democracy in the philippines

11
Oliveros, Joshua December 15, 2014 BS Biology 2014-74128 An Egalitarian Prison Freedom can have several interpretations from different viewpoints. A pris freed from his offenses after being released from prison, yet he will still be c guilt that his crimes had made him feel. A doctor can feel a state of relief aft operation, however he may still feel detained by the risks and dangers tomorrow’ might bring. These varying instances suggest how the definition of freedom is dy hen one asks about the meaning of freedom, the answer usually deals with the de of a philosophical, !udicial, political, economic, and social system. "n general, freedom is a state wherein there is an absence of restriction Freedom can be incorporated as a natural right, which is intrinsic to every huma "t can also be identified as a constitutional privilege, wherein one can do what wants as long as it is in the !urisdiction of his#her country’s constitution $An p.'(). All of these characteristics e*hibit a definite but parado*ical meaning not absolute. "n the Philippines, democracy and freedom are two misguided ideologies use describe power. emocracy as a governmental structure formed and constr people of society, is the source of sovereignty of the Filipinos. Th adopted by the Philippines as the pillar of its administration ever s coloni-ed the country on /01. The estern coloni-ers implemented this type of the Philippines in order to protect their colony from the influence of communism being promulgated by the different 2ommunist leaders $Paredes, /3/, p. %). "n government, citi-ens e*ercise power and civic responsibilities directly elected representatives. The Filipinos were given the power to enact laws and decide h these laws will be enforced. Even though not every definition of democracy is al culture and society influence people’s ideals, the fundamental principle remain consistent in every form $4ramer, %&&1, p.0''). At present, democracy in the Philippines is still alive and active. The po still able to elect their officials by the means of electoral voting. The Filipi the rights and opportunities their country’s !urisdiction can provide, are still the liberty and the freedom of speech and information. Although, the sovereignty had attained is very much different from the autonomy it has today $5cken-ie, %& 7efore, there was a genuine balance of power between the e*ecutive and leg branches of the government, even if this sometimes resulted in politi POSITION PAPER REVISION 1

Upload: joshua-oliveros

Post on 07-Oct-2015

26 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Article about the Democracy in the Philippines

TRANSCRIPT

position paper revision

Oliveros, Joshua December 15, 2014BS Biology2014-74128

An Egalitarian PrisonFreedom can have several interpretations from different viewpoints. A prisoner can be freed from his offenses after being released from prison, yet he will still be caged within the guilt that his crimes had made him feel. A doctor can feel a state of relief after a successful operation, however he may still feel detained by the risks and dangers tomorrows surgery might bring. These varying instances suggest how the definition of freedom is dynamic. When one asks about the meaning of freedom, the answer usually deals with the description of a philosophical, judicial, political, economic, and social system.In general, freedom is a state wherein there is an absence of restriction or limit. Freedom can be incorporated as a natural right, which is intrinsic to every human being born. It can also be identified as a constitutional privilege, wherein one can do whatever he/she wants as long as it is in the jurisdiction of his/her countrys constitution (Anderson, 2002, p.35). All of these characteristics exhibit a definite but paradoxical meaning of freedom; it is not absolute. In the Philippines, democracy and freedom are two misguided ideologies used to describe power. Democracy as a governmental structure formed and constructed by the people of society, is the source of sovereignty of the Filipinos. This type of regime was adopted by the Philippines as the pillar of its administration ever since the Americans colonized the country on 1946. The Western colonizers implemented this type of system in the Philippines in order to protect their colony from the influence of communism that was being promulgated by the different Communist leaders (Paredes, 1989, p.12). In this type of government, citizens exercise power and civic responsibilities directly and through their elected representatives. The Filipinos were given the power to enact laws and decide how these laws will be enforced. Even though not every definition of democracy is alike, as culture and society influence peoples ideals, the fundamental principles it upholds still remain consistent in every form (Kramer, 2006, p.433). At present, democracy in the Philippines is still alive and active. The population is still able to elect their officials by the means of electoral voting. The Filipinos, in terms of all the rights and opportunities their countrys jurisdiction can provide, are still able to exercise the liberty and the freedom of speech and information. Although, the sovereignty that it once had attained is very much different from the autonomy it has today (Mckenzie, 2012, p.157).Before, there was a genuine balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of the government, even if this sometimes resulted in political stalemate and administrative inaction. Now, due to the abuse of the granted rights to speech and information by the systemic government, the population, including the administration and the society, is currently experiencing instability within its economic system (Paredes, 1989, p.11). Although democracy is fair and nondiscriminatory, it relies mostly, if not solely, on a majority to make an informed decision, and in the Philippines, that unaware majority can be manipulated by capitalist politicians, this can lead to ineffective governance.Democracy in its direct form, mostly favors small governments and personal liberty over large administrations and personal freedom (Marsh, Blondel, Inoguchi, 1999, p.197). It also has intrinsic characteristics that suggest how it can be a feasible type of government in developing countries. The voice of a states citizen and their liberties are the most important factor, thus personal interests of the democratic people are protected and safeguarded by the government. This suggests how democracy is a type of government that is appealing to not only the state officials but also to normal citizens in a nation. A representative government is established in a democratic country, thus elections are free and fair. Media and press are also autonomous, meaning that these mediums of communication cannot be influenced or controlled by the government, thus transparency of information is attained. It is a form of administration wherein it represents the views and notions of all the citizens of the country, whether majorities or minorities (Keohane, Macedo, Moravcsik, 2009, p.8). Thus, the citizens are able to voice their opinions without fear of governmental retribution.A democratic state also promotes equality in terms of its law-making judiciaries and law-implementing councils. It is a just government wherein all members of the State are equal in the eyes of law. All enjoy equal social, political and economic rights and the state cannot discriminate among citizens on the basis of caste, religion, sex, or property. All have equal right to choose their government. And because it is a system based on public will and interest, there should be little, or perhaps, no chance of public revolt, thus forming a stable administration (Anderson, 2002, p.35). Representatives elected by the people conduct the affairs of the state with public support in order for the administration to branch out its influence and maintenance to the society effectively. This results to a harmonic communication between the government and the people, thus public revolts and chaos will be avoided (Holcombe, 1985, p.223).All of these characteristics of Democracy show how it is a type of government wherein unification of equality and power are its main techniques to establish a stable economic nation. However, most of these qualities also contain ambiguities that can become gateways for abuse. This accountability is also a very significant element especially in the Philippines, wherein the majority of the democratic community population is a part of the marginalized sectors of the society, a region of the society wherein the influence of the wealthy dominates the minds of the unfortunates. Another issue can also be accounted to this is the conflict about the middle class sector of the community, wherein ever since the transition of the Philippines from the authoritarian rule to democratic government, more and more citizens from this section try to expel democratically elected leaders through extra-constitutional actions like protests and rallies (Ungpakorn, 2007, p.8). These actions further promote instability within the democratic governmentDemocracy in the Philippines is an important paradoxical issue. The nation is the first country in the region to topple authoritarian rule (Girling, 2002, p.47). Signs of a vibrant democratic atmosphere are extensive: high voter turnout, civic engagement, and institutional arrangements that theoretically promote accountability and safeguard rights and liberties. Yet the flaws in the democratic process are also extensive: elite dominance, institutional feebleness, and widespread abuse of public office (Mckenzie, 2012, p.157). Concerns about the quality of democracy have become central to political discourse in the Philippines. According to Jose Sison (2014):

We have been on this experiment of an independent republic anchored on a US-style democracy for nearly three (3) generations since 1946. True, we were under an authoritarian regime for a brief 14 years, but we have been back on a democratic track for 28 years or twice as long as the Marcos dictatorship and yet the level of economic prosperity, quality of life and happiness index remains much to be desired (n.p.).

One point of argumentation why democracy is not a feasible system of administration in the Philippines is the flaw of its original definition on the emphasis of quantity vs. quality. This definition states how democracy doesnt really seek out what is best for the citizens, but simply does what the majority of the citizens want. A defect of this definition is it generalizes the fact that what the majority wants will always be what the majority needs. It does not account the errors in human decision-making wherein the views of the people aren't always the ones that will lead to the greatest outcome, in fact they often aren't. In direct democracies, like in the Philippines, where the people rule, they often make mistakes in their decisions, because of fleeting passions and not having full knowledge which has severe consequences for everyone (Mckenzie, 2012, p.158). This loophole of democracy can eventually lead several shortcomings; unawareness of national political status and misuse of the granted democratic rights. According to the principles of democracy, the common man has all the powers or rather rights to elect their government as well as their main authorities. However, too much of these powers can be dangerous for various reasons. For example, it is evident that not all people are aware of the political conditions in their country. Additionally, majority of the common people are not familiar with governmental issues affecting the society because the only source of information of the marginalized community are news cycles and media, which can be insufficient and inaccurate at times. This can be supported for the rich may hold the media and use it for their own advantage. Big business houses influence dailies, like Rappler, and use these for creating public opinion to their favor (Vajpeyi, 2003, p.95). How can they make an informed decision in terms of their nations well being when the information being fed to them isnt exactly bipartisan? This issue can furthermore affect the principle of democracy in the transparency of law, wherein this code of egalitarianism will be useless if people are not knowledgeable about the mechanisms that ensure transparent governmental transactions. Any government can easily abuse its people if people are bereft of the tools or knowledge that will secure their welfare. A starving man, for example, will simply say that he has no time to think about corruption in government nor will he reflect about the character and qualifications of the person he will vote for during elections. He will just vote for the person that will allegedly satisfy his hunger without thinking of the consequences this one-sided reason can entail. As a matter of fact, a study was conducted in Sorsogon to test the predictions of a behavioral model of transactional electoral politics in the context of a randomized anti-vote-selling intervention in the Philippines, particularly in areas wherein the citizens are more or less apathetic or unaware about the political state of their society. According to the analysis, there was approximately 47.1% of increase of vote-buyers by just using simple interventions, like eliciting promises of money and food after the elections. This proves how the minds of people can be easily manipulated by money and influence (Hicken, Leider, Ravanilla, & Yang, 2014, p.26).It can also be said that anti-corruption drives and the right of suffrage are only seen in a negative way as an exercise of ones negative freedom, and not as positive opportunities to empower ones self in public (Vajpeyi, 2003, p.95). Thus, there is no certainty that democracy will lead people to not be being apathetic or unaware of ones own nations political status. Democracy cannot assure that no wrong choices will be made during elections, suggesting that this flawed system can bring into power devious and moneyed individuals who are likely to misuse the rule of the republic.Lastly, Modern democracy is, in fact, capitalistic in nature. It is the rule of the capitalists. Electioneering is carried out with money and influence. The rich candidates purchase votes. Might of economic power rules over the whole process. This sad truth of democracy is a blatant quality of the innate freedom and liberty that a systemic citizen-controlled administration exhibits. The net result is that we get plutocracy under the garb of democracy-democracy in name and form, plutocracy in reality. It is a significant issue for the common man. The need to raise enormous sums to have some impact on an expanding electorate has, of course, naturally strengthened the influence of the rich and those organizations favored by the rich over the electoral system. In this respect, Philippine electoral democracy is a splitting image of its parent, American democracy. In both, the influence of moneyed elites in shaping electoral outcomes is enormous and widely influential (Girling, 2002, p.47).Fig.1. Gross Domestic Product growth rate of the Philippines (1999-2011)One statistical proof of this stagnant development of the economy in the Philippines is the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth of the nation. GDP is the overall output of goods and services in a specific time period. It primarily gauges the health of a countrys market economy. In the Philippines, Fig.1 shows that there is stagnant growth of GDP for the last decade. It disagrees to the economic principle that with the supposedly humanitarian government, increasing the GDP should be no problem for a developing country. In order to experience economic development and economic growth at the same time, a nations government should be able to stabilize a continuous growth of its nations GDP. However, this data proves how the democratic government is not that effective in sustaining its own nations economic health (Barrientos, 2011, n.p.)The root cause of Philippine poverty is its dysfunctional democracy. In line with this unstable government are the scheming officials that continue to swindle and abuse the democratic society. Many of the democratic institutions and programs have failed to even deliver basic services to ordinary people. An example of a program is the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program of the present president Benigno Simeon Aquino. This specific program was supposed to pioneer the eradication extreme poverty in the Philippines during Aquinos term (Girling, 2002, p.46). However in November 2012, the Commission on Audit (COA) released a report that found critical problems in the implementation of the program. COA discovered that a large number of beneficiaries were not really poor yet were included in the program (Girling, 2002, p.47). This is another proof that the democratic government of the Philippines is not capable of maintaining its implemented programs. This loophole in the administration shows how the corruption of the few can easily overcome the government of the many.With the kind of leaders and bureaucrats who have ruled the nation in the past, the present, and maybe even the future, an interim possibility can be assumed that the reduction of extreme poverty and progression to economic prosperity can be attained by the Philippines only after it detaches from its current democracy. Through all these decades ever since the nation became a democratic and independent republic, it can be perceived that poverty in this country and the lack of authentic economic progress is mainly due to the corruption and incompetence of the administration (Marsh, Blondel, Inoguchi, 1999, p.196). What freedom is and is not is pivotal to comprehending how the ideology is being reflected in the Philippines today.The Filipino nation should understand that democracy is not only intrinsically important, but it is also instrumentally vital. It means that not only the liberty that democracy endows to its citizens is significant, but also the power and influence that this type of government grants its people. People empowerment should not be abused just to satisfy the wants of the many. Freedom should not become a gateway for corruption and exploitation of resources and wealth. Today democracy in the Philippines is still not as effective after years and decades of experience, as it was planned to be by the Americans and by the Filipino administrators as well (Girling, 2002, p.47). Citizens from different sectors of the community are expected to stabilize democracy and mitigate conflict within the administration. Although, because of the bestowed power and control of information and speech within the democratic government, the democratic citizens are now more concerned of protesting complaints rather than suggesting ways of economic developments. This just shows how democracy in the Philippines is stagnant and unmoving. In conclusion, since in Philippine democracy the majority wins, and when the majority of the voters are poor, and the poor can be bought, it necessarily follows that democracy can be bought and the winner in any election will be the person that that has the most money to buy the votes. This statement provides a general conclusion why democracy in the Philippines is not a feasible type of government for it seems that only the power of wealth and the influence of authority can exercise freedom in the Philippines. A power that is louder than the voice of the democratic people and an influence that is strong enough to imprison freedom within a state of democracy.

References:Anderson, C. (2002). What is Freedom For? InA deeper freedom liberal democracy as an everyday morality(pp. 35-36). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Barrientos, M. (2011, January 1). Philippines - Population - Historical Data Graphs per Year. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=rp&v=66

Girling, J. (2002). The Philippines: Acquisitive elites. InCorruption, capitalism and democracy(Taylor & Francis e-Library ed., p. 46-47). London: Routledge. Hicken, A., Leider, S., Ravanilla, N., & Yang, D. (2014). Temptation in Vote-Selling: Evidence from a Field ,Experiment in the Philippines. Temptation in Vote-Selling: Evidence from a Field Experiment in the Philippines, 26-27. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http://www-personal.umich.edu/~leider/Papers/TemptationVoteSelling.pdf Holcombe, R. (1985). The Growth of Government. InAn economic analysis of democracy(pp. 224-226). Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.Keohane, R., Macedo, S., & Moravcsik, A. (2009). Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism.Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism I,63(1), 8-9. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from https://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/multilateralism.pdfKramer, P. (2006). The Difference Empire Made. InThe Blood of Government: Race, Empire, the United States, and the Philippines(1st ed., pp. 433-434). The University of North Carolina Press.Marsh, I., Blondel, J., & Inoguchi, T. (1999). The Philippines. InDemocracy, golvernance, and economic performance: East and Southeast Asia(pp. 196-198). Tokyo, Japan: United Nations University Press.Top of Form Bottom of FormMckenzie, D. (2012). The Unlucky Country. InThe Unlucky country: The Republic of the Philippines in the 21st century.(pp. 157-159). S.l.: Balboa Pr.Paredes, R. (1989). The Paradox of Philippine Colonial Democracy.Philippine Colonial Democracy,11-12. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http://badaboum.bidibom.free.fr/mat-old/notes/sea-pol/content/39.htmlSison, J. (2014, September 29). A law each day keeps the trouble away. The Philippine Star. Retrieved December 3, 2014, from http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2014/09/29/1374318/fake-democracyUngpakorn, G. (2007). The Taksin Crisis. InA Coup for the Rich Thailand's Political Crisis(p. 8). Chulalongkorn, Bangkok: Workers Democracy Publishing.Vajpeyi, D. (2003). Nepal in Crisis: Democratization and the Failure of Local Government. InLocal Democracy and Politics in South Asia(p. 95). VS Verlag fr Sozialwissenschaften.

OutlineThesis Statement: Although Democracy is fair and nondiscriminatory, it relies mostly, if not solely, on a majority to make an informed decision, and in the Philippines, that unaware majority is too easily manipulated by capitalist politicians which can lead to ineffective governance.

I. Democracy and Freedom are two different ideologies especially in the context of the Philippine Government.a) Freedom is not just a state of liberty.1. The definition of freedom can be different if viewed in varying perspectives 2. Freedom is not a gateway to commit immoral acts. 3. Freedom can never be absolute.b) Democracy is the type of Government in the Philippines.1. The Americans instituted Democracy in the Philippines.2. Democracy became the Philippines initial and staple administration after it became independent.3. Filipinos have integrated democracy in their culture.c) Democracy is a part of the Filipino lifestyle.1. Democracy is active and alive in the Filipino society. 2. Filipinos mostly depend on their leaders for support.3. Managing Political propagandas is considered a money-earning job in the Philippines.II. Democracy is a type of government that best suits developing countries.a) Democracy protects the rights of the citizens.1. The government safeguards the rights and privileges of its citizens.2. A democratic governments power comes from the citizens and their rights.3. Democracy promotes constitutional freedom.b) Democracy emphasizes on constitutional and social equality.1. The constitution considers everyone equal in the eyes of the law2. The citizens have the power to elect officials and be elected as leaders of their nation.3. A democratic government grants the right to free media and information to its citizens.c) Democracy is a pillar of a stable administration.1. A democratic government is instituted on unity.2. The democratic people construct the administration.3. A democratic government promotes a harmonic communication between its citizens and its leaders.III. Democracy is not an effective type of government in the Philippinesa) Democracy doesnt seek out what is best for the citizens but simply does what the majority of the people want.1. It generalizes the fact that what the democratic people want will always be what they really need.2. People abuse their rights to speech and information 3. People step on other peoples rights in order to be free.b) Abusive and Incompetent Leaders can be elected as officials 1. Voter turnout quantity is more than enough but voter profile quality is overrun by the marginalized sectors.2. GDP growth is stagnant ever since the Americans left the Philippines.3. Peoples votes can be bought by money.c) Capitalism is imbued within the Democratic government of the Philippines1. Market economy and Democracy2. Money overpowers the democratic government3. Wealth and Media pair up to influence the democratic government.

Annotated Bibiliography

Anderson, C. (2002). What is Freedom For? InA deeper freedom liberal democracy as an everyday morality(pp. 35-36). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.This book explains freedom in terms of democratic concepts and ideologies. It helped me define freedom in a different perspective.

Girling, J. (2002). The Philippines: Acquisitive elites. InCorruption, capitalism and democracy(Taylor & Francis e-Library ed., p. 47). London: Routledge.

This volume discussed the different interrelated political and economic ideas in the Philippine setting. It helped me compare and contrast the different periods wherein of the Philippines in terms of the Market and Political Economy.

Hicken, A., Leider, S., Ravanilla, N., & Yang, D. (2014). Temptation in Vote-Selling: Evidence from a Field ,Experiment in the Philippines. Temptation in Vote-Selling: Evidence from a Field Experiment in the Philippines, 26-27. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from http://www-personal.umich.edu/~leider/Papers/TemptationVoteSelling.pdf

This journal talked about a study of vote buying and the psychological aspect of this issue. It helped me support my statement about votes can be bought and will be bought by the ones who are in need of money.

Holcombe, R. (1985). The Growth of Government. InAn economic analysis of democracy(pp. 224-226). Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.

This book talks about democracy in an analytical viewpoint. It talks about how a government grows from within a democratic aspect.

Keohane, R., Macedo, S., & Moravcsik, A. (2009). Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism.Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism I,63(1), 8-9. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from https://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/multilateralism.pdf

This journal shows how democracy can be enhanced by multilateralism. It helped me by suggesting new ideas how democracy can be strengthened and structured by the used of international unification.

position paper revision1

position paper revision11