The Art of the False Dilemma

A discerning electorate needs to wisen up on the logical fallacy of the false dilemma as the pundits dish out pro and anti spins for their respective candidates.

As defined in the open source reference:

The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix “di” in “dilemma” means “two”. When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.

False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (“If you are not with us, you are against us.”) But the fallacy can arise simply by accidental omission—possibly through a form of wishful thinking or ignorance—rather than by deliberate deception (“I thought we were friends, but all my friends were at my apartment last night and you weren’t there.”)

When two alternatives are presented, they are often, though not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities. This can lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options are typically presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy can be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.

A recent FV article entitled “Whose election frame will dominate?” provides a perfect example of how the author uses the fallacy of the false dilemma. MCB wrote:

Slander cannot destroy an honest man—when the flood recedes the rock is there.—Chinese proverbPulse Asia just released its latest nationwide survey on the top choices for president. Noynoy Aquino is at 44 percent while Manuel Villar, Francis “Chiz” Escudero and Joseph Estrada are at 19, 13 and 11 percent, respectively. That makes the 2009 election a race for second place. But that’s only true if honesty and an unblemished reputation remains the horse to ride. Pulse Asia asked their respondents why they were voting for a particular candidate. The five top reasons cited were: “Hindi kurakot/malinis” (Does not steal/is clean) (21.2 percent); “May nagawa, may magagawa” (Has done a lot/can do a lot) (14 percent); “Para sa mahirap, galing sa mahirap” (Pro-poor/comes from the poor) (12.2 percent); “Tumutulong” (Helps a lot) (12 percent); “Reputasyon ng pamilya” (Family reputation) (4.2 percent). Looking into the components of each of those five reasons will show why the election frame is still up for grabs. The first and fifth reasons belong to Noynoy Aquino, obviously. The second reason,“May nagawa, may magagawa,” belongs to padrino (patron) politicos—Disaster relief (2.7 percent); Other accomplishments (6.1 percent); Nagbigay ng pabahay (Provided housing) (4.9 percent) and one other at 0.4 percent. The third reason, “Para sa mahirap, galing sa mahirap,” is also padrino (patronage) politics—“Matulungin sa mahirap” (Helpful to the poor) (7.8 percent); “Makamahirap/pagtingin sa mahirap” (Pro-poor) (3.7 percent) and “galing sa mahirap” (Came from poverty) (0.7 percent) The fourth reason, “Tumutulong,” is still about padrino—“Tumutulong sa OFW” (Helps overseas Filipino workers) (6.6 percent) and “Matulungin” (Helpful) (5.4 percent). So it seems that the way to defeat Noynoy is to change the election frame from a question of character to a contest of who is the best padrino, regardless of record and reputation. I think the Villar and Estrada camps realize that. That’s why there is a concerted campaign to knock Noynoy off his white horse. Estrada does not attack Noynoy directly but his campaign manager, writing an article in a newspaper closely associated with him, started a rumor that was picked up by the slimiest practitioners of jukebox journalism. As for the ethically challenged Villar, his statement that all candidates were the same was followed with an exposé by one of his loyal lieutenants. Rep. Crispin “Boying” Remulla alleged that Noynoy Aquino got the SCTEx (Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway) rerouted for his family’s benefit. He added that Noynoy’s family overpriced their land. In short, Noynoy was no different from Villar. SCTEx was a road project between Estrada and the Japanese government. It started during Estrada’s term and was completed under the Arroyo administration. Noynoy had no hand in it. The difference between the non-role of Noynoy in SCTEx and Villar’s hand in the cookie jar in C-5 is black and white. The rerouting of C-5 and the overpricing of Villar’s landholdings happened while Villar was chairman of the Senate finance committee. Note that in fairness to Villar, I used “while” instead of “because.” Noynoy neither had the political power nor the gall to do to SCTEx what Villar did to C5. Most important of all, Noynoy, unlike Villar, will not run away from an ethics investigation. He is not afraid to testify under oath. He has nothing to hide, nothing to lie about. The strategy of those lagging behind Noynoy is to run gimmicks and political ads selling themselves as the patron saints of the poor while spreading black lies about Noynoy, his mother and their relatives. The American journalist Jimmy Breslin once described political campaigns as a season of “speeches and slander, of lies and libel, of life without a conscience.” The laggards have oodles of money to finance the sort of propaganda that would do Joseph Goebbels proud. So the question is, what will win the people’s trust and confidence this time around: the politics of honesty and cleanliness, or the politics of patronage and slander?

Why is this a false dilema?

The following statements present the issue as if it were a dichotomy when clearly there is another issue that is not being addressed – “the political platform”.

• So it seems that the way to defeat Noynoy is to change the election frame from a question of character to a contest of who is the best padrino, regardless of record and reputation

• What will win the people’s trust and confidence this time around: the politics of honesty and cleanliness, or the politics of patronage and slander?

Due to the lack of a comprehensive substantiated platform, the pro-Noynoy camp is attempting to downgrade and lower the bar by repositioning the framework as one of personality trait A vs personality trait B. It might appear that this is a valid dilemma because the dichotomy of the personality traits are being discussed. What’s being missed is that this personality trait-centric framework does not address the strategic issues facing the Philippines today.

Make the people think that the Noynoy campaign – is their campaign, “the people’s campaign”, that they are changing the politics, when this is actually a continuation of oligarch rule on the electorate. Play enough Noynoy music triumphalist ads, never mind that it has any substance at all, not even an iota of a platform; play it over and over on the oligarch-owned ABS-CBN media channels; in due time, you will have people believing in something without actually knowing what exactly it is they are believing in. Joseph Goebbels will gladly pin an Iron Cross on the oligarch-backed media campaign of Noynoy. Ensrugin that the framework remains as one of contrasting personality traits removes the pressure on discussing solutions that address economic disparity. This approach is reinforced through reptitive bombardment of vacuous music ads to an oblivious audience.

Personality traits form only one aspect of a candidate’s campaign. The pinoy electorate has been on this road before. Identifying these same personality traits allowed candidates to push emotional buttons and get results – a methodology that would make Pavlov, Thorndike, Skinner, and Goebbels proud.

Philippine Electorates Voting Preferences – Andrew Mungcal’s Thesis

The findings in a 208-page thesis titled “”POLITICAL CHOICE BEHAVIOR IN THE 1998 PHILIPPINE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: AN INTERPRETATION OF SWS SURVEY DATA” submitted by Andrew Lou L. Mungcal as requirement for getting his MA in Political Science from the ADMU show that not much has changed on how the Pinoy electorate evaluates candidates.

The research study shows that a correlation exists between the independent variables such as language, region, socio-economic class, religion, age and survey ratings except sex, and the dependent variable such as a voter’s political choice behavior.

Specifically, Andrew Mungcal’s study yielded these findings:

1. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their language with that candidate’s language.
2. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can connect their language with that candidate’s language as closely related.
3. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their region with that candidate’s region.
4. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their socio-economic class with a candidate who represents or symbolizes their causes and class interests.
5. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can connect their socio-economic class with the endorsement of their class leaders of a candidate.
6. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their socio-economic class with that candidate’s education or profession.
7. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can connect their religion with the endorsement of their religious leaders of a candidate.
8. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can connect their religion with that candidate’s political party (conative image).
9. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify the idealism of their age with that candidate’s idealism.
10. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their issues with that candidate’s platforms (cognitive image).
11. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their issues with that candidate’s track record (cognitive image).
12. Voters tend to choose a candidate if they can identify their emotional feelings with that candidate’s popularity or pleasing personality (charisma) [affective image].
13. Voters tend to choose a candidate if that candidate’s rating is leading in opinion polls (bandwagon effect).

The study’s conclusions were very revealing and certainly very relevant to the current political exercise leading to 2010. The conclusions are:

1. The study ascertains that candidate image is a factor that often affects a voter’spolitical choice behavior other than language, region, socio-economic class, religion, and age. Voters probably tend to choose a candidate based on the cognitive, affective and
   conative aspects of candidate image ifthey cannot identify their language, region, socio- economic class, religion, and age with that of the candidates’ socio-demographic profile. This relationship of voters’ emotional association to a candidate’s affective and conative image, and the connection of the voters’ socio-demographic characteristics (language, region, socio-economic class, religion, age) to a candidate’s socio-
   demographic profile, and survey ratings of a candidate are narrow identifications with a candidate.
2. These independent variables, especially the emotional feelings and candidate image, determine a voter’s political choice behavior. However, these factors do not necessarily mean an improved quality of voting, and of election, as well as selection of leaders in the Philippines.
3. The voters would have to be educated in their choice of leaders based on some solid criteria other than affective and cognitive images, language, region, socio-economic class, religion, age, and survey rating considerations. These criteria may include qualifications, and mature discernment of the candidates’ issues, platforms, and track record or performance.

Mungcal then proceeded to provide his recommendations:

These are the specific recommendations to agents of social change in order to educate the voters in their choice of leaders based on some solid criteria other than affective and socio-demographic considerations:

1. 1. Congress and the legislative bodies of Local Government Units (LGUs) should appropriate funds and enact policies and programs for State Colleges and Universities (SCUs), Locally-funded Colleges (LCs) and other public educational institutions that would sponsor seminars and trainings concerning political, economic, and social issues of national and local importance for the electorate. Congress should also frame policies that would review and amend the existing minimum qualifications of a candidate for a public office at the national level in the
      Constitution. Possibly, these minimum qualifications could be tertiary education and managerial experience in public administration or private enterprise.
   2. Political parties should institutionalize the process of selecting and screening their candidates based on qualifications, platforms and track record. They should not rely exclusively on the winnability factor of their candidates.
   3. Public and private educational institutions should include in the General Education curriculum a special course of Voters’ Education to tertiary level students or they should integrate this course in the Humanities and Social Sciences. They should also organize and support voter’s education programs at the tertiary level, through the Academic Affairs Office in coordination with the Student Affairs Office, that would study and discern on the candidacy of national candidates based on national and foreign policy issues, political and economic platforms, educational background, professional experience arid track record. In addition, public and private educational institutions should integrate in their curriculum a special course of Governance and Public Policy to elementary and secondary level students who are beginning to become voters. These would-be voters should be educated in selecting candidates based on qualifications, platforms and track record.
   4. People’s Organizations (Pos), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and other grassroots organizations should sponsor seminars and workshops to the urban poor communities, small farmers and tenants, local fishermen, laborers and Indigenous People’s Communities (IPCs) concerning political, economic and social issues of national and local importance. Although these marginalized sectors should be very clear on how to choose their candidates who understand their needs and problems, nevertheless, they should go beyond their narrow identifications with a candidate. Specifically, POs and NGOs should provide solid criteria for these sectors of society in selecting national leaders based on qualifications, platforms and track record.
   5. National scientific opinion poll institutions should not just describe the ratings of candidates during elections. They should also analyze the candidates’ position concerning political, economic and social issues of national and global importance so that the voters and the general public would have a better discernment of issues that matter in the selection of national leaders.
   6. Broadcast media organizations should sponsor national debates in radio and television shows so that voters would have a glimpse of the candidates’ national priorities and foreign policy issues and platforms. They should also suggest to voters solid criteria for selecting candidates that would sustain political stability, economic growth, social mobility and national pride.
   7. Print media organizations should publish the issues of national and foreign policy concerns of the candidates, their track record, as well as their platforms if they would be elected in public office. They should suggest to voters solid criteria for selecting candidates based on genuine issues, track record and practical platforms. When these social agents of change heed these recommendations, there is no
      assurance, but somehow these measures could significantly help voters make their choice and decision in selecting leaders. Given all these suggestions, these may contribute and clarify reasonable criteria for the voters’ choice of a candidate.

The Strategic View

Beyond the politics of pitting one personality trait against another, the electorate has yet to grasp the underpinning economic structure of the Philippines – beyond the politics of personalities, there lies the poltics of poverty versus prosperity.

It is a no-brainer to figure out who exactly are in the prosperous segment – the oligarchs. And it is quite understandable that these same oligarchs would prefer that positions on solving economic disparity receive as little airtime as possible. Or, to present “solutions” that aren’t really solutions. Take for intstance, the anti-corruption line. This line is the most common denominator that people can understand. What’s being missed is that corruption is a symptom of a social disease – the lack of prosperity – poverty.

Addressing poverty is not just anti-corruption, it also includes systems change that will involve consitutional change, an investor-friendly policy regime, land reform, the environment, education, and health care among others.

Framing the debate as a battle of personality traits does not address the strategic issues facing the Philippines in the 21st century. Not only is it barriotic, it is irresponsible.

Where’s the Chiz?

Retrogressing Education

Consider this pronouncement from Chiz Whiz:

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we should and we propose that the curriculum be restudied. Mr. Speaker, I know that this will generate a lot of debate but I hope that our colleagues will listen for awhile. Sa ngayon, umaabot sa nine to eleven ang subjects ng ating mga estudyante sa elementary at high school. Nakukuba na ang ating mga estudyante sa kakabitbit ng napakaraming libro. Subalit ang tanong ko ho: Ito ba ay angkop pa rin sa pangangailangan ng ating bansa sa ngayon? Ang kanila po bang pinag-aralan ay nagagamit nila sa kanilang buhay sa labas ng paaralan at magagamit kapagka sila ay naghanap ng trabaho?

I can only cite myself as an example, Mr. Speaker, but mula po nung natapos ako nung high school hindi ko pa nagamit ang Calculus, hindi ko pa ho nagamit and Trigonometry, hindi ko pa ho nagamit and Algebra, IYUNG GEOMETRY, SA BILYAR KO LANG NAGAMIT. At iyong mga ibang itinuturo ay marapat sigurong ituro sa kolehiyo kung nais maging inhinyero ng isang bata. Iyong mga ibang itinuturo, marapat sigurong ibigay na lamang nating sa kanila sa kolehiyo o bilang elective pagdating ng high school.

He couldn’t grasp the necessity of mathematics, therefore he’d rather keep math out of the elementary and high school curriculum, during a time when the rest of the world is upgrading its mathematics curriculum. For example, this is what the Londonderry School District of New Hampshire has to say on the importance of math in the curriculum

The Importance of Mathematics

At all levels grades preK-12, the Londonderry School District has placed mathematics as a top priority along with reading. Why mathematics? Mathematics is the foundation for success in a variety of content areas during a child’s educational experience. According to a U.S. Department of Education’s Mathematics Equals Opportunity White Paper – October 1997, the authors concluded the following:

• Students who take a rigorous K-12 mathematics sequence are more likely to go to college than those who do not.
• Students of all income levels who take rigorous math courses in high school are more likely to go to college.
• In the job market, students who have strong mathematics backgrounds are more likely to be employed and earn 38% more per hour than those with insufficient skills in algebra, geometry, measurement, and probability.

Mathematics is crucial not only for success in school, but in being an informed citizen, being productive in one’s chosen career, and in personal fulfillment. In today’s technology driven society, greater demands have been placed on individuals to interpret and use mathematics to make sense of information and complex situations. As a result, the Londonderry School District places the understanding, application of numbers and
operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, data analysis, problem-solving, and reasoning skills as a top priority. During the students’ primary years, our focus is on learning number and operations, basic measurement, and basic understanding of data. As students move into the intermediate and middle school years, a greater emphasis is placed on the practice and reinforcement of basic math facts and operations while at the same time increasing the depth of understanding of skills in algebra and geometry. At the high school level, while our focus remains on fundamental mathematical concepts and skills to prepare all
students to be productive members of society, students encounter new perspectives in algebra and geometry as well as new ways of analyzing data within formal mathematics courses and other high school courses in science, social studies, business, and other electives.

Our high school academic expectations are clear:

• Students will be able to formulate, critically analyze, and solve a variety of problems.
• Students will be able to use various forms of communication to accurately receive, process, and deliver information.

Through their experiences at Londonderry High School, students are expected to have a strong understanding of mathematical computation, concepts and processes, problem-solving, reasoning and analysis while using mathematics to make sense of, and to solve complex problems in a variety of applications.

An Indictment of  Party Politics or Putting the Cart Before the Horse?

As generally defined,

A political party is a political organization that seeks to attain and maintain political power within government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.

Here comes Chiz again,

Una, sino man po ang nagpapaplanong tumakbo bilang pangulo, dapat wala pong partidong kinabibilangan –NPC, LP , NP, Lakas o ano pa man. Ang dapat na partidong kinabibilangan ng sino mang nagpaplanong tumakbo, dapat po Pilipinas. At lahat ng mga kapartido niya, dapat lahat din ng Pilipino.

The statement shows Chiz’ grasp party politics, it shows that:

• Chiz concept of a political party is limited to his experience with parties such as LP, NP, NPC, Lakas-Kampi – trad-pol parties. These are trapo parties, of course there will be horsetrading, what do you expect? He misses the fact that there are other political parties which have ideologically motivated members – for instance, Kapatiran, Bayan Muna, and Akbayan.
• Whoever runs for the presidency is a citizen of the Philippines – in a manner of speaking, the candidate is already a member of the party called Philippines – and his party mates are all the Philippine citizens. Chiz sure knows how to pander to a vacuous crowd!
• However, lets consider the proposition of the Philippines as THE Party, and citizens as Party members – sounds like a one party state like China, Vietnam, Cuba, and North Korea. Are the people cheering Chiz ready for a one party state? Remember, even one party states have factions within the party, which if there were no prohibitions against political parties other than the state party, these factions will evolve into political parties.

Nonpartisan politics would be fine with a highly educated, relatively affluent responsible voters who are not beholden to patrons, who will take the time to discern and vet candidates. It might seems that Chiz was innovative when he floated the idea of nonpartisan elections. If he had done his homework, he would have found that unless there are legal prohibitions against political parties, factions within nonpartisan systems often evolve into political parties.

Dumb and Dumber?

Chiz indictment of party politics because it does not serve him is consistent with his thinking process when he indicted of Calculus, Algebra, and Geometry because he wasn’t able to use it in his profession as a lawyer.

Though Chiz recent policy recommendations provide a glimpse:

• Provide passing grades to the students who weren’t able to come to class due to Ondoy. We know how the teachers reacted to this prescription – they gave Chiz an F.
• Remove math from the elementary and high school curriculum and make it an elective. We also know how the teachers reacted to this prescription – they gave Chiz another F.

The question then is what are these reforms he wants to accomplish? He needs to organize his thoughts and articulate his policy goals and prescriptions into a platform. In doing so, he rises above the demagoguery – or prove that he is one helluva demagogue.

Ondoy: The Chickens Come Home to Roost in Manila

Clean up the trash.

Upgrade the sewage system.

Rationally apply Zones.

Don’t vote bozos into Congress.

This is an I TOLD YOU SO moment.

The Philippines has Urban Planning and each city has a Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) crafted. Coming up with a CDP is an involved process which entail a series of public hearings where the public provides its inputs to the CDP. In areas where the citizenry are uninvolved, the process practically institutionalizes the local elite’s dominance of the domestic market for goods and services. They can direct the development so that if they happen to have properties adjoining the area then there will be an appreciation of the value of the property.

However, the practice of “spot zoning” has rendered lots of CDPs inutile.

Wikipedia defines “Spot Zoning” as

“the application of zoning to a particular area within the jurisdiction of a government. Such a change may have a legitimate use, such as when a community wishes to have more local control of land use. This may occur in a rural county which has no zoning at all, where a village or hamlet may wish to maintain its characteristic feel and historic appeal (often to protect tourism), without adding another layer of local government and taxes by creating a municipality. The county designates the boundaries (often that of an already census-designated place) and maintain regulations through the county commission instead of a separate town council. It may also be invalid as an “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable treatment” of a limited parcel of land by a local zoning ordinance.[1] It is an invalid exercise of authority, if spot zoning is not a right conferred upon the body by the state’s zoning enabling statute, because it deviates from the plan set out by the enabling statute.[1]

The Planner’s Web website provides more details on spot zoning

Most planning commissioners have heard the impassioned cry that a particular rezoning decision will constitute an invalid “spot zoning.” This allegation typically arises where the community is considering the rezoning of a single lot or small parcel of property held by a single owner and the rezoning will permit land uses not available to the adjacent property. Because spot zoning often focuses on the single parcel without considering the broader context, that is, the area and land uses surrounding the parcel, it is commonly considered the antithesis of planned zoning. While rezoning decisions that only affect a single parcel or small amount of land are most often the subject of spot zoning claims (as opposed to rezonings of larger areas), a locality can lawfully rezone a single parcel if its action is shown to be consistent with the community’s land use policies. As I will discuss shortly, courts look to the community’s comprehensive plan, or to other planning studies, in determining whether the rezoning is, in fact, consistent with local land use policies. Of course, whether a particular rezoning constitutes an unlawful spot zoning depends largely upon the facts surrounding the zoning decision and upon the judicial decisions of each state. However, courts commonly note that the underlying question is whether the zoning decision advances the health, safety, and welfare of the community. A zoning decision that merely provides for individual benefit without a relationship to public benefit cannot be legally supported. Where a particular zoning decision is not supported by a public purpose, the zoning decision is arbitrary and may be subject to invalidation as unlawful spot zoning. Although courts throughout the nation differ in their specific approaches when reviewing spot zoning claims, the majority consider: the size of the parcel subject to rezoning; the zoning both prior to and after the local government’s decision; the existing zoning and use of the adjacent properties; the benefits and detriments to the landowner, neighboring property owners, and the community resulting from the rezoning; and the relationship between the zoning change and the local government’s stated land use policies and objectives. This last factor — the relationship of the rezoning decision to the community’s land use policies and objectives — is perhaps the most important one. As a result, when a planning commission (or governing body) initially considers a rezoning request it should determine whether the request is consistent with the comprehensive or master plan. Many communities’ zoning codes also require a separate planning study that examines the merits of the proposed rezoning. This further ensures that any rezoning is consistent with the community’s land use objectives, and not a case of spot zoning. The bottom line is that courts will give considerable weight to evidence that the locality’s rezoning decision reflects thoughtful consideration of planning factors. It should be noted that there is one situation where a rezoning decision that does not conform to the comprehensive plan may nevertheless be upheld. That is where there is evidence showing significant changes in the community since the adoption of the plan that would justify a rezoning of the property. This is especially true where a review of other factors, such as benefit to the community and the size of the rezoned parcel, indicate that the rezoning was not merely intended to confer a benefit to the property owner.

source: http://www.plannersweb.com/articles/wid060.html, accessed 9/29/09

“Spot Zoning” is a lucrative business. Firms lobby legislators to pass the spot zoning ordinance. In the process, the bounty is distributed to all who vote in favor of the spot zoning legislation. This allows the likes of pig farms, coconut oil refineries, activated charcoal plants to operate within areas which are clearly zoned as residential.

If one were to review all the spot zoning ordinances, one will see the active players. Allegedly, the offer is made to the senior legislators, both the majority and minority floor leaders – and the leadership of the City Planning Office – all the way to the mayor/governor.

Along Came “The One”

I am a huge advocate of a demanding vetting process when it comes to selecting a car, a house, or a spouse. There would be less separations, annullments, and divorces if people would put a little more effort in this process. Or in the case of presidential candidates, less protests, less impeachment attempts, less bickering, less coup attempts, and more opportunities for greater prosperity.

What would you do if you were picking a spot for your residence? Would you choose it by just looking at the exterior? Of course, you wouldn’t. You will walk through it many  times, inspect the rooms, fixtures, lights, have an appraiser come in. You will also look at the neighborhood and check whether its is safe and secure? You will also check the facilities – is there a common recreation area like courts, playgrounds, pools, work-out rooms. You will also check the location whether it is far or near your work. And you will check if you can afford it. You do the same thing when choosing a car. You review its features – efficiency, mileage, safety ratings, warranty, handling. You ask feedback from your mechanic, your friends and family.

Unfortunately, some of of us (presumably, a lot) do not take the same rule of thought to the selection process when choosing a spouse – or for that matter, a presidential candidate.

Shouldn’t the process be more demanding than the procedures we use for selecting a house or a car? Shouldn’t we ensure that our future spouse or candidate is an excellent fit for us and the relationship built together can weather the storms of life?

Each person will have many things to consider, some will have less to consider. Others probably have lists which can be short or long, but the list that I know best is my list. So here it goes. You will easily recognize the items in my list as you may have come across the items sometime in your life, one time or another.

Find Out Who They REALLY Are

Just like hunting for a house or a car, the only way to find out if you are getting a lemon is if you inspect and do your due diligence in great detail to find out who the candidate REALLY is. Look beyond the headlines, all the media projection might make the candidate look good, when in reality, the candidate is actually a can of worms. When the superficialities are removed and you finally meet the REAL candidate, you may not like them. So, get to know THAT candidate before you vote for them, or in the case of a spouse – before you get married to him or her.

The easiest way to know who a candidate REALLY is, (next to actually knowing and spedning time with the candidate) is to invest time in reading about the candidate, asking friends and family who might know the candidate, even his enemies – as it gives you an idea of how such candidate is seen under the most unflattering of lights.

The election will not be until May 10, 2010 – there is no need to rush into making a choice. Take your time – get to REALLY know the candidates some more.

Should Be Someone You Like

Have you ever been in a relationship you don’t like? Sucks doesn’t it? If you vote for a person, shouldn’t you at the very least like the candidate first?

A lot of people vote for candidates they don’t like because they feel the overall person is good. Or to feel “safe”, to be “protected” from a worse candidate who might win if they vote for the candidate they like, thus they choose the second best candidate or even the next to worst candidate as long as its not the worst candidate – they resort to a phenomenon known as satisficing.

Satisficing (a portmanteau of “satisfy” and “suffice”) is a decision-making strategy that attempts to meet criteria for adequacy, rather than to identify an optimal solution. A satisficing strategy may often be (near) optimal if the costs of the decision-making process itself, such as the cost of obtaining complete information, are considered in the outcome calculus. The word satisfice was coined by Herbert Simon. He pointed out that human beings lack the cognitive resources to maximize: we usually do not know the relevant probabilities of outcomes, we can rarely evaluate all outcomes with sufficient precision, and our memories are weak and unreliable. A more realistic approach to rationality takes into account these limitations: This is called bounded rationality. Satisficing in Groups Satisficing occurs in consensus building when the group looks towards a solution everyone can agree on even if it may not be the best. Satisficing in Economics In economics, satisficing is a behavior which attempts to achieve at least some minimum level of a particular variable, but which does not necessarily maximize its value. The most common application of the concept in economics is in the behavioural theory of the firm, which, unlike traditional accounts, postulates that producers treat profit not as a goal to be maximized, but as a constraint. Under these theories, a critical level of profit must be achieved by firms; thereafter, priority is attached to the attainment of other goals. Satisficing in Social Cognition As an example of satisficing, in the field of social cognition, Jon Krosnick proposed a theory of statistical survey satisficing which says that optimal question answering by a survey respondent involves a great deal of cognitive work and that some people would use satisficing to reduce that burden. Some people may shortcut their cognitive processes in two ways: Weak satisficing: Respondent executes all cognitive steps involved in optimizing, but less completely and with bias. Strong satisficing: Respondent offers responses that will seem reasonable to the interviewer without any memory search or information integration. Likelihood to satisfice is linked to respondent ability, respondent motivation and task difficulty Regarding survey answers, satisficing manifests in: choosing explicitly offered no-opinion response option choosing socially desirable responses non-differentiation when a battery of questions asks for ratings of multiple objects on the same response scale acquiescence response bias, which is the tendency to agree with any assertion, regardless of its content Satisficing in Decision Making In decision making, satisficing explains the tendency to select the first option that meets a given need or select the option that seems to address most needs rather than the “optimal” solution.

What am saying is, while a candidate may be adequate, it doesn’t mean they are the optimal or the best candidate.

Values Should be Similar

When you vote for a candidate (or when you decide to get married) you are saying you are willing to work with the candidate (or to become one). This will be tough if your values are fundamentally different, possibly even on opposite ends. The monarchist or fascist will clash with the democrat;  pro-labor will clash with pro-management; pro-land reform will clash with anti-land reform; protectionists will clash with free market advocates, so on and so forth.

You don’t want to be miserable, disturbed, and unsettled on the core issues. The trivial issues may vary, but you should be in agreement with regards to the central issues that move you.

Life Plans Should be Similar

If one person’s life plan is to live in the suburbs while the other wants to live in downtown or the beach or the forest for that matter, a major conflict will be in the offing because your visions don’t align at all. Thus, it is important to see whether your vision of life matches that of the candidate. For short, you ask what is your candidates “life plan” – what is your candidates platform? Does it have substance? Are his goals measurable and time-bound? Is it achievable?

Are the candidate’s plans relevant to your life’s plan? Does your candidate even have a credible plan at all? If a plan is lacking, you need to seriusly rethink your choice. What if your future spouse turned out to be the Batman or the Ghost Rider or the Joker. Good or bad, do their life plans blend with your plan?  Do you want to go somewhere or do you want to go nowhere. Is that somewhere you have in mind, the same somewhere your candidate has in mind.

If you don’t know your candidates platform, well, this ties into the previous points, you better know. Remember, the platform may look adequate, but it may not be the best – so, take your time, and get to know not just the candidate, know the platform as well.

Able to Get Along With Their “Families”

A lot of people overlook this point, but it is significant as well. Voting for a candidate also means, you marry the “family”, too – Kamaganak Inc., Kabits/Thugs and Company, Mistahs Inc, Cronies et al, and all the vested interests that come with the candidate. If you don’t like your potential “in-laws”, do think twice about voting for the candidate, becuase you will inherit that candidate’s “family” (and all their drama) as well.

For the Mathematically-Gifted – Apply Decision Theory

For the mathematically-gifted, if you you want to go further, Larry Kahn, an MIT alumni has an article on Decision Theory and Selecting a Spouse. In this article, he provides the  different ways by which people seek and interpret  information. Larry provides a short description of the five theories he discusses below:

Image Theory – This theory has three parts (images). The value image consists of the decision maker’s principles; what’s right or wrong, any organizational rules or principles that must be followed, etc. The second image is the trajectory image, the goals that the decision maker wants to achieve. The third image is the strategic image, which are the plans adopted to achieve the goals, including making decisions, evaluating, and modifying approaches based on results. Decisions can be made by screening out candidates because they don’t pass a minimum level, or by doing some sort of combined comparison to rank the candidates in preference order. Recognition Primed Decision Making (RPD) – This model describes how experts make decisions under stressful situations, perhaps due to time pressure or rapidly changing environments. The decision maker uses their expertise and experience to quickly asses the situation and to come up with an acceptable course of action. They then “play out” the course of action to see whether it is feasible or requires modification. If the first choice doesn’t work, they will go back, select another option, and do the evaluation again. A good example is a firefighting captain who arrives on the scene of a burning building. He will quickly recognize what to do and act accordingly, but the situation may change rapidly and he will have to stay on top of the situation, perhaps changing priorities on the fly. One aspect of RPD is that the expert can quickly rule out unimportant information or unusable solutions, almost on a subconscious level, whereas a novice would need much more time to explicitly think through all possibilities. Explanation Based Model – There are two parts to this model: The coherent story and the choices. The theory says that the decision maker will attempt to create a full story from some incomplete raw facts and then match this story against possible choice options to come up with a solution. For example, a jury will try to formulate a full explanation of a defendant’s behavior from the evidence, general knowledge about similar events, and knowledge about story structures in general. With their completed story, they will then try to match that with the choices (verdict categories). If a match is found, they can make a decision, otherwise the process would have to be repeated with additional inputs. Lens Model – The lens model is a part of Social Judgment Theory. It tries to analytically build a model of how well a person’s judgments match up with the environment they are trying to predict. The interface between the two are the cues that represent the environment. An example is a trader trying to predict what the market will do so that they can pick good stocks. Some of the cues might be unemployment rate, price/earnings ratio of the stock, inflation rate, etc. The trader observes the cues and makes a judgment on how to interpret them, then selects stocks. The lens model takes a large number of these trial cases and comes up with equations for how well the trader does, plus other models for how well the cues are judged or how well they represent the environment. Even with perfect information, most task success rates are nowhere near 100%. This is due to many factors, including errors in judgment, insufficient or unrecognized cues, or important cue patterns that are hard to determine. Dominance Testing – There are four major steps to making a decision. First, the decision maker simply screens out alternatives that do not meet minimum standards. After that, if there is more than one choice left, the second step is to select a promising alternative. This can be a fairly subjective choice based on preferences or initial reaction. The third step is to test for dominance. An alternative is dominant if, for all the selection criteria, the alternative has no disadvantages and at least one advantage, it is selected. Often, this is not the case, and the fourth step is entered. This is where the decision maker tries to restructure or reinterpret the information in order to make the promising alternative dominant so it can be selected. This can be good or bad, since if overdone it can mean talking yourself into making a bad decision.

It will be good to let the candidate know that he is being evaluated on a whole range of issues – based on merit and not just based on a visceral emotional reaction.

It means you are taking the matter seriously, and you would rather vet the candidate the thoroughly if you are going to bet your life on the candidate.

The Wimpification of FV

Filipinovoices.com is now using the issue of “civility” to censor comments which does not jive with its wuzzie-in-chief. Crap and double crap.

Snapshots of 2005 – Aquino vs Villar

PROPOSED LEGISLATIONS, Oct 2005

Aquino Vs Villar

I was wondering what the man of destiny and the survey superstar were doing in October 2005 in terms of their proposed legislation.

Fortunately, the Philippine Business website operated by the Makati Business Club kept a record.

And this is what I culled from the site.

AGRICULTURE

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 604	Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 703	Foot and Mouth Disease Eradication Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 704	Rice Safety Net Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 705	Bio-Organic Farming Promotion Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 706	Creating a Coffee Research, Development and Extension Center at the Cavite State University in Indang, Cavite	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee

BANKING

AQUINO

HB 2101

Exempting government officials and employees from the prohibition against disclosure of or inquiry into deposits with any banking institution

8/4/2004

Rep. Agapito A. Aquino

Pending in Committee

VILLAR

- NONE

DEMOGRAPHICS

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 562	Philippine Science Centrum Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 600	Requiring all cigarette and cigar manufacturers and distributors to scientifically and truthfully print, on each box or pack of cigars that they manufacture, distribute or sell, the levels of nicotine, tar and carbon monoside that could be inhaled in smoking a stick of cigar or cigarettes	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 604	Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 654	Protection of Minors from Vices Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee

ENVIRONMENT

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 288	Environment Friendly Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 295	Providing for the installation of anti-pollution devices as pre-requisite to the registration and issuance of licenses and license plate numbers to vehicles newly registered	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 657	Establishing Forest Management, utilization, conservation and preservation centers in provinces inhabited predominantly by members of indigenous communities and upland families	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 714	Shore Protection Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 717	Ship Pollution Prevention Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 729	Oil Pollution Compensation Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 734	Community Environmental Information Program Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee

GOVERNANCE

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 735	Anti-Terrorism Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 789	The Judicial Right To Know Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee

PUBLIC FINANCE

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 510

Fixing the Debt Stock of the Republic of the Philippines

6/30/2004

Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.

Pending in Committee

TRANSPORTATION

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR

SB 651

Airline Passenger Fairness Act

6/30/2004

Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.

Pending in Committee

UTILITIES

AQUINO

- NONE

VILLAR -

SB 516	The Power Rebate Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 597	Safe Drinking Water Act of 2004	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee
SB 598	Safe Bottle Water Act	6/30/2004	Sen. Manuel B. Villar Jr.	Pending in Committee

***

Filipino voters are self-flagellants

Convicted plunderer former Erap Estrada takes second position in the 2009 poll surveys on the 2010 Philippine Presidential elections.

Based on Pulse Asia’s August 2009 survey, Villar was ahead with 25% choosing him as their first pick for president.

Estrada was next with 19%, followed by Vice-President Noli de Castro at 16%.

Senators Chiz Escudero and Mar Roxas were statistically tied at 12% and 11% respectively.

***

From Mediocracy to Idiocracy

The May 10, 2010 Presidential elections is fast approaching. As I survey the array of candidates and voters – I can’t help but recall the 2006 Mike Judge movie “Idiocracy”.

A quick summary in the movie review by Mike Adams shows the simplicity of the storyline:

A career military desk jockey of average intelligence is cocooned in an experimental hibernation machine for 500 years. (By accident, of course. It’s the military we’re talking about here.) When he awakens, he finds himself in a world populated and run by complete idiots — the result of 500 years of reverse natural selection, where the stupid people fornicate the most, and the smart people stop having children. (Sound familiar, anyone?) The result of it all? A tabloid quality, corporate-controlled world of idiot consumers whose thought processes are limited to the three-word phrases pounded into their heads by relentless advertising campaigns. Phrases like, “Money is good” or “Plants need electrolytes.”

What’s so great about Idiocracy is not merely how funny it is, but rather how accurate it is at constructing a future society extrapolated from the real trends of modern-day America. Today, for example, corporations have taken over control of the Food and Drug Administration. In Idiocracy, a sports drink company simply BUYS the FDA and replaced the entire Food Guide Pyramid with sports drink ads.

What struck me is that where the movie is an extrapolation of a future America – “The Future is a No Brainer”. When applied to the Philippines, the tag line might as well be “The Present is a No Brainer”.

IMDB presented a quick synopsis:

A narrator explains that natural selection is indifferent to intelligence, so that in a society in which intelligence is systematically debased, stupid people easily out-breed the intelligent, creating, over the course of five centuries, an irremediably dysfunctional society. Demographic superiority favors those least likely to advance society. Consequently, the children of the educated elites are drowned in a sea of sexually promiscuous, illiterate, alcoholic, proletarian peers.

Where the movie takes 500 years for the natural selection to take place, it only took the Philippines 300 years!

Consider this:

• In brief conversations, one’s “more advanced” manner of speaking is “elitist”.
• Any nuanced observation that aims to improve an existing gap is “anti-pinoy”.
• Hospital diagnoses is reduced to “f*cked up” or “hopeless”, specially when you don’t have money.
• Everyone gets to pass a class and gets medals for trying.
• The Filipinos actually elected an idiot (and a sizable number are bent on electing the idiot again).
• There are more idiots running for public positions.
• The cabinet members are super corrupt, engage in nepotism, and use emotional buttons in political media coverage.
• The landscape is full of trash, mountains of garbage, a crippled economy, and a dust bowl where there used to be crops and forests.
• The people need foreign capital, but rally around a protectionist and mercantilist constitution.
• Filipinos fought to remove an oligarch, elected another oligarch. Then in the middle of the term, they complain about the oligarchs stranglehold on the economy.
• and the list goes on

I came across BenK’s list, and I added his list:

1. Promote the BPO industry as a key driver of the economy, and then insist on using a language which is completely unsuitable for that business as a medium of instruction in public schools.
2. Hold public protests about being insulted in a Hong Kong newspaper column that wasn’t even about them in the first place.
3. Support a candidate for President not because he has a solid platform, but because his Mom died.
4. Use a bizarrely inappropriate literary simile to argue against amending the Constitution.
5. Support presidential candidates who either have no knowledge of or no opinion regarding foreign affairs.
6. Complain about the indignities of Spanish rule, and then behave as though they’re still a Spanish colony.
7. Pay special thanks to and reward those who distinguish themselves by not fucking up their jobs.
8. Assert that overpopulation as an argument for the Reproductive Health bill is “controversial”.
9. Spend any time at all paying any attention to this loser.
10. Or this one:

Reality is indeed stranger than fiction! The Philippines can give Idiocracy a run for its money.

So, when J_ag (whose take on reality seems to be founded on  extrapolation) wrote:

That is what makes America unique… Mental cripples are allowed platforms. There will always be fringe groups around political discourse. In times of societal stress they start banging on empty drums. They make the loudest noise.

Jingoist nationalism is a dangerous element in open societies. Open societies though are designed precisely to give opportunity for these people to blow methane to dissipate their ignorance and outright stupidity… Highly flammable rhetoric gets headlines.. The tabloid nature of media in a digital connected globe where news travels at the speed of light is a double edged sword.

The Fox news crowd, Paris Hilton, Malkin appeal to the lower base of awareness. Fear mongering is a potent weapon… Unfortunately underdeveloped brain functions are easily manipulated by fear. The rightist fringe wacko groups have taken hold of the Republican party  platform at a time where very little separates the right of center  from the left of center.

At the very least, the American electorate recognized the mental cripples, and chose someone they did not find as “a mental cripple”.

The Philippines is a different story – mental cripples do not need platforms when they run – they get elected just the same. The US can’t top the Philippines. Fox News will eat the dust when ABS-CBN shows WOWOWEE.

Fear mongering in Fox? Wait till you hear the Philippine media -

• fear of term extensions;
• fear of charter change;
• fear of foreign capital;
• fear of martial law;
• fear of communism;
• fear of secession;
• fear of recession;
• fear of the Caliban and INC bishops
• fear of ASG/MILF/NPA
• fear of assassination;
• fear of plunder;

And speaking of underdeveloped brain functions – I wonder how developed were the brains of the people who voted for Erap Estrada.

Nothing compares to the homogeneity of mental cripples in the Philippine homeland — a complete monopoly — where mental cripples run government, voted into power by mental cripples. — a government of mental cripples, by mental cripples, for mental cripples.

The socioeconomic classifications reveal a lot to Philippine politicians – pander to the DE classes, never mind platforms and visions – and you are in the race. No wonder, if one looks at the platform of the Philippine presidential candidates, it is a list of motherhood statements. View the Political ads of each candidate – it is mind-numbingly moronic. But for the Philippine idiocracy – the ads are perfect.

ABCDE Socioeconomic Classification

As pointed out by Mahar Mangahas in his blog on 3 ways of looking at the income distribution of the Philippines:

Market/opinion researchers classify according through proxies of wealth/assets, rather than direct measure of income to segment the (consumer) market.From the 16 April 2007 release of Pulse Asia, its nationally-representative sample has:

• seven (7) percent making up classes A, B, and C;
• sixty-seven (67) percent, class D; and
• twenty-five (25) percent, class E.

This breakdown has a sampling error of +/- 3 percent.  [Statistically speaking, classes ABC may be  4 to 10 percent of the population; class D, 64-70 percent; and class E, 22-28 percent.]

(Mahar comments: Data source is Pulse Asia website . Click on Ulat ng Bayan. Select October 2007 Nationwide Survey on Presidential Performance and Trust Ratings. You will see at the middle of the report (See Table 1). Click on this link; this brings you to a table entitled ‘Awareness & Performance Ratings of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’. You will see that class ABC has 10 percent; D, 67 percent; and E 23 percent, slightly different from mine which came from an earlier survey, but still statistically the same.)

Do an experiment. Identify an individual from each socio economic group. Attempt to ask questions about the platforms, experience, plans of governance of each candidate – out of the total interviews, record how many times you get a look that says “that is a more advanced form of political evaluation, that’s for the bright folks, we don’t like smart people, we just want one with a heart”.

I am reminded of  a joke about Cory based on her name, thanks to Jamal Ashleys blog on on FILIPINO CRAB MENTALITY  – THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MEDIOCRACY – Corazon C. Aquino: Corazon (point to the heart), Sí (Yes); Aqui (Here, point to the head), No. – Cory was all heart and no brain.

Today, the Philippines is in another cycle – and there are more names, all running under name recall, platforms be damned.

it looks like the evolution of Philippine society from a Mediocracy to an Idiocracy was completed in less than 20 years.

America can’t top that, Philippines is the world’s first idiocracy!

The Idiocy of… duh… Idiocy

Names of Moros etched on the walls of Corregidor hospital, a reminder of the Jabidah Massacre.

The Indio PoV

A recent blog post by Blackshama on “Another example of Philippine Idiocy” encapsulates the historical amnesia in the artificial Philippine state

The Inquirer even in its editorial silliness  at least has got one thing right. A solution to the Mindanao conflict involves a grand strategy  which includes political and increasingly a military solution unless the insurgents realize the futility of their position.  This is something like the total destruction of Nazi Germany and Militarist Japan by the allies in World War II.  While political solutions and peace talks may be attractive, a Commander-in-Chief should know when such are futile. A Commander-in-Chief should not hesitate to use the appropriate response and firepower to secure the peace and Harry Truman did it in 1945 and nuked Japan.  Similarly this Republic should not hesitate to destroy its enemies in order to secure the Philippines peace. Who is the Inquirer trying to scare?

The Moro PoV

Compare this to the position Michael Mastura’s piece on The Belfast Agreement: A Lesson in Political Maturity.

A sovereignty-based conflict normally involves two parties on a collision course: on one hand is the nation-state with its ‘ideology’ of ‘national sovereignty and territorial integrity’; on the other is the captive nation with its claim to right of self-determination. These colliding principles and interests inevitably end up in a violent conflict between the state and the captive nation.

The Bangsamoro Problem is one such sovereignty-based conflict. In this case, the Philippine nation-state, a creation of foreign colonialism and imperialism, claims sovereignty over the Bangsamoro homeland, once the territory of independent Moro sultanate states. The Moros have invariably contested this claim ever since the Bangsamoro Homeland was incorporated into the Philippine nation-state without the plebiscitary consent of the Bangsamoro people. The Moros were never conquered militarily by the Filipinos or, before them, by the Spaniards. It was the United States, with its technological superiority, that subdued the Moros militarily and later on, over the protestations of the latter, handed them over to the Philippine nation-state initially in 1935 and finally in 1946 when independence was granted to the Filipinos. The Moro Homeland, thereafter, became part of the national territory of an independent Philippine nation-state but is treated more as a colony by the latter. The Moros, however, have resisted Filipino colonial rule, and through various forms and means have reasserted their separate identity as a nation; hence, the sovereignty-based conflict in Mindanao.

The conflict in Northern Ireland, like the Bangsamoro Problem, is a sovereignty-based conflict. Both are multi-dimensional in character: political, nationality-based, and compounded by social, cultural and religious undertones. Both are also profoundly violent. But, what made Northern Ireland more complicated is that the conflict was not merely a ‘one state-versus-one captive nation’ configuration. There were two nation-states (‘sovereignties’) and two peoples/communities involved with each of the latter claiming right of self-determination – a right that was defined by and viewed from political positions diametrically opposed to each other and by intense loyalty  to one of the two sovereign states in question.

Yet, for all the complexities involved, the Northern Ireland problem has been resolved – or rather, the armed conflict that characterized it – when all the parties to the conflict decided to end the vicious and debilitating violence that plagued the province since the 60s. The political formula that came out of the negotiating table is in itself a unique political arrangement that brought hitherto bitter foes together to settle a long-standing political-cum-religious dispute through peaceful democratic processes that would allow the people of Northern Ireland themselves to chart their future.

***

There is one important aspect of the Northern Ireland peace process which we found to be relevant. The objective of the Belfast Agreement is to end the violence and allow the most bitter of political foes to work together through electoral democracy and run a government that would pave the way for the final determination of the political future of Northern Ireland. This would not have been possible without the parties to the conflict agreeing to “decommissioning” or the disarmament of the paramilitaries on both sides.

But unlike the Philippine government which is demanding that the MILF disarm before a comprehensive peace agreement is inked on the negotiating table, “decommissioning” in the context of the Northern Ireland peace process came as a result of the Belfast Agreement in April 1998. In fact, “decommissioning” has taken a gradual approach, a long process that keeps step with the progress of the devolution of political power to the Northern Ireland government. When we were in Belfast the “decommissioning” of Unionist paramilitaries was not yet complete, and given the fact that the Good Friday Agreement was signed in 1998, one wonders why it would take more than ten years for “decommissioning” to be completed. That is, if one were totally ignorant of the complicated and difficult process that “decommissioning” entails.

There are, of course, recalcitrant minority factions on both sides of the political fence who refuse to recognize the Belfast Agreement or wait until the latter succeeds or fails. But these factions remain isolated and efforts by the mainstream Unionist and Republican groups to bring them into the fold or rein them in continue.

One important lesson is drawn from this Northern Ireland experience though. “Decommissioning” or disarmament can only be done if a comprehensive peace agreement between the parties to the conflict is concluded. It cannot come before that. Otherwise, it would be putting the cart before the horse. No revolutionary liberation movement would ever agree to “decommission” until the other party, which is normally the state, settles for a signed political agreement which would, by logic, include withdrawal of state security forces from the occupied territories. Less than that would be tantamount to surrender.

After our educational trip to London and Belfast, we could not help but compare our peace process in Mindanao with that of the one still taking place in Northern Ireland. There are similarities and dissimilarities and many can be cited. But for the sake of brevity, we can only mention a few.

As already mentioned and explained, the sovereignty-based conflict in Northern Ireland is more complex than the Bangsamoro Problem. Two sovereign nation-states and two communities of people are involved in Northern Ireland. In Mindanao and Sulu, the conflict is between the Bangsamoro nation and the Philippine nation-state.

In terms of the magnitude of destruction quantified by the number of lives lost, material losses, and human displacement in Mindanao and Sulu, the Mindanao conflict is considered more devastating than the Northern Ireland conflict. This is not to say that the Northern Ireland conflict is not devastating. All armed conflicts are destructive. And that is what the Northern Ireland conflict had wrought on the people of Northern Ireland for three decades. However, figures would show that the level of destruction is very much higher in the Mindanao Conflict. In the recent fighting in Mindanao since August of 2008, no less than 600,000 people were displaced and over 2,000 Moro homes were destroyed by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). During the MNLF-led war in the 70s, more than 200,000 people were killed, over one million were internally displaced, and about 500,000 Moro refugees had to flee to the neighboring state of Sabah, Malaysia. This would be replayed in the all-out wars against the MILF in 2000 and 2003 when again millions would be displaced and thousands would perish.

Whereas on record, conflict-related deaths in Northern Ireland from 1969-1994 numbered 3,173.

Nonetheless, we are not concerned with comparing levels of destruction between the Northern Ireland conflict and the Mindanao conflict. Figures could never really measure the detrimental effects of war, particularly the psychological aspect, on the lives of the people concerned.

Our purpose here, which was the objective of our journey to Northern Ireland, is to draw lessons from the experience of the latter in its peace process and use these lessons to validate our own experience in the Mindanao peace process.

Indeed, there are very important observations we were able to draw from our exposure trip to Northern Ireland. But to say it again, the most profound lesson we learned is the pivotal role that political maturity plays in resolving sovereignty-based conflicts. In the Northern Ireland conflict, the political maturity of all the actors involved – state and non-state – was the ‘blade’ that unknotted the Gordian knot, so to speak.

Unfortunately, in our engagements on the negotiating table with the Philippine government, we do not find even a semblance of political maturity on the side of our adversary.

There is no political maturity when the Philippine government invariably turns its back on political compromises and reneges on its commitments to signed agreements with the Moro liberation movement as what it did to the MNLF in 1976 and 1996 and recently to the MILF in 2000, 2003 and 2008.

There is no political maturity when the Philippine government embarrasses itself before the international community by aborting an initialed MOA-AD  with the MILF on the very day that such a conflict-resolving compromise political agreement was about to be signed in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

There is no political maturity when the Philippine government does a Pontius Pilate by disowning and scuttling its own peace panel, renouncing an agreement that it jointly crafted with the MILF for almost four years, and subsequently announcing its total withdrawal from the negotiating table.

There is no political maturity when key officials in the Philippine government cannot put their acts together and exercise a strong collective political will to resolve the Mindanao conflict through a negotiated political settlement with the MILF.

There is no political maturity when the Philippine government reverts to military solutions and resorts to repressive counter-insurgency measures and propaganda demonization of the Moro nation to resolve the almost five-century old Bangsamoro Problem which even the Spaniards and the Americans were unable to put an end to during their stay in the Philippines.

There is no political maturity when the Philippine government undermines the role of the third party facilitator to the peace negotiation, Malaysia, whose role as such the former officially requested for in 2001.

And, if I may add, there is no political maturity when Filipino government officials involved in the peace process shed crocodile tears in front of the media over the misery and sufferings of Moro refugees while the Philippine military keeps up with its relentless operations in Moro areas.

This is not political maturity but deception shamelessly being played out before the eyes of the world.

Such deception will never put an end to the sovereignty-based conflict in the Bangsamoro Homeland.

Society-wide Stockholm Syndrome

Blackshama’s point of view (PoV) is not surprising – one which glorifies the Spaniards landgrabbing, murder, and destruction of the indio way of life. it appears that the collective indio memory is similar to abducted hostages, in which the hostage shows signs of loyalty to the hostage-taker, regardless of the danger or risk in which they have been placed – a Stockholm syndrome of epic proportions.

As described in the open source reference:

The Stockholm Syndrome is a psychological shift that occurs to captives when they are threatened gravely but shown acts of kindness by their captors. They tend to sympathize with their captors and think of them highly because they believe that their captors are showing favor because of their inherent kindness and thus might not be as bad as they look. Unfortunately, they fail to recognize that their captors are making choices based on their own discretion. When subjected to these situations for a period of time, the captive develops a strong bond with the captor and in some cases (especially with a captor of the opposite sex) develops a sexual interest.

According to the psychoanalytic view of the syndrome, the tendency might well be the result of employing the strategy evolved by newborn babies to form an emotional attachment to the nearest powerful adult in order to maximize the probability that this adult will enable — at the very least — the survival of the child, if not also prove to be a good parental figure. This syndrome is considered a prime example for the defence mechanism of identification.

This syndrome has also been explained in evolutionary terms, which highlights the fact that our ancestors sided with the tribes that captured them. In many cases, the capture may also involve the killing of the captive’s relatives, thereby isolating the captive. The captive is subjected to isolation and so sees even a small act, such as providing amenities, as a great favor. They may side with their captors since they think the captors gave them great importance and love. This effect also stems from the fact that everybody other than the captive may have been killed, and thus the captive tends to think that (s)he is shown a special interest.

Three hundred years as a Spanish colony, and the colonial subjects have forgotten who they are, the sacrifices of their ancestors for their way of life. And, they now try so hard to emulate the former colonizers – the Filipino is an indio afflicted with the Stockholm Syndrome.

The Fabricated Philippine State

Not surprisingly, it is amazing how much is being left out in classes on Philippine history. Joseph Fallon’s article on the Fabricated Philippine State was on point, however, his thoughts have slim chances of finding its way into the indios’ classrooms. Fallon points out in his piece on Igorot and Moro National Reemergence:

Created in 1946 – the result of a series of negotiations conducted between Filipino nationalists and the U.S. government – the Republic of the Philippines is an arbitrary amalgamation of a multitude of diverse islands and peoples.

This political entity is not a nation-state; neither is it a voluntary multinational association. Rather, it constitutes a new, post World War II, colonial order centered in Manila, and dedicated to the political and economic hegemony of the local Christian-Europhile community over the entire territory of the former American colony. That which separates the Philippines from all other multi-ethnic states in Asia is its unique nationalism.

Although distinct Cambodian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tibetan, and Thai countries had emerged by the time of the onslaught of European imperialism in Asia during the late 19th century, there never existed a Filipino nation.

While other heterogeneous Asian countries can seek to legitimate the existence of their states by declaring a continuity – however dubious – with indigenous kingdoms or empires that flourished in their lands before European domination, Filipino nationalists cannot.

No single political entity ever ruled the entire archipelago, and those states which did arise to govern significant portions of these islands, including the area around Manila, were Muslim. Unlike other Asian nationalisms, for Filipinos history is an enemy, not an ally.

The Nations Within

Filipino nationalism is an artificial, non-Asian construct with no existence prior to and separate from the Spanish invasion of 1565. The extent of its dependency on European colonialism for its very identity is seen by the nationalists embrace of The Philippines as the name for their country, a name given to the islands by the Spanish in 1542 in honor of King Philip II of Spain – a tyrant, and a racial and religious bigot.

Originally, Filipino nationalism did not even seek independence for the Philippines but rather its complete cultural assimilation and total political integration into Spain. The goal was equal representation with “the other parts of Spain” in the Cortes at Madrid. To these Filipino nationalists, Filipinos were just eastern Spaniards, as Majorcans were western” Spaniards, as Andalusians were southern” Spaniards.

Only when this aspiration failed to be realized did the objective of Filipino nationalists shift to political independence – but not to decolonize. If they could not be an integral part of Spain, then the Philippines would constitute a second Spain – one which would complete the hispanization of the islands.

The commitment to this non-Asian identity is so intense that in 1962 then President Macapagal warmly embraced the suggestion of Spain’s dictator, Generalissimo Franco, that the Philippines should initiate the creation of a political-cultural bloc consisting exclusively of states sharing a common Spanish- Catholic heritage.

As a result, Filipino nationalists view the rest of Asia with ambivalence and as somewhat alien. Like Israeli and Afrikaan nationalisms, Filipino nationalism considers itself as culturally and spiritually separate from, and in fact superior to, the region and peoples in which it is geographically situated.

The failure of the Philippines to develop into the Southeast Asian showcase for democracy and economic growth which was anticipated for it by both Filipino and U.S. politicians is a direct consequence of this nationalism. For the indigenous nations in the Philippines, especially, the Igorots and the Moros, this assumed nationalism has endangered their continued cultural and physical survival.

The Petraeus Doctrine and Mahinda Rajapaksa

Thus far, the Mindanao issue has become Asia’s Palestine. The Philippines is what China is to Tibet, what Israel is to Palestine. It is rather ironic, that the Philippines supports the Tibetans and Palestine – and yet has hypocrisy bullcrap all over its backyard and front yard. It becomes poetic justice if one takes into consideration that the Philippines had the gall to hatch Operation Merdeka -

The strategy will be determined by the unique nature of each theater. In the 1990s, the Powell Doctrine, with its emphasis on overwhelming force, assumed that future American wars would be brief, decisive, and infrequent. However, a decade ago, the Army corp of officers that took its cue from Powell is now increasingly identifying with Petraeus.

According to the emerging Petrae­us Doctrine, the Army (like it or not) is entering an era in which armed conflict will be protracted, ambiguous, and continuous—with the application of force becoming a lesser part of the soldier’s repertoire. A more detailed discussion is provided in The Petraeus Doctrine. Petraeus strategy in Iraq boils down to this — protecting the population while cleaving apart the insurgency through reconciliation efforts to crush the remaining hard-core enemies.

The indio PoV espouses the Sri Lankan model as the way to go. The moro PoV is looking at the Belfast model. The Philippine government tried the Rajapaksa option in Erap’s time. Fast forward, Erap has been convicted and pardoned, the Bangsa Moro is still a force to contend with.

Going into ARMM guns and galore without addressing the core issue of economic and government negligence is a guarantee that doing a Rajapaksa will lead to more LTTEs – the very reason why this issue cropped up and has never been resolved up to the present.

Continuous Scuttlement of a Comprehensive a Fair and Just Solution

There have been many attempts to find a solution that recognizes the historical facticties. However all of this efforts have become a farcical cycle of negotiations, peace talks, peace agreements, ceasefire violations, and resumption of hostilities. On one side, is the demand for self-determination and on the other hand the natural tendency of a state to protect what it considers its “territory”.

Fallon lists some of the following reasons that underlie the thinking about the preservation of the Philippine state:

1. The boundaries of the Philippines constitute internationally recognized borders which were officially delineated nearly a century ago during the colonial era.

This rational is a paradox. Philippine independence bases its legitimacy on a passionate repudiation of European colonialism, yet it ardently champions and defends the fruits of that colonialism, the territorial boundaries. The essence of this argument is that political borders are legitimate if they have been accepted by the world community of states. But, for its proponents, the logic of this position is self- defeating. For if international recognition confers legitimacy upon political borders, then all decolonization – including Philippines independence – becomes illegitimate. After all, the borders of the various, colonial empires had been accorded such recognition by their peers. If accepted as a general principle, this argument would deny national self-determination to Tibetans and Turkestanis, to Ukrainians and Byelorussians, to Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians, to Irish and Kanaks. Each nation is part of a state, much against their wishes, whose boundaries are internationally recognized — de jure or de facto — by most states.

2. Preservation of the Philippines existing borders is supported by Third World concepts of the sanctity of the territorial integrity of post-colonial states.

This belief has only been advanced by the Organization of African Unity in Articles 2 and 3 of its charter. According to this document, in any conflict between the principles of territorial integrity and national self-determination, the former takes precedence. This situation is unique to Africa and has no real bearing on Asia. Asia has no equivalent to the OAU or its charter.  On the contrary, borders, more often than not, have been altered from their colonial boundaries. States have been enlarged, others reduced, and still others obliterated from the map.

– China invaded and annexed Tibet (1950), later seized parts of the disputed territory of Kashmir (1959-1962).

– India and Pakistan were established in 1947 through a dual process of partition and annexation. The British Raj was partitioned into two successor states, while the legally separate entities known as the princely states were annexed to either India or Pakistan.

– India annexed the French enclaves of Karikal, Mahe, Pondichey, and Yanam in 1954, the Portugese colonies of Dadra, and Nagar Aveli in 1960, and the last Portugese strongholds of Damao, Diu, and Goa in 1961. The Kingdom of Sikkim was annexed in 1975.

– India and Pakistan have fought two wars for control of Kashmir in 1947-48 and again in 1965. The result has been Kashmir’s partition between the two rivals.

– The eastern wing of Pakistan seceded to form Bangladesh in 1971.

– Dutch New Guinea was transferred to Indonesian rule in 1963. East Timor was invaded and annexed by Indonesia in 1975.

– The British colonies on Borneo, Sarawak and Sabah, were united with Malaya to create the Federation of Malaysia in 1963. Singapore was expelled from the federation in 1965.

– The United Nations Strategic Trust Territory of Micronesia administered by the United States was partitioned into four separate political units — Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Northern Marianas, and Palau — during the late 1970s, early 1980s.

3. The Boundaries of the Philippines form “natural” borders for they enclose a distinct, geographic archipelago.

The Philippines, however, do not form a single archipelago. It is part of the Malay, or East Indian, Archipelago which includes Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia, and Papua New Guinea as well as the Philippines. According to the logic of this argument, the states’ borders should be expanded to include the entire archipelago — islands, states, and peoples. The division of this archipelago in to various states was arbitrary based on European needs not “natural” criteria. A variation of this theme is to stress the “natural” compactness of the state. Yet the distance between Manila and Sibutu Island is almost the same as between Manila and Taipei. Should the Philippines, therefore, claim Taiwan, in part or in whole, as belonging to it?

4. The borders of the Philippines enclose a racially homogeneous Malay population.

This is a variant on the “natural” border theme. Malays, however, are not restricted to the Philippines. They constitute the majority of the population of Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia. If the borders of the Philippines are legitimate because they unite the Malays in one state, then logically these borders should be expanded to include Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia. If, on the other hand, the proponents of this argument accept these three, other Malay states as legitimate (and they do), then there is no reason why two additional Malay states — Igorot and Moro — could not be accepted as well.

5. The boundaries of the Philippines have been established in accordance with democratic principles. The state’s borders have been endorsed overwhelmingly by Filipinos at the voting booths.

From 1903-1946, the Moros demonstrated to Washington their consistent and universal opposition to incorporation within an independent Philippines. The argument seeks to deny the ethnic realities of the Philippines and to conceal the colonial domination of the smaller Igorot and Moro nations by the larger, Filipino community behind the democratic facade of majority rule. The implication of this “majority rule” argument is dangerous. It rationalizes the annexation of smaller nations by their larger neighbors and condones the subsequent colonization of the former’s land by the latter. If accepted as a general principle, this argument justifies Chinese occupation of Tibet, Soviet occupation of Lithuania, and the French occupation of Kanakia.

6. Independence for the Igorots and the Moros is without historical validity since neither ever succeeded in establishing a unified state encompassing all of Moroland or the Mountain Province.

This is perhaps the most bizarre reason advanced by the supporters of the Philippine state. The argument undercuts their own position, since there never was a Filipino state that ruled all the 7,100 islands. Even the notion of a Filipino identity is non-indigenous. Of the three groups, Igorot, Moro, and Filipino, it is the Filipino which is the most historically invalid.

7. If the Philippine state is broken up, the resulting successor states — Igorot and Moro — would be unviable.

Both an Igorot state and a Moro state would be politically, and economically viable. Each in terms of territorial and population size would be larger than a number of independent countries of Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, and the Pacific. Freed from Filipino occupation, the Igorots and the Moros could devote their resources to establishing, or re-establishing, stable independent states. Having successfully defended their national existence for over 400 years against military assaults by Spaniards, Americans, Japanese, and Filipinos, the goal should not be impossible to realize. It is precisely because the lands of the Igorots and the Moros are rich in natural resources — and economically viable as states — that the Philippines wishes to retain possession of them. The price which Manila is paying to hold on to these lands, however, has been costly. The true expense can be seen in the resulting political turmoil and economic decline.

8. The breakup of the Philippines would de-stabilize the region.

The threat to regional peace comes from the attempt by the Philippines to dominate two, small nations — the Igorots and the Moros. Especially the latter. Manila’s obsession with retaining Moroland has lead it to lay claims to Sabah province of Malaysia. Alleging that Sabah was an integral part of the Sultanate of Sulu, and that the sultan had transferred his patrimony to the Philippines, Manila nearly went to war with Malaysia for control of this territory in the 1960s.

The MoA-AD was Doomed From Day One or The 1987 Constitution is “Damaged Goods”

Fr Bernas SJ, explains, essentially, why the MoA-AD was but another episode of taking the Bangsa Moro for a ride.

Aside from the 90-page main opinion, there are 11 other pieces, some concurring and others dissenting. Going through them one will find that there really is more unanimity than what the 8-7 count might indicate. There is a clear majority which would agree that there are provisions in the MOA-AD which depart from the present Constitution. The most notable of these would be the powers envisioned for the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE). The powers envisioned go beyond those possessed by local governments and even by the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The MOA-AD speaks of the relationship between the BJE and the Philippine government as “associative,” thus implying an international relationship and therefore suggesting an autonomous state. This goes beyond what the present Constitution has set up. Clearly, the MOA-AD authors were willing to try untested approaches and to operate “out of the box” as other peace negotiators in other places have done.

If one sees that the signing of the aborted MOA-AD would have had the effect of making it a “done deal,” a finalized MOA-AD would indeed have been unconstitutional.

It would, however, be unconstitutional not necessarily because it contained provisions which departed from the current Constitution but because these provisions would have been given life without following the constitutional provisions for achieving change in the Constitution.

Thus the underlying assumption in the majority decision seems to be that, if the draft had been signed, it would have disastrously contained government commitments which, even if not self-executing, would have disastrous implications.

Taken within the Constitutional framework, it was a bum deal from the get-go. Though, a case can be made that the 1987 Philippine Constitution promulgated by the EDSA state didn’t just give lemons to the Moros but to the general Philippine population as well. As the local economic elite institutionalized protectionism in the Constitution, the opportunity for Arab investors to invest in Mindanao (and any foreign investor for that matter) ) didn’t have the pull of ASEAN’s Indonesia and Malaysia.

Prospects for the Moro Agenda within the EDSA State

The issue still goes back to economics, jobs, property, and public services – or the near complete absence of such. Behind the morass lies a silent player, it does not help the Moros or the Indios that, the EDSA state is

A carbon copy of the electoral democracy that was the country’s system of governance before it was destroyed by Ferdinand Marcos in September 1972, EDSA has reproduced most of its faults of the former: it has encouraged maximum factional competition among the elite while allowing them to maintain a united front against any change in the system of social and economic inequality. (Walden Bello, A Requiem for the EDSA System)

Two Sides of the EDSA System

The staying power of the EDSA system is that, in contrast to the Marcos regime, it is democratic. Yet it is democratic in the narrow sense of making elections the arbiter of political succession. In the principle of o­ne man or woman, o­ne vote, there is formal equality. Yet this formal equality exists cannot but be subverted by its being embedded in a social and economic system marked by great disparities of wealth and income. Like the American political system o­n which it is modeled, the genius of the EDSA system, from the perspective of the Philippine elite, is the way it harnesses elections to socially conservative ends. Running for office at any level of government is prohibitively expensive, so that o­nly the wealthy or those backed by wealth can usually think about standing for elections. Thus the masses do choose their representatives, but they choose from a limited pool of people of means that may belong to different factions—those “in” and those “out” of power—but are not different ideologically. The beauty of the system is that by periodically engaging the people in an exercise to choose among different members of the elite, elections make voters active participants in legitimizing the social and economic status quo. Thus has emerged the great Philippine paradox: an extremely lively play of electoral politics unfolding above an immobile class structure that is o­ne of the worst in Asia.

Throughout the EDSA years, the Filipino masses were largely a force that was manipulated electorally to achieve the political ends of competing elite alliances. Yet coexisting with the electoral tradition of the EDSA system is another o­ne–an insurrectionary dimension that derives its legitimacy from the manner in which Ferdinand Marcos was ousted from power. In the last 18 years, it was through an appeal to this insurrectionary tradition that the masses occasionally erupted o­n the national scene, bursting the electoral parameters to which the elite wanted to confine them. In January 2001, the middle class, driven by anti-corruption sentiment, served as the base for the extra-constitutional removal of Joseph Estrada from the presidency in what is now known as EDSA II. Then three months later, in what is now known as EDSA III, the lower classes, particularly the urban poor, came together in a mass uprising that was o­nly dispersed by the military at the gates of Malacanang.

Especially in the case of EDSA III, elite personalities were o­nly nominally at the head of an angry class-based urban insurgency that took the form of a movement to restore to power a defrocked leader who, despite a record of corruption, was seen as a man of the masses. After each insurgency, however, politics settled down to a normal electoral competition managed by elite politicians.

The Anti-Developmental State

While entrenched corruption is the feature of the EDSA system that has elicited loud protest from the middle classes, it has been the utter failure of the system to deliver economic prosperity and reduce inequality that is the greatest source of mass alienation. Close to 10 per cent of the Filipino nation, or over seven million Filipinos, now work or live abroad, and, according to recent surveys, o­ne out of five Filipinos wants to migrate. The sense of frustration is deepened by the widespread sense that our neighbors in Southeast Asia were achieving “economic miracles” while we were paralyzed by factional politics and mistaken policies. However much we may decry its authoritarian policies, it is hard to deny that Singapore, with its controlled competition, prosperity, and security, has become to many Filipinos the ideal polity, the anti-thesis of an EDSA system that has become deeply dysfunctional.

Economic stagnation, according to some analysts, may be related to the political system’s focus o­n elite representation and the parliamentary mechanisms to assure this rather than o­n the development of a strong central bureaucracy that is relatively autonomous from the private sector. The influence of the pre-1930’s American model of governance that guided the formation of the colonial and post-colonial state in the Philippines is again evident here. With the rationale of discouraging tyranny, the American pattern of a weak central authority coexisting with a powerful upper class social organization (“civil society,” in today’s parlance) was reproduced in the Philippines, creating a weak state that was constantly captured by upper class interests and preventing the emergence of the activist “developmental” state that disciplined the private sector in other societies in post-war Asia.

In his influential book o­n contemporary politics in the US, Daniel Lazare says, “Government in America doesn’t work because it’s not supposed to work.” For much the same reason, the subversion of the democratic potential of the masses by the realities of concentrated wealth and power, o­ne can say the same thing of the Philippines.

How long such a state of affairs can persist is anybody’s guess. But the really deep sense of frustration, bitter electoral competition, and EDSA’s insurrectionary tradition can interact in volatile ways. EDSA III showed how this mix can produce a lower-class insurgency, something that can be set off by a concatenation of events. To many observers, the question is not if EDSA III can happen again but when.

Within that backdrop, a resolution of the Moro agenda will not happen, unless a rewrite of the Philippine Constitution takes place. The Charter Change debate has become an emotional landmine as the left and the landlord classes have come into an alliance to keep the economy closed. While lip service is being given to how open the Philippine economy is – the fact of the matter is that the local elites have been very lazy in developing strategic industries which are vital to national development. Opening up the economy will allow new players to fill the gap not being met by the domestic players.

Scenarios for Change

The different strands of seemingly unrelated issues are converging towards a conclusion that social and economic change in the Philippines needs a dismantling of the dysfunctional elite democratic regime – the EDSA state. As to how this change will happen, Walden Bello, goes through the following scenarios:

• Scenario 1 – Charter change – Any calls for charter change will be easily sabotaged by the elite – as it is being sabotaged now.
• Scenario 2 – Military coup – led by “Young Turks” – models could be Singapore or South Korea
• Scenario 3 – Communist revolution – has limited appeal but will not go away and will maintain significant presence in the marginalized areas of the country
• Scenario 4 – EDSA IV – the road not taken after EDSA I.

Hitting the Reset Button – EDSA IV?

A wide disparity in income in the Philippines is an established fact. The seeming Gordian knot known as the Mindanao issue boils down to economics. Providing political and military solutions to an economic problem simply stoked the embers of a resurgent Moro nationalism.

The anemic economy and the Moro issue have  a score to settle with the  1987 Constitution in many fronts. Clearly, the 1987 Constitution needs to be revised to  a more participatory  democratic  government  while addressing historical wrongs – federalism, a blend of open markets and strategic protectionism. There was talk of change in 1986, in 2004, and now, 2010. But it was all talk and the fundamental economic relationships that make for a dyfunctional uncompetitive Philippine economy remain the same. For now, the Filipinos are still under the sway of the landed classes -  a captive audience for the game of musical chairs played by the oligarchs.

The Moro masses are no different as their feudal elites have also taken on the behaviors and mannerisms of their indio counterparts. The cries of the moro and indio masses are no different – economic prosperity, the rule of law, freedom of belief.

What will a “reset” look like? Walden Bello describes the hypothetical future state as:

The fourth route would derive inspiration from that “other” dimension of the EDSA system—its insurrectionary side.

Both EDSA I and EDSA II began as mass mobilizations that developed into insurrections. Owing to the threat that prolonged insurrection posed, however, the dominant faction of the elite quickly pushed to normalize politics by asserting the continuity of the elite democratic tradition and institutionalizing elections.

In contrast, an “EDSA Four” might have two stages.

• First is the displacement of the old system via an mass insurrection in which the working classes and the middle class are the central actors, the key partners of an alliance built o­n that potent combination of tremendous class resentments of the poor and the disgust of the middle strata with corrupt elites.
• In the second stage, the new configuration of social power gives rise to a democratic state, but o­ne that is more thoroughly democratic than the EDSA state in that it institutionalizes effective mechanisms of asset and income redistribution and the methods of participatory democracy.

These institutions would serve as the pillars of a strong state that would make national development o­ne of its priorities. This would, in short, be the “road not taken” after the EDSA uprising of 1986: a truly democratic state oriented to development.

I would further argue that an EDSA IV, can be an opportunity to do things right this time around. It can address the unresolved historical demands of the Moros and the Indios, it can put a federal state in place – one that is reflective of the multicultural modern state. Or, it can affirm the Moros clamor for self-determination.

The alternative is the idiocy of more bloodshed.

Whose dirty laundry is it?

The jolog nation went on a feeding frenzy recently when the POTUS met the POTRP. Snippets of the balitaktakan provided below: