The main choices in the 2016 Philippine presidential election are clear
cut. They are either more-of-the-same, entrenched political establishment types
or they are the new, fresh starters on the presidential aspirant block who indignantly
arch their brows at traditional politics and politicians, but naively or
craftily promise the moon to disillusioned voters from an ivory tower.
Davao City mayor Rodrigo Duterte is
one such contender for the top national office. As a provocateur and
contrarian, he illustrates the collision between traditional politics and the populist,
anti-establishment political narrative. However, Duterte’s opposing vision has
offered little beyond the most cursory and reductionist assumptions and
prescriptions for the country.
Throughout modern political history, individuals aiming for national
office have spoken reverently of their collective themes and platforms. In his
capacity as a candidate, Duterte has spoken reverently of his own views but in
such a style and tone that it reflects his conviction that he is subject to no
one outside of himself. Duterte has brought forth his understanding of the
pressing issues that beset the Philippines with all the vanity and self-certitude
he can muster.
Duterte’s braggadocio about what he
would do as president has shown that he has taken little time to delve deeply
into the major issues confronting the Philippines. For example, he has treated
the democracy vs. discipline debate as an easily resolved dilemma. Having no
better testimony than his uncompromising corpus of work as Davao mayor, Duterte
has suggested that he would slow the democratic process down because of the
chaos and disorder he believes it leads to. Indeed, he has stated that he is
ready and willing to abolish the Philippine congress if his proposed reforms are
not passed.
Duterte’s political mind is shared
with authoritarians the world over: turmoil generally arises from giving people
too much freedom so the authoritarian thinking goes. Over the centuries, every
authoritarian worth his or her salt has intrinsically ascribed to this notion. As
a subscriber to this view, Duterte has the perfect makings of a dictator in the
wings. He will brook little dissent from any corner once in power.
Filipino voters seek a leader who can
apprehend their fears, feelings, needs, and expectations as they have grown
weary of a political establishment that pays lip service to their right to live
and prosper as decent human beings. The 2016 election is going to mean everything
to Filipinos as they look for a candidate from an alternate socio-political universe
rather than from the old school what with its solid array of craven,
duplicitous, and ineffectual leaders.
But Filipino voters should be careful of what they wish for they are as mentally
and emotionally vulnerable as they have ever been in a presidential election
season. Instead of deliberating with their minds, too many Filipinos are impulsively
listening to their hearts as they search for the leader that has the tidiest prescriptions
for the most complicated of the nation’s problems. Politicking on the tailwind
of a populist wave, Rodrigo Duterte appeals to this susceptible mass audience as
he leads it on a crusade to bring law and order to the nation.
As his campaign gathers speed,
Duterte’s aptitude for making quixotic pledges becomes all too plain to see and
hear. He tells Filipinos that he would utilize both the armed forces and the
police to “wipe out” (i.e. kill) all criminals as if that could be accomplished
without violating any human rights. Cleaning up crime and corruption is always
commendable. But if there is any truth to the accusations of human rights
violations during his stint as Davao mayor, it would portend a path towards
authoritarian rule for Duterte if he were to become president.
Duterte has gone on to blithely promise that he will end traffic in the
overcrowded Metro Manila area, eliminate corruption in just a few months time,
and make vague statements about improving the economy. Far from being
realistic, Duterte’s promises are more significant for their lack of
concreteness than for their viability. Duterte comparisons have been made with
another smug, narcissistic, and boastful nonconformist presidential candidate
in the United States, Donald Trump. For both, the devil is truly in the details
as they avoid revealing any in their promises.
Opportunistic politicians like Rodrigo
Duterte and Jejomar Binay are commanding voters’ attention by clarifying,
rationalizing, and reprising their themes and positions with strong doses of
sophistry and misdirection. It is what these conniving politicians do best----blow
smoke up their constituents’ asses and pull excrement out of their own.
Rodrigo Duterte, both as a public servant and as a presidential
candidate, is more illusion than reality. No more is this obvious than in the misguided
sentiment he has generated among his staunchest supporters. To them, Duterte is
the hailed individual, the familiar male protagonist who has found the sweet
spots in their socio-political consciousness and left a delusionary trail of gold
for them to follow.
In voting for a new president,
Filipinos should pursue their passion for change but temper it with common
sense and the dictates of reason. What should count as a wise decision for
president is an individual possessing the steady disposition, perspicacity,
inner strength, compassion, and patience required of any democratic leader.
Taking a frantic leap of faith with a candidate like Duterte does away with all
those virtues and instead invites further enmity, inequality, marginalization,
and oppression.
ALLEN GABORRO
A great piece of work better written in Filipino based Tagalog to be understood by the great majority of Filipinos.
ReplyDeleteIt is a tragedy that it us written in a language not comprehended by the very people it seeks to awaken.