Return of the scheme

Earlier today, at around 10:51 am, radio station DZMM said that the Palace was set to issue a statement favoring Charter Change today. During the lunchtime news program of Tony Velasquez and Bernadette Sembrano, word is that the President, in a workshop this morning, directed government agencies, particularly the Department of the Interior and Local Governments and the Department of Budget and Management, to pursue Charter Change by 2009.

What will make this version of Charter Change different is that it will be focused on Federalism, an original component of the administration’s first Charter Change efforts, but eventually dropped in favor of a focus on a shift to the parliamentary system.

Whether this focus on Federalism is meant to muster local government support, and salve the wounded feelings of original Civil Society allies of the Palace, remains to be seen -just as whether this is an effort to put the President’s imprint on this version in contrast to the parliamentary focus of the Speaker who pushed for the previous effort: after all, having solved the President’s impeachment-related problem for 2007-2008, the Speaker is now dispensable (despite warnings from the Speaker that if he falls, she falls, which he said he told her in a one-on-one meeting Sec. Puno denies every happened; see also Datumanong drafted by Palace to replace JDV? But Newbsreak says, detente is the name of the game).

Anyway, here’s the news: Arroyo renews call for Charter change: Panel formed to draft federalism ‘roadmap’ by 2012. See also Arroyo revives Cha-Cha bid, forms federalism panel (the political opening, of course, would be, such a shift would require some sort of transitional government).

I’m inclined, for now, to treat this as a clumsy effort to deflect attention from the Palace’s dilemma over what to do with Pampanga Gov. Ed Panlilio. But it would be prudent to place the whole thing within the context of a problem identified in Chinese Money Meets Filipino Politics in Asia Sentinel:

With the president out by 2010, however, her hold may be waning as junior leaders look toward their political futures. There are allegations of other irregularities in Chinese deals and critics may find lots of material to throw at newspaper reporters in an effort to chip away at Arroyo’s credibility, despite the country’s solid economic performance in recent years.

Mon Casple in his blog, says the ruling coalition is also increasingly paranoid:

The real rift between the GMA and the JDV camp threatens the solidity of the ruling coalition–a coalition that weathered the political storm of the past three years.

This is compounded by a lot of factors: among them are the continued political challenges coming from the opposition, the inexorable deadline of the 2010 end-of-GMA-term, the wily play of the presidentiables, the US and Western concern over growing Chinese influence, health problems of key administration players, and the flexing of the military’s political clout.

These factors are leading to a growing perception of a lameduck GMA presidency. This may not yet be the case but it cannot anymore be denied that, if no decisive GMA policy decision on the political crisis is forthcoming, the perception will take hold and influence the decisions of the various key players.

Atty. Pulido’s impeachment complaint–however haphazard it may seem to many–acquires significance beyond its original assessment in the light of this current political reality. Considering the political nature of an impeachment process, a significant coalition of legislators in the lower House can seize and railroad the process (only 80 votes needed for impeachment). They can shortcut the process and give it to the Senate.

Such a possibility spooked Malacañang and hence its attempt to hold the line with the ruling coalition majority. It may entail more concessions to the JDV camp. On the other hand, it may also precipitate an ouster move on him. What is clear is the signs of nervousness (and suspicion) that everyone exhibits when looking at his or her neighbor in the coalition.

Shifting loyalties–such is the stuff of transitions and wind of political change.

As the political class’s attention increasingly focuses on 2010, the Palace has to find ways to keep itself relevant to the political class. An effective way is to keep everyone guessing what the President’s real intentions are concerning 2010 and one way is to keep local government officials and legislators coming back to the trough for regular fattening.

A news item like this one, seems innocent at first, Palace looks to add judiciary in Ledac, but becomes interesting in light of what the President is poised to do next year: enjoy the opportunity to appoint a new Civil Service Commissioner, new Commission on Audit Chairman, several Supreme Court justices, etc. An institutional means to circle the wagons over the next couple of years has just been floated.

Gov. Panlilio’s revelation last week was that after a Palace meeting, he was given half a million pesos in cash. Bulacan Gov. Jonjon Mendoza confirms the account of the Gov. of Pampanga. Their accounts go in the face of denials or conflicting testimony from everyone else who was at the same meeting. An earlier meeting involving congressmen, has led to conflicting accounts, too: Cash gift ‘standard’–House leader: This is when we’ve done something good, he says and Two more congressmen admit receiving Palace ‘cash gifts’. Now the congressional dole outs may have had impeachment immunization in mind (see GMA gets ‘immunized’) but the local government dole outs make sense not only with the baranggay elections but also Charter Change in mind, too.

Gov. Panlilio’s initial response was pastoral, not legal: to take the money and place it in the provincial treasury and use it for good works. But then he seems to have realized that what is pastoral (therefore, moral) is not necessarily legal. Also, considering he’s a reformist governor, it’s a political opening for his critics: Kampi mayor to Gov Ed: Why did you take the money?. So the Governor has said he intends to ask why he was given money without the required voucher, and if Palace can’t explain why he’ll return the money: Panlilio to Palace: Where did P500,000 come from?.

Meanwhile, Neda firm on keeping NBN papers. Konfrontasi with the Senate continues.

Even as Opposition plans to take impeach referral to SC, this is a sensible move: Opposition to boycott impeachment hearings. And this is a long-overdue reform: Noynoy eyes 3-strike rule vs Cabinet appointments.

Economic news: No stopping the peso, closes even higher while Hot money back, Sept. net inflow $38.2M.

Senator Joker Arroyo vigorously justified himself in a piece he demanded be published, and his opinions are shared by Philippine Commentary while criticized by last Sunday’s Inquirer editorial and in a commentary by Amando Doronila today.

In his column, Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ discusses what an impeachment is and isn’t:

The whole point of the impeachment process is to save the nation from one who does not deserve to be in office. It is not meant to be an instrument of punishment. Punishment can follow in a criminal proceeding if impeachment succeeds or when the official concerned leaves office.

The constitutional rules for impeachment, however, can be manipulated to make the process achieve the precise opposite of its purpose. It can be manipulated to shield an official from a serious impeachment complaint for one year. And this is easily done. All that is needed is one member of the House who is willing to file or endorse a flimsy complaint. This is what all the current brouhaha is about.

(See Philippine Politics 04 for related materials on impeachment and the Supreme Court’s definition of when a complaint gets initiated.)

Justice Isagani Cruz tackles executive privilege.

Randy David says the legal system hasn’t caught up with public opinion:

Thank heavens not everyone hangs by the thread of unresolved legal issues. In the meantime, there are political closures. The fact that GMA or her husband has not been charged or found guilty of any crime does not negate the certainty that the majority of Filipinos have closed the political book on her. Her consistently negative approval ratings in recent surveys attest to this. The rejection of most of her candidates in the last senatorial election shows this in no uncertain terms. The stunning election to the Senate of the detained young military officer Antonio Trillanes IV, accused of leading a mutiny against her government, confirms this closure. Ms Arroyo governs on the sufferance of a nation still recovering from past upheavals. Everyone awaits her last days in the presidency.

There are moral closures too. No one today, not even its most rabid supporters, thinks of this administration as an emblem of good government or of ethical leadership. Those who still see politics as a contest between the forces of good and evil are in no doubt at all as to which side Ms Arroyo is aligned with. No other administration has been as brazen as this one in giving cash to legislators, election inspectors and bishops.

And there are social closures. After Marcos, no other head of government has earned the resolute distrust of the citizenry as much as GMA. Again, survey after survey expresses this. More than at any other time, distrust permeates the whole political system today because of the way she has run the government. She ought to listen to how ordinary folk talk about her on AM radio. She may not sense this now, but it will be difficult for her not to notice it when she finally leaves public office. She will receive none of the lingering affection and awe that Cory and Erap continue to bask in when they are among ordinary people. No one with any hope of winning will want to be associated with her in any future election. That is social closure.

A truly outstanding entry in Ricelander’s blog, on the relationship between politics, politicians, and issues: read the whole thing.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

285 comments

Skip to comment form

    • Equalizer on October 16, 2007 at 8:48 pm

    “A man died and went straight to heaven. He noticed many clocks hanging around, so he asked St. Peter what those clocks were. The saint replied, “Those are clocks of lies. When a person lies, the hands of his clock move. Look at this one. This is Mother Teresa’s clock. It never moved. It means she didn’t tell any lie. This one is Abraham Lincoln’s. It only moved twice.” “Remarkable,” the man said. “But where is Gloria Arroyo’s clock?” St. Peter said, “It’s in Jesus’ office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.”

    • harry on October 16, 2007 at 9:01 pm

    doctor norton:I can personally attest that bibith is in DFA and tililling is a cosmetologist.Have a life .

    • mavfag on October 16, 2007 at 9:04 pm

    how pathetic that other people are using my name but their email is not the same as mine. if you want to play dirty, alright let’s play dirty in here nincompoops.

    • harry on October 16, 2007 at 9:04 pm

    where are the GMA bashers today????

    • mavfag on October 16, 2007 at 9:05 pm

    harry, why don’t you shut up you stupid fuck impostor.

    • mavfag on October 16, 2007 at 9:06 pm

    why don’t you write your address in here and let’s settle this like men and not like faggots that you are. what? or are you some little shitty scary asshole

    • harry on October 16, 2007 at 9:06 pm

    i will be on watch mode and wait for these anti gma guys,i mean gays…

    • mavfag on October 16, 2007 at 9:07 pm

    dami ka pang satsat, ano sulat mo address mo dito at makita mo sino hinahanap mo

    • mavfag on October 16, 2007 at 9:07 pm

    duwag ka impostor na harry. isang bakla

    • harry on October 16, 2007 at 9:08 pm

    so harry the impostor, your address?

    • harry on October 16, 2007 at 9:10 pm

    another monkey that hides behind the monitor. post your address in here

    • mlq3 on October 16, 2007 at 9:14 pm
      Author

    mavfag i suggest you reconsider your handle and tone of your statements and that extends to others on the verge of making personal threats against each other.

  1. sorry for all the misunderstanding guys. i’m a faggot

  2. let’s play some games that people play. i’m a defective detective

  3. mlq3, i’m sorry. i just don’t like people pretending to be me. won’t happen again if these people stop their attacks on me.

  4. mlq3, i suggest you make a registration mechanism in your blog so that people don’t use sn of other people indiscriminately. with the corresponding email add, with the corresponding ip address. thanks

  5. i’m already a chef now. my work as a cosmetologist is part-time. on thursdays i’m a military man.

  6. mlq3, i hope you consider putting a mechanism in your blog wherein people cannot use an sn already registered to another person. this is to avoid attacks using the sn of other people.

    • Fresh air on October 16, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    guyd,

    Warning: ” Excessive Obssessive Compulsive Blogging is Dangerous to Your Health.”

  7. i dnt think, mlq3 has the power to do this on his own. unless wordpress supports this kind of screening. we just have to be discerning enough to know when impostors appear.

    • rego on October 16, 2007 at 9:58 pm

    Pulse Asia: 2007 Senatorial Elections a Referendum on GMA
    ‘It is about people wanting changes in government’”- The equalizer

    I just coudlnot understand why the Pulse Asia, SWS and other survey orgatnization just keep on dong surveys when you can just use the data from 2007 election.

    What I would really like to see is a study based on the voter turn out and total number of voters.

    Tried googling some figures but dont have much time to get to the official figure.One paper says the projected total number voters for 2004 is 49.25 milion. So that could be around 50 million by 2007.

    And I dont have much time to sarch for the voter turn-out in 2007 eleksyon.

    Anyway what I am saying is that Loren got around 15 million votes. That is like less tnan half of the total number of votes. Its like 30% And Triallanes got 11 million votes and its 20% like 50 million.

    So i dont believe that the voice of 11 miliion voter is already a majority voice. It very much a minority

    So equating that to the approval of Gloria administration. What do you got.? There is like almost 65 – 70 % voters who did not judge Gloria in the last eleksyon. And Im sure majority of those who trooped to the polls are the ones who hated Gloria and wanted express there dissatisafction of Gloria be heard through the vote.

    Could this be the reason why is we are very far from the so called tipping point to osust Gloria and that is why Gloria is still in power ?

    Therefore its just very hard for me to accept and to use the results of 2007 senate election as an outright repudiation of the Gloria administration. It is safer to say that is an outright repudiation of Gloria by those who hate her.

    I dont know with you guys. But just correct me if im wrong.

  8. people accused me of being karah
    people accused me of being luli

    even you manolo could attest to the fact that i even sent you an email asking about karah but it seems to me your kept your silence.

    some people are even saying i’m part of this luli internet brigade. is that how cheap and paranoid are people now these days. you people can rot in this blog for all i care. at the end of the day, what you do is being counter-productive to the society at large. instead of you being productive, you spend so much time bashing gma and her administration as if you can make her step down.

    i noticed that for the people who pretend to be more like manolo in this blog, a commenter is not welcomed in here not unless he/she is anti-gma.

    mav, the only reason i wasn’t able to respond to your copy and paste last night was because i had a lot of customers and i’m servicing them – i’m curling their hair. i was waiting for you but you were gone. what i find more hilarious is that when someone says he/she is into cosmetology, people take it hookline and sinker. your brains are burly that’s why. i thought only in the courts they have stenographers but i was mistaken, they have those here as well.

    • nemo on October 16, 2007 at 10:13 pm

    rego,

    If you look at all the countries with elections, you’ll find that not 100% of the population will participate in any political activity, you’ll be lucky if you get 50%, actually perhaps 20% of the voting age within the population. Lets be realistic, some are not interested, whether they are happy with the status quo or don’t care at all, or for some reason are unable to participate. Its basically the critical few who actually participate actively in matters of the state, and it is this critical few who matter. Statistically we don’t have to get a 100% (one by one) survey of all these people, just a representative sample.
    Even if you look at the odds, one can easily predict winning candidates just by using the SWS survey. If you dare, bet on it and you’ll see.

    • Ka Enchong on October 16, 2007 at 10:16 pm

    rego,

    “So equating that to the approval of Gloria administration. What do you got.? There is like almost 65 – 70 % voters who did not judge Gloria in the last eleksyon. And Im sure majority of those who trooped to the polls are the ones who hated Gloria and wanted express there dissatisafction of Gloria be heard through the vote…

    …Therefore its just very hard for me to accept and to use the results of 2007 senate election as an outright repudiation of the Gloria administration. It is safer to say that is an outright repudiation of Gloria by those who hate her.”

    Would it be safer to conclude that those who hated Aling Gloria hated her so much as to bother and vote for the opposition while those who liked her did not like her enough to express their support for her candidates?

    What I see is that 30%-35% surely wanted to send her their message. What remains is a mixed bag of voters who are either supportive of her or are plainly clueless, if not apathetic.

    • mlq3 on October 16, 2007 at 10:21 pm
      Author

    rego, the problem is the comelec has not released definitive figures and no election body gathers data on voters’ motivations or thinking. even prior to may, 2007, the comelec could not provide precise data on the 2004 elections on a per-province and per-city municipality much less precinct basis, which inquirer.net was trying to obtain, for example, to get a basis for comparison between those who voted in 04 and those registered to vote in 07, etc.

    also bear in mind that we have a winner-take-all system, locally and nationally. all you need is 1 vote more than your leading opponent, and you win. therefore the number that stays away or who can’t vote is irrelevant unless there is massive disenfranchisement or terrorism/fraud on a scale to markedly affect the outcome. you snooze, you lose, you don’t vote, you vote does not count for anything, that’s a harsh reality of democracy.

    • nemo on October 16, 2007 at 10:25 pm

    Tililing,

    Hi! Here we go again? I fully understand your situation, its not easy being the odd-man-out, but there’s nothing wrong with that. Remember your “Johari Window?” what you perceive yourself to be may not be the same as how others see you (or in this case read). In a group of people with more or less the same views, you’ll almost always see this scenario. What remains to be done is to learn how to handle the situation, and how to behave, or talk, in a manner that will merit a certain degree of respect from your peers. First of all, respect yourself, using names with schizophrenic connotations will not help, use a normal one, use your real name, whats wrong with that? I am using mine actually. It really depends on your decorum also, I’m sure you and Mav will not see things eye to eye on some issues but at least lets try to be more civil to each other.
    As I said, you seem to be a reasonable, smart, witty, intelligent individual, behave like one and you will notice the difference. 🙂

    • mlq3 on October 16, 2007 at 10:27 pm
      Author

    frankly, i’m totally confused as to who is what and where in terms of the handles people use. there’s a way to register your handles, folks, i’m sure one of the habitues here will help you find out how.

    • nemo on October 16, 2007 at 10:39 pm

    sorry, nemo is me ramrod, I tried using another handle to see how it goes but I can’t seem to get back to ramrod, some help here please…

    • ramrod on October 16, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    🙁 🙂

    • ramrod on October 16, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    I’m okay, now how do you remove the website?

    • rego on October 16, 2007 at 11:18 pm

    Manolo,

    If Comele doesn’t want to release the figures can’t we just use the data on the actual certificates. add them and all teh number of voters in per precinct and add all teh number actual number of those who cast their votes. Just for analysis purposes. This I belive is much much better than the surveys that has very very small sampling size.

    On the winer takes all system. Yes thois who won really won and those who lose really los. I have no problem with that.

    my concern is the way we analyze and use the recent senate election results for the “repudiation” of Gloria administration.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 1:13 am

    “my concern is the way we analyze and use the recent senate election results for the “repudiation” of Gloria administration.” – rego

    If we look at it simply, a majority of the candidates who won, and at the top of the final list, had “oppose Gloria” as their main platform. No one can argue with success.
    The comelec list in itself I believe has some glitches in it, and I think that even if you use this as your raw data you’ll still won’t have an accurate result, your degree of error will not be within tolerance.
    Then again, most people will agree that the last senatorial elections was the most watched, if you were here during that time, there was an abundance fo poll watchers, media was quick to react, there was a text brigade, and there were several instances of poll violations that were caught on TV/radio. There was no sudden “brown outs” during the counting which was almost always the norm before.

    • justice league on October 17, 2007 at 1:17 am

    If the means meant to be used to pursue Federalism in the previous ChaCha attempts are viewed, those plans are so “sneaky” in character that it makes it appear that federalism is not so favored after all.

    In the House resolutions; much of the changes dealt with Parliamentary shift while probably only one section dealt with the federal shift after about a 10 year period.

    In the Concom recommendations; Federal shift ultimately boils down to a small percentage of votes (in favor of it) making the process so suspect that the idea doesn’t have much of limbs to stand on.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 1:34 am

    justice league,

    Being that I’m one of the other people who is not so attuned to politics, I really believe that “Federalism” should be presented to the people in relatable terms focusing on pros and cons or benefits/disadvantages, costs/benefits, etc. Including this ChaCha thing.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 1:59 am

    hey where did everyone go? this is just about the only time I can blog, busy week…

    Anyway, I really believe that we should even the playing field, seeing that we all know what mlq3 looks like, I don’t want him to have a monopoly of “character.”
    Now you can see my homely “mug” just click my name.
    Good night…

    • rego on October 17, 2007 at 2:16 am

    “Lets be realistic, some are not interested, whether they are happy with the status quo or don’t care at all, or for some reason are unable to participate. Its basically the critical few who actually participate actively in matters of the state, and it is this critical few who matter. Statistically we don’t have to get a 100% (one by one) survey of all these people, just a representative sample.”

    Of course Nemo, walang problema, lets be realistic.

    Your key word is “critical few”. However, those who anti GMA in blog , is making it appear that “critical few” is
    All Filipinos or Majority of the Filipino. How realistics is that?

    • rego on October 17, 2007 at 2:21 am

    “Even if you look at the odds, one can easily predict winning candidates just by using the SWS survey. If you dare, bet on it and you’ll see.”

    Nemo,

    Agian I agree with you that the SWS survey or nay other credible surveys can predict election results. But not all the time or 100% accurate though. And that is teh challenge for that.

    All Im saying actually is that why use use a very sampl esample size through survey instead of using a more precise data from the most recent election.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:22 am

    hi rego,

    Its ramrod, I tried using another name to see how others do it last night but I had a hard time changing it back to ramrod again.

    I believe you can’t say really majority or all in the measurable sense of the word, most of us just say it for emphasis. You know how it is, figures of speech stuff.
    By the way, click on my name, thats my family’s pictures there, Nemo is actually the name of my son…

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:29 am

    rego,

    I doubt if we can get precise data even from the most recent election, though I believe it was a bit cleaner than the previous ones. It would appear though because of several incidents and pronouncements (TV, newspapers, tabloids, radio) that GMA’s political career is far from healthy. I think it comes with the territory, this country has never been easy to govern, there’s always a tendency for party politics to extend beyond the elections period, now how could anyone set up a good team?

    • Equalizer on October 17, 2007 at 2:33 am

    ramrod:why did you leave the military?

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:34 am

    “Agian I agree with you that the SWS survey or nay other credible surveys can predict election results. But not all the time or 100% accurate though. And that is teh challenge for that.” – rego

    Yes, I have to agree with you that its not 100% accurate, but at the moment, we have no other tool. Honestly, when they published the SWS Survey results close to or within the campaign period, it could even influence voter decision making, we like to pick a winner.

    • rego on October 17, 2007 at 2:38 am

    Would it be safer to conclude that those who hated Aling Gloria hated her so much as to bother and vote for the opposition while those who liked her did not like her enough to express their support for her candidates?

    What I see is that 30%-35% surely wanted to send her their message. What remains is a mixed bag of voters who are either supportive of her or are plainly clueless, if not apathetic.

    ——————————————————-
    Ka Enchong,

    Tama ka rin naman. People who hated Gloria wanted to be heard so they pasionately trooped to the polling precinct. and even guard their ballots t makes that their votes are counted properly. And I believe this is very good attitude that must be keep.

    But you have to understand that in qouting the 30 -35% you are making an assumption that those who voted for Loren 100% hated Gloria. Which isnot realy the case. It can be 90%, 80%, or lower. But no one really knows.

    Now I have a question for you.

    Should our counrty be run by the weaknesses ( hatred is a weakness not strength) assumed 30-35% of the population. Or should it be run by the strength of majority?

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:40 am

    equalizer,

    Disillusionment really. I couldn’t for the life of me relate the discussions on politics, and saving the people from themselves, to being a professional soldier,it didn’t make sense, but my friends believed in something and would have been willing to die for it, I wanted to be with them. My mother’s incessant crying helped, and my father’s calls/letters to come home also.

    • Equalizer on October 17, 2007 at 2:42 am

    ramrod:ok .thanks.you have a lovely family.sleep now!

    “We are the opposition”

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:43 am

    “Would it be safer to conclude that those who hated Aling Gloria hated her so much as to bother and vote for the opposition while those who liked her did not like her enough to express their support for her candidates?” – rego

    I believe you hit it on the nail here . I was one of those who liked her at the time, I voted for Mike Defensor, but I found out not many people did.

    • justice league on October 17, 2007 at 2:44 am

    ramrod,

    Well I heard the pros including Abueva’s. I presented some of the cons since years back.

    My cons have not been exactly countered yet.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:48 am

    Should our counrty be run by the weaknesses ( hatred is a weakness not strength) assumed 30-35% of the population. Or should it be run by the strength of majority? – rego

    It shouldn’t. Most of the opposition candidates who won made “oust GMA” or “watch GMA/administration” as their platform, there was no real vision/plan at all. Take for example Escudero, most of the people voted for him because he talked fluently in Tagalog (defiant tenor and everything) but if you actually listen there was no substance in what he was saying.

    It was disappointing at best. People with sensible plans/platforms should have been chosen.

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 2:52 am

    justice league,

    I’d really appreciate it if you bring them back or refer some reading material. People are starting to get interested, I mean the business community where I run around with, these guys were quite cynical before.

    • rego on October 17, 2007 at 2:56 am

    “Lets be realistic, some are not interested, whether they are happy with the status quo or don’t care at all, or for some reason are unable to participate.”

    Nemo,

    This is also one of my concerns. How to make these those uninterested to actively participate.

    Despite the media campaign, depsite all the efforts of the civil society and the opposition, the noises made, sowing of hatred against Gloria 3 years. They managed to get or activate only 30-35% of the population. Dont you think there a need to revisit the strategies used?

    • ramrod on October 17, 2007 at 3:05 am

    “Despite the media campaign, depsite all the efforts of the civil society and the opposition, the noises made, sowing of hatred against Gloria 3 years. They managed to get or activate only 30-35% of the population. Dont you think there a need to revisit the strategies used?” – rego

    Its ramrod,

    I believe so. If we follow this line of thought, it would look like the majority of our people are suffering from apathy. If thats the case, it will need new strategies, psychological intervention even for “learned helplessness.” Major incidents like war could rally the people into one cohesive unit but then again thats a negative motivation. Can people be motivated by lofty goals like nation building? I seem to remember a few years back we even had this song “Bagong Lipunan” and a host of slogans. Until now I can still recite the Panatang Makabayan, I don’t know if it instilled nationalism in me though but maybe unconsciously…

Load more

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.