality people in government who won their positions by cheating – like Gloria in 2004 – is not democratic.
June 30, 2009 at 10:21 pm
actually, our twitter conversation sparked a train of thought. it wasn’t a reaction to your blog post or any other and i’m not limiting to just automated elections. i’m even including the campaign to get the youth to vote.
My blog post is the sum of my observation, and because of my observation about the news, about Filipnos in general, about the campaign to get the youth to vote, heck, even ako mismo thing awhile back factored in to this blog post. I came to the conclusion that all these things Filipinos are doing— automated elections, the campaign to get the youth to vote, I saw that it isn’t an answer to what’s really plaguing us as a people, as a nation, as a society. It is an answer for /other/ things, which are also important. automated election: prevent future fraud. getting the youth to vote: get the young interested in our politics— their future.
And all these things we are doing, I realize isn’t answering the real problem /because/ it wasn’t meant to. The problem is, we don’t have real statesmen, especially in the national position. Preventing voter fraud doesn’t give us better politicians. Neither having people to vote nor ensuring that voter irregularities are a thing of the past guarantees we will have deep thinkers i n the senate or in congress, or a benevolent leader in the office of the president.
That’s what I’m trying for people to understand.
if you will note in my post: i did not disagree with you regarding for the need for electoral reform nor do i disagree with people asking the youth to go out and register and vote.
if you will read it again, i was most careful in expressing it.
The practical reality is that we can’t do everything all at the same time. If this nation had to triage and choose which of all the important stuff that needs to get done had to be given attention, all i’m saying our energies could do more if we had people more engaged in politics.
oh boy. Bush “won” the electoral college vote against Gore. The latter actually won the popular vote. the difference in American voting is one of the weird things about American democracy. That’s just one aspect. That’s why there are things like “50 state” strategics, etc. etc. It would take whole books just to discuss voter turn out in Florida, much less the power of the conservative right of the Republican Party.
Anyway, Gore’s book the assault on reason is a good book to gain insight. not just about that point in American politics but how most people don’t really think.
So what if it takes years? That’s the problem with us Filipinos, we want the short cut! for crying out loud if it is that important for the future, why don’t we invest in it? I will be the first person to tell you these things do take time. The Filipino people will understand but someone has to start doing it.
that said, i’m not arrogant enough to say I know how to get the ball rolling. in fact, I fear that’s the stupid part and I hope that by writing about it, someone out there could get insight in how to actually start it.
my answer is this: xkcd’s Idiocracy.
That said, there is no requirement of literacy to vote in an election.
please re-read what i had to say. It is not “an attack”. i was most careful to write it in a way that i hope would not offend. Clearly, I was wrong. Please, re-read it with an open mind.
July 1, 2009 at 12:42 am
Hi there, Cocoy. No offense taken. No worries. I’m wondering why you felt that I got offended. Was it in my choice of words? Anyway I often get mistaken for taking it personally. Don’t ask me why. Go figure.
Let’s forget about automated elections and stick to manual to simplify the issue. Credible elections, whether manual or not, are prerequisites for democracies to exist. Without clean and honest election, no democracy. That’s political science 101.
Now, if an idiot is honestly elected into office by an electorate of idiots, that’s how a democracy works, unfortunately. Great if the majority elects a Magsaysay.
But democracy doesn’t always work like that. That’s why there are people who argue for dictatorships like Lee Kuan Yew.
Recognizing the limits of democracy, the US sought to offset it with an electoral college. That’s how Bush won in 2001. But note that he won releection in 2005. That says something about how democracy works.
That’s why you are correct that we need to improve the quality of candidates and voters, and I agree. But we’ll still need a reliable election system — whether automated or manual — to make sure that votes are counted correctly. Otherwise, everything will be all for naught.
Can a reliable balloting system help produce quality candidates? Yes, if their votes actually go to them instead of someone else who’s only out to enrich himself.
Credible elections are certainly useful if voters want to inflict electoral punishment on political parties for wrongdoing. Think of John McCain.
But it goes both ways, as you’ve said. If idiots elect idiots to public office, then there’s nothing we can do. That’s democracy.
I’ll be happy to direct you to several political science professors in La Salle as well my those in Social Democratic Caucus, with which I’m loosely involved. They can explain the concept of democracy better than I do.
You’re the first person to tell me that educating the electorate takes time? Begging your pardon, but you haven’t told me anything new. No offense taken.
I’ve been covering elections since 1992 as a newspaper and television reporter. My dad is barkada with House Speaker Ramon Mitra’s nephews during the PDP-Laban days in the 1970s when Ninoy Aquino campaigned from his cell at Fort Bonifacio. We were already involved in the elections vs Marcos. Yes, we fought for democracy and risked arrest so future generations of Filipinos can enjoy the free air.
But it’s no big deal for us. We only did our obligation.
You’ve said that you hope that by writing about it, someone out there would make an effort to educate voters and produce quality candidates? Please visit my blog, I’ve been at it since February. My ideas are all there. Tell me what you think.
Also, the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting has been at it since the 1986 elections.
July 1, 2009 at 12:57 am
to NormanS: “Anyway I often get mistaken for taking it personally. Don’t ask me why. Go figure.”
It’s the way you write. You do work hard to defend your turf. You ask rhetorical questions that can only be answered by “yes”, “no” or “you did not understand me”. Evidence:
You argue that we need to improve candidate quality first because we end up electing thieves in public office. But can you guarantee – guarantee – that this certain candidate won’t turn out to be a thief once in public office?
June 30, 2009 at 8:00 pm
It’s that age-old thing about automation being seen as the silver bullet solution that it isn’t. If we can’t do something right manually, what makes us think we can do it right computerised?
We can have the cleanest election in the world, but if voter just simply don’t get it we will continue to be stuck with the kind of politics (and the kind of “experts” who analyse it) over the next 100 years.
Take Erap. His election into the presidency back in ‘98 (1998 nga ba?) was not the cleanest, but it was certainly a convincing win. And yet he ended up losing his office via an illegitimate exercise some morons call an “expression of the people’s mandate”.
My point is, Filipinos will always be creative when it comes to circumventing and perverting the otherwise legitimate. And no amount of purchased technology will buy us consistent legitimacy in the way we conduct our affairs.
June 30, 2009 at 9:42 pm
“Filipinos will always be creative when it comes to circumventing and perverting the otherwise legitimate. ”
Hhhmmm. Some ring of truth in this.
Aha, but you could also look at it this way: the manual election system is an ‘enabler’ for/of/to the poll cheats.
Kung baga sa basketball game, daya na nga yung dalawang referee, pati timer at scoresheet kuha pa. ;)
June 30, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Benign0, and Phil Manila
Exactly.
If I may add, there really isn’t any fool proof system. No un-hackable computer, well except one that’s turned off. That’s beside the point, really.
June 30, 2009 at 9:08 pm
@Benigno. You said: “My point is, Filipinos will always be creative when it comes to circumventing and perverting the otherwise legitimate. And no amount of purchased technology will buy us consistent legitimacy in the way we conduct our affairs.”
If that’s the case, then therefore it becomes more important to have credible elections in order for democracy to exist, does it not?
Credible elections — whether automated or not — is an expression of the people’s will. Otherwise, a government ceases its reason for being, or raison d’etre, once it no longer reflects the people’s will. That’s how a democracy works.
Erap won, yes in 1998, even though many people didn’t like him. But that’s how democracy works. We deserve our leaders because we elected them.
I have one question. You said: “It’s that age-old thing about automation being seen as the silver bullet solution that it isn’t. If we can’t do something right manually, what makes us think we can do it right computerised?”
Obviously from your statement, we have yet to try a nationwide computerized balloting. So how can you already conclude that automating the elections isn’t a “silver bullet” if we haven’t tried it and actually found out? Were you giving a conclusion based on actual facts or speculation?
As for Amando Doronila being “an expert” (I assume that you were referring to him), I recommend that you read “The Power and The Glory” by Raul Rodrigo before you dismiss his analyses — backed by decades of experience and scholarly study abroad in Australia — outright with your own expert opinion.
One last thing: the Comelec did test an automated balloting during the ARMM elections in the mid-1990s during the Ramos presidency. It was a success. I covered the elections then as a writer/researcher for ABS-CBN’s election coverage before moving up as editor in “The World Tonight”.
July 1, 2009 at 12:45 am
to NormanS: Chances are that there are differences in the metrics that you, bongV and cocoy use to define “success”.
bongV will probably ask you if the ones elected after ARMM automated elections are inspired, honest and hard-working representatives of their constituency, while you may be focusing on accuracy and timeliness of the vote-count.
July 1, 2009 at 12:56 am
I was referring to the vote count’s accuracy and timeliness. Not on the quality of candidates elected.
July 1, 2009 at 1:36 am
the wrong candidates voted via timely and accurate elections?
sounds like a Porsche Boxster driving 160MPH straight over the cliff – i am catastrophe, hear me explode.
July 1, 2009 at 1:07 pm
@bongV
Tama ka, automated elections don’t guarantee quality people elected to public office. Automated balloting is only about counting votes accurately. It was the Comelec that said the automated ARMM elections was a success.
That’s why many corrupt politicians fear the day when computers are used in elections because it would make it more difficult to cheat. How we wished in 1986 for automated elections when Cory ran against Marcos. Ah, memories.
June 30, 2009 at 9:22 pm
@benigno
I read my blog again because of your comment.
You wrote: “My point is, Filipinos will always be creative when it comes to circumventing and perverting the otherwise legitimate. And no amount of purchased technology will buy us consistent legitimacy in the way we conduct our affairs.”
Nowhere in my blog did I claim that automating the elections would finally rid us of cheats. I did imply that it could minimize the cheating, but I didn’t claim that it would stop cheating outright.
July 1, 2009 at 7:48 am
Norman, I wasn’t addressing that comment to you. It was more an exercise of thinking out loud on my part.
July 1, 2009 at 11:30 am
@benigno: Oh, alrighty. Thank you for clarifying.
@bongV: Tama ka, but that’s the way democracy works. Basic political science. It’s not democracy if quality people get into office by cheating in the elections. An election is an expression of the people’s will or of the majority.
Come 2010, you’d want your vote for a certain person to be counted properly, hindi ba.
@UP n grad: Yeah, I speak frankly and I’m direct. Parang Amerikano, some of my friends tell me. But being direct doesn’t mean it’s personal. Wala iyon.
July 1, 2009 at 11:42 am
mr sison,
i am pinay and i am very direct too. What’s your personality got to do with the americans. Are you suggesting that majority are shy? My personality has nothing to do with the americans. Are you also suggesting that you’d rather be thinking like the americans.
in your blog, you are correct on ID system. That’s all, the rest are pinnacles.
watch out with leytenian. I bite…:) are you new? welcome. hehehe
July 1, 2009 at 1:00 pm
@leytenian I wasn’t implying anything.
July 1, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Democracy is not just about holding elections, otherwise, the process may have the trappings of democracy but it really isn’t democracy. Stanford political scientists has a term for that – “Electoralism” –
As defined in the Wiki –
July 1, 2009 at 1:04 pm
argggg *have
July 1, 2009 at 1:27 pm
@bongV
May point ka din because the Philippines isn’t a fully functioning democracy. For one, political parties revolve around personalities, not ideology. Local governments center around local officials, not the institutions they represent. Iyan ang gustong ayusin ni Cocoy.
I’m happy to say that my friends in Social Democratic Caucus are trying to painstakingly fix. I invite you guys to come join in the effort.
In 1998, people realized the limits of democracy when the masa outvoted everybody and elected Joseph Estrada. But what could anyone do? Estrada won in a credible election. That’s democracy or electoralism for you.
July 1, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Norman:
it is electoralism to me.. not a democracy..
June 30, 2009 at 11:06 pm
Democracy cannot be learned easily. Especially we Filipinos. We have
the DATUISM mentality. Added by our Colonial Mentality. It will take
time for our mindsets to change.Just be patient. We will improve
and get there, if we keep trying. It is a frustrating process really.
America got almost two centuries to learn its good governance.
So was some European countries.
Just be vigilant. That we will not revert to Dictatorship. Or to slide to become another BANANA REPUBLIC.
July 1, 2009 at 11:38 am
Well said.
Exactly, just be vigilant. As I’ve been saying, credible elections are prerequisites for a democracy to exist.
Tama ka diyan sa iyong analysis. Someone once told me that America’s problems were Europe’s problems at least a hundred years ago. While our problems were America’s problems a hundred years ago.
I highly doubt that we Filipinos HERE in the Philippines (not the ones abroad) fully understand what democracy is and how it works. We’re still tinkering with it up to now.
July 1, 2009 at 12:55 am
I forgot to add, I have a cause on Facebook, “Take back our Pilipinas!” I hope you guys will join me in my advocacy. It can get lonely sometimes kasi. Thanks.
July 1, 2009 at 5:02 am
Excellent piece. Juices, there I go, agreeing with RealityCheck again.
I rather suspect change will come when someone gets in power who actually wants to do good things for the people, and for their historical reputation, even if they were born in the den of prostitu . . . er, luxury cars. There is no doubt the Presidency is a powerful position. A sound election process gives the People confidence, for sure.
Joe
July 1, 2009 at 6:08 am
yep.
July 1, 2009 at 10:08 am
It comes to me as a rather extraordinarily long blog although its points seem simple:
Democracy = road in EDSA, partly paved, partly pot-holed
Philippines = a Kia car, bogs down often, parts are affordable
Politician = the driver of the shuttle Kia
People = passengerns of shuttle Kia who pay the driver (politician)
And the oversimplistic analogy of casting a wider net to have other choices other than Mike (the driver) and a voting system (automation) that ensures no cheating of any kind.
So apparently, say we are “Joe”, we cannot just fire the driver?
Then from out of the blues, Cocoy, proposes a revolution that mimics internet, making reference to ’small pieces” (must be twits and twats, I dont’ know). In fact, cocoy suggests improving the choices we present to our people.
So what in the end is the problem of philippine democracy – the ballot not safe, the voting not automated, young people not voting, choices are not the best, can’t fire the driver?
If the whole piece is a little bit better organized, I could have asked few more questions.
July 1, 2009 at 11:46 am
Hi. Actually, I do feel that we’re running in circles because I’m already repeating myself.
July 1, 2009 at 11:11 am
Automation supplemented by education on voting rights cannot be separated. Both must be effected. Education such as instruction, learning development and guidance to voters are among the dominant role of any administration willing to break the chain of fraudulent election. The rule of law regarding legal duty of “not to buy” and civic duty of “not to sell” cannot be separated in governance. Automation can afterwards be freely executed at its highest probability of success.
Any candidates whose promotions are integrity, credibility and honesty will lead this country to its true Vision.
Who among them and who among the previous administrations are willing to lead?
July 1, 2009 at 11:20 am
This country should not be spending capital on non-essential when majority cannot produce to pay the bills of purchasing/leasing automated equipment. We should be spending more on classrooms, upgrading old school infrastructure and equipped the people with FULL knowledge.
July 1, 2009 at 11:44 am
Exactly, what I’ve been saying. Fixing just one part of the problem isn’t enough.
July 1, 2009 at 11:49 am
Before I forget, I just want to say that I’m very delighted with this discussion. The more people talk, the more politically mature we become as a nation.
Cocoy, you have a good thing going here. Keep it up. You’re already contributing to the efforts in voter education. Cheers.
July 1, 2009 at 1:44 pm
I almost forgot, I also have a Facebook group, Pinoy Bloggers para sa Pilipinas. I formed that group encourage political discussions and help foster political maturity. Feel free to register your blogs there. See ya.
http://www.facebook.com/normansison?ref=name#/group.php?gid=95204362492&ref=ts
July 1, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Norman,
Where did you learn that Filipinos in the Philippines do not understand how democracy really works but those Filipinos not in the Philippines do very well know?
Can you explain.
July 1, 2009 at 6:48 pm
i am actually agreeing with Norman. In my view, the majority poor are left without education. As I said above: “Education such as instruction, learning development and guidance to voters are among the DOMINANT ROLE OF ANY ADMINISTRATION willing to break the chain of fraudulent election.The rule of law regarding legal duty of “not to buy” and civic duty of “not to sell” CANNOT BE SEPARATED IN GOVERNANCE”
July 1, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Governance is a duty. Role is a duty of every running candidates or anyone in the current administration.
When one assume the position of power, he/she is expected to perform his/her duty. Keeping the people dumb and poor, are his/her alibis.
July 1, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Hello. I’m not here to offend anyone, but that’s my observation. One thing I’ve learned since coming back from abroad is that we Filipinos are sometimes too sensitive and we take it too personally. I have to phrase my words carefully at times. Ask Filipino balikbayans. Don’t ask me.
Please lang, let’s discuss this without our emotions getting the better of us. Emotions cloud logic.
Anyway, I’ve lived abroad in the US-territory of the Mariana Islands (2001-02), where half of the 75,000 population are Filipino alien workers. So I’ve seen how the government there works and have made comparisons on my way back. Take a poll of Filipinos who live there, they will tell you the same thing. Ask your Pinoy friends in Facebook who are abroad.
One example: here it’s common practice for the police to present crime suspects before the press. You will not find that in any developed country because it’s a human rights violation. In court, a suspect is considered innocent until proven guilty. Kaya nga “suspect” ang term.
Another: when a suspect is arrested in the US, he is already read his Miranda rights. We have no Miranda rights here, which I’ve been advocating through the CHR and my lawyer friends.
Another: here it’s illegal to burn the Philippine flag. In the US, there are people who may not like it, but it’s considered a freedom of expression. Let’s remember that the Philippines prided itself as America’s “showcase of democracy in Asia.”
Dinky Soliman was once arrested by the police for wearing a t-shirt criticizing Arroyo’s election legitimacy shortly after the Garci tapes. They violated her freedom of expression.
Randy David was arrested in February 2006 for participating in a legitimate rally. Also a violation of freedom of expression, and he was shortly released by the court.
Hindi ba it’s standard for the police to prevent buses full of protesters heading to Manila during rallies? That’s a violation of the freedoms to expression, assembly and travel.
Read the text of Proclamation 1017, issued by Arroyo in February 2006 when she declared emergency rule, and Proclamation 1081, issued by Marcos when he declared martial law in 1972. They’re the same. Read my blog http://www.lanuevaligafilipina.wordpress.com.
I was the editor assigned to wrap up the story that day for Philippine Star and I pointed that out in my edited copy, hoping that the Supreme Court would notice. The court did eventually, thank God.
Consider this point: what does 1017 say about how the people in Malacanang think? What’s stopping Arroyo from doing it again? Is that democracy for you?
Look at how Arroyo’s allies railroaded HR 1109, did it look democratic to you? The VERY PEOPLE who run the country have trouble implementing democracy.
For people here who were too young to remember, in May 1971 constitutional convention delegate Eduardo Quintero revealed that he and several other Con Con delegates were taking bribes from Marcos. Quintero came forward because his conscience couldn’t take it anymore. Marcos sent the NBI to ruin Quintero’s reputation and frame him. Sounds like Jun Lozada, no?
And then next year, in September, Marcos declared martial law. I still have vague memories of army jeeps and trucks roaming around Metro Manila. The names of Camp Crame, Camp Aguinaldo and Fort Bonifacio inspired fear.
And, oh yes, there were bombings going off in Metro Manila months before martial law. Few were wounded but killed no one. Sound familiar? Notice, we’ve been having bombs at government offices lately with very few casualties and wounded. Don’t forget that several officials in the Arroyo cabinet are former military and police generals.
Understand from my perspective: I was born in 1967 kasi. My dad was barkada with Ramon Mitra’s nephews, who were uncles to me. We kids were involved in the PDP-Laban days when Ninoy Aquino ran for election from his cell in Fort Bonifacio. Of course, we children didn’t understand what it was all about.
My aunts and uncles were then students holding street protests in 1970s and battling with riot police during the First Quarter Storm. My Tito Noel was arrested and my grandmother had to beg the police for his release. Ganyan ang buhay noon, po.
My family participated in the noise barrages because rallies were banned. May curfew pa. Yes, the noise barrage was invented during martial law because we had to get creative in staging protests.
No such thing as rally permits and freedom parks. No free press. Walang ABS-CBN, Philippine Star, Inquirer, Manila Times noon. “Maximum tolerance” was coined by the PC-INP in the late 1980s when Marcos couldn’t stop people from rallying anymore because nagalit na ang taong bayan after the Aquino assassination.
My political awakening came in 1983 (I was in high school) when Ninoy was shot. We San Beda students started wearing lapel pins with anti-Marcos slogans while police and troops stood nearby dahil stone’s throw lang ang San Beda mula sa Malacanang.
Ninoy was a Bedista. Our mentality then was: kalaban mo kaming lahat kapag may tinarantado kang Bedista. We taunted the soldiers and police. Ah, what fun. San Beda’s high school library is now named in Ninoy’s honor.
My wife is a veteran of the 1986 revolution. She was hit on the head with a rock during the attack on Malacanang on the last night of the revolution. She fell unconscious and woke up in a hospital. My dad was out and told me to stay home, so I missed the fun.
In my own experience abroad, my car once broke down in the middle of the road and a Filipino-American police officer stopped and helped me out, even checked under the hood. Ganito ba katino ang mga pulis natin?
When I got back here, in just less than two months my car was towed and the Makati MAPSA were hoping I’d give a bribe. I paid my P1,000 fine and asked for a receipt to make sure my money went to the Republic. Ganito ba ang demokrasya?
If we’re a fully functioning democracy, why do we still need to educate Filipinos how to exercise their right of suffrage? Why are we complaining of the shortage of quality election candidates? Why do we still have political killings and desaparecidos that merited the attention of the UNHCR? Why do we have a president with a martial law mentality?
Democracy is not just about credible elections — it’s about human rights, civil liberties, having a say in your government, having congressmen respect the will of the people, it’s about making democratic institutions work for the people, it’s about political parties centered around ideologies and not around personalities.
If you want to know more about democracy, I can direct you to my contacts in Social Democratic Caucus who are in a better position to explain. You can also ask the mother of Jonas Burgos.
After what I’ve already gone through since the 1970s, I think I can fairly say where Philippine democracy is standing right now.
Last June 10, I attended the anti-cha cha Makati rally, my first rally since the 2001 EDSA rally vs Estrada. Sa totoo lang, pagod na ako. Walang katapusan ang gulo! Mukhang mamamatay pa si Cory Aquino.
But I need to do this for my two kids. Or I just uproot my family to the US or elsewhere.
With that, I leave you with a line from Jose Rizal’s “The Indolence of the Filipinos”, published in La Solidaridad in 1890: “Without education and freedom, which are the soil and the sun of man, no reform is possible, no measure can yield the desired result.”
The whole lesson in this: tumatanda na ako, assuming I don’t do a Michael Jackson, beat it and die of a heart attack like the idol of my teen years. :)
July 2, 2009 at 11:07 pm
what do you mean too sensitive?
1) filipinos everywhere are too sensitive?
2) filipinos in the philippines?
3) poor filipinos? rich?
July 1, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I second that request, Norm.
Your “…I highly doubt that we Filipinos HERE in the Philippines (not the ones abroad) fully understand what democracy is and how it works.” is overdrawn if not grossly misplaced.
Medyo nakaka-insulto, bro.
July 1, 2009 at 7:04 pm
nakaka-insulto, subalit, totoo.
a feudal society engaging in electoralism and passing it off as a democracy.
ang pinas nga naman.
July 1, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Bong,
The point is not about the matter being untrue. But making the assertion in a wholesale manner is something else.
@ Norman, no need to hyperventilate, Sir.
Lahat tayo tumatanda pero di tayo dapat mawalang ng pag-asa.
July 1, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Ding:
If the wholesale assertion being made is the truth, I don’t have a problem with that.
I will learn from it, make the necessary corrections, and move on.
July 1, 2009 at 8:05 pm
@Ding Gagelonia
Believe me, I ain’t hyperventilating yet.
July 1, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Wow, Primer and Ding on the same page.
Wrote down the date.
You know you are inviting blasts from the articulate outsiders.
I, on the other hand, remain humbly yours . . .
Joe
July 1, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Really, joe.
This is how things are at FV.
Though perspectives can greatly differ, at times, the acrimony if any is not usually personal.
Not with me at least.
July 1, 2009 at 7:13 pm
I vote for keeping the acrimony to a minimum. Where do I sign up?
And when you have a good thread such as this, I’m happy to read and think without saying a thing. It’s possible to learn and expand when everyone isn’t yelling at at everyone else.
“Attack the post, not the poster” are good words to blog by.
————
OK, two cents of space is used up. Now back to the regularly scheduled program……..
July 1, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Ding,
I aspire to your calm and diplomacy, but some times it is fun to rip. Guess I am a bit of a sadist; usually the third and fifth Tuesday of every month.
I think journalism training helps,eh. Sort out the facts from the slant.
Joe
July 1, 2009 at 7:39 pm
By the way, I’m going to do a flash mob protest versus cha cha at a mall, hopefully on July 27 during Arroyo’s supposedly last State of the Nation Address.
All we’re going to do is wear T-shirts saying “Stop Cha-Cha”, like the bag tag that I made for the June 10 rally. You’ll see a picture of it on my blog.
So, who’s with me?
July 2, 2009 at 11:15 am
it isn’t a flash mob if you announce it a month in advance :)
July 2, 2009 at 11:55 am
Eh, paano ko magagawa without sending out an announcement to invite people?
I’m taking up Jim Paredes’s suggestion kasi on creative protests in our Facebook group, TindigNation. I invite people who are really serious about moving things forward to join that group.
I’m done talking kasi. I’m just doing it and showing people how it’s done.
I’d rather do it while we still have our civil liberties than revert to the old noise barrage of the Marcos era when we’re out of democratic options.
No takers here on my flash mob invitation?
July 2, 2009 at 11:59 am
My wife and I are privileged to have Jim Paredes and his wife, Lydia, as family friends. Kasama namin kasi sa breast cancer support group, I Can Serve Foundation (www.icanserve.net). We’re into breast cancer awareness.
Jim coined the word “TindigNation”, by the way.
July 2, 2009 at 12:21 pm
You don’t need a flash mob to stop ChaCha.
July 2, 2009 at 8:26 pm
@norman
ang flash mob yung biglaang mass action.
people use twitter updates or facebook updates and such to organize it. usually, it lasts for a short time, say 1 hour. (so no one gets arrested, and traffic isn’t stalled)
i have no problems with flashmobs, as long as hindi magulo at walang naaabala.
i only wanted to point out what the terms means.
July 2, 2009 at 12:18 pm
I humbly disagree. I’ve been disagreeing with that kind of thinking since the month I started posting for Filipino Voices. (you can all just check the archives, if you want).
Simply put: T-shirts fade away when you put ‘em in the wash.
i’d rather you and every other person who can, help organize and band together and put people like Randy David in to public office. We need deep-thinkers. We need people who see beyond today and what the future can be. We need serious people who got the guts and the wisdom. There are others i’m sure out there who should be in public service. They need organization. They need money. They need resources not just to get elected but to do the right thing in office.
Nation building starts when we work within the system— however rotten it is. Don’t like a law, then lets get better laws. Don’t like the crappy politicians we have to vote for? then let’s get better ones.
I don’t like Arroyo’s brand of leadership. I don’t like Erap’s brand of leadership. I feel that both are counter productive.
I humbly disagree with “protests” and rallying in the streets to get a message across. You want a message that sticks? Well leave a legacy in Congress or in any local government. Start a school to give better education. Start a service like a hospital, if you’re a doctor and give service. It doesn’t have to be free. It just has to be reasonable.
Hell you don’t even have to start there. If you got a maid or a driver, help send them to school. Or their kids. It maybe not be the big picture kinda thing, but it helps a life.
I am “No to ConAss”, I don’t have to rehash what i’ve blogged before. I think “rallies” is going to miss the point too. To change things, you have to be part of the system and wage war behind the scenes.
July 2, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Write on.
joe
July 1, 2009 at 7:47 pm
And, oh yes, I’m a journalist living in a country that’s among the most dangerous for journalists to work in.
July 1, 2009 at 10:53 pm
What I mean here is that the fact that I’m working in one of the most dangerous countries for journalists — which feels like a virtual death threat over my head occasionally — it says something about what kind of country we live in.
But I’m aware of the risks and have long accepted that it comes with the job.
July 1, 2009 at 11:37 pm
Are you in Manila? I didn’t realize that Manila (or NCR) based journalists were at risk like those in the provinces. Is there a difference in the threat level or no?
July 2, 2009 at 12:19 am
@realitycheck
Are you being hostile with me? Because when words are used like that, they are meant to insult. And if you are being hostile, what wrong did I do to you?
To answer your question: I live in Antipolo. I used to work at Philippine Star, which is in Port Area, Manila. I now freelance usually for Star. You can check my work online.
One time in 2006 a guy on a motorcycle stopped in front of my car and stared at me in a not-so-friendly manner. He drove off after about 10 seconds. I never knew what it was about.
OK lang if you dismiss or downplay my fear of becoming a dead journalist statistic just because I live in Metro Manila. To be clear lang, hindi ako nagyayabang for stating that I’m a journalist living in a dangerous country.
What I meant in my statement is that it’s funny for Asia’s first democracy to have political killings, desaparecidos and a large number of dead journalists.
I don’t expect thanks for the work I do either as a journalist or a political reform activist. It’s no big deal. It’s a choice that I made for myself. I’m not going to cry over it.
July 2, 2009 at 12:32 am
Norman,
No. Not at all. No insult intended. No hostility towards you whatsoever. I don’t know you and I’m interested in your words more than your soul.
But I like to discern facts from what is being said…said by anyone. It’s my habit. You will see it again if you hang around FV enough. Hope you don’t mind.
My understanding has been that the journalist deaths have been primarily radio guys in the provinces. And I am not aware (due to ignorance?) that media men working in the NCR have been killed.
I’m not downplaying your fear, I’m asking you to explain it…especially since I don’t know myself.
July 2, 2009 at 12:58 am
@realitycheck
I apologize because I think I made a mistake and read your comment as hostile.
I would like to think that Metro Manila is safer compared to the provinces. But all we need is just one gun pointed to our heads.
I do know that my friend Ellen Tordesillas is in the eye of the military and police for her anti-Arroyo stand.
July 2, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Norman,
You indicate that, in fact, you do not really live with a “virtual death threat over my head” here in Manila.
That changes the meaning of: “I’m aware of the risks and have long accepted that it comes with the job.”
But then you write: “I don’t expect thanks for the work I do either as a JOURNALIST or POLITICAL REFORM ACTIVIST.” (emphases mine)
Now being an activist in Manila is probably more dangerous (factually, measureably) than being a simple journalist. So I can see the feelings of insecurity.
But there is a huge difference between being a journalist and being an activist. In fact, isn’t it that the classical approach is that the two roles are mutually exclusive? After all, how can a journalist do his job if he has a serious bias about the very people and events he is covering?
And if an activist is using the media to portray his views as objective fact, isn’t that a case of unethical journalism? How come the self-policing media body (forgot the name of the association) never uncovers or regulates this conflict?
And — please correct me if I’m wrong — but aren’t most of the radio journalists killed in the provinces more often than not “commentators” on block air time? Do they often get in the middle of feuding political clans/groups?
I’m not dismissing the reality of the politically motivated killings of activists and I most certainly am not approving the killing of journalists (or of any civilians). But I am seeing if they are two seperate types of killing have gotten mixed together. Perhaps being a pure, bona fide, non-aligned (at least visibly in the public’s eye) journalist isn’t very dangerous after all.
You may be feeling threatened because you are an activist, not a journalist.
But, in the first place, is it proper for you to be a journalist when you are an active activist? Should the two be mixed? Not only is it possibly unethical, it is probably dangerous.
———
In hindsight, I should have written two seperate entries — one about journaism ethics and another about seperating the data of the killing of activists and that of journalists. But I already wrote everything so…so be it.
Please recall that I find any of the killings immoral and illegal and punishable…regardless of any killer’s identitiy or excuses.
July 2, 2009 at 12:52 pm
RealityCheck,
I think you make an excellent point.
(My independent thinking at work again.)
Joe
July 2, 2009 at 9:47 pm
I left Star in April 2007 and have been freelancing since then. I’m free to pursue my political advocacy now (I started in February early this year) because I’m not on staff with any publication. I wasn’t into political advcoacy during my stay in Star and other news organizations. I hope that clears it up.
July 2, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Norman,
Thanks, that is clear. And it sounds commendable. I hope others are as careful as you in keeping the two worlds seperate. Good luck!
July 1, 2009 at 10:44 pm
I think it stills boils down to the culture. Change Philippine culture, and you might have a good chance at changing everything. I believe that most of the things that really influence events outside of the formal meetings. When they take coffee, play golf, drink at a bar, etc., instead of in the meeting or session halls. It seems everything actually happens there, every final decision made. So whatever the electoral system, the Filipino participants will always a find way to circumvent the formal system. It’s in the culture.
July 1, 2009 at 10:54 pm
I agree.
July 1, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Chino,
“It’s in the cilture.”
I don’t think this kind of attitude is unique to this culture. I’ve seen it throughout Asia and South America…and much of Europe. Even in the law-abiding US once can find this.
But yet they can have, for the most part, reliable, credible elections.
Perhaps the obstacle has been merely habit…and thus will power to kick the habit is required. But, if the problem is embedded in the deep fabric of culture, it may have to be accepted as an irreversible blot.
I prefer to think the problems are just bad habits (which can be discarded after some pain).
July 2, 2009 at 12:42 am
I agree that they’re bad habits. Sometimes, though, bad habits become an intrinsic part of culture. In that case, the people will have to go a long way to gouge out the bad habits. It seems that way to me here.
July 2, 2009 at 1:17 am
There was once an article or column that appeared years ago about the Filipino culture as being “flawed”. Pakicheck na lang sa Internet.
My definition of culture is basically a system of beliefs that determine how we do or see things. For example, when we’re the new guy at the office, we ask ourselves: “Ano ba ang kultura dito?” So, I guess, habits all under culture. I suppose sociologists can give a better explanation.
A reporter friend of mine once went on a trip to Shanghai and she noticed how clean the streets were. As an experiment, she tossed a spent cigarette after having a smoke. She waited and later a well-dressed Chinese woman, the kind that you see at Makati, saw the cigarette butt, looked for a trash can and disposed of it.
My friend went up to her and asked why she did that. The woman said: “If our city is dirty, who’s going to visit?” That blew me away.
Here’s one thing that I notice a lot: we often hear Filipinos saying we love our country. But why is our sense of history poor? Look at the state of our historical monuments and shrines.
With that, I share with you a quote from Jose Rizal: “Ang hindi marunong lumingon sa pinangalingan ay hindi makakarating sa paroroonan.” Frightening thought, isn’t it?
Kaya malaking bagay ang contribution ng educacion sa pag-unlad ng cultura. That’s why public education is a key area in my political reform advocacy. Please see my blog na lang.
“Without education and freedom, which are the soil and the sun of man, no reform is possible, no measure can yield the desired result.” – Jose Rizal, “The Indolence of the Filipinos”
July 2, 2009 at 1:29 am
Sorry for being makulit. I’d just like to add something.
I recommend Stanley Karnow’s book, “In Our Image: America’s Empire in the Philippines”. It’s a great read on the history of US-Philippine relations. Hindi siya boring because it reads like a novel.
Karnow, an American journalist, says in the book that democracy in the Philippines is shallow even after 50 years of US colonial rule because of the Filipino culture. Our political system is feudal at best.
July 2, 2009 at 3:05 am
Norman:
I agree. As I wrote in a previous blog on Philippine political culture ,
Using the Civic Culture Theory as a frame of reference, based on the description of each type of political culture, in my opinion the Philippines’ political culture – is that of a SUBJECT (in a feudal society).
- FILIPINOS “are aware of central government, and are heavily subjected to its decisions with little scope for dissent. The individual is aware of politics, its actors and institutions. It is affectively oriented towards politics, yet he is on the “downward flow” side of the politics. In general congruent with a centralized authoritarian structure.”
July 2, 2009 at 11:14 am
The specific “bad habit” I was referring to was the one Norman noted —
“I believe that most of the things that really influence events outside of the formal meetings. When they take coffee, play golf, drink at a bar, etc., instead of in the meeting or session halls. It seems everything actually happens there, every final decision made.”
Which led to his conclusion —
“So whatever the electoral system, the Filipino participants will always a find way to circumvent the formal system. It’s in the culture.”
———-
My point is that other cultures — especially in Asia — have the same inbred tendency to deal with issues in an informal way…yet they have the ability to have credible elections.
I am seperating the two notions (culture of informal person-person solutions and credible elections) and de-linking them. There doesn’t seem to be a causal link.
July 2, 2009 at 10:17 am
Norman made exhaustive ‘tiny little narratives’that purport to show how democracy in this country works.
In each and all these personal experiences of his, he equates them with the brand of American democracy that he finds more ideal than our local version.
Ergo, he concludes from these personal experiences in tiny little narratives that ours is not fully functioning democracy.
Every law promotes social justice. Please don’t find a doctor, ally, or friend in every law being implemented. It goes beyond personal justice.
The democracy in RP should not be the type Norman is hostile with or finds antagonism with. First, this is not America and you’re intellectual is something you can keep to yourself.
July 2, 2009 at 10:32 am
Norman and Primer, I think it already goes without saying that the Philippines’ style of democracy is neither perfect nor ideal. I think we’ve all come down to that conclusion several times over the past decade that Arroyo has been president. We can even count back longer, I suppose.
It has been blogged and realized over and over again.
The funniest and most satirical example of this (and my favorite post so far) is Arbet’s post here on Filipino Voices: “For an Absolute, Hereditary Monarchy”
I’m glad more and more people come to realize this.
There are two important questions I think we fail to ask:
1) What if this is what our people want?
2) If you, me, and most readers of Filipino Voices don’t want it and we think this is wrong, how do we go about to change the dynamic?
I’ve mentioned it in my blog post:
let me paraphrase myself:
Taking the Philippines from the existing closed and elitist configuration that exist today, how do we make it open, free and engaging for people to participate in? To make our society truly free, and engaging is disruptive. This, most importantly, is a significant cog among many to get this country moving in the right direction. And then maybe, we can have a country that is liberal in what it receives, and conservative in what it says.
July 2, 2009 at 11:46 am
you can consider this approach/methodology provided in this presentation – http://www.adb.org/Documents/Events/2009/ADB-DMC-Dialogue/RVillaluna-presentation.pdf
while the presentation deals on sanitation, the methods in change management are tried and tested – just boils down to someone actually getting it done.
July 2, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Cocoy,
The answer to your HOW question on “people’s participation” can be simple. People in large part consume their time during the day, for example-
The youth are in colleges,universities, internet cafes, and other local groups. The adults are in church on Sundays, at workplace and some maybe on the streets.
Applying the concept of marketing and advertising on “EDUCATION to participate “, the target locations are quite obvious. Maybe administration should think of “Education to Participate” as a service/product that needs branding and awareness.
A leader with vision will address the issue and will not abandon the issue. When one assume a position to serve the public, he/she is expected to perform his/her legal and contractual duty between our Constitution and the people. Non-performance is a breach of his relationship and duty.
Why is it hard for them to do the right thing? In my opinion, they are lacking the skills of acting locally and thinking globally.
It’s too backward.. i really feel sorry to all juan de la cruzes. :)
July 2, 2009 at 12:13 pm
In addition, we must not blame juan de la cruzes for selling their votes, politicians in our country simply knew uncomplicated issues to win, buy the votes and enhance the result. are they true leaders? NO…They are pseudo leaders who only know FEW more other things -encouraging further corruption and for Juan to ALWAYS sell.
kawawa talaga :)
July 2, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Cocoy,
I don’t know of any democracy which is “perfect or ideal”.
To me, democracy is just the best system we have found (so far) which deals with the reality of an underlying animal instinct. There are bad guys, there are powerful people, there are rich people, there is inequity. There is a drive for an Alpha male/female (or group of them) to rule the rest of the herd.
Democracy gives some limited power to the weaker, poorer, everyday people. That includes the middle class, not just the worst off. The power of the aggragate vote is real.
Nonetheless, money and power still rule the day…even in the US and Europe — the bastions of democracy. And they do here.
The issue — as many in FV have been pointing out — is that the power of the aggregate has been innocently misused (Erap) or purposefully manipulated (bought/forced votes).
—————
So to answer your questions:
1. Yes, democracy and the power of the vote is what everyone wants, flawed as the system may be.
2. To change the dynamics, one must change the incentives and the levers of selection. One can argue that re-rigging the system via a change to federalism or parliamentarianism lends an opportunity to do so.
July 2, 2009 at 6:28 pm
here’s a tried and tested mantra:
A – O – M
Arouse – Organize – Mobilize
Arouse – Generate awareness; Discuss the issue with your target audience; Discuss the pros and cons; Solicit a commitment
Organize – People who commit are then “brought in” into an organization; Or form an organization;
Mobilize – Elicit action from the organized group – volunteering; campaigning; protesting; Repeat the cycle – get the new members engaged
July 2, 2009 at 8:30 pm
don’t blame the people for selling votes huh – ignorance of the law excuses no one – even idiots are sent to institutions.
July 2, 2009 at 11:47 am
yup better to have pinas run like hell
July 2, 2009 at 12:20 pm
thanks bong for the link. thanks too leytenian. i’ve some ideas on what you’ve said. maybe for the next post.
July 2, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Perhaps you missed my point. And since you like to focus on me instead of my argument in this very civilized and intellectual discussion, I’ll elaborate further to ease your feeling of insult.
“I would rather have a country run like hell by Filipinos than a country run like heaven by the Americans, because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved.” — Manuel Quezon
Note what Quezon, who fought for Philippine independence in the very halls of the US Congress, said: Can always be IMPROVED.
If Philippine democracy is functioning properly, why do we have people like Cocoy and others here complaining about our country up to now? I have this joke that I tell from time to time: How do you know that you’re Filipino? When you don’t want to be one.
Gauging from your tirade on me, you must then be content with the way things are. If you’re content, I’m happy for you.
For the record: I’m advocating for a democracy that’s RUN PROPERLY and I long for the day when Philippine democracy is finally RUN PROPERLY. Or, as Quezon said, IMPROVED.
But if you’re happy with Philippine democracy as it is, hey, it’s a relatively free country. Leave the work to us to make it better for you. Wala naman pipilit sa iyo na tumulong. Subalit kung hindi ka tutulong, maaari lang at huwag ka maging sagabal.
Enough of Rizal? Wow, you just insulted the sacrifice made by the guy. I was only sharing his wisdom for people to appreciate how relevant he is.
“If the Filipino cannot truly grasp his own past, he may not value his present nor ascertain his future,” writer and educator Maria Soledad Lacson-Locsin (1907-1995) wrote in the introduction of her 1996 English translation of Rizal’s “Noli Me Tangere”.
Filipinos’ poor sense of history or lack of it, short memories and attention span are among the very causes of our problems. Kaya nga may term tayo na “ningas cogon”. We’re that good at it.
Dahil sa maliit na kaalaman sa ating kasaysayan, paulit ulit na lang ginagawa ang mga pagkakamali ng mga nauna sa atin. If we make a mistake the first time, it’s all right. Make the same mistake twice, it’s stupid. Make the same mistake over and over again, it’s already criminal.
“Farewell, my adored land, region of the sun caressed,
“Pearl of the orient sea, our Eden lost,
“With gladness I give you my life, sad and repressed;
“And were it more brilliant, more fresh and at its best,
“I would still give it to you for your welfare at most.”
– Jose Rizal, Mi Ultimo Adios
Just imagine what was going through that man’s head while writing that on the last night of his life. Let’s all ask ourselves: do we Filipinos have the guts to “ang mamatay ng dahil sa ‘yo”? Conrado de Quiros recently wondered in his column if we Filipinos are actually afraid to live for our “lupang hinirang”.
What is the Tagalog word — not Filipino, mind you — for “history”? Kasaysayan. The root word of “kasaysayan”? Saysay. And what does “saysay” mean? Relevance.
“I die without seeing the dawn brighten over my native land! You, who have it to see, welcome it — and forget not those who have fallen during the night!” – Jose Rizal, “Noli Me Tangere”
No need to thank them for their sacrifices. Ang hiling lang ay huwag sila malimutan man lang. And after more than 100 years of Philippine independence, what do you come up with? Enough of Rizal? I find that very insulting to the memory of Rizal and other founders of our Pilipinas.
I’m not insulting you, ha? I’m making this clear dahil baka mapikon ka. Mabilis pa naman mapikon ang Pilipino, parang batang maliit, can’t stay focused in a civil, intellectual discussion without his emotions overtaking him.
Just look at our presidential candidates, calling each other names instead of arguing intelligently and respectfully on issues. Hind ba iyan ang inaangal ni Cocoy in this blog discussion in the first place?
If you don’t believe me that Filipinos are generally pikon, try arguing with a cop. I once did and he was ready to arrest me for the crime of impertinence. Viva democracia Filipina!
July 2, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Clarence Henderson’s seminal piece Onion Skins, Quick Judgments, Damaged Culture? expounds in detail some observations on the renowned onion-skinnedness (being pikon) of Pinoys. Check it out. ;)
July 2, 2009 at 2:49 pm
@benigno
Thank you. That’s the one I was referring to in an earlier comment.
July 2, 2009 at 10:22 am
the word rumblings, musings, or even arrogance can come with the word intellectual, as found in the last sentence of my comment.
Enough of Rizal.
July 2, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Rizal says, enough with Primer :lol:
July 2, 2009 at 12:40 pm
I’ll second the motion on this. Sloganeering does not deliver results. Change needs to be underpinned by a framework bourne out of systemic thinking. In order to change you need to be clear on two things:
:D What you are changing from;
and;
:D What you are changing to.
You need a framework for understanding the As Is and a framework for understanding the To Be.
There is a method to the madness of change, and BongV already wrote a brilliant article about it here.
You’ll probably get a boot up you arse if you come up to your boss to propose a process change by waving a placcard with the words “No to process inefficiency!” in his face.
In the same way, the same kind of mid-1980’s thinking simply does not cut it any longer. There are now institutions, processes, and governance frameworks in place (flawed as they may be) that we can work with.
A sign of maturity is a wherewithal and discipline to run the proper course instead of throwing a tantrum everytime “change” is seen to be needed.
July 2, 2009 at 1:07 pm
If the whole set up were running right, what you envision above Cocoy is actually possible without really changing much.
The whole reason why the exercise of participation seems to be so chaotic and disruptive is because there is no real engagement between the electorate and their representatives.
Participation should follow a kind of hierarchical upward cascade of engagement. Voters should routinely engage in open evaluation, discussion, and dialogue with their representatives, and then said representatives then take all that onboard in the evaluation, discussion, and dialogue that they themselves engage in with their peers in the Legislature.
What is happening instead is that there is a dynamic amongst the constituents that does not engage with their representatives outside of elections. At the same time, because representatives do not engage their constituents in between elections, they form their own dynamic amongst themselves in Congress.
Both dynamics run parallel — the ocho-ocho fiestas of constituents, and the closed-loop political maneuverings within Congress — but do not intersect in any meaningful way outside of campaign/election periods. Add to that the low-thinking-applied way we regard elections whenever they do occur and you get an entire society that so missed the whole point of “democracy” since the word came into vogue.
July 2, 2009 at 8:11 pm
This is a great thread.
Joe