필리핀 민주주의 이해하기(6)

대중-엘리트 깊은 도덕 갈등

편견 속 대중은 정치적 소외

두테르테 당선, 엘리트 반작용



빈곤층 정치의식 변화 필요해

정치적 성숙에 상당한 지분 有

대중 도덕적 역할 배반 말아야

계급 사회...

'Understanding Philippine Democracy'

In his book “Moral Politics in the Philippines,” Wataru Kusaka explains the rise of moral antagonism existing between the ‘masses’ and the ‘civic sphere’ of Philippine society. The Japanese scholar, who had studied at the University of the Philippines and who now teaches at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, describes the idea of the moralization of politics as “the transformation of interest politics, centered around resource distribution, into moral politics predicated on definitions of right and wrong.” At the height of the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. during the 70s, a moral divide in the country has prevailed between the middle class, with their self-proclaimed moral astuteness, and the masses, who are perceived to be dependent, unintelligent, and lazy.

Resentment, according to Kusaka, characterizes much of the politics in the Third World. The Philippines has been in a peculiar state, with its elite continuing their grip into power. While Cambodia, Myanmar, and Thailand have their military as a factor in regime changes and control, People Power or mass revolt has taken its roots in the Philippines. However, Philippine society has since fragmented into a form of antagonism in which individuals who consider themselves as “upright citizens” stand in opposition to the masses who are judged as blameworthy for their misery. Precisely, the problem is that the bias against the poor and their ability to determine their own political fate has been a factor in Philippine politics. Yet, if one needs to understand the dynamics of power, one also realizes that the masses cannot be dismissed because they have the number that is critical in electing anyone who has the political ambition.

Yet, Kusaka reveals something that is depressing when it comes to politics in the country. The inclination of the masses to vote for actor-politicians during elections is viewed as blind devotion. This is apparent in the latest survey conducted by the Social Weather Station in which TV personalities such as Willie Revillame, Tito Sotto, and even Ramon Revilla Jr., who was charged in the past for embezzling money, are topping the surveys. Democracy in the Philippines has something to do with the divide between the masses and the elite. The poor do not trust the rich. It is for this reason that they resort to the type of social media justice that is promoted by the program of the likes of Erwin Tulfo, who ranks number one as a senatorial candidate. Kusaka notes that it is usually the case that the educated class think of themselves as “responsible citizens” whereas the poor in the slums are wrongly labelled as unintelligent voters who can be easily manipulated by money and the superficial influence of showbiz fame or popularity.

We have a real a problem because in a democracy, people are equal. The masses are mocked for their voting behavior while those who belong to the upper class are exalted for their political principles. In this sense, the poor are considered as the greatest threat to democracy instead of the structural injustices perpetuated by elitist rule. This results to a moral antagonism in which the masses, who are actually the real victims of the self-righteousness of the moneyed, have become the enemy of the state. When one hears the opinion of Western media about former President Rodrigo Duterte, they only focus on the alleged bad aspect of his presidency and fail to mention the good side of his pragmatic albeit effective leadership that put some oligarchs on their toes. My position remains. Duterte’s rise to power is a reaction to elite rule.

The country remains to be in a state of political uncertainty. Indeed, the use of a huge portion in the National Budget amounting to 26 billion pesos (458 million dollars) for what is called ayuda (financial assistance to the poor) is no more than a means to influence voters in the forthcoming May 12, 2025 midterm elections. This is actually money down the drain because the same is not only tainted with corruption, it also encourages dependency among the poor. Funds for the proposed Mindanao railway system and other major projects for Mindanao are non-existent. What this implies is that the mechanism employed by the current Marcos government to help the poor is not sustainable in the long run, with the country’s debt now at around 15 trillion pesos (257 billion US dollars) while the country’s budget deficit this year stands at 1.2 trillion pesos (20 billion dollars).

This problem is beyond conceptual. Real lives are at stake. The only way to understand the political consciousness of the poor, and in the process recognize the value of their humanity, is by means of living with them. Politicians, except for a few, cannot empathize with the masses because the majority come from political families. Julio Teehankee, a political scientist from De La Salle University in the Philippines, maintains that the reality of political dynasties thwarts any attempt of achieving authentic democracy in Philippine society. While this is so, the poor also needs to realize the value of responsible citizenship. While it is true that they cannot be considered blameworthy for structural injustices and systemic corruption, that does not preclude them from using their freedom of choice in terms of electing the right people to office.

Jeffry Ocay, a university professor at the Eastern Visayas State University and one of the country’s top scholars, says that domination and resistance are a facet of Philippine society since the colonial period. The masses do not believe in liberal reformism anymore. What is the reason for this? My argument is that such is due to political bias. It exists since political discourse is left in the hands of a cultured class that parades itself as belonging to a moral high ground. When intellectuals parody the masses, this kind of behavior alienates them from the public discourse. Yet, those in the cultured class also know that without the support of the masses, they cannot make the candidate of their choice to win in any election. Such was the case in the last elections. This is because the country also suffers from the hypocrisy of those who think of themselves as the saviors of democracy.

What is needed is changing the political consciousness of the poor. The masses need to know that their substantial stake in the pursuit of political maturity and human progress. The poor must be seen as real partners in the pursuit of human development. Filipinos need to trust each other. To alienate the poor from democratic governance is to betray them of their important moral role to society. Former UP President Jose Abueva wrote that the political leadership practiced in the country is transactional. In contrast, transformational leadership provides vision and guidance in realizing the democratic goals of a society. But the prospect for the future remains bleak. Democratic consolidation is impossible since majority of our elected officials have the same motive when it comes to perpetuating themselves in their positions of power. The forthcoming political exercise in May is nothing new when it comes to results and consequences.


www.newscj.com)

얼마전에 윤통이 필리핀을 방문해서 필리핀식 민주주의를 배워간거 같네요

신천지일보에 나온 기사군요 ...