The value of tears

RR Rañeses

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Democracy is a regime of difference. And studies have shown that while democracy does not always deliver instrumental goods, its intrinsic defense of difference has in many instances tempered and trumped violent anti-democratic tendencies.

It is difficult not to be persuaded by a beleaguered President Benigno S. Aquino III nearly overcome with tears drawing strength from the memory of his parents – icons of Philippine democracy, Ninoy and Cory – to drive home the point in his recently delivered 5th State of the Nation Address (SONA).

In a persistently macho and family-centered society such as the Philippines, a man who tears up in public when talking about his parents is almost always endearing and is likely, patently upright too.

Admittedly being a good man is not enough and good private character does not necessarily translate to effective leadership. And yes, Aquino failed to exercise visionary leadership in the last three years.

But because leadership is always a collective effort, Aquino’s failures are not solely of his own doing.

They are also, and in a more important way, a reflection of the collective failure of the men surrounding the good king to stand up to his high moral standards.

Deep political divisions

Critics assailed Aquino for cheap appeal to populist sentiment and goaded him to grow up and stop conjuring the shadows of his parents.

Ad hominems aside, the charges reveal a condition that Aquino (and his successor administration) should by now learn to live with: the Philippine nation remains deeply divided.

And given contemporary currents, including generationally driven ones, not just in the domestic but also in the global political and cultural economy,  it will likely remain so.

For Aquino the division is starkly delineated with each camp constituting a monolithic bloc.

Social formations, however, are not homogenous. And while politically a potent device, rallying one’s side against another side almost always runs the risk of simplifying a fight, even if it’s worth fighting for.  

Oppositional challenge

But here too lies the challenge for the opposition and for Aquino’s critics. Being simplistically categorized as detractors is not unreasonable when oppositionists and their think tanks themselves are unable to propose clear policy alternatives.

Blame it on the presidential system’s “winner take all” tendency where oppositionists are relegated to the reactive posture of “fiscalizing” the ruling administration. There is of course nothing wrong here and oppositionists including their civil society allies must be given due part in fulfilling this role.

But if all the opposition does is to replicate the tasks of existing institutions such as the Commission on Audit or the Ombudsman to the point of redundancy, something is clearly amiss.

While it behooves Aquino to acknowledge and draw energy from existing social divisions, it also behooves those in the opposition to channel their energies through creative means of communicating their alternatives.

The opposition should take inspiration from the parliamentary practice of nurturing a “shadow cabinet” dedicated to matching administration policy statements not just with fact-based counter-points but with vision-driven contrarian trajectories.

While critically constructive voices abound such as budget experts Professors Benjamin Diokno and Leonor Briones, they remain outside the policy and decision making environment.

Demanding difference

President Benigno Aquino III delivering his 5th State of the Nation Address.

The failure to endorse and prioritize crucial political party reforms in the last couple of years and during Monday’s SONA is an unfortunate sign, however, that Aquino is queasy about reciprocating the trust he has repeatedly demanded from the public.

Democracy is a regime of difference. And studies have shown that while democracy does not always deliver instrumental goods, its intrinsic defense of difference has in many instances tempered and trumped violent anti-democratic tendencies.

This is why rather than diffusing difference, Aquino should take heed from the 1968 student-riots in France and instead, “demand difference”.

Equitable and proportionally determined state-funding for political parties facilitates the autonomous growth of political formations away from patronage. It also provides disincentives for politicians to tail the coats of the president’s party, weakens the temptations of turncoatism, and strengthens minority blocs in legislative assemblies.

Until Aquino sees the vibrancy of policy debates driven by differences in party commitments,  he will always see the different as a detractor. And until such party commitments are formed and deepened, the government will always find a reason to justify the exclusion of oppositionists from institutions of decision-making and power.

The demand to propose difference is however a responsibility that all citizens must share. Including those within opposition ranks.

Sadly, even oppositionists have not agreed amongst themselves and endorsed a policy that will quash the stumbling block for genuine difference in the Philippines today: political dynasties. It is likely that the administration’s aversion to difference is also shared by those in the political opposition. Equally lamentable, even radical Left groups who are supposed bearers of difference stifle intellectual debate between their comrades.

Democracy’s Vale of Tears

Aquino’s penultimate SONA delivered at a time when two impeachment complaints are up for deliberations at the lower house and public trust ratings are at their lowest levels, reminded the Philippine nation why he was catapulted into the presidency four years ago.

That Aquino alone among those candidates in 2010 had both widely perceived moral ascendancy and mobilizational capacity to rescue the country from the democratic decay it suffered under the Gloria Arroyo regime is a belief that many still hold on to, including this author.

Aquino’s real tears shed on Monday reinforce the dominant public perception that he is a good man and that singularly he can only do so much. Aquino rightly exhorted his constituents to keep the fight.

But here lies democracy’s vale of tears: both fight and fighters are not singular. They are, rather, an unruly multitude of difference. – Rappler.com

RR Rañeses is an Instructor at the Department of Political Science, Ateneo de Manila University. On academic leave this semester, he is presently a Senior Research Analyst for an Asia-wide business intelligence and risk reduction company. He blogs at http://rrraneses.wordpress.com.

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!