The State of Our Nation and Democracy in

The State of Our Nation and Democracy in 2010: Building “The Good Society” We Want Ang Kahimtang sa Atong Nasod ug Demokrasya sa 2010: Ang Pagtukod “sa Maayong Katilingban” nga Gugma Nato Ang Kalagayan ng ating Bansa at Demokrasya sa 2010: Ang Pagbuo ng Ninanais Nating “Magandang Lipunan” By Professor Jose V. Abueva President of Kalayaan College, U. P. Professor Emeritus of Public Administration and Political Science, and Member of the Citizens’ Movement for a Federal Philippines (CMFP)

My frustration. Honestly, like many of you, I am frustrated that we, Filipinos, have not achieved more political, economic and social progress since our independence in 1946, compared to some of our progressive neighbors in Asia that were less developed then in one way or another. It’s been over sixty long years of struggle with some success, reversals and continuing crises.

Lets look at our national development historically. Filipinos –the first colonized nation in Asia to defeat a Western colonizer (Spain in 1898), declare independence, and initiate a constitutional democracy. But U. S. imperialism immediately replaced the Spanish in our land. Our patriotic forbears fought the Filipino-American War in the next few years. Nevertheless, a colonial policy of increasing Filipino autonomy and democratization enabled the Filipinos to gain experience in local government, legislation and public administration.

In 1935 the ten-year Philippine Commonwealth was established under a U. S. law and a Philippine constitution, in preparation for our independence in 1946. We suffered so much under the brutal and destructive Japanese occupation (1941 -1945). We had to rehabilitate our ravaged economy and rebuild our institutions.

Philippines—a fast-growing, developing nation and aspiring democracy. 1. Philippines has a population of 94 million, the Philippines is now the world’s 12 th most populous nation, although in land area our homeland is among the smallest (in 71 st place). We have more people than Vietnam, Malaysia, and Germany, which are larger in area. 2. With some 10 million Filipinos abroad as permanent residents or transient workers, we are conscious of our Global Filipino Nation. 3. Overseas Filipinos may now avail themselves of their rights to dual citizenship and absentee voting and help even more in our national development beyond their valued remittances.

4. Mounting population pressure on our limited land, natural resources, and development efforts congests our cities and aggravates the degradation of the environment. 5. Drives many Filipinos to find jobs abroad at the sacrifice of their separation from their families. 6. Global warming and climate change trigger disastrous calamities, and the displacement and impoverishment of our people. Rising sea levels threaten the submersion of our coastal settlements.

We are a Weak Nation Failure of our leaders to unite and inspire our diverse peoples as a nation. Too many of them, as well as citizens, may not love our country enough to transcend their selfish personal and family interests when called upon to lead, to obey the laws, elect leaders, support change and reforms, and sacrifice to promote our common good and national interest.

1. These deficiencies mark us as a weak nation in the face of our grave problems and challenges. We sense our predicament when we observe the national unity and determination of the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Taiwanese, Vietnamese. 2. The poverty, ignorance and apathy of some of our citizens make them vulnerable. They sell their votes to cynical, votebuying candidates, exchanging their support and loyalty for the political patronage and protection that leaders promise and provide. 3. If more citizens would be better educated and employed and be able to escape poverty and rise to belong to the middle class, they would become more secure and independent, more informed about public affairs, and also more critical of bad governance and corruption. They would demand change and reform in our politics and government.

4. However, we also rationalize that in a democracy development must not infringe on our political freedom and civil liberties as citizens, and so we minimize or ignore our responsibilities. 5. Every nation needs social and political trust as “social capital. ” In this regard the Filipino nation has a very troubling deficit. Majority of the respondents in a national survey in 2001 agreed with these test statements: (1) “Most Filipinos do not trust each other” (57 percent) ; and (2) “Most Filipinos would know what is for the common good but care only for what is good for them and their family” (73 percent). Moreover, there is social class animosity as may be shown by the response to this test statement: “In our society, the poor people are oppressed or exploited by the rich and powerful people” (65 percent).

6. We enjoy religious freedom and, basically, among Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, and Filipinos of other faiths, or nonbelievers, there is no conflict. To bind us as a nation we can recall a shared history, our heroes of the past and the present, and our common challenges and struggle. 7. However, many Muslims resent their relative poverty, exclusion and underdevelopment and the political and cultural dominance of the Christians; thus the perennial Moro struggle for political and cultural autonomy, if not secession, and the Moro rebellions since the early 1970 s. Some indigenous Filipinos feel discriminated and excluded in the nation’s development. 8. The Maoist Communist rebellion dates back to 1968, succeeding the Soviet-oriented Communism that began decades earlier. The rebellion is partly ideological—based on social inequities and injustice; and partly a livelihood, as when rebels collect “revolutionary taxes” and protection money. The Abu Sayyaf terrorist organization has engaged in kidnap-forransom operations in Southern Mindanao.

9. In a nation of ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity, and social inequality, there are varying degrees of resentment towards a highly centralized and Manila-centric governance expressed in the term “Imperial Manila. ” This fuels the legitimate demand for regional and local autonomy and even federalism. 10. Given the advantages of a global lingua franca and a national language, there is a reaction to the dominance of English and Filipino—the supposedly evolving national language which is largely Tagalog—in our language policy and official communication. Such structures, policies and practices are prejudicial to the people in the outlying provinces, and especially the poor, whose languages are not used in official communication.

Ideas for nation-building and unity. Focus on what may be done to strengthen a weak Filipino nation: the people and citizenry of our nation-state called the Republic of the Philippines. Led by Senator Leticia R. Shahani and Dr. Patricia B. Licuanan, The Moral Recovery Program in 1988 urged our people to develop:

(1) a sense of patriotism and national pride, a genuine love, appreciation and commitment to the Philippines and things Filipino; (2) a sense of the common good, the ability to look beyond selfish interests, a sense of justice, and a sense of outrage at their violation; (3) a sense of integrity and accountability, an aversion towards graft and corruption in society and an avoidance of the practice in one’s daily life; (4) the value and habits of discipline and hard work; and (5) the value and habits of self-reflection and analysis, the internalization of spiritual values, the emphasis on essence rather than form. ”

We have a “Soft State” According to our Constitution: “The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. ” (Section 1. Article II. ) The political reality is otherwise in our oligarchic society marked by the dominance of the rich and powerful, and by widespread poverty, landlessness, homelessness, insecurity, injustice, and a weakened “rule of law. ”

In Gunnar Myrdal’s Asian Drama he describes “Soft States” as having the following characteristics that seem to apply to the Philippines to some degree (Asian Drama, 1969. pp. 66, and 277). • “Soft States are dominated by powerful interests that exploit the power of the State or government to serve their own interests rather than the interests of their citizens.

• “Policies decided on are often not enforced, if they are enacted at all, and in that the authorities, even when framing policies are reluctant to place obligations on people. • “Governments require extraordinarily little of their citizens [and] even those obligations that do exist are enforced inadequately, if at all…. . • “There is an unwillingness among the rulers to impose obligations on the governed and a corresponding unwillingness on their part to obey rules laid down by democratic procedures.

Who are the exploiters of our “Soft State? ” (1) “rent-seeking” oligarchs or rich and powerful politicians and their families who exploit the State to serve their selfish interests; (but not all oligarchs exploit the State) (2) “warlords” who use violence to gain and protect their power and political position; (3) politicians who use deceit, fraud, or buy votes to win elections and stay in power; (4) “rent-seeking” businessmen; (5) “rent-seeking” public administrators;

(6) gambling lords, drug lords, and smuggling lords; (7) tax evaders; (8) rebels who undermine the State and business; (9) terrorists; (10) even poor “informal settlers, ” maybe for sheer survival as homeless, landless migrants in the cities, and “squatter syndicates”--who use their votes to buy the protection of politicians.

Why do we need A Strong State? In Francisco Nemenzo’s judgment: “We need a State that is strong to implement fundamental reforms, to break elite resistance, and to withstand imperialist pressure. ” (“Beyond the Classroom: UP’s Responsibility in Helping Rebuild a Damaged Nation, ” U. P. Centennial Lecture, February 15, 2008. ) But that State, the Republic of the Philippines, embodies the Filipino nation itself that should also be made strong and united in pursuit of the common good.

The Marcos Dictatorship (1972 to 1986) “New Democracies” compared to “Established Democracies. ” As a “New Democracy” Filipino democracy is still unconsolidated and thus reversible. We made progress in development and democratization from 1946 to the 1960 s. But Ferdinand Marcos destroyed our fragile democracy. By destroying our fledgling democratic institutions, Marcos was able to extend his powers as an authoritarian president from the maximum of 8 years to over 20 years, until he was overthrown by the people at the EDSA Revolt in February 1986.

Our democratization suffered a traumatic reversal. 1. He plundered the government and the economy, 2. He enriched his family and cronies, 3. He reversed our economic development, 4. He corrupted politics and society, and 5. He politicized the military as his partner in power. Through patriotic resistance by militants and committed leaders, Ninoy Aquino’s long imprisonment and martyrdom, Corazon Aquino’s heroic challenge to Marcos in the “snap elections, ” the underground press, and spontaneous “people power” at EDSA, we finally ended the Marcos regime and “restored our democracy” in February 1986 and under the 1987 Constitution. But despite its laudable vision of democracy and “a just and humane society” and its ideals of public office and good governance, under this Constitution, we have not been able to reform and transform our weakened and ineffective political institutions. Under President Aquino, the old oligarchy and traditional politicians, including those who had collaborated with Marcos, quickly recovered their power.

Filipino Democracy an “Unconsolidated Democracy. ” To this day we have not consolidated our democracy. “Democracy is consolidated when…a particular system of institutions becomes the only game in town, and when no -one can imagine acting outside the democratic institutions” (A. Przeworski, Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. 1991. p. 26).

We, Filipinos, soon played various games outside a “constitutional democracy. ” 1. Rebel soldiers sought to remove President Corazon Aquino in nine disruptive but failed coup attempts. Causing continuing instability. In the course of his impeachment trial, President Joseph Estrada was removed in a “people power revolt” in 2001. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo became the target of intended “people power” revolts, coup attempts, an aborted rebellion, & proposed “snap elections. ” 2. Despite public outcry, various human rights are violated with apparent impunity. Corruption and betrayal of public office are rampant.

3. Free, fair, peaceful, and credible elections are not assured, after the reasonably good elections held in 1987, 1992, 1998, and 2001. 4. The judiciary, often too slow in doing its work, is unable to dispense justice in many instances. 5. Rebels, warlords and private armies exist in their own territories. The military and the police under civilian rule do not have the monopoly of the use of armed force expected in a democracy. 6. Dysfunctional political parties. 7. Dysfunctional form and structure of governance. 8. Dysfunctional policy on foreign investments.

Filipino Democracy is at Risk In 2005 Freedom House in New York downgraded the ranking of the Philippines from “free” to “partly free”; and in 2008 disqualified the country as an “electoral democracy. ” According to Larry Diamond: “The Asian Barometer found that the percentage of Filipinos who believe democracy is always the best form of government dropped from 64 percent to 51 percent between 2001 and 2005. At the same time, satisfaction with democracy fell from 54 percent to 39 percent, and the share of the Filipino population willing to reject the option of an authoritarian ‘strong leader’ declined from 70 percent to 59 percent. " (“The Democratic Rollback: The Resurgence of the Predatory State, ” Foreign Affairs, March-April 2008)

In the same article Diamond cites the Philippines among more than 50 democracies that are in "democratic recession, " where democracy is "at-risk. " My own observation above is that Filipino democracy has not been consolidated since its formal restoration following the EDSA Revolt in 1986 that ended the Marcos dictatorship of over 13 years. Diamond’s theory of democratic consolidation is relevant. “Emerging democracies must demonstrate that they can solve their governance problems and meet their citizens' expectations for freedom, justice, a better life, and a fairer society. If democracies do not more effectively contain crime and corruption, generate economic growth, relieve economic inequality, and secure freedom and the rule of law, people will eventually lose faith and turn to authoritarian alternatives. Struggling democracies must be consolidated so that all levels of society become enduringly committed to democracy as the best form of government and to their country's constitutional norms and constraints. ” (Larry Diamond, “The Democratic Rollback: The Resurgence of the Predatory State. ” Foreign Affairs, March-April 2008. )

Weak Sense of Vision and Direction Because of our collective failures, somehow many seem to feel that as a nation we have no vision, no common purpose and goals, and no clear direction. This is one of the worst failures of our national leaders. As a whole, they have not focused our sights on our authentic and authoritative vision and goals which are clearly stated in our 1987 Constitution. And on our emerging ideals of “good governance. ” As transactional leaders they focus on the politics of bargaining and patronage for their short-term, personal ends.

Reaction and Hope As a palpable reaction, we are also witnessing a crescendo of public dissatisfaction with our traditional politics, leadership and governance. There is rising demand for change to “a new politics” of integrity and nationalism, to good leadership, good citizenship, and good governance, towards a modern society and democracy. Some exceptional leaders in and outside the government are demonstrating the possibility and reality of transforming leadership based on shared ideals and goals and rising levels of morality of leaders and their followers that promote the common good. In this regard Antonio Meloto who heads the popular Gawad Kalinga housing and community development movement stands out.

But we are far from tipping point…. Sad to admit, although some of our people may be buoyed by rising hope and self-confidence, as a nation we are still far from reaching the tipping point for enlightened, organized and sustained “people power” that can effect progressive change and reform. The weight of our traditional political culture and our dysfunctional political system are still holding us down. The massacre in Maguindanao of 57 unarmed people, including women and 30 journalists, on November 23, 2009, is a tragic indicator of the failure of our political leadership and democratic institutions on the whole. It reminds us that there are several other places where the rule of law does not prevail.

The Vision of “the Good Society” and the Ideal State and Government in our 1987 Constitution “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order (1) “to build a just and humane society”; and (2) “establish a government that shall embody our ideals, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of independence and democracy---under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution. ” (Preamble. ) (3) “The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people, and all government authority emanates from them. ” (Art. II. Sec. 1) (4) “The prime duty of the Government is to serve the people. ” (Art. II. Sec. 4) (5) “Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all time be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. ” (Art. XI. Sec. 1)

“Good Governance” This concept and ideal of Filipino democracy has emerged after over 13 years of authoritarian rule under President Ferdinand Marcos. Blending Filipino and international ideals, we understand “good governance” as manifesting these features: (1)people’s participation in free and fair elections and in policy and decision-making made possible by an open and accessible government in a free society with vigilant, competent and responsible media; (2) responsiveness of the government to the needs and demands of the people who are informed, empowered and enabled to express their will to their political leaders and civil servants;

(3) transparency and accountability of public servants in response to the citizens’ will and their right to know (“the truth” in governance) as the sovereign in a democracy; (4) honesty and fidelity of public servants and the certain punishment of those who are abusive and corrupt; (5) efficiency and a sense of urgency in the exercise of power and authority to make the best use of scarce resources, including time especially; (6) effectiveness in providing the needed public services, solving problems, and achieving goals, all for the common good;

(7) the protection and enhancement of human rights and the fulfillment of social justice; (8) achieving ecological integrity and sustainable development; and (9) realizing “Pamathalaan, ” the indigenous Filipino vision of governance: “dedicated to the enhancement of man’s true spiritual and material worth”…”through leadership by example, reasonable management, unity (pagkakaisa) between the governors and governed, and social harmony based on love (pagmamahalan) and compassion (pagdadamayan). (Pablo S. Trillana III. The Loves of Rizal, 2000. p. 179. )

A Vision of an Ideal Future Philippines For my part, since 1987, I have composed verses, a poem if you will, regarding a vision of our future as a nation in the global community. It is largely based on the vision of “the Good Society” and the ideal “democracy and good government” embodied in our 1987 Constitution. But I have elaborated on them as I learn of other ideas and ideals that Filipinos may wish to consider in thinking about the future of our Global Filipino Nation. Here is my contribution to the quest for an inclusive and unifying vision of our borderless Global Filipino Nation in which every Filipino in the Motherland overseas would have a significant role to play and an important stake in its fulfillment.

A Vision of Our Ideal Future: Building ‘The Good Society’ We Want United under God, we shall develop citizens and leaders who love our country, and trust and challenge one another to solve our problems and achieve our goals. Upholding truth, honesty and excellence, we shall work together for the common good of all Filipinos at home and around the globe. For, conscious of our roots in Asia, we are a Global Filipino Nation committed to the well-being, security, and advancement of all our people—and humankind.

We want to be free and peaceful, united in our diversities, egalitarian, prosperous, life-sustaining and nonkilling. In our quest for “the Good Life” we shall focus on the poor and powerless, the excluded, exploited, and oppressed. We shall achieve our vision of “The Good Society” through good citizenship, leadership and governance in inclusive democracies.

And responsive, effective and accountable institutions that enable us to satisfy our needs and fulfill our lives as individuals and as a nation. As well shall we do our share in shaping a just, humane, and nonkilling world, and safe, sustainable environments. In sum, a Global Filipino Nation that is God-centered—whose people love and care for one another near and far.