Why the nation is divided
WHY is Philippine society divided again as it was during the martial law years? It’s because our government has again taken the country to an extreme mode of governance.
Killing suspected criminals without due process is an example of extreme governance. Pathological cursing is extreme behavior.
A lust or craving to kill people is extreme behavior, or extreme governance if it becomes state policy. A lack of tact or diplomacy and indeed a tendency to pick up a fight is extreme behavior. A propensity to insult people is degrading not only to the people insulted but also to the one dispensing the insults.
President Duterte came to office with guns blazing. He put into action his so-called “war on drugs” which has resulted in nearly 8,000 deaths so far. Drug suspects are still being gunned down even though the police have been ordered to stand down. They are now poised again to take over from the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency.
Mr. Duterte has introduced initiatives that have jarred the Filipino people, like the switch of allies from the United States to China and Russia. The President has been flipflopping on his peace talks with the communists, which are currently off the table.
Duterte waves a thick “narco” list of government officials who are allegedly involved in the illegal drug trade. But he hasn’t released the list to the public and no large-scale arrests of such officials have been made. Those who’ve been killed so far are poor people suspected of using or selling drugs.
These are examples of the new administration’s drastic changes in governance. Mr. Duterte claims to be a socialist but it’s really hard to pin him down ideologically. How could he be a leftist when he adores the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos? How could he be a rightist when he’s friendly with local communists and with China and Russia?
What is more and more apparent is his autocratic bent, acting without Cabinet input or public consultation. A lot of his announcements appear to be off-the-cuff, they have to be explained the next day by his handlers, who are often as confused as the public about their boss’ statements.
The key element here is that the President’s acts are drastic and far from the ideological or political center, which creates uncertainty and alarm among the people.
Most people in society place themselves in the center of political orthodoxy. Many Filipinos don’t even subscribe to any political ideology, it’s something alien to them because they have very little exposure to ideological teaching or indoctrination. Even our politicians have undefined ideological leanings.
The best that one can define people who are politically attuned is that they’re either conservative or progressive. In between are a large mass of centrists who have no defined ideological leanings. Being in the political center, the large mass of people are not keen to take extreme positions and are content to be what’s called the silent majority.
The large mass are uncomfortable with extreme political positions. They’re not used to drastic measures imposed on them by government. Being at the center and not part of either left or right, they find themselves powerless and disconnected. They keep quiet and cede their political space to the militants on either side. They go along and hide whatever disagreement they have with the activist government by embracing conformity and becoming invisible.
But drastic measures by government, either of the left or right, create uncertainty and fissure among the populace. The activists take to the streets while the vast majority pretend to not see anything and just carry on with their obscure lives.
The battle is left to adherents of the extreme ends of the political and ideological spectrum. They each push and push until one side wins. The center stays silent and waits for the ultimate winner to emerge.
Until then society is divided because of competing extremes. The scrimmages continue until, as in war, one side proclaims victory. One side emerges, bloodied but triumphant, the other quiet as in dead.
*** Tantrum Ergo. I’ve heard some university students taking up Tourism or Hotel and Restaurant Management are required by their schools to perform on-the-job training abroad, which is of course expensive. What if the students can’t afford to go abroad? Would they get failing grades? The Commission on Higher Education should look into this.