Duterte is not the threat, it is cheating

I know there are kababayans who feel threatened when the word ‘revolution’ is used to describe what is happening to the Philippines today. Some (and I tend to agree with them) say it is wrong to call Edsa 1 and 2 as revolutions. They were either putsches or coups d’etat. Because of the lessons we learned then, we seek a real revolution, something that is more comprehensive and lasting.

This can either be peaceful or violent. But we want to do better this time and the only way is through a real revolution. We seek far-reaching changes and one in which the reforms will last. From the start BayanKo had sought this revolution through constitutional reform. But we were not sure how it could be done because of two factors – the lack of an inspiring leader and the following by the masses.

Revolution, according to Wikipedia is “fundamental change in political power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time when the population rises up in revolt against the current authorities.”

There are two types of political revolution according to the Greek thinker, Aristotle – a complete change from one constitution to another or a modification of an existing constitution.

The Filipino nation or crowd (the modern term to include as many citizens as possible) seeks the first one. The Filipino crowd wants a complete overhaul of their political and economic structure for a more humane society. It is made up of a large portion of the citizenry and by their numbers hope to win their cause.

That change is to shift from a presidential unitary we have had for years to a parliamentary-federal system. It is hoped that with this new system changes will be more encompassing. In time this shift is expected to create new cultural, economic and new socio-political institutions. It is time to accept that the presidential unitary system imposed on us by American colonialists has failed.

* * *

Of all the candidates, Davao Mayor Rodrigo Duterte has taken up the cause for real revolution. Whoever thought of getting big crowds to show the power of numbers has to be congratulated.  In boxing parlance the blows came one after the other, from Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. It came to a TKO.

It had the two necessary elements to bring revolutionary change, a leader and the followers to support him. As an advocate of parliamentary federalism I was not sure how it could be done. What would come first – a leader or a crowd of supporters? In 2016, it came simultaneously and we cheered this virtuoso act of citizenship. Whatever attacks his enemies or critics will lodge against him will not work. We will finally have the change reformists desire.

It remains to be seen what the 2016 revolution in the Philippines will be. Alexis de Tocqueville differentiated “between political revolutions, sudden and violent revolutions that seek not only to establish a new political system but to transform an entire society, and slow but sweeping transformations of the entire society that take several generations to bring about.”

Charles Tilly, a modern scholar of revolutions, differentiated between a coup, a top-down seizure of power, a civil war, a revolt and a “great revolution.” (Wikipedia)

The way the Aquino government is responding to events, it could turn violent. Up to today, when we are just counting hours to D-day, Comelec, the electoral body mandated by the Constitution to ensure clean and honest elections, has not done its job.

If a real revolution comes about, Duterte could join great revolutionary leaders like George Washington, the leader of the American Revolution, Vladimir Lenin, the leader of the Bolshevik Revolution, and Sun Yat-sen, the leader of the Chinese Xinhai Revolution.

They are one in the belief that “the cause of revolution is in the state of mind of the masses but differ on what exactly caused the people to revolt such as modernization, recession, or discrimination. They believed that the primary cause for revolution was the widespread frustration with the socio-political situation.”

* * *

From Tong Payumo this column received a note that all we need to do is look at the cheating that was done in 2010 and 2013. He cites the example of the perpetrators of the Hocus PCOS in Dinalupihan, Bataan. It was done so badly they left the tampered ballots still wrapped when they inserted them inside the ballot boxes.

The people of Dinalupihan were relentless in uncovering the truth. How? By succeeding against all odds in having the ballot boxes opened for manual counting. The evidence discovered was physical evidence that could be seen, touched, and held. Sen Dick Gordon succeeded in getting the SC to order the opening of the ballot boxes.

From Cenpeg comes this complaint of “data breach on the Commission on Elections (Comelec) data system last March 27 has serious implications not just for the security and privacy of registered voters, but also for the integrity of the elections.”

* * *

At a meeting of Robolusyong Du30 Kontra Daya, one reformist told the group we were already too late if we are looking for honest and fair elections on May 9. Cheating is happening from different places. OFW voters complained that they voted for Duterte but the receipts showed Roxas instead. Another report: of 200,000 voters in the Emirates, only 40,000 OFWs were allowed to register. 75 percent voted for Duterte.

One suggestion was rather drastic – just bomb those machines and get it over with.

Meanwhile the President’s uncle Jose Cojuangco issued the following statement:

“As a freedom loving Filipino, I have decided to rise and defend democracy once more.

Ninoy came home ready to give his life for God, our country and the Filipino people. Cory in 1986 became President so that democracy may live and flourish.

In the light of all these fears of disenfranchisement and massive fraud, I call on our people to be vigilant and faithful to the ideals of freedom and democracy for which many of us fought hard for.

Let not even the President – the son of Ninoy and Cory – threaten us by using his public office and spending public funds to extinguish the legacy of his parents which they bequeathed to the Filipino people, that of fair, free and credible elections.

His recent pronouncements have become a betrayal for all the sacrifices of his father and mother.

Duterte is NOT the threat to democracy. It is this administration’s insensitivity to our people’s plight and yearning for a decent and peaceful life which has caused this irreversible tide of compulsion for real and meaningful reforms.

Let us fight for the universal human right of suffrage. Let no one trample on this right.

Ako si Peping Cojuangco, inuulit ko po Duterte is not a threat to our democracy.”