THE PARABLE OF THE YOUNG TRAPO: The Final Sermon

"We have to protect the morals of our youth, for the corruption of our youth is the corruption of our hope." Salvador H. Laurel

He was awakened by the thud of crowd in front of his sturdy manor. They bellowed for words aren’t clear to him for the moment. As they continued to screech for more, the presence of them continued to stir mixed feelings upon him. Just days ago, he was elated to know that he won in the first ever automated elections. He was in utopia. Then several days after that, here they are bellowing at the top of their lungs…shouting of words he barely can’t understand. Are they mad at him? As far as he can remember everybody was good to him, all smiling and doing beso-beso. When finally he cleared his mind, he routed his eyes on the crowd in front of him. A weary woman, in her worn-out malong, carrying a small child on her arm and making a plea as if he has fathered her child; a middle-aged man with a slightly thwarted face shouting as if he had owed him something; and a bigger group of people asking for more!

He was in a state of confusion. Gradually though, the words are beginning to make sense, but he refused still to understand. He merely uttered to himself, “Who are these people? What are they doing here?” He suddenly did not remember anything or anyone. He tried to recollect thoughts but can’t recover anything. He tried hard. Hard enough to put into perspective why a wide group of people would gather in front of his mansion uninvited. His victory party was long over, he thought. He was lured back by a voice. They are asking for what you have promised, remember? He tried hard again to remember and refused once more. But their words are now clearer, more lucid and unavoidable: Konsehal! Asan na ‘yong ipinangako mong kapital para sa itatayo kong negosyo? Nasaan na po ang tulong na sinabi niyo noong eleksyon, ibinoto pa naman namin kayo dahil doon! With these all clear to him, still he hesitated to go down and face them. So unlikely of the past weeks when he was so willing and in all smiles shaking their hands. In his perplexity, he sought refuge from the concrete walls of his folks’ mansion and felt somehow secured. But instincts tell him, this won’t be the last. The words that lasted on his mind: IT’S PAY BACK TIME!

Allow me to share this short story about the aftermath of the recently concluded elections on a young politician who crafted his way to his post thru groceries and unconcrete promises to his constituents. This is fictional. And I sincerely hope that you do not in anyway find yourself in this short story, either as the “he” who suddenly turned deaf or the “crowd” that continues to cry out. Unfortunately however, this may be happening in the very near future if it is still not happening today somewhere out there…Isabela City perhaps?

What is the moral of the story then? The narrative has a great deal to do with the Biblical proposition: WE REAP WHAT WE SOW. In politics, when a candidate’s platform is rooted on money politics and personal interest, his eventual assumption to power signifies only two things: PERPETUATION OF POWER AND CORRUPTION. He has no choice really, sink or swim he needs to sustain the whims and caprices of his constituents. Empty promises and commitments ranging from “pangbinyag” to “pampalibing” are common practices which are deeply etched in our political culture. Political solicitation is from womb to tomb. Hence, for every handshake and “beso-beso” during barangay sorties, a deal is sealed. Literally, a politico so committed with traditional politics could never meet the demands of his evil practices without dipping his fingers in public coffers. Whatever it takes he has to give in to their demands at any cost if he wants political survival. What else could we expect from this vulture? Indeed power corrupts absolutely. In the long run, the dutiful taxpayers of this nation are at the losing end having to shoulder the burden of incessantly filling the monetary buckets of government.

In my article, “New Breed on the Block: Young trapos in local politics?” I warned the voters, mainly constituents of my beloved hometown, to examine carefully young candidates running for public office. I was appalled of the fact that trapos nowadays are not anymore imaged after some old and beer-bellied politicos but even amongst the good built yuppies. In fact, although I knew that my past post had lame targets, I never imagined that the said article would create a big fiasco over the net. The people on the other end did everything to argue with me except answer the very basic issue of the exposition I did. As I see it, the reason why this fiasco over the net got big is because they failed to be objective. Their plan of attack was simple: shy away from the issue then attack the writer. God! I just can’t imagine how much time they have devoted in seeing through me. They tried to explain why this writer writes the things he writes and why he writes the way he does. In fact, in defense of his brother, Roland Rodriguez had given me a needle-like lecture on sociology, trying it hard to explain why I was critical about his brother, Councilor-elect Mr. Abner Rodriguez. He discussed in that response all the sociological characteristics of the Filipinos, i.e., crab mentality, amor proprio, etc, trying to point out that I was unFilipino. But then again, we do not need all these terms to explain my political leanings and criticisms. We do not need so. And we do not have to. They merely should answer the question I laid down. That’s being objective. I would not attempt to be a self-proclaimed sociologist like him. You see, some people envision public office as something that will boost their egos, fame and influence on society. They often think highly of themselves so much so that they can never accept any kind of criticism. Not even an objective one. They instantly take umbrage and unleash the critics with senseless bickering and below-the-belt innuendos. Now why is this happening? I would like to believe that this has something to do with the wrong motivation and lack of understanding of what public office truly means. It seems that even at this point they could not harmonize the basics of free speech in relation to “public figure, public interest and governmental powers”. Clearly, they have a limited view of the entire democratic framework. In the scheme of things, there is nothing they can do about it. That’s how democracy works. This kind of elitist mentality, wrong motivation and all are the very causes of malfunctions under the present political system. I must say however that, in my opinion, being “not objective” is NOT a collective character of all Filipinos. I am in no better position to say that. Maybe the other man can for he devoted all his discourse in educating me as if I am reading a sociology handout in college. Nope, it’s not a Filipino like thing. It’s basically human’s way to escape things when everything else fails.

As far as I can still recollect, it all started with this query: Did he or did he not engage in traditional politics to win a seat in the local council by giving out noodles and cans of sardines? Firstly, let me clear that the name of this public official never came from me. It was his supporters who flaunted his name. So they must, I understand, defend him at all costs even if it means coming out of the real issue. I can’t think of a better explanation for their behavior but this: How on earth can you find the right words to defend something or someone you know is wrong? The answer is simple again: Go out of the box and shy away from the issue. Their first strike: Our supposed familial ties. On my part, that should have never been brought forwarded. It was and should never have been an issue. They did not realize that by bringing that familial thing, they created a scenario that convicted their ‘public official’ more. Their message was clear: I should stop writing about my observations in our recently concluded elections, especially that regarding our local elections in Isabela City, because we are family after all. This was to me, the lamest mean to escape the situation because in the end, their defense ended as a plea. NAGMAMAKAAWA PARA TIGILAN NA PARA NA LANG SA DAHILAN NA MAGKAPAMILYA. It would have been different if they have told me to cease writing because I am wrong and not because we are simply related by blood. My respect would have been easily bought, este, gained in that way. Kidding aside, I must stress that the saying that “blood is thicker than water” finds no application in politics and governance. For if it does, you, as a public official, exposes a kind of governance that encourages corruption and palakasan. I also remember the brother saying to me that his brother will never succumb to corruption if elected as city councilor because from his very words, “they have always lived a luxurious life because of his family’s hardwork.” The term “luxurious” struck me in a different light. On my part, he should have at least used the term “comfortable” or even “contented” which to me are more innocuous terms in light of the discussion. The word scared me, really! Luxuries should always give in to public office and service. Otherwise, it’s dooms day. Public service, in its honest sense, can never live up with the luxurious life he has. Reality however bits us hard, wounding us deep. Luxury and public service are congruent terms in a corrupt political setting. Anyway, let us give him credit for his truthfulness. I hope they were as truthful when confronted with the sardines and groceries issue, lol. Just a thought! Now you may say, "C'mon, give this guy a break and let him prove his worth in the council." Yes, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt but on one condition: NO MORE BEATING AROUND THE BUSH AND SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT! Did you or did you not? I can read your mind and I agree. It certainly takes a great deal to admit one’s shortcoming. But that honesty does not make you less of a man. We all have our shortcomings. In fact, history has unfolded several times that reviving a besmirched reputation starts from honesty. It must not end here though. What matters is what we do after a fault. Remember, a bad beginning emulates a worse middle and figures a worst ending. It’s a vicious cycle that only we can stop.
.
To end this exposition, I would emphasize again that this phenomenon of young trapos joining politics is far more dangerous because they are more likely to stay in power for the longest time by merely replacing the old players in the system. I’m a hopeless idealist alright, but something tells me that my ideals would in a way reflect the common sentiment of the silent minority that change must come from the outside. But what happens if those who are tasked to instill noble reforms in the old system are merely heirs of the traditional system-operators? Here I would like to suggest that the system is not the problem. The system was meant to serve as a medium to bridge the chasm, forge consensus between the people on one hand, and government on the other. But our government officials, the operators in the system manipulated it to suit their personal agendas. Again, similar to a philosophical assumption, when the starting point is flawed everything is bound to be wrongheaded. It is best then, that we should not expect too much from the incoming young “Honorables” whose mandate to rule stems from the evil practices of trapo politics. This is not an omen but a warning to our fellowmen to choose the people they want to run the system. It’s also a challenge, a brave challenge to run counter the present political maladies in the country.

Reference: To Build Upon A Rock: Excerpts from Public Discourses 1967 to 1987 by Salvador H. Laurel (1987)

Why I Am Still A Christian?

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God;because if there be one, he must more approve of the homeage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."- Thomas Jefferson

Allow me today to write about my Christian faith and how I wrestled with recurring doubts to satisfy my intellectual curiosity and worldly urges through the years. At the outset, let me stress that I was born a cultural Catholic. However, upon reaching the age of six (6), I was exposed to an entirely different belief. It was my mother, a dedicated elementary teacher, who opened our eyes to the teachings of the bible and Christianity. From then, the whole family shifted devotion and became born again Christians. As the words imply, we felt being born again into this world, with a new faith to hold on to. Our new faith catalyzed the irreversible changes in our family. I witnessed first hand how my father changed his life instantly, from habitual drunkard to a living saint. He was in a state of total transfiguration. Meanwhile, the rest of us vowed to spread the gospel in our community. On my part and so with my two older siblings, we ventured into the realm of reading bible stories and other gospel anecdotes. I can say that this exposure has honed me to be the writer and reader that I am today. Since then, I can beastly say that my reading skills and comprehension hyped unimaginably. Although admittedly I was an inconsistent honor student in school, but when it comes to bible quizzes I always emerge as the ultimate victor above anyone else. As my spirit is languished with a fresh faith, my tot brain was flooded with bible characters and scriptural verses one after the other.

Later, my desire to read the bible became monotonous until the passion dwindled to ground zero. It was not abrupt, though. Gradually, as I discovered the wild edges of secular thoughts and practices, I began to question the very faith I turned down the other one for. At the age of twelve (12), I became obsessed with rock music and learned to play the guitar as fast as I could. My fondness for bible characters dramatically shifted to rock icons like the Beatles and later to a much heavier stuff. How, un Christian-like of me! I turned deaf to all criticisms, especially of my mother who was very against it. Unheeding her authority, together with my high school buddies, we formed a rock band to satisfy our rock n’ roll fantasy. Now, we felt like certified rockstars! Suddenly, I was being reborn again! This time I was embracing another passion …

For quite sometime, we enjoyed local popularity like appearing in local television shows and radio programs. Humbly, we won the much coveted battle of the bands contest. The perks and porks of slight popularity elevated our minds to a nearly euphoric level. Being the popular guys we were, flirting with girls was much easier. Add in all the mischief we seemed licensed to do so, undoubtedly, this new passion has moved me further away from my Christian faith. It was on the brink of destruction and no amount of biblical passages could save it from ruin.

My unchristian journey continued until college. Way passed through it however, I was beginning to see an unclear direction for my future. This time however, my desire to turn my life into the path where it should be was abrupt. I suddenly realized how education could lift me from the emptiness I am feeling. I completely abandoned my foolishness and decided to devote more time in my studies. But reviving my faith was never put into issue. My Christian faith remained dormant in many ways except that by this time I regularly attend Sunday service in our church. Thus again, did not revive my Christian faith even in some little way. The next lines would illustrate why.

Please give me this chance to make these admissions. The sermons delivered by our pastor never arouse my intellectual hormones let alone strengthening my Christian faith. Going to church every Sunday became more of a routine rather than a sacrosanct duty for every devout Christian. These made me crave for an unorthodox or radical perspective of the bible. I hail for a teaching far from the usual evangelical sermons which to me were purely rhetorical and conventional. These things however were not done without a little sense of remorse for my slowly weakening faith. In fact, I feared that one day I may not be able to defend my Christian faith against other religious dogmas. To counter this, I made a commitment to pursue the truth at all cost. Thus, I began to ask serious questions regarding origin of life, morality and ultimately the very existence of God. As mentioned, the conventional evangelical teachings failed to provide persuasive answers to these critical questions. Thus, I remained a nominal Christian for quite sometime. So it must have been fate (that’s contextual), that I entered law school…the battleground for logical thinking and academic discipline.

In law school we were thought not to take anything at face value. Facts must be supported by convincing evidence otherwise you can't justify your theory to win a case. Having this kind of training and thinking, I started to test my Christian faith using my training as a law student. I contemplated whether most Christians are really indeed Christians in the truest sense of the word. Do they have the right reasons to support their belief? This is where the distinction between faith based on reason (reasonable faith) and faith guided by blind assumptions deserves critical precarious considerations.

Here there should be a clear delineation between cultured Christians and authentic believers or followers of Christ. And so I search deeper and deeper, asking questions about faith and the existence of God. To satisfy my intellectual curiosity, I read books on secular worldviews. Having proclaimed myself as a fledgling Christian apologist, I started to conduct my own research and ended up with Bertrand Russell's essay on "Why I am Not A Christian." I must admit though, that Russell's objection to Christianity is a bit shallow and mostly couched in an open-ended language. Nonetheless this essay however bolstered my curiosity and decided to search deeper on atheism and agnosticism. Finally I devoured books authored by militant atheists Sam Harris (e.g.The End of Faith and Letter to the Christian Nation) and Christopher Hitchens (e.g. God is not great), both are staunch defenders of atheism or should I say hard core atheists. Most of their objections, except for their incessant anti-God tantrums, are valid and intellectually stimulating so to speak. I then entered into the realm of metaphysics which I found amusing but very difficult to understand in first reading. By this time I was partly convinced that the anti-theist theory is bereft of any logical arguments as to the non-existence of God. Embracing atheism as a way of life is like succumbing to a life of perpetual emptiness, a life without meaning. But still questions exist in my head. If atheism is a farcical worldview, does Christianity provide authentic answers to all questions pertaining to meaningful existence- a life based on morality? Again I searched for answers carefully weighing everything and anything that Christianity has to offer as the gospel of truth. Then I came across Ravi Zacharias’ book on Christian apologetics entitled Can Man Live Without God. (e.g. The End Of Reason) This work tackles on the philosophical aspects of Christianity and deals squarely among others, with Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason” on the issue of morality and happiness. Then I resorted to Lee Strobel’s outstanding book, The Case for Faith, a very interesting book which answers almost all my questions and doubts as to what faith really is in essence. My further readings obviously expanded my understanding on faith and reason, between theism and anti-theism, and more importantly the essence of being a true Christian. I always thought that God gave me the absolute freedom to navigate uncharted waters so that I may be able to appreciate Him more. To do otherwise, I guess is to depict God as a lesser Being.

The pursuit of truth is a never ending journey for us Christians. My journey so far has brought me satisfaction both intellectually and spiritually. While I do not wish to discuss Christian philosophy or apologetics in this writing, the message I want to convey is two fold. First, it is a normal thing for us human beings to question or to have doubts regarding our respective faith. By encountering doubts, we pursue the truth, we search for a deeper explanation about life and meaningful existence. That is the essence of free will. Freedom to think is a God given right, use it to know your creator by heart. Second, by pursuing the truth you may be able to defend your Christian faith in any given forum, and in the end convince others to be followers of Christ. Knowing the truth is the decisive answer to the question on why I am still a Christian all this time

I THINK therefore I am for GIBO

Right from the start, I’m torn between two astute presidential candidates. This is not always the case ever since I became a registered voter. Normally, I had it all figured out a year or two before official declarations are made. But in this crucial 2010 Presidential Election, I must say I walked the extra mile before reaching a decisive decision whom to support. To be fair, I deliberated so hard on the pros and cons of each prospective candidate. Spent enormous time in research and profiling. I really wanted to make sure that if I will select a presidential candidate, I may be able to defend him not on Plaza Miranda but coffee shops. Why coffee shops? Well, for one I’m an insatiable coffee drinker. I love to talk, talk and talk over a cup of brewed coffee. (Not all the time of course, especially when the one sitting at the other end of the table loves to talk more about non-sense TV shows like the pathetic Pinoy Big Brother.) But more than this, coffee shops are convenient venues for the perceived “educated” working class in the metropolis. This is not to say that those who can’t afford Starbucks or Figaro are bereft of any opportunity to have fruitful discussions. In fact, even the street sweeper has a lot of sensible things to say on socio-political issues more than the conos whose silly conversation centers on six pack abs and weight loss. Anyway, my point is, in coffee-shops people tend to shed their inhibitions on almost anything. I would like to think that caffeine has something to do with this. It may be psychological or a cop-out to some, but coffee to me is something closely related with my personality. And so before throwing off my hat in the arena of coffee-table discussion, I had to make sure that my turf is secured. Heck, my presidential candidate deserves a zealous defense against the evils of politics like black propaganda and character-assassination. It has been my practice to never discuss issues with anyone who focuses more on personalities rather than substantive issues like platforms of government and track-record. Can you defend your preference with passion and objectivity? I’m sure you do and so am I! So here it goes.

At the outset and by looking at the prospective line-up of presidential candidates, I decided to go for Richard “Dick” Gordon all the way. Not until the eloquent Gilbert “GIBO” Teodoro came in the picture. I came to know Gilbert Teodoro long before he became a member of the House of Representatives but when he landed at the top spot of the 1989 Bar Examinations. As we all know, the bar examination is “arguably” the most difficult government examination administered no less than the Supreme Court itself. While passing the bar exam is more than enough ticket to success, topping the bar is surely every barrister’s elusive dream. GIBO, in all his media interviews, never bragged about topping the bar or bagging the Dean’s Medal for Academic Excellence in the prestigious UP College of Law. And oh, not to mention GIBO is a holder of Master of Laws from Harvard University. With all his sterling academic achievements both here and abroad, GIBO remains a humble creature.

You must be nuts if you say that GIBO is not a standout amongst the presidential candidates during live television debates. While most candidates stutter when answering stale yet tricky questions propounded to them by the audience, GIBO managed to answer it all with honesty and sincerity. He may not be a great speaker in the likes of Ferdinand Marcos or Ninoy Aquino but in terms of wit, deep grasp of issues, and vision of government, GIBO could emerge as the runaway winner in today’s presidential derby. Unlike most presidential bets, GIBO never promised the stars and the moon just to win the masses. He is a realist. He does not have to hide beneath the cloth of motherhood statements to the extent of exuding false hopes to the people. In my article Aquino and Villar: Slogging through Campaign Slogans, I lambasted two “messianic” inflicted presidential candidates for exploiting the issue of poverty and corruption throughout the campaign season. The 1987 Constitution is emphatic that a president can only serve for one term and that is for six (6) years with no re-election. How the hell can a president extirpate deeply-rooted problems of poverty and corruption in six (6) years? The least he can do is to minimize or lay a foundation for the next president, may be his vice-president or any other future president. Is this what they are trying to say? I think not. Most of them seem to make us believe that they have some sort of a magic wand in their hands. And with a magic spell like Harry Potter’s “Wingardium leviosa!” alas, poverty and corruption disappear in the face of our nation. And so for the next six (6) years, we will be all living under a utopian state as envisioned by Plato. No hunger, no corruption and to make it more rustic, let’s say that there will be angels singing and trumpeting all throughout the six-year term. I understand that a populist platform is an effective campaign strategy. But sorry to say, like most thinking Filipinos, I’m not buying it. I don’t get it really. The reason why most candidates resort to messianic-strategy is because they have little respect for the masses. Like what I always say, necessitous men are not free men. This to my mind is one of the factors that separate GIBO from other presidential candidates. His honesty and sincerity can be judged with the way he presents himself to the public. He talks more about feasible reforms supported by hard facts and figures. If you, by any chance happens to be an avid viewer of presidential debates then you know very well what I’m talking about. With all the deeply rooted problems of this nation, what we need are real solutions coming from a realistic and intelligent leader. Of all presidential candidates, only GIBO has the guts to admit in public that genuine reforms may take some time to implement but we will be heading towards that direction. Now taking into consideration our political culture, how’s that for a presidential candidate?

The reason why most people tend to shy away with politics or government for that matter is because they picture it as a dirty game. This attitude has serious repercussions. It discourages citizens to participate in the affairs of government. It likewise promotes complacency and attention-deficit on the part of the people in relation with the government. In the end, the outcome is manifested with the crop of leaders we have elected to sit in public office. The players, mostly traditional politicians have a lot to do with this negative perception. This is especially true even during election season. Have you seen how LP presidential bet Noynoy Aquino and Nacionalista standard-bearer throw mud at each other? The equation is simple: Noy accordingly has an untainted character but very poor track record while Villar has a relatively solid legislative track record but with a questionable character. Now, with this kind of picture, the strategy is predictable. Pinch salt on the weaknesses and bank on the perceived advantages. I don’t have to elaborate any further since the media has always been jumpy every time these two presidential candidates fired at each other. It’s an ugly mess and I don’t want be associated with this kind of politics. If one of them happens to be your sure-fire bet to the presidency, then don’t expect reforms in government because what you see right now is what you’ll gonna get for the next six years.

Where is GIBO amidst this mudslinging politics? Well, my presidential candidate is obviously busy waging a positive campaign all over the country. Critics, mostly from the anti-GMA camps, have tried to put him down many times. Some of them throw black propaganda at him but what do they get in exchange? GIBO just simply shrugged them off. Show me one, just one TV interview where GIBO appears to be vindictive against his fiercest critics who have nothing against him except that he is a LAKAS standard bearer, and I would be willing to concede my mistake. I tell you there is none. GIBO, despite his superb credentials and being a Cojuangco, remains prudent and humble amidst the political circus. When asked about the rationale behind his positive campaign, GIBO had this to say, "If I also put hatred and negativity in my heart, and practice mudslinging, how can I unite the nation when I become the president?" LP presidential bet Noynoy Aquino has a lot to learn from his cousin on how to wage a positive campaign that promotes unity rather than divisiveness.

For argument’s sake, let us pretend that LP bet Noynoy Aquino has the much needed character and integrity to become the next Philippine president. Does it necessarily follow that all other presidential contenders are corrupt and devious? In other words, Noy Aquino or anyone for that matter has no monopoly or exclusivity whatsoever to make a pompous claim that, “Inde ako magnanakaw!” If you ask me, I will go for character plus track record. Why settle for less if we could have more. Strangely, if all that is needed is simply character to make a good president, why not elect Ang Kapatiran standard bearer JC De los Reyes or perhaps Nick Perlas to the presidency? Surely these two struggling presidential contenders have never been linked to any scandal or corruption in government. They too represent new blood in Philippine politics as opposed to trapo governance. The truth is, and some quarters may find this hard to admit, qualities such as character, intelligence and track-record are all essential features of a great president. Very well then, is there even a hint that GIBO, judging from his many years of public service, would be a “magnanakaw” if elected as the 15th Philippine President? Critics are quick to dismiss him all because he served as a cabinet member of GMA and later as the standard bearer of LAKAS. This is a clear case of guilt by association. The way I see it, this issue has always been the lone objection against GIBO. Like my pessimistic friends, critics label GIBO as GMA’s lapdog. On the contrary, I believe this single yet defensible barrier may work to GIBO’s advantage. It is here where GIBO show the makings of a great president.

In various live presidential debates and media interviews, GIBO has always been castigated and tagged as GMA’s puppet. However, critics don’t seem to care to check on his accomplishment as the youngest appointee since Ramon Magsaysay to head a key executive position. In August 2007 and at the age of 43, GIBO was appointed as Secretary of the National Defense and chairman of the National Disaster Coordinating Council. As Secretary of Defense, GIBO led the campaign against communist and Muslim rebels. GIBO likewise vowed to employ anti-corruption measures to cleanse the department. And he did. To systematically combat corruption within DND, GIBO implemented a policy that would coincide with transparency and accountability in all DND’s transactions especially with a third party who belongs to the business sector. As chairman of the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) GIBO oversaw rescue and rehabilitation efforts in areas devastated by typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng. In both tasks, GIBO undoubtedly gain public admiration for his performance as a cabinet secretary.

During his stint as Secretary of DND and while serving concurrently as the head of the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), I never heard an iota of accusation charging GIBO of corruption. And so if GIBO did a fine job as a cabinet secretary, why charge him guilty for the excesses committed by the Arroyo administration? Is there a reasonable link between GIBO’s performance as cabinet secretary and the Helo Garci, Fertilizer scams, NBN-ZTE fiasco and other constitutional violations committed by GMA? Time and again, critics tried to squeeze blood on GIBO because he is the administration’s candidate. Believe me, I’m not an apologist for GMA’s administration. I have been very critical in my writings every time GMA so decides to tinker with the 1987 Constitution. But let us put things in the proper perspective and be objective enough.

I may not be able to cite each and every accomplishment of GIBO as a budding lawmaker and as a cabinet member but one thing is sure about my candidate, he definitely has what it takes to conquer the highest position in the land. Yeah right, Aquino and Villar are the frontrunners based on manipulated electoral surveys but GIBO has been upstaging them in every presidential debate. To me, it’s more than enough that GIBO left a significant mark for voters to rethink their choices and maybe, just maybe, switch their support and go for the substance. If you want a cheesy presidency, by all means vote for LP's Benigno Simeon Aquino III. Or maybe if you’re not into that, there is transactional politics or the win-win solution approach offered by NP Manuel Villar. As for the convicted plunderer Erap Estrada all I can say is, YOU HAD YOUR WINDOW SIR…AND YOU BLEW IT BIG TIME! No pun intended but what is at stake here is the future of our country and GIBO is the best choice for the 2010 Presidential Election. I THINK therefore I am for GIBO!

New Breed On The Block: Young trapos in local politics?

I would like to write about local politics today. I would have preferred to discuss national politics again but my interest has shifted dramatically towards the micro-level aspect of the entire political spectrum. I remember what my feisty professor on local government would always say: all politics is local. And there is absolutely a ring of truth about this observation. Certainly, national officials, particularly the incumbents who seek re-election, draw enormous strength from their wards and errand boys in the local level. This is where political parties play an important role for any national candidate during elections, at least ideally. But culled from the premise that all politics is local, are we to say that most local officials or candidates too have little regard for party principles? Conversely, I would like to believe that the deterioration of principled politics in the national level is but a mirror of what is really happening in the parochial arena. It is really of no moment even if you have elected the best presidential candidate come 2010 if in the end, you have just filled the city hall with the worst possible incompetent candidates for public office. I mean let us be realistic in all this. If you happen to be a gullible person and you picture the next president as someone who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, well you are in for a disappointment. The next president, even with the best possible technocrats and advisers in his cabinet, can only do so much during his term of office. To be able to solve all the deeply-rooted problems in our country necessitates more than just a great chief executive but it also entails a strong and stable foundation of the entire structure. At the end of the day, the progress of your respective hometowns will have to depend with the kind of local officials you have elected and your devout participation in the community. What I am trying to say here is plain and simple: political reforms must come first from the bottom and not on top of the political structure as pundits would like to suggest. Put bluntly, elect principled leaders in the foundational level, which is the local government then translate it up to the national tiers of the political structure.

I understand that as a rule, ethics and politics can never be merged into one. As long as the key players of Philippine politics continue to dominate the game, we can never expect legitimate reforms and genuine transformations for our country. Change must come from the outside not from within the old system. I shall propose the term “outside” to mean the youth sector of society. Indeed, this observation affirms the age-old saying that it is hard to teach old dogs with new tricks. This is especially true if we rely on traditional politicians to make meaningful reforms in the political system I am therefore deeply convinced that the youth can introduce new kind of politics within our corrupted system of government and it is in them I can foresee the reinvigoration of party principles as a democratic way of life. For one, unlike the old-timers of the present political system, the youth sector is not yet a prey to cynical thoughts. They possess purity of principles that will stand the test of solidity amidst the recurring political turmoil in our country. I have put so much faith in the youth of my generation to shoulder the burden and help educate the masses in terms of political education. Or better yet join the political mainstream and gradually infuse youthful idealism to counter the gargantuan tide of corruption and ineptitude that thrive incessantly in the halls of public offices.

The question therefore now is: how best can we determine who amongst the local candidates has what it takes to bear with the constitutional declaration that “Public office is a public trust?” I think the most decisive starting point here is for the voter to look into the candidate’s character. Verily, when I speak of character, the same should not be limited to the examination of a candidate’s public character but private as well. Necessarily, a leader must be whole. He cannot have his public character be honest but on the other hand, have his private character be deceitful and corrupt. The core ethical values like respect, honesty, and the will to distinguish right and wrong amidst over-powering temptations inherent in public office are all ingredients of a great leader. I would like to think, and as I propose in this writing, that young candidates possess the much needed character for public office. This however does not mean that all young candidates running for public office are character-proof. In fact in my hometown Isabela City (Province of Basilan) where politics is as devious as the devil, the reverse is more likely the rule. It saddens me to know that even young candidates, people I grew up with, have not lived up to the expectations of what youthful idealism should be. Albeit there are indications of immense political awareness from the youth sector these days, thanks to the Internet by the way, the political vigor and exuberance inherent in them have not been translated locally. Sadly, the local scene still remains pretty much the same. Most young candidates have nothing but well-sounding surnames, wealth and porma as part of their credentials. Visit their Facebook accounts and see for yourself how they visualize themselves as the next Philippine president when the office they seek to land on is simply that of a city councilor. I have at least one encounter with a pompous young candidate from my hometown who postures himself as the pag-asa ng kabataan. And since he flaunted his candidacy for city council in Facebook, I could not help but asked him some relevant questions about platforms and his ideas on local statecraft. To my dismay, he simply shrugged off the questions and boasted instead his supposed achievements as a young philanthropist in terms of humanitarian and civic projects. What was he thinking? Organizing party events, sponsoring a basketball team, and sitting as a judge for a gay pageant makes him qualified to be a city councilor? Is there a reasonable connection between his purported generosity and the functions of a city councilor under the present Local Government Code? Or is he posturing as gay rights advocate once elected in the city council? Let me remind him as early as now that the august office he wishes to serve is a seat of deliberations. Questions involving his views on individual liberty and the basics of government are not misplaced because as a future local legislator he will encounter these concepts in drafting ordinances. It is best, by way of preparation, that he should browse once in a while the provisions of the Local Government Code and the 1987 Constitution for enlightenment. He could have earned my respect had his sudden itch for generosity came long before the local elections but the timing is really off and the motive is highly suspicious.

Let me integrate the term “character” with party loyalty for it is here where a young candidate either manifest signs of conviction as a future leader or the tendency to emerge as a sure-fire traditional politician someday. In my writings, I have always been critical with the multi-party system as structured under the 1987 Constitution. From the democratic vantage point, apart from the fact that it is incompatible with a presidential system, such mechanism has greatly contributed to the demise of principled politics in our country. Worse, down in the local level, political dynasties continue to gain sturdy support from their constituents who are immensely benefited by patronage politics. As a result, political families have effectively replaced political parties as key institutions in the democratic polity. Again I wish to remind the readers that political parties are essential components of a functioning democracy. Without a strong party system and in the absence of political watchdogs like the academe, we can never expect political maturity from the people especially the masses. And following the bottom-up approach I mentioned earlier, it seems that the light at the end of the tunnel remains long in sight. To be sure this is not to say that under our present system there are no respectable political parties to count on during elections. In fact, despite my own misgivings on Senator Noy Aquino running as president, I have always respected the Liberal Party for having strong and reform-oriented programs of government. But because of the multi-party system and not to mention the party-list system, political parties in our country can hardly be seen as a reliable institution to bank on in terms of principled politics. Thus, elections in this country whether national or local elections, are personality-based contest rather than an issue-oriented democratic exercise.

It is therefore an imperative for the young candidates especially in local politics to understand the rudiments of the entire system so that they may be able to assess how to effectively infuse “youthful” reforms in government. Local statecraft entails more than just noble ideals or intentions but more importantly how to implement it as well. In other words, candidates must both possess pristine motives to serve the people better and a firm grasp on the basic mechanics of government. This two should always compliment each other. It is best then to join a well-entrenched political party composed of men and women with impeccable reputation and with a solid track-record on governance. However, if you find these political parties too “political” in the sense that the people who composed it are so ruthless to hold the reins of government then by all means take the road less traveled and run as an independent candidate. And stay independent at all times. It is unfortunate that in my beloved hometown some of our young candidates for local positions seem to show early signs of political opportunism if not arrogance. As I said it is fairly within the judgment of a candidate whether to join a political party or not. But to play safe and engage in double-talk do not speak much of a promising leader coming from the ranks of the youth sector. Take this young local aspirant for example, while pledging his undying loyalty and commitment to his party he also secretly supports the ruling dynasty. Rumor has it though that this young aspirant was recently fired from the party not because of disloyalty but due to fluctuating childish behavior during sorties. Some I presume opted to run as independent candidates because they feel that most political parties do not have definite programs of government other than motherhood statements. If you are neophyte, or a perennial loser and you happen to run as an independent candidate I must say that I praise your courage not to join the circus despite the odds of running without a racehorse. However there are also those who, young as they are, have already mustered the art of cunningness at this early point of their political careers. These young vultures either run under the banner of a well organized political party or run as independent candidates but nonetheless joined the bandwagon as guest candidates. There can be no logical reason for this tactic other than wanting to play both cards safely. But surely, I don’t see any principled politics here let alone the makings of a great youth leader. In times of never-ending crises, a potential leader must always takes sides on issues that define convictions no matter what the political consequences are. There is no middle-ground in the face of a power-hungry administration, either join the opposition or stay truly independent. We have had enough of these fence-sitting trapos in the halls of government. To run as an independent candidate while at the same time appearing as a guest candidate of a potent political party will certainly mislead the voters. I challenge these young candidates who are “semi-independents” if not binabae, to bolt out from these parties as guest candidates and once and for all make a firm stand on issues that will help the voters decide intelligently. These reasons make me very skeptic to take our chances on these young politicians.

After all what has been said, the bottom line is: taking the big leap towards change and reform in our government, starts in our hands, the youth. While traditional politics may have robbed some of these youth candidates/aspirants of the innocence and pristine motives, the voting youth has a duty to ground them back to where they should be. The malfunctions in our political system while largely attributed to the players of the system, we too are partly responsible for its failures. And so this coming May 10 elections, let us start a youthful revolution by choosing the right candidates for public office. The bottom-up approach as proposed above is designed to push the youth sector to take the lead on matters of governance. Again if we want meaningful reforms, change must come from the outside not from within the present political system. Simply, these new breed of politicians must not keep abreast with the old and traditional “public servants.” They, as youth, must recreate, reform, if not give breath to a genuine new breed, unbitten by the dangerous bug that brought our country into malady.