Yesterday I attended a talk given by Prof. Randy David in the University of Asia and the Pacific. He addressed university students with his “Message of Modern Politics: A situationer on Philippine current politics.” Let me take this opportunity to echo salient points of his talk.
First Prof. David said he was not endorsing anyone. He structured his talk around four major themes – ‘Quest for political stability’, ‘the Philippine experience’, ‘The Arroyo government’ and ‘Possible scenarios in 2010.’
I found the first part most instructive. His training as a sociologist requires him to always paint a broad historical picture, allowing listeners to situate themselves in the current situation as part of the national context. The second part outlines some historical details relevant to the present. The third part argues GMA has painted herself in a corner where her options have become restricted. And the last attempts to forecast what might happen this year.
Quest for political stability
David observes that Filipinos are “sick and tired” of politics. In other societies, people are not overburdened with politics. And normally citizens think only about it during elections. The fact the politics consumes much of our national imaginary has both good and bad effects, he says. It is good in that citizens are kept informed. It is bad in that the constant politicking leaves little room to do much of anything else. It is time spent away from thinking about ways to improve education and health, growing businesses and the arts.
He says in the region the Philippines has had the longest experience with elections and yet we cannot seem to get it right. Elections are a good way of making the transition from a ‘traditional’ to a ‘modern’ society.
Here he gives quick yet unerring definitions of these broad concepts. A ‘traditional’ society is one of hierarchies. One might also call them ‘feudal’, ties and associations based on families. He also calls this society ‘limited-access’ in that only certain people enjoy monopolies of power and influence. A ‘modern’ society is ‘open-access’ and allows associations not based on familial or personal ties but through functions. They are ‘functionally differentiated’, allowing for clear divisions between politics and business, politics and religion, politics and other public realms. One might argue that a modern society is also more democratic.
David then makes an astonishing claim, one that many of us will probably instantly recognize but which we have not yet articulated, most of all to ourselves. I know I was struck by it. David claims we cannot seem to make that transition from being a ‘traditional’ (i.e. hierarchical, monopolistic) society to a ‘modern’ (i.e. truly democratic) society. We are stuck somewhere in the middle, exhibiting characteristics of either model. And here is where David makes a crucial point. He asks, why is it important to modernize?
He says it is important because “many young people are already leaving in disgust.” He means disgust with the status quo. Now more than ever, young Filipinos cannot see themselves in this particular context. He says it is now possible for Filipinos to pursue personal development and growth independent of their nation’s development and growth. This argument hit close to home. I have articulated before how I felt as though I were a cultural minority, believing in certain ideals and principles divorced from the reality here.
To address political stability, David defines ‘governance’ as the ability to create “collectively-binding decisions”, that is, decisions that will apply to all irrespective of identity and position. He names public debt as a collectively-binding issue. All of us incur public debt whether we like it or not.
He asks, how does government achieve legitimacy so its collectively-binding decisions are accepted? This can only be achieved through a democratic exercise free of coercion. He asks, and this one made me cringe I hadn’t realized it, “Can you imagine if we settle political constestation like the Ampatuans?” CRINGE. Political contest then will devolve to who has more guns, goons and gold to finance them. All matter of rhetoric, appeals to the public good etc. etc. will take a backseat. In such a scenario, how do people with no guns, goons nor gold make the people who do accountable?
Here David makes another important point. He says the governments legitimacy and authority should not emanate from its coercive power, that is, the ability to force people to submit. Legitimacy and authority should be consensual. The LESS there is a need to force people to abide by collectively-binding decisions, the MORE legitimacy and authority it has. The two elements – legitimacy/authority and coercion are inversely proportionate. In simple language, a government that enjoys the approval and support of the governed does not need to use FORCE.
Here David uses a statistic to drive home a point. The Philippines has the largest private security force in the world – these are the blue guards we see in every building in the country. HALF A MILLION. Almost thrice the size of the AFP’s standing army. We have gotten so used to seeing security guards toting guns, we have become immune. It is not like so in other societies, says David. And yes, I am reminded of my stay in Australia, where it took me 3 months to finally spot a police car. David also deplores the presence of security in the UP campus nowadays. He recounts how it was when he was a young professor, there were no security guards. We ask ourselves then, if visibility of police and quasi-police forces is an indication, then it must mean our current government does not enjoy legitimacy and authority?
Philippine experience
David begins his broad strokes with the declaration of Martial Law in 1972. At that time, many of our neighbours in this region were run by authoritarian governments. David argues that Marcos styled himself as a ruler in the middle of the dueling left (communists) and right (oligarchs), with the strong state creating a space for sped-up modernization. This was why, he says, so many UP professors at the time joined the Marcos regime, forming the backbone of the technocracy. They had high hopes for the Marcosian experiment.
The experiment ran aground though. My favorite example here is South Korea. That country’s martial law regime, which took over in 1973 and ran almost as long as ours, delivered an economic takeoff that now counts South Korea among the richest countries in the world (i.e. a member of the OECD). The Marcosian experiment, far from strengthening the state-in-the-middle created new oligarchs and new insurgents. Instead of widening public space and access to public institutions, Marcos created pockets of privatized gain.
David also tackles the difficulty of universal suffrage being made a tool for modernization and change. In other societies, economic rights were fulfilled first before political rights. That is, poverty and hunger were solved first before democratization. A citizen cannot take his or her political duties seriously if he or she is economically dependent. And so, until today, we have Filipinos who will gladly sell their votes for money.
Cory Aquino’s transitional regime was saddled with problems. It had the difficult task of solving problems accumulated in 14 years under Marcos. Old trapos came in to fill public offices, those displaced by Marcos again back in the limelight.
David argues that Fidel Ramos’ economic growth in the nineties didn’t trickle down to the poor. The 1997 Asian financial crisis made life even more difficult for the most vulnerable. And so by the 1998 elections, these marginalized sectors were in electoral revolt. And what better ally than Erap Para Sa Mahirap?
David makes a difficult admission – EDSA Dos was a mistake. It was a mistake because Arroyo shouldn’t have been sworn in as president and that Joseph Estrada didn’t resign. He says there should have been snap elections.
The Arroyo government
For the last nine years David says Arroyo has been in a permanent mode of political survival. Her administration has been riddled by political instability – the Garci tapes, the Oakwood mutiny, the ZTE-NBN scandal etc. etc. Her actions hence have been compromised by political survival. David says she employed tools to ensure her stay in power:
1. Firm grip on AFP & PNP through distribution of patronage
2. Firm grip on LGUs through the same
3. Firm grip on judiciary
4. Carrot and stick approach to control the business community
5. Striking deals with political warlords to deliver votes
Here David says if one should review the Garci tapes back in 2004, one would hear the word ‘Maguindanao’ mentioned every so often. And lest we delude ourselves into thinking warlords only exist in Mindanao, let us think of all sorts of organized criminal elements such as jueteng lords operating in Luzon and Visayas.
At the end of her almost decade-long reign, David claims that Gloria Arroyo has broken so many rules it would be impossible for her to give up power. She does not have an exit option like Marcos (who was flown to Hawaii by the US government) and she doesn’t want to do an Erap incarceration. Lastly the professor outlines five scenarios and we will see why charter change is crucial in all of them.
Scenarios in 2010
1. Failure of elections – automation breaks down, chaos and confusion ensues (whether spontaneous or instigated), AFP and PNP step in and we have a transitional government.
2. Elections held but no proclamation – local officials, including members of Congress are sworn in, but no national winners. Winning local candidates vote for charter change and elect House member Gloria Arroyo as prime minister.
3. Wholesale automated cheating – pro-Gloria incumbents are re-elected, changing government, GMA as prime minister.
4. 2010 results are credible, having a legitimate new government. GMA in Congress takes speakership of the lower house, pushes for con-con, shift to parliamentary government, GMA as prime minister.
5. 2010 elections are credible. GMA doesn’t get speakership, is possibly indicted or at least removed from office.
In conclusion, David reminds us of three important points. First, that political stability is important and that elections are important. Second, GMA has been there so long she has privatized and distorted democratic institutions. Lastly, and perhaps the most important note, how can GMA be peacefully prosecuted without a decisive change in government?
These are some of the things we must bear in mind this year, once we troop to the polls. Let us keep our eyes and ears pealed.
Popularity: 1% [?]
The “move on” crowd is reaping the Gloria tsunami.
“…stuck somewhere in the middle, exhibiting characteristics of either model.” – Prof. David
This is the main reason why RP needs to again amend its charter, i.e., “to change from being a ‘traditional’ (i.e. hierarchical, monopolistic) society to a ‘modern’ (i.e. truly democratic) society. ”
In order to ‘modernize,’ the presently powerful must be stopped from ‘gaming’ our system e.g. family dynasties in Congress, non-genuine land reform, etc.
I dunno how to go about a fair, meaningful Charter Change, but the other means of changing the system could be bloody.
Unless, the present powerful also ‘games’ the Charter Change to perpetuate their interests.
In order to prevent this, a system could be devised such that an independent institution e.g. Social Weather Stations (?) cull, say 10,000 names, from its data base with adequate gender, age, occupational, sectoral, regional, industry, etc. distribution/diversification. Some allowance could be made for the ethnic minorities, et.
Then the Invincible 300(like in the movie from the same title) could be chosen, what do you know, by lottery, to draft the new charter.
Voila! You have an independent Constitutional commission until the Presently Powerful finds ways to get to them, ala The Juror.
Preciousss!
puwede rin ipa-sub-contract the writing of versions 1-thru-4 of the draft constitution. Send the work to East West Center, Hawaii, or to Walden Bello contacts at Mahidol University, Bangkok.
Any intellectual recital of the Marcos regime is certainly played up like a broken record.
That is where David’s critique may have been rather ‘ideologically’ blurred by his personal bias of Marcos.
What Randy should have undertaken to explain is why he suddenly disappeared from the political hemisphere.
Ms. Arroyo has the same gahi ulo claim to unending power that can also be seen in local Barangays, where the Captain is locked in for life, or in congressional and mayoral seats where family members follow toe to heel. Amputuan is another example. It is an irrational perspective on public service, 180 degrees of backward, an irrationality of ego akin to that held by Stalin or Hitler. It is a national condition, though, not just a one-off case.
Until the nation has a decent court system, and an honorable police and military force, there will be no change, for there is no road for an honest civic man or woman to take to carve out a little justice.
Joe
joe,
Not being a pure blooded Filipino. You sure know the damn system well.
Now, that is a true Filipino politics style.
Mario,
To be truthful, it is hard for me to grasp the concept that public positions are considered private property by those holding the positions. Being elected to public position is a privilege, not a right, eh? Here it is very different. Has anyone done studies of the Filipino Ego? What’d they find out?
Joe
joe,
We Filipinos have to many egos to look at. For one thing, we do have over 170 languages, and these common people have plenty to argue about, whos the brightest of them all. You get the idea.
Why not simply put “democratic instruction” as part of the public schools curricula. Past governments, including this one, didn’t seem to think Filipinos need to be taught democracy, as if genetics would simply kick in, or word of mouth would do its usual contribution. Perhaps they believe it’s the responsibility of media to educate. Every new generation should be educated.
What action-steps did Randy David recommend?
Let’s return to this:
A. When? If “today”, the impeachment process has always been there. First, impeach, and once executive-cloak removed, then prosecute.
If after July-2010, the Constitution does not prevent court-action against a sitting congressman or senator or even supreme court justice.
B. Is the question “…GMA be peacefully prosecuted” or is the
question “…GMA be found guilty and sent to jail”?
C. I disagree with suggestions “..that GMA cannot be sent to jail without a decisive change in government” but my disagreement with Randy David is not material.
What is Randy David’s proposal to bring about the decisive changes?
Choices include “…a decisive change in government that is verifiably-accepted by at least 47% of the voters” as well as “… changes made to happen by a cabal of 70-men and 2-women using the powers of the PNP and AFP”?
What are the decisive changes that Randy David asks for? Are they different from what NoyNoy and Mar Roxas are working towards?
And it looks like Randy David has already pinpointed where the bottleneck is.
If this is Cultural — You already raised the image about the cream of Pilipinas middle-class (“…. UP professors at the time joined the Marcos regime, forming the backbone of the technocracy…”) getting nowhere in contrast to what happened in South Korea. — then a different educational system may provide the solution. [Genetic engineering is still a very unstable science, so maybe Pinas can do a Statue of Liberty -- allow more South Koreans, Chinese, Iraqis refugees, Nepalese, Urghurs, Syrian and other Arab entrepreneurs, Hindus, Sikhs, French, Lebanese and Canadians to enter and become citizens of Pilipinas.]
And again, your notes from Randy’s presentation pings on a solution:
It is good in that citizens are kept informed. It is bad in that the constant politicking leaves little room to do much of anything else. It is time spent away from thinking about ways to improve education and health, growing businesses and the arts.
A solution is obvious — when doing too much bad and too little good, then don’t. Fight the odious and be too busy to fail (JoeAm’s words). Think about and go act on ways to improve. I suppose that is why a few Pinoys-in-Pinas have taken flight to jobs in Abu Dhabi or Canada, others persist in NGO work in the Visayas or in Payatas and others chose “moving on” to focus on their Human Resources, accounting or lawyering jobs.
Even Randy David had his action-plan so that post-June2010, that GMA is denied any active role in Philippine governance, remember?
The prosecution of GMA after her term is the least of her worrries. The Filipino people have short term memory. Like the Marcoses who were back in power and riding the crest of adulation from the Pinoy electorate, GMA could be as fortunate as the Marcoses. With her millions stuck somewhere and with her knack how to distribute them to the right power-wielders, she could yet buy her own measure of tranquility.
Pinoys are stuck-up in a rigodon of brigand masquerading as public servants every election time. My advice: Do not pin your hope on automated election. Even if the result is clean, those in contentions are not.
Good points, UP n. Except that your halfslip is showing. You’re too eagerly defensive of the the president. Which is not to say it’s bad.
In my opinion, GMA should be talsik-diyan because of her policies about gun-ownership by Filipinos. Too restrictive!!
Think these statistics: Gun ownership in Pilipinas per hundred citizens is 5. Five per hundred.
The “good countries”, the prosperous countries???
26.3 – Saudi Arabia. 15.5 – Australia. 16.0 – Thailand.
12.1 – Italy. 11.0 – Spain. 31.5 – Canada.
32.0 – France. 46.0 – Switzerland.
Up n grad,
You forgot about us Americans. Where our President Obama, wants to disarm all the abiding citizens with our Second Amendments Rights. That’s O.K., just about over 90% of the Americans owns guns. This is the last thing Obama don’t want to happen, to have another Civil Revolution to occur. And I’ll be there up front to fight for my Freedom. God, how I love this Country.
Filipinos has short memories becuase we filipinos keep telling thet to ourselves.
If teh peopel wantt o prsecute arroyo and randy david wants to that to. He can easily gather peopel like him to prosecute arroyo. But as UPn Said. Psecute arroyo and convict her are two different thing.
We’re a First Wave society attempting really hard to transition into a Second Wave society.
We live Politics. We think about it: 7 days a week, 24 hours a day,
365 days a year. We always talk about it. Politics is in our subconcious minds. The trouble is: we have Politics of Destruction.
Once a party wins. It is the duty of the opposition to dig garbage.
And hound those sitting in power. Out of their positions. It is always the OUTS versus the INS. It is a vicious cycle. Ever since we have elections. God save us, from this political madness.
I don’t know who else writes like that, but this sentence is flaky.
Not because of GMA…. the presence of security guards on UP Diliman campus is directly from incidents from jologs outside campus. Also KFR. The 45%-approval (or maybe it is 73% disapproval) by Diliman students for GMA performance has nothing to do with UP administration’s decision for campus security guard presence.
And then, there is police science. This science would put more policemen per hundred-thousand-population as a good thing, not a bad thing. Karl Garcia would have a better insight on Pilipinas PNP staffing, but if Randy wants to say GMA talsik diyan, then say talsik diyan because she continues to refuse to raise VAT to provide more funds to Pinas National Police. To get closer to a Denmark or Australia standard, Pinas has to double its police force.
2.2 or 2.5 or 2.7 or 2.9 — that is the ratio : number of internal police per hundred-thou population for Denmark, Switzerland, Spain, Malaysia, Australia, Singapore. Cuba, four per hundred-thou. Pinas is hovering at 1 per hundred-thou, seriously understaffed.
[PS: I haven't read of any presidentiable proposing to increase the size of Pinas police force.]
UP n,
I think you have to add in the army numbers here; they have no major international wars to fight, so they act as supplementary police. And the security guards take up some of the load. And the tanods. There is no lack of people about with guns and, by God, a willingness to use them. We, the unarmed, are in the minority, I think . . .
I think it is better to invest in things other than police . . .
Joe
JoeAm: This is what I thought I gathered from what sparks wrote about what she thought she heard from Randy’s speech.
1. In simple language, a government that enjoys the approval and support of the governed does not need to use FORCE.
2. the number of men-in-uniform is an indication of a government that uses force. When you see too many men in uniform, that should tell you that a government does not enjoy the approval and support of the governed. You don’t even need me to mention garci/Garci GMA talsik diyan Le Cirque NTN/broadband, but I can tell you that the current administration does not enjoy the approval and support of the governed because if it did, then Pilipinas will not have the number of men in uniform that Pilipinas has. Like security guards now on UP Diliman campus. Why when I was a young whippersnapper college student back in the days when it was Marcos who was president, but I digress! But these security guards now on campus should make you think about coercive GMA government.
Now everyone can look at other countries with legitimate governments — Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Denmark, Belgium, Singapore. They don’t have the number of policemen that GMA has hired, do you know that? They don’t have the army soldiers that GMA has. They don’t have the guns on the street that this country does. This Garci-garci government is not legitimate. The size of Pinas police and army is too big!! Coercive government.
A student listening to Randy David would clap their hand and say “…yeah, that’s why he’s the PhD and his message is correct”. PNP and AFP soldiers??? Too many of them, uniformed GMA puppet too many of them.
The student will also NOT do research because “… you, you college student you! you’re supposed to learn and absorb, you don’t need to even think to question when an older generation Walden Bello, PhD or Arroyo, PhD, talk to you. Nope, don’t question, college students are there to just learn and absorb and believe.”
———————
Whatever you think about “coercive government Pilipinas”, you have to maybe think different about Pilipinas police-guarding-the-ballot or Army-ranger-headed-to-Basilan. Someone should take at least an hour to do internet-google about police-per-capita or soldiers-per-capita or guns-per-capita for Pilipinas, Australia, Switzerland, Malaysia, Denmark, Singapore.
Do your research. Or ask Karl Garcia, he (to me) is better expert on PNP/AFP than Randy PhD. Do your research. You’ll be surprised.
You’ll be surprised that Randy David did not do his research.
UP n,
Thanks for the elaboration. I always wondered why there were so many generals here, when there are not really many foreign wars on the horizon, so the enemy must be within, or perceived to be within, eh?
Randy David is a neo-Nationalist, and so I find his thinking is sometimes a bit scary. Like, he would go back before going forward . . .
Joe
Where in Neptune are you picking up these numbers?
ha!
J
Did Randy David just say …. “there are now security guards on UP Diliman campus, therefore GMA Talsik Diyan! “
tranquil…. that UP n dude is nuts, isn’t he?
And what exactly is GMA approval rating among UP Diliman students? Does anyone know? Are UP Diliman students being coerced by GMA? Can you tell based on the presence of those security guards on campus?
“
”
The key word is “and yet we cannot seem to get it right.”
This is a good example of Filipino politiking. Is how to eliminate your opponent, quickly and painlessly. Let me take a step back; with gruesome and brutally effect. So, is this ‘traditional’ or ‘modern’ ways for our Trapos in this society of ours. I don’t get it. Must be the ‘TRADITIONAL’ ways to campaign, the Filipino ways. I wonder how it feels, to be staring, at the other end of the barrel?
These are good pointers. In other words, listen, and keep a watchful eyes for the perpetrator(s), who wants to steal, or buy your legitimate vote.
Just look at the idiots settling for imagined “integrity” when you can have real “integrity AND performance”.
Where’s the integrity in accepting a salary and not rendering the due service? Sa madaling sabi – empleyadong 15/30 – pumapasok lang para mangolekta ng sweldo! Ayan idolo ng mga naglilipanang tamad, engot, at jolog!
Puro pasaway. lol.
If any of the first four scenarios laid out by Prof. David happen I can’t think of any other way to fight back. Mass action may no longer appeal to Filipinos, but if that is the only way to fight back I will have no hesitation in joining an Iran-style protests. I am even toying with the idea of suicide bombing. Why not? Who will not die anyway? Better to die for a good cause, than be oppressed for life. He .. he.
to macapili: No need to bring Middle East style hyper-activity into Pilipinas, not necessary. Very easy to get in the way a GMA premiership. Be sure that representatives are of the Randy David-point of view and interests.
This raises the question — will Tarlac, Camarines Sur, Cebu, Makati, Laguna, Ilocos Sur, Albay and other places vote like Randy David wants them to vote?
To UP n grad: During the American regime, the election of local officials and members of the Philippine assembly had a very stringent requirement – a voter must be able to read and write, owns a property of a certain value and paid a tax of a certain amount. So, we had good assemblymen and officials. Today, every Juan and Pedro and those who Magsaysay lovingly called the “common tao” dominate the elections. In our district, for example, a fairly exclusive one, only 25% voted in the last election, compared to 95% in the adjoining depressed area. This obviously explains why we have the quality of congressmen and senators in our congress.
macapili,
Interesting point. Supposedly democracy requires an educated public, to discern when they are being bamboozled or to sort out complex issues. I think the US is getting dumbed down by reality shows and sound-bite popular “news” aimed at garnering ratings. Therefore it’s democracy resembles a back alley cat fight. The Philippines is more like union elections, or mafia elections; you do what ‘da local boss say.
Joe
If only those among the masa with read-write are allowed to vote, then will the Tarlac, Camarines Sur, Cebu, Makati, Laguna, Ilocos Sur and Albay votes be what Randy David wishes for?
This is a return to that “elitists-hate-Erap” issue. EDSA-Dos — Erap-para-sa-mahirap ousted by the elitists of metro-NCR.
erap was ousted by the evil, ehe, este, civil society of metro manila :), reason why we’re in hell now.
lets vote for villar :)
If the masa are not allowed to vote, the remaining electorates will look for a doctorate/masteral-GMA/Marcos type president so we remain always in hell.
Will you?
No. A masteral or a doctorate is no guarantee of good governance that will take us out of this rut we’re in. If Marcos or GMA be any indication, or the others that have been up there before them, we should be wary of such. That is not to say that good academic education is the problem, no, not at all. It’s mainly the personality and character of the person of course. But Philippine political history and statistics should have taught us a good lesson already.
I’m with the masa, you see :).
Obviously, you are not illiterate and perhaps have a property and paid taxes. I remember when Magsaysay ran for the presidency, my mother had to laboriously teach our maid to write “Recto”, because the Batanguenos needed all the votes they could muster in a town in Zambales where my parents earned their living by running a store in the public market. I am not suggesting that illiteracy, lack of property or non-payment of taxes should be a ground for disenfranchisement, because that would lead to what the leftists call “democratic centralism.” I am only trying to show the relation between the quality of electors and the elected.
I know you, macapili, I have no argument with you. You are a good man. Unlike the ‘elitists’ who think undergrads are inferior people than the degree holders. Well, UP n is a good man too, I’m his admirer (eherm). He’s ‘elite’ so not an ‘elitist’. Just can’t help speaking my mind out loud because the masa where my heart belongs has been mentioned in a bad light.
let’s vote for erap :)
lets vote for noynoy :)