Wild and ridiculous idea

IT should be very clear by now to President Duterte and other proponents of a revolutionary government that their wild idea is not feasible based on the relatively poor turnout of the Nov. 30 “Revgov” rallies unless they want this country to plunge into chaos and anarchy.

The claim that 16 million Filipinos want Duterte to declare a revolutionary government is baseless. I can name people who voted for the President in the 2016 elections who are either frowning over the prospects of a revolutionary government or are clueless on what the proponents are talking about.

The proponents’ line is this: 16 million Filipinos voted for Duterte last year, and therefore, 16 million Filipinos are in favor of a revolutionary government. That is simply full of illogic. One doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to see how flawed that assertion is.

But assuming for argument’s sake that all those who voted for Duterte last year are clamoring for a revolutionary government, 16 million still do not make up the Filipino majority. The figure merely represents 38.6 percent of the 41.348 million who voted in the hotly contested 2016 elections that had five presidential candidates. The majority of that is 25 million who voted for the now late Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Jejomar Binay, Grace Poe, and Manuel Roxas II. But even then, the 41 million Filipinos who trooped to the election precincts last year are not the majority in a country with a population that, as of 2016, has ballooned to 103 million or more. They were just the citizens who were qualified to vote in the 2016 synchronized national and local elections. Our election laws or rules are not applicable to the subject of revolutionary government. It is an entirely different matter that could impact on the lives of 103 million people, and not just 16 million, 25 million or 41 million Filipinos.

A plebiscite, perhaps, may be had to establish the public opinion on this question of much national importance but before that, the proponents would need to present their case for a revolutionary government and make it stand scrutiny first.

But amid all the “Revgov” noise being created and amplified by Duterte and his cohorts, I have yet to come across one intelligent argument for a revolutionary government. All I read and hear are weak assertions that can easily be demolished.

Let me examine some of the flawed assertions.

On Saturday, Gold Star Daily ran the column of lawyer Batas Mauricio who asserted that “those who are loudly opposing the putting up of a revolutionary government in the Philippines today… are known conspirators in earlier power grabs against legitimately installed presidents and governments in the country.” He generalizes and calls those who oppose it “hypocrites” who “have no right questioning the desire of a greater number of Filipinos to establish a revolutionary government at this point, because they themselves are tainted with the dark spirits of rebellion and diabolical disobedience to lawful authorities and institutions.” Really?

As I already pointed out, the assertion that a revolutionary government is the “desire of a greater number of Filipinos” is unfounded.

I do not know if Atty. Mauricio can look Duterte supporter and former Senate President Nene Pimentel in the eye and call him a “hypocrite” for declaring over radio station DxCC last week that the “Revgov” movement is “hinangal” (tomfoolery).

Mauricio’s case for a revolutionary government collapsed even before it could take off because he has not established that majority of the 103 million Filipinos really want it.

The same day, Gold Star Daily also published a piece that was claimed by Energy Undersecretary Ben Ranque to be his. In it, Ranque asserted the need for a revolutionary government by highlighting many ills in Philippine society which he blames on “an oligarchic state… worsened with the tradition of political dynasties and the entry of narco politics.”

Ranque conveniently omits the fact that there exists a Duterte political dynasty in Davao City where both his children are the political rulers, and the fact that the President’s relatives were summoned by the Senate blue ribbon committee that looked into the shipment of P6.4 billion worth of shabu from China.

How then, pray tell, would a Duterte revolutionary government make the Philippines any better when Duterte is now the ruler of the oligarchs, and given that what the proponents want is the abolition of all the necessary checks and balances, including the Constitution?

The most ridiculous assertion I read so far came from columnist Ben Contreras who, in his apparent unthinking moment, went to the extent of attacking — hold your breath! — democracy itself.

Contreras writes in his Nov. 28 column: “But his failures are not due to his inability to perform but because of the enormity of the problems coupled with a system of too much democracy.”

Let me point out that Contreras acknowledges that Duterte is unable to perform but then he blames this failure on the “enormity of the problems” aggravated by “too much democracy.” By “too much democracy,” he means institutionalized corruption and “bureaucracy, the red tape, the due process.”

On the subject of corruption, there is no way Duterte can get high marks given the kid-gloves treatment he has been giving his own election supporters who were tainted by corruption allegations. He fired his first irrigation administrator, and interior secretary, etc., and let go of his Customs chief allegedly due to corruption but just let them go away with it. They were never brought to court.

If Duterte is really serious in fighting corruption, then why is it that the former prosecutor did not exert much effort to prosecute his own people, some of whom he personally accused of being corrupt?

Duterte also has no problems rubbing elbows with former presidents and/or their families who are epitomes of corruption and Philippine oligarchy. The Marcos corruption, for instance, is neither imaginary nor unproven. There is a Supreme Court ruling on this. Yet Duterte breaks bread with this family and even honored their patriarch by causing his remains to be buried at the heroes’ cemetery.

It amazes me how Contreras could attack democracy itself and praise dictatorship. Before 2016 when reason still prevailed in this country, that would be like a taboo subject, and no one in his right mind would contend that democracy is bad, and dictatorship is a good thing.

While I understand Contreras’s complaint about the bureacratic red tape, he did not mention the fact that Duterte is now on top of the bureacratic chain and is therefore in the position to effect the needed changes. Given the kind of powers that come with the presidency, it is silly talk for anyone to say that Duterte is powerless. That is baloney.

Neither did Contreras say exactly how a revolutionary government would get rid of the bureacratic red tape. How? By getting rid of the Supreme Court, Congress, the Constitution and everything that goes with it?

It is appalling to note that Contreras, who is espousing this absurd revolutionary government idea, has himself admitted that he has been a conspirator in this gargantuan corruption and bureacratic red tape problem which he now wants to end. He was a participant.

In a previous column, he narrated how a mining company he worked for had to resort to under-the-table deals. In order to secure an ore transport permit, he alleged, “we had to shell out a handsome amount before it can be signed by the then Misamis Oriental governor Oscar Moreno.” In other words, “we” (they) resorted to bribery. That makes him a part of the problem because he admitted to be a participant.

Thanks to Contreras’s habit of writing without careful thought and his penchant for incriminating himself, we know now at least one of the bribe givers. Perhaps, Contreras should start identifying exactly who received the alleged bribes from “we” (them). And now, Contreras wants “shortcuts” via revolutionary government the way “we” (they, the shameless miners) allegedly ensured shortcuts in securing ore transport permits. Yeah, right.

I do not know if Contreras and Co. realize that they are attacking the very core of the Philippine government itself by advocating some sort of a nuclear attack on the very institutions that provide the necessary checks and balances. Do they even know that what they want is for Duterte to push the reset button?

Nobody told Duterte in 2016 that the job of a president is going to be a walk in the park. And nobody told him that the problems that would confront him won’t be this enormous.

Yet Contreras discounts one plausible explanation for Duterte’s epic fail and that is, the President is simply unfit to be president.

And so, he proposes: “Can we not take the chance? I will.” Well, that is neither a good argument nor a case for a revolutionary government. That would be to gamble on the future of this nation based on nothing but trust. That is like giving a drunk who is running amok blanket authority over the entire nation without institutions in place to ensure accountability.

The columnist has written some columns in the past that can pass off as intelligent. But, sorry Ben, not this one. That idea is simply dangerous and ridiculous or, to borrow the word used by Nene Pimentel, “hinangal.” Pastilan.