Not one
A quick look at all the presidents from Aguinaldo to Arroyo will show that not a single one of them belonged to a class lower than middle class, even if they claimed humble beginnings (only during election campaigns). One of Ramon Magsaysay’s campain leaflets showed him working as a mechanic and, not to be outdone, one of Arroyo’s campaign slogans was “Gloria Labandera”, as if anybody could believe that she had washed at least one clothing apparel with her own hands.
That the Philippines has an oligarchic republic (admittedly a contradiction in terms) was described in the article “RP Politics: Family Affair” published in the June 2003 issue of the Cebu Daily News. There was one curious statement in the article: “A century plus three years later, his (Aguinaldo’s) cousin, Gloria M. Arroyo, rose to the same position “ and that Gloria Arroyo is also a relative of “Erap”(President Joseph Estrada) according to their genealogies, showing affinity by blood and/or by marriage. No wonder, then, that the 1986 “revolution” was a repeat performance of Aguinaldo’s coup.
Two paragraphs stand out in “Dynasty”, an unpublished commentary by Luis Teodoro, posted in his website September 12, 2005. Two paragraphs in Mr. Teodoro’s commentary clearly show the continuation of the system first established by Aguinaldo in 1897:
The persistence of political dynasties reveals how seriously flawed Philippine democracy is, and validates the view that the state is no more than the executive committee of the ruling class. It is also testimony to a damaged electoral system run by money and patronage, which prevents the middle classes and even more certainly the poor from breaking the monopoly on power of the landlords and big businessmen who also control the economy.
Though they do not say so, and may not even be conscious of it, the dynasties are united by certain common goals and interests, the most basic being their commitment to the preservation of the political, economic and social systems that have assured their dominance, wealth and power in this country.
Uncanny
What the two articles did not mention is the uncanny similarity of the method by which Aguinaldo and Arroyo seized power; uncanny because of the space of just a little more than 100 years between the two. Aguinaldo toppled Bonifacio from the position of chief honcho by allegations that led to the murder of the Bonifacio brothers, Andres and Procopio; and later, the same method was used on Antonio Luna . Gloria Arroyo stole Malacañan in much the same way; through charges—real and imagined—against President Joseph Estrada. As soon as President Estrada wrote the letter stating that he needed to take a leave of absence for reasons of health, it was announced that President Estrada had resigned. Arroyo was sworn in as President of the Republic of the Philippines with such unholy haste by then Chief Justice Hilario Davide. Aguinaldo used sycophants among the Magdalo; Arroyo used the group called “Omerta”. In an exclusive article in the October 30, 2000 issue of Daily Tribune, Ninez Cacho-Olivares wrote
“A group which calls itself ’Omerta,’ composed of representatives of business groups and Catholic Church leaders as well as representatives of celebrated personalities, came together and met formally early this month to fine tune the plan to ’constitutionally’ oust President Estrada under ’Oplan Excelsis.’”
Nothing has changed since 1896; nothing, except the dramatis personae in the governance of a nation through what Mr. Teodoro calls “a flawed democracy”. The question is: Is there democracy in the Philippines, and, is it even a republic? That question has long been answered by the ordinary Pinoy who are most unfairly described as “idiot voters”. Their answer to both questions is “No”. Yet, everybody above the group classed as living below poverty level, gleefully encouraged by mass media, insist that there is democracy in the Philippines. In a country ruled by family dynasties, democracy is an impossibility. In an election where the voters can choose only the lesser evil from among the candidates, there cannot be a republic which, by definition, is a government based on popular representation and control.
Two journalists of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Neal Cruz and Cielito Habito, wrote two articles this month, analyzing the state of the Philippine economy while presenting economic statistics. While the articles were very good and well written, as is usual with those two writers, they are read by people who might as well be deaf and blind. But the poor, as Neal Cruz said, do not need statistics to know that their life is a sorry mess and that there is no hope in the near future. If the poor vote movie celebrities to the Senate and if the poor sell their votes, does it matter much in a country where elections are a sham? Whatever remnants of democracy remain in that hapless country cannot describe as merely flawed. The democracy that “EDSA 1986” demanded was an illusion maintained by the ruling elite through their representatives in Congress and in Malacañan.
There must be magic in numbers. Filipinos waited 300 years before they wielded their bolos in 1896, then waited another 90 years to revolt against a dictatorship in 1986, and are still waiting now, 111 years later. The gap is narrowing. Perhaps, the next spontaneous combustion will come after 50 years, or maybe sooner, when the Filipinos can no longer say “Puwede pa; puwede na.” Meanwhile, the cry for freedom and democracy that has been denied twice awaits the answer from a nation that is in a perpetual state of denial. (Bulatlat.com)
