Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Game of the Elite? Or not?

“In theory, it is taught that in governance, all power derives from the people and the goal of politics is the common good. Because by themselves, individuals, families and groups cannot achieve full development in order to live a truly human life. Hence, it is the task of politics to make available to them the necessary material, cultural, moral and spiritual goods.” -- Lope Coles Robredillo, SThD, “Philippine Politics: Game of the Elite”

Theoretically speaking, office holders in the government are placed in power by the people not only to reconcile the particular goods of groups and individuals, but also to interpret the common good that is consistent with the guidelines of the majority . In view of the enormity of this responsibility, one cannot but admire a politician ― those brave souls who choose to undertake the seemingly heavy burden of this task. However, if the Philippine experience has anything to tell us, it is that politics is generally a “power game” ― a game that seems to hardly make any marked improvement in the lives of the impoverished, since the common good is scarcely―if not at all―its absolute goal. If this is the case, who, then, plays this game? Who, then, becomes the master of this unjust game?

In the national scene, Philippine politics is almost exclusive of the few who are rich. In fact, our politics could be described as a struggle for power among the rich and privileged who are more concerned with their own advantage and that of their own class than with the advantage of the majority who are poor. Of course, one can object that this is just a generalization, and to generalize is to falsify. Yes, that is true, but still, this provides us a pattern, a framework, and a certain viewpoint that we can utilize to understand a known thread in the Philippine political arena― the trapo, or more formally known as traditional (Philippine) politics.

This interesting term “trapo”, as presently used in Philippine politics, is a fusion of two words “traditional” and “politician”. In the beginning the preferred word was “tradpol”. But this contraction fell into disuse because it lacked the pejorative power of “trapo”, a worthless cloth (basahan) meant to wipe off dirt . Over the years, trapo mutated in meaning, and has since acquired negative connotations towards politics in general. Today, the Filipino understanding of this term has actually little to do with being merely traditional; it has more to do with being dirty and immoral. First of all, whatever happened to a word that is derived from a beautiful root word (that is, “tradition”) is saddening. “Tradition” is something usually good that is handed down from forefathers to offspring, inherited for generations and eventually becomes a part of a nation’s culture. However, today, we see the word with a totally twisted meaning especially when used to refer to a traditional politician ― the latter having been a derogatory description of the unwanted, of the hated, and of the much talked-about species of humankind engaged in dirty politics.

A traditional politician is one who leads and manages the country like everyone does. Sadly, the common way nowadays is through the corruption of power, position and procurement. So how, really, do Filipinos view trapos at the first place? First on the list is the trapo’s being “rent-seeking”, someone who dabbles mainly in the dirty realm of patronage politics. His motives are mostly for self-aggrandizement, deriving wealth and power from the existing system. Sad to say, this has become the general way on how politics is done in the Philippines. Next, he has ill-gotten wealth to begin with . He enriches himself while holding public office. He invariably seeks elective public office in order to expand and protect their ill-gotten wealth. Also, a trapo is one who perpetuates himself in power. He tends to stick to his post because he enjoys all the perks from the pork barrel even though the constituents he is serving are not fully satisfied and contented. What’s even worse is he rather builds a political dynasty, making politics a very lucrative family business. These people run for office not because of their own capabilities but because their parents or relatives were also in public office ― as if it has already become their birthright. We have a lot of actual situations, or variations thereof, where Papa is a senator, Mama is a congresswoman, Ate is a governor, and Kuya is a mayor. We even have a case in Mindanao where the governor had his four wives run for mayor in four towns of the province . Surprisingly unsurprising, three of the four actually won. And lastly, according to many “fed up” Filipinos, trapos do not actually care for political ideologies or programs of government, which explains why most of them don’t have visions for their constituents . Why? Because majority of them are self-interested, and are not capable of or willing enough to turn their stagnant community into a progressive one. Preserving self-interest above that of the state through politics of convenience is indeed their “top-of-the-list” priority.

What happens to us then? Well, admit it, we sort of develop hatred and extreme disgust towards the what-we-call “power addicts”. We almost always blame them for the misfortunes predominant in the country. We even despise the idea that they exist in our society. Yes, the idea of trapo has shaped our understanding of what ails the Philippine politics. But parallel to our take against the trapo, we unconsciously raise the image of the “morally unblemished politician” . Meaning, to fight evil, we are now in a “quest of the good and the moral”. But dude, how are we supposed to measure the good in politics? Is it by their personal traits alone? Or primarily by their political visions? This depiction of our political monsters―as not just being our rivals in the seemingly unending contest for power, but also as an epitome of evil―is in fact misleading.

Our problem is not simply that we have had enough bad men and women in politics. Well, every society does, so to speak. The main problem could possibly lie on our failure to recognize that our entire “political system”―the mechanism by which we govern ourselves , the whole system by which we choose the leaders who make decisions in our name, the quality of relationship between the governors and the governed, and not necessarily the form of government or the choice between different types of government―has indeed become dysfunctional.

“The perpetuation of this dysfunctional system is what breeds corruption, incompetence, and misuse of governmental power”. I guess I would have to agree that this ‘system dysfunction’ has something to do and is deeply intertwined with our traditional Philippine culture. Yes, we may have all the modern political structures before us, but the problem is this: our structures had already gone far ahead of our culture. In other words, our attitude dealing with these structures is not of the same pace. Despite all the modern democratic mechanics (such as the institutionalization of exteriorities as official components of Philippine politics ), we are still stuck with some of our traditional Filipino culture and values. As Prof. Jose Ma. Sison in his 1986 lecture at UP Diliman entitled “Crisis of Philippine Culture” puts it:

“Culture is not simply the ideological reflection of current forces and contradictions in the economy and politics. It is also the accumulation of notions, customs, habits and the like which date as far back as prehistory, and which persist in current circumstances for so long as there are carriers and they are part of the social psychology of the people. ”

As said, something will “persist for so long as there are carriers”. A trapo still persists because he simply is acting on the basis of an established practice that is ingrained in a culture of continuity ― a culture that is prolonged whether consciously or unconsciously both by the people who loathed (us, citizens) and are actually being loathed (trapos).

We, Filipinos, are known for our close family ties. From this, we could say for the majority that the family is a big part of our existence since they influence a lot of our beliefs and actions. But in the deeper context of Philippine society, the family could also serve as a bridge to getting power. Through this reach, I think getting into the action of politics through family is a little bit related to palakasan. If you are a direct relative of someone in power (preferably the ones with the same surname as yours), it’s more likely that you’ll get a chance of attaining a position of power than if you’re not ‘connected’. It is of no surprise that political dynasties are prevalent in the country up to this day. Look at the countrywide known families such as the Marcoses, the Estradas, the Cojuangcos, the Binays. Or perhaps the Ramos-Shahani clan in Pangasinanan, Joson clan in Nueva Ecija, or the Crisologo-Singson clan in Ilocos Sur . Just like the political elites, they would always be there, and it seems that nothing in this country could ever change it.

Another traditional Filipino value that helps propagate―in one way or another―the unwanted trapos is pakikisama. It is when we give in to what others want, so that we won’t be ‘out’. We don’t say anything against anyone to have that smooth relationship. It’s being less confrontational in order to avoid conflict. At first, it may seem good to sustain valuable interpersonal relationships; but in the long run, things move to our disadvantage. Problems, comments, and actual conditions aren’t dealt with; and no real change occurs.

Of course, we won’t forget about one of the many classic Filipino characteristics ― utang na loob. It is the indebtedness to someone who has done you a favor. This obligation to repay would continue to be inside us unless we do make up for it. The social elites particularly love this. This is a tool which people with the most resources use to become part of the political elite, and stay there (thus ending up as trapos). As people with the most property or assets or income, whenever they do something for the ‘little people,’ these little guys are obliged to give back the good deed in any way they can. Obviously, usually not through money, but through votes. Votes for the givers when they run for office, votes for those they favor, or votes for those they are related with.

But for me, the one word that best captures the substance of politics in traditional societies like ours is patronage. This refers to the support rendered by superiors to subordinates in exchange for the latter’s loyalty, often called as patron-client framework . This is possible because of poverty and since there are sharp inequalities among our people. Under this system, “the ideal leader is kind and generous, rather than knowledgeable and law-abiding; the ideal citizen is loyal and grateful, rather than informed and assertive of his rights” . This culture of patronage so pervades our political life that elections are seen as nothing more than contests to determine who can give more and promise more in the short-term. These are the things that make our politics traditional rather than modern; these are the values that make our political system not at par with structural modernization.

Philippine political system has been tagged to be corrupt and helpless. Why? Because politics is unhealthy, and rights are for most point, abused. Getting real reforms are very challenging, but there must be an escape from traditional political system which we all consider as our comfort zones. But we have to keep in mind that changing the political system alone would not solve the problem at all. Maybe, we need to look at ourselves first, and reassess our values as a people, because admit it or not, what’s happening in the country is not just a result of a corrupt system, but also of our own doing. “People who are blaming the government alone are pointing the government with a finger without knowing that four fingers are pointing at them, implying that the blame also belongs to them.”

So, is there anything else to hope for? Of course there still is! In a republican society like the Philippines, governance is always at the hands of the people. Real transformation may seem a bit impossible now, but hey, change has happened in much more difficult circumstances, so let us keep our hopes up! We must just be willing to change our attitudes, and of course, our perception. As Carlos Celdran, freelancer-cum-tour-guide in Manila, says of himself: “Just a regular fellow trying to change the way you see the city of Manila one step at a time.” I guess it is just so true, that transformation happens when one person at a time believes it can happen, and starts that change right within himself. Here’s to forthcoming change!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Paper for Sociology and Anthropology (SA21) Class under Ms. Czarina Medina. One of the papers I really spent time writing about. Oh, Politics in the Philippines.

No comments:

Post a Comment