Category: elections

Honesty, lies and Sara Duterte

this was first published in march 2019 @inquirerdotnet, when the mayor was campaigning for her senatorial bets. now that she seems to be on the verge of running for president sa 2022, time to double up. the marcoses are not nag-iisa.

RACHEL A.G. REYES

We are not naïve, stupid or gullible. We know and even accept that in politics and in public life, white lies, untruths, evasions, dissimulation, feigning, pretense and bullshit are at times necessary, even required for political wheeling and dealing.

At the same time, truth and honesty are universally valued and cherished in social and private lives. We categorically believe that lying is wrong. Lies rebound on the liar, and we know how a single lie can wreck lives and destroy reputations. Plato was unequivocal. He said lies were evil and poisoned the soul of the person who uttered them. The French Renaissance philosopher Michel de Montaigne concurred. “In plain truth, lying is an accursed vice,” he said. “We have no tie upon one another, other than the reliability of our word.”

We can be similarly uncompromising. We demand truthfulness and honesty from our elected public servants and from our colleagues and friends. We teach our children to be truthful and honest and regard as treacherous the lover, husband or wife who is found to be untruthful and dishonest.

That said, I have been trying to fathom Sara Duterte’s thinking. The President’s daughter has recently been saying a lot about lying and honesty. But given the nature of politicking in this country, the talk has spiraled out of the realms of reason.

Sara’s thinking

As far as one can gather, her argument can be unpacked as follows: (a) all politicians lie, everybody lies; (b) honesty should not be an electoral issue; (c) there is no legal requirement for senatorial contenders to be honest, truthful and of good moral character. Neither are academic qualifications necessary. Philippine citizenship and being able to read and write would suffice.

One could take the view that championing lying, as Sara does, is hard-as-nails pragmatism. Lies can decrease conflict, promote harmony, forge compromise. In this way, one is able to justify lies, accept the utility and necessity of telling lies, if the outcome is beneficial—if more good than harm can come from falsehood. The unbounded pessimist Friedrich Nietzsche went further. He said: “That lies should be necessary to life is part and parcel of the terrible and questionable character of existence.”

Yet, society cannot possibly function if, as Sara contends, we accept that everybody lies all the time. Society, writes the British philosopher Anthony Grayling, operates on probity and integrity. “For the ordinary transactions of daily life, we have to believe that most people are telling the truth most of the time.”

But public office is a public trust

Those who penned the Philippine Constitution would agree. Section 27, Article II is explicit: “The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption.”

Moreover, Section 1 of Article XI states: “Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.”

I can’t see how these passages can be read as anything but a stern rebuke of Sara’s legal justification for lying and dishonesty in public life.

Sara is mayor of Davao City and running for reelection. She has been doing no campaigning of her own. This seems to be because she is very busy being the campaign manager and spokesperson for senatorial candidates running under her regional party Hugpong ng Pagbabago. Clearly, she is confident of winning the Davao mayoralty without too much effort on her part.

She’s loud and she swaggers

Loud and swaggering, Sara has enormous presence. She is not a senatorial contender but acts like one. Those who think that she has her eye firmly on the presidency and aims to succeed her father are probably right. Which is precisely the reason why we should listen to her carefully. She is amassing power before our very eyes.

Sara advocates lying and dishonesty as acceptable for those in public life. Why should this be so troubling? Because, as Grayling writes: “To tell a lie you have to know the truth but deliberately intend to communicate its very opposite to your audience. You thus commit a double crime: of knowing but concealing truth, a precious possession; and of purposefully leading others away from it.”

Would Sara apply this standard on her children? Would she allow her husband to deceive her with lies and dishonesty?

Rachel A.G. Reyes (rachelagreyes@gmail.com) is a historian of Southeast Asia and writes commentary pieces on science, gender and politics.

 

Bongbong Marcos should apologize for his father

ANTONIO CONTRERAS

INDEED, children should not inherit their parents’ sins. But in reality, we do. In a culture where debt of gratitude is inherited, even debts, whether financial or moral, are bequeathed by deceased parents to their offspring. We cannot take pride in the accomplishments of our parents, without balancing it with a sense of remorse, and the duty to ask forgiveness from those they may have offended.

I once argued against the act of asking for forgiveness for our parents’ actions, simply because I was a firm believer of a kind of ethics where you can only be held liable or responsible for the things that you had control over, or that in which you had an active participation. But upon much deeper reflection, I soon realized that this is a very Western construct, where responsibility and rights are very much defined within an individualistic ethos.

This is not what happens in our communitarian culture where family honor is considered to be a well-revered institution, that in some cultural groups, clan wars erupt to defend it. Thus, preserving honor is not a mere individual construct, and becomes a family duty.

It is in this context that former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. should apologize for the sins of his father, the late President Ferdinand Marcos Sr.

At the outset, it must be emphasized that the Marcos family has always been pleading for a fair and objective treatment. They appeal to our sense of balance as we pass judgment on the complex period which Marcos Sr. had presided over, including the dark years of martial law. In fact, it is precisely because of such fairness and objectivity that Bongbong Marcos should not gloss over such complexity, by denying that everything was bright and sunny.

I lived through that period, and while I know that there were benefits that came out, there were also black memories that darkened the period of his father’s rule. To be objective is to take stock of both the positive and the negative. Bongbong Marcos cannot remind us of the good things that his father did without recognizing the bad things that happened during his term in office. After all, Marcos Sr. was not perfect as he was human, and he had his flaws. He was also not in total control of the actions of his people, but as president he bore the responsibility of being in command.

I know of people who disappeared in the dark of night, brothers in the student organization I joined. I have been told stories of torture. Indeed, these are people who may have rebelled against the state and joined the communist insurgency that threatened to make the Philippines into one of the Asian dominoes that faced the risk of falling, as the communist ideology was wreaking havoc and bringing death and destruction as it engaged in its expansionist project.

Nevertheless, there are rules of war which state parties are duty bound to uphold. While I do not expect rebels to uphold the law, what distinguished the state agents from them is the commitment to act within the boundaries of civilized combat, that inhuman punishments are prohibited, and that rights even of people who committed crimes against the government should be respected and protected. Thus, when state agents commit these atrocities, government leaders are duty bound to apologize and take responsibility.

There have been allegations of corruption, and the amassing of hidden wealth. I have always depended on the courts to adjudicate and determine the veracity of such allegations, and it is a given fact that sans the partisan agenda of those who hounded the Marcos family, independent courts both here and abroad have made judicial determination of the veracity of some of those claims.

If only for these, then it is in order for Bongbong to act honorably by recognizing that there were instances where laws of reasonable engagement against dissidents were violated and that there were instances where the courts established that indeed there were economic crimes committed. There is a preponderance of things that warrant, at the very least, a display of sincere remorse and contrition.

But instead, Bongbong has doubled down by refusing to apologize. He boldly declared that he is thankful that he is a Marcos, even congratulating himself for choosing his parents very well. Of course, no one is telling him not to be thankful for having been born into a very privileged family. And while he actually didn’t choose his parents, he can actually choose how to honor them.

As children, we do not control the actions of our parents. And while we owe so much to them, there are many parts of their lives that we are not familiar with or that were probably hidden from us. We are not privy to all the lies they told, every transgression they made, and every sin they committed. There is nothing dishonorable if we apologize for these. And it becomes a duty when we somewhat knew, and we tolerated it, and worse, we benefited from it.

For me, that is the biggest honor a son can perform on behalf of an imperfectly human parent — to bear the burden of an apology which the parents were denied of asking when they were still alive.

There is one other compelling reason why Bongbong should sincerely apologize. He is a presidential candidate offering himself to the people. If we believe surveys, scientific and otherwise, he has a chance of being the next president of the Republic. He has a solid base of support. He has nothing to lose if he apologizes. He may not convince many of those who have an intense dislike for him and his family, but he may just create more space to unify this toxically divided country by changing his narrative and redeem it in the eyes of those who are still open to changing their minds.

 

Grace #Halalan2022

Katrina Stuart Santiago

Talking 2022 means talking about the elephant in the room that is Grace Poe.

It is clear to anyone who has a sense of how elections are won and lost, who has as starting point Duterte-Marcos’s massive propaganda machinery, who looks at surveys critically vis a vis one’s own political biases, that the only way to win this is to bring together the business sector, the middle classes, and the mass vote behind one candidate.

It was clear, since the 2019 Senatorial election results, that this would be Grace.

And no, you’re not talking to a Grace Poe fan. Search through this site and my social media accounts and you’ll see that I have had the worst opinions of her in terms of where she stands on oligarchs, at the same time that I have been impressed by how she takes the side of the transport sector and commuters in the Senate inquiries she’s led. This doesn’t make me two-faced. It makes HER a Senator, and it makes me a citizen who agrees as much as I might disagree with the people in power.

But that IS the thing isn’t it? The right to vote is tied to a sense of our responsibility to nation, not to the people we vote into positions of power. We are not their fans, or their followers; positions of power aren’t Facebook Pages or Twitter accounts. This is about citizenship and about having a sense of what nation needs at any given point, relative to the decisions that our leaders make for us, in our names, using our funds, regardless of whether we voted for them or not.

No one seems to see this anymore, and this is no surprise. Duterte propaganda has pushed even the most sane, most rational among us to turn to fanaticism and troll discourse, which is easy to fall prey to on social media, where people across Left to Liberal leanings have enjoyed deeper echo chambers. Yes, you will get leaders, from VP Leni to Makabayan talking about uniting the opposition, but none of that matters when their actors are first to engage in divisive, DDS-like behavior on public platforms.

Liberal actors throw around labels like “enabler” and “trapo” forgetting that we can list down as many from the Liberal side who are both, but more importantly failing to realize that this WILL NOT TRANSLATE to votes for VP Leni. It also only reminds us of the Liberals’ false purity politics and the moral highground that defined the elitism of the PNoy years.

The Liberals and the Ka Leody side have also discredited “winnability” as an important part of choosing a candidate on our side. This is silly. Yes, winnability and surveys shouldn’t play such an important part in who is encouraged to run. But are rules going to change just because you put up a losing candidate? Of course not. In fact putting up a candidate that is sure to lose serves Duterte-Marcos and no one else. Putting up a losing candidate is playing right into the hands of Duterte-Marcos, because they are experts at playing this electoral game and using the rules to their advantage.

You want to change the rules, you work on changing it six years before the next Presidential election. There’s no changing it with eight months to go.

Troll discourse, divisive behavior, discrediting winnability, and refusing to work from election data and facts, have been what we’ve lived with all of 2021. It was clear to me in May that unity was impossible, not with this set of actors that were leading the way, and no matter 1Sambayan trying to hide its liberal convictions (anyone with half a brain could tell this was a liberal formation from a mile away).

The social media noise and clutter, the culture of cancelling and trolling on our side, has led us to this point. It has led us to Lacson-Sotto, two (dirty?) old men who are classier, dignified versions of Duterte, both conservative, both militaristic, both representative of a misogyny that we have had enough of the past six years. It has led us to Isko Moreno who, for all the good he has done in Manila and despite good speeches, sounds like nothing more but budget Duterte-Marcos in impromptu interviews: the masa I’m-Juan-dela-Cruz rhetoric ala Duterte with no depth or vision, combined with the clean, good looking, educated voice ala Marcos. Kuya Germs would be proud of this performance.

It has led us to this point when no one wants to admit anymore, that our biggest chances of winning 2022 versus Duterte-Marcos-Pacquiao would be to have a Grace Poe run. She who is conservative enough (Cojuangco-supported enough) to get business sector support; she who is kolehiyala enough to get the middle class vote; and she who is FPJ, Susan Roces, and Ang Probinsyano enough to get the masa vote. She who has shown us her mettle with how she has dealt with the Duterte government’s disrespect of our transport works and jeepney drivers. She who was only one of two people (the other was Senator Nancy Binay) who didn’t do a Duterte fist when the 2019 Senatorial winners were proclaimed.

She who is in surveys regardless of whether she campaigns or not.

If the goal is to beat Duterte-Marcos-Pacquiao. If the goal is a unity that goes beyond our echo chambers, that goes beyond our social class, that goes beyond our notions of who deserves this. If our focus is on who will win this with us who will not just be controlled by politicians and business (Pacquiao), that will not just sell our resources to China and kill us (Duterte), that will not just continue a legacy of violence and plunder (Marcos), that will not just be a variation of the misogyny and violence of Duterte (Isko-Lacson-Sotto), that will actually allow us our democratic rights to dialogue, protest, and freedoms back.

If the goal is to WIN this, so that we can finally really defeat the tyrants among us, Grace Poe is our saving grace.

Anyone else is a losing proposition, some more murderous than others. ***

Decision time on Marcos electoral protest

Tony La Viña

With the impending release by the Supreme Court sitting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal of its ruling on vice presidential candidate Bongbong Marcos’ electoral protest against Vice President Leni Robredo for the 2016 national elections, the nation waits anxiously for the PET to do its constitutional duty.

Much has happened and been said since Marcos lodged the electoral protest three years ago. Vice President Robredo and political allies have been subject to relentless attacks to discredit the opposition, including the filing of sedition charges against them. On the other hand, the Robredo camp is said to be prematurely claiming victory even as the PET has yet to announce any action on the Caguioa report. As early as July, Robredo’s camp was asking for an early resolution of the election protest on the ground that “the result of the revision, recount and reappreciation of the ballots clearly confirm the victory of protestee Robredo.”

At this point of the protest, it is fitting to recall the resolution of the PET on August 27, 2017 which paved the way for the recount.

Read on…