---------- Forwarded message ----------
Subject: Fwd: Political reality
To:



Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:41:30 +0800
> From: Rene Azurin <[email protected]>
>
> BusinessWorld <http://www.bworldonline.com/main/content.php?id=2155>
> http://www.bworldonline.com/main/content.php?id=2155
>
> Thursday, November 26, 2009 | MANILA, PHILIPPINES
> <http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&pub=wwwbworldonlinecom>|
>
>
>
> Opinion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Strategic Perspective -- by René B. Azurin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Political reality
>
>
>
>
>
> His decision, announced last Tuesday, not to run for any elective office in
> 2010 is itself proof of the faulty reasoning that underlay the reasons Sen.
> Francis Escudero gave when he bolted -- a month ago -- the political party
> he belonged to and served for 11 years. Disregarding any rumors that he made
> that decision to quit in a fit over not getting the funding support he
> needed for a run at the presidency, it is interesting that he chose to turn
> his special rationale into a polemic about political parties in general.
>
> The remarks Mr. Escudero made were probably more revealing of the state of
> his political maturity than he might have wanted it to be. These could be
> ignored -- since he is no longer a candidate for any elective position in
> the upcoming elections -- but the paid ad publicizing his statement in major
> newspapers invites comment because it appears to reflect a rather common
> misconception about democracy and democratic processes among the young and
> politically naïve.
>
> The essential thrust of what can be given better-than-passing marks for
> political rhetoric is that -- paraphrasing Mr. Escudero’s remarks -- any
> aspirant for the presidency of this republic should not be a member of any
> political party because his party should be the one to which all Filipinos
> belong. The explicit basis of this position is the accusation that all
> candidates who are members of a political party have their hands tied
> ("nakakadena ang kamay") and their mouths muzzled ("nakabusal ang bibig") by
> those who represent their party’s specific vested interests. Also expressly
> stated by Mr. Escudero is the notion that only by being free of membership
> in any political party can one truly perceive what one must do and what role
> one must play to advance the best interests of the nation as a whole.
>
> It is hard to believe that an experienced politician of Mr. Escudero’s
> education and training actually believes that one can dispense with the
> existence of political parties in a democratic system. His published remarks
> reflect such a fundamental misunderstanding of democratic processes that one
> can imagine hearing them in some high school debate but not in the
> rough-and-tumble world of real politics.
>
> The reality of life in a democratic setting is that it is the special
> interests represented by political parties (and other social groupings) who
> compete in democratic elections for the power to promote their particular
> agenda. Individual citizens can entertain the illusion that they wield power
> during the periodic democracy-characterizing exercises called elections, but
> their solitary votes are, to be realistic, insignificant. It is only when
> these single votes are consolidated into blocs by political operators or
> vote aggregators do these acquire a measure of importance. This is why the
> ability to aggregate votes into blocs is a highly valued function in a
> working democracy. This is what political parties do (or, at least, what
> they are designed to do).
>
> To elaborate somewhat, creating a voting bloc means getting a group of
> voters to vote together. This, almost by definition, requires uniting these
> voters in the pursuit of a common goal or special interest. Since the
> citizens in a democratic country invariably have various goals and different
> interests, elections therefore are effectively competitions among various
> voting blocs -- each representing some shared goals or special interests --
> for the privilege of wielding government power in order to realize those
> shared goals or to advance those special interests. Rousseau’s famous notion
> of "the general will" being the supreme arbiter in representative government
> is a theoretical concept that is impossible to actualize. The truth of the
> matter is that organized voting blocs -- in other words, political parties
> (however one might label them) -- dictate the agenda of government in a
> democratic society.
>
> It must be emphasized that there is nothing inherently wrong in that (as
> Mr. Escudero seems to believe). In fact, the competition of organized
> minorities -- again, these voting blocs are political parties however they
> might call themselves (civic groups, advocacy movements, religious
> organizations, etc.) -- for political power is part and parcel of the whole
> idea of representative democracy. When a special interest minority gains
> power because it is successful in selling its special agenda to the majority
> of the voting public, it is expected to promote this particular agenda.
> Other special interest minorities, depending on the extent that that agenda
> conflicts with their own or competes for the same desired resources, are
> expected to oppose the bloc in power and seek to limit its power. This is
> what causes power to swing, from one election to the next, from one bloc to
> the next. As long as power is sufficiently dispersed so that power can
> conceivably swing from one voting bloc to another, competing minorities are
> often forced to make concessions to each other and to seek a modus vivendi
> that ultimately diminishes each group’s ability to push its particular
> special interest forward too much. This is the reality of how it is.
>
> The point is, as long as citizens are free to organize themselves into
> voting blocs that represent their special interests and there is working
> competition (as in economic markets) among the various minorities that make
> up a society, the general welfare has a chance of being realized.
>
> The problem, perhaps, of Mr. Escudero is that he, strangely, did not appear
> to realize that his problem was specific to him and the political party to
> which he belonged. One surmises from his tirade against it that he no longer
> shared the goals of the Nationalist Peoples’ Coalition and no longer
> subscribed to the aspirations of the voting blocs that constitute that
> party. Obviously then, he could also no longer exert any sort of a claim on
> that party’s funds (or its fund-raising ability).
>
> What Mr. Escudero’s announcement that he is abandoning his political
> ambitions for 2010 -- "hindi natin panahon ngayon" -- might indicate is a
> newly acquired realization that his political ambitions require him to,
> heavens, organize a political party. He will have to build voting blocs that
> will share his goals and special interests (whatever those are) if he wants
> to be president someday since none of the main political parties or
> groupings now share his goals or interests. Necessarily, his new political
> party must also acquire the means to raise funds to pursue its objectives.
> The challenge for Mr. Escudero is to build this new party around a
> distinctive political philosophy instead of merely around his ambitions to
> become president. Nothing he has said or accomplished so far in his
> political career -- and it has been a successful one -- indicates that he is
> capable of this. One actually does not know what philosophical principles he
> stands for or what programs of government he espouses. One actually does not
> know what his "Ako bilang ako" ("Me as myself") really means or implies.
> Still, one always hopes to be surprised. Otherwise, his organization of a
> new political party for the 2016 elections will only serve to add to the
> problem of person-centered political parties in a patronage-based Philippine
> political system.
>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gimik" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/gimik?hl=en.


Reply via email to