Comments on: Democracy with Southeast and East Asian characteristics http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/ Punditry. Politics. History. Commentary. Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:37:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: cvj http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-705659 cvj Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:31:07 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-705659 <blockquote>The trick is how to ensure that such an unelected group supports national policy set down by our elected government. - Marcelo</blockquote> I agree. That's something Washington Sycip wants to bypass.

The trick is how to ensure that such an unelected group supports national policy set down by our elected government. – Marcelo

I agree. That’s something Washington Sycip wants to bypass.

]]> By: Silent Waters http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-705429 Silent Waters Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:27:16 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-705429 Marcelo A sane discussion, for a change. At least a basis for a discussion. Unlike yung iba diyan na ideya lang nila ang tama. Yung sa iba, mali. :-) Marcelo

A sane discussion, for a change. At least a basis for a discussion. Unlike yung iba diyan na ideya lang nila ang tama. Yung sa iba, mali. :-)

]]> By: Marcelo http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-705274 Marcelo Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:01:40 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-705274 Everything in life, including politics, rests on the ability to find sensible balances. Sometimes those balances rest on points as sharp as the tip of the knife. OF COURSE technocrats (reasonably positive description)/bureaucrats (negative description)/civil servants (neutral description) have to be accountable. The trick is how to make them accountable without POLITICIZING them. Also, when you select a group by competitive examination, constant assessment through the ranks, or through political appointment on the basis of outstanding qualifications (whether in the real world of business or NGO work or the Ivory Tower -- horrors)the members of this group are OF COURSE going to be an elite. That's why they were recruited. In my view, there is nothing wrong with an elite service so long as it is built on talent and experience. The trick is how to ensure that such an unelected group supports national policy set down by our elected government. The civil service recommends, based on its best professional judgement. It does not (or should not) make political decisions. Decisions of that nature are the final responsibility of the political arms of government (the President, the Cabinet, and the Congress). Finally, many civil servants or elite technocrats were not recruited/appointed because of their political savvy in dealing with Mendiola. Theya re not supposed to win elections. Many of them are incapable of communicating outside of a policy brief. Advising the people what has to be done rests, again, with the political arms of government. Everything in life, including politics, rests on the ability to find sensible balances. Sometimes those balances rest on points as sharp as the tip of the knife. OF COURSE technocrats (reasonably positive description)/bureaucrats (negative description)/civil servants (neutral description) have to be accountable. The trick is how to make them accountable without POLITICIZING them. Also, when you select a group by competitive examination, constant assessment through the ranks, or through political appointment on the basis of outstanding qualifications (whether in the real world of business or NGO work or the Ivory Tower — horrors)the members of this group are OF COURSE going to be an elite. That’s why they were recruited. In my view, there is nothing wrong with an elite service so long as it is built on talent and experience. The trick is how to ensure that such an unelected group supports national policy set down by our elected government. The civil service recommends, based on its best professional judgement. It does not (or should not) make political decisions. Decisions of that nature are the final responsibility of the political arms of government (the President, the Cabinet, and the Congress). Finally, many civil servants or elite technocrats were not recruited/appointed because of their political savvy in dealing with Mendiola. Theya re not supposed to win elections. Many of them are incapable of communicating outside of a policy brief. Advising the people what has to be done rests, again, with the political arms of government.

]]> By: Silent Waters http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-705115 Silent Waters Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:27:12 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-705115 CVJ *sigh* here we go again....you certainly have it in for the people who were able to parley their talent into becoming rich. You never fail to imply the evilness that lurks amongst the rich and the elites. It really makes me wonder now if you were "inapi" by the so called rich/elite as a child. Now, as for the difference in attitude...guess what....the Filipino voter has the same attitude, don't you think? Nagpapabayad naman sila kung gusto nila, di ba? Asus. As usual, it takes two to tango, you know. Walang babayaran kung walang magpapabayad. In your analysis, you always, always forget the factor of the human heart. You're probably one of the those technocrats you hate so much. And that's why you work in Singapore. CVJ

*sigh* here we go again….you certainly have it in for the people who were able to parley their talent into becoming rich. You never fail to imply the evilness that lurks amongst the rich and the elites. It really makes me wonder now if you were “inapi” by the so called rich/elite as a child.

Now, as for the difference in attitude…guess what….the Filipino voter has the same attitude, don’t you think? Nagpapabayad naman sila kung gusto nila, di ba? Asus. As usual, it takes two to tango, you know. Walang babayaran kung walang magpapabayad.

In your analysis, you always, always forget the factor of the human heart. You’re probably one of the those technocrats you hate so much. And that’s why you work in Singapore.

]]> By: cvj http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-705072 cvj Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:49:07 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-705072 Manolo, i think businessmen (and other market-oriented individuals) are more responsive to <i>one-peso one-vote</i> more than <i>one-person one vote</i> hence the different attitudes when it comes to accountability and oversight. Manolo, i think businessmen (and other market-oriented individuals) are more responsive to one-peso one-vote more than one-person one vote hence the different attitudes when it comes to accountability and oversight.

]]> By: anthony scalia http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-704921 anthony scalia Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:28:15 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-704921 mlq3, "anthony, a productive discussion might be for you to point out where, if any, a publicly-listed corporation allows management to run the show on faith, without the intervention either of a board, or of the board in turn being subject to a stockholder’s annual meeting. a board can remove a ceo at any time and a stockholder’s meeting can theoretically shake up a board. both involve voting. and both hold the threat of instant dismissal over those tasked with leading a corporation" in the US, that scenario is already commonplace! There are lots of listed companies who have unaccountable management and a rubber stamp board. That usually happens when the CEO is also chairman of the board. But in the past decade reforms have been made. I think a non-CEO chairman is required now. And there are many activist boards ready to drop the CEO in a heartbeat. Too bad such events happening to local listed firms are not big news here "now what is the difference between that system and representative democracy? in fact there isn’t even the guarantee of a fixed term beyond the interval between meetings" the difference? let me mention some: - its easier to remove CEOs and board members. even for no reason, they can be removed. that can't be done with elected public officials - elected LGU officials can be recalled, but the process is slower - the president can be impeached, but impeachment complaints can only be filed once a year - elected officials can be removed before their term ends, provided the conditions set by law are met - voters are not required to hold annual meetings - for the rest, I am adopting bencard's comments mlq3,

“anthony, a productive discussion might be for you to point out where, if any, a publicly-listed corporation allows management to run the show on faith, without the intervention either of a board, or of the board in turn being subject to a stockholder’s annual meeting. a board can remove a ceo at any time and a stockholder’s meeting can theoretically shake up a board. both involve voting. and both hold the threat of instant dismissal over those tasked with leading a corporation”

in the US, that scenario is already commonplace! There are lots of listed companies who have unaccountable management and a rubber stamp board. That usually happens when the CEO is also chairman of the board.

But in the past decade reforms have been made. I think a non-CEO chairman is required now. And there are many activist boards ready to drop the CEO in a heartbeat.

Too bad such events happening to local listed firms are not big news here

“now what is the difference between that system and representative democracy? in fact there isn’t even the guarantee of a fixed term beyond the interval between meetings”

the difference? let me mention some:

- its easier to remove CEOs and board members. even for no reason, they can be removed. that can’t be done with elected public officials
- elected LGU officials can be recalled, but the process is slower
- the president can be impeached, but impeachment complaints can only be filed once a year
- elected officials can be removed before their term ends, provided the conditions set by law are met
- voters are not required to hold annual meetings
- for the rest, I am adopting bencard’s comments

]]> By: Bencard http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-704677 Bencard Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:44:58 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-704677 now, cvj, are you admitting you 'dislike' your own father and mother? i don't think they are 'younger' than you, are they? (lol). now, cvj, are you admitting you ‘dislike’ your own father and mother? i don’t think they are ‘younger’ than you, are they? (lol).

]]> By: Bencard http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-704672 Bencard Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:37:51 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-704672 mlq3, pardon me for barging in but i think the basic difference between corporate business governance and representative government is that the former is controlled by the number of voting shares (held by an individual or group of individuals with the most money), whereas the latter is controlled by the majority of the people (regardless of wealth, education, or physical attributes). both abide by a pre-set constitution and sets of laws or by-laws. a ceo favored by a single holder of majority shares can stay in office over the opposition of a thousand individuals holding the minority shares. even a corporate charter can be changed by that single individual/group majority shareholder so long as it doesn't violate the corporation law and the rules of the s.e.c. in contrast, it is not as easy or simple to change a president of the state outside of his/her fixed tenure, or change the constitution of the land. mlq3, pardon me for barging in but i think the basic difference between corporate business governance and representative government is that the former is controlled by the number of voting shares (held by an individual or group of individuals with the most money), whereas the latter is controlled by the majority of the people (regardless of wealth, education, or physical attributes).
both abide by a pre-set constitution and sets of laws or by-laws. a ceo favored by a single holder of majority shares can stay in office over the opposition of a thousand individuals holding the minority shares. even a corporate charter can be changed by that single individual/group majority shareholder so long as it doesn’t violate the corporation law and the rules of the s.e.c. in contrast, it is not as easy or simple to change a president of the state outside of his/her fixed tenure, or change the constitution of the land.

]]> By: cvj http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-704647 cvj Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:04:59 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-704647 Bencard, looks like you saved the best for last. Bencard, looks like you saved the best for last.

]]> By: Bencard http://www.quezon.ph/2008/01/25/democracy-with-southeast-and-east-asian-characteristics/comment-page-3/#comment-704645 Bencard Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:03:23 +0000 http://www.quezon.ph/?p=1657#comment-704645 silent waters, it seems to me that cvj is anti-elite, anti-rich, anti-american, anti-arroyo, anti-democratic (except his own, homespun version), anti- legal, anti-conservative, anti-capitalist, and he dislikes people older than him. silent waters, it seems to me that cvj is anti-elite, anti-rich, anti-american, anti-arroyo, anti-democratic (except his own, homespun version), anti- legal, anti-conservative, anti-capitalist, and he dislikes people older than him.

]]>