Now for my two centavos worth: I agree that our coming May 2007 elections must not be postponed – and perhaps no Cha-Cha effort can be fast-tracked to effect such a postponement. There is no way, I fear, to effect instant salvation for us via changing our form of government – without changing our attitudes and our mores.
But, contrary to the elegant two paragraphs above, some of our public officials deserve to be insulted, as well as our people’s intelligence, at times, "affronted." And here’s my problem: How can we hope for meaningful elections unless and until we reform the corrupt Commission on Elections which flubbed the May 2004 elections? As long as we cannot eject the crooked, and allegedly "vote-rigging" Commissioners of the Comelec – whose identities are wellknown – how can any Comelec-run polls be clean, honest and acceptable? Those who have been touting a "snap election" were guilty of the worst form of sophistry when they presented this to our people as the antidote to a "vote-cheating" La Gloria. A new "President" elected through the courtesy of the old Comelec by "snap elections"? It’s no surprise the idea fell flat on its face, and our people refused to "people power" anything of that demented sort, and went on trying to make a living.
Max Soliven himself is being disingenuous. Aside from GMA's stepping down, the opposition has also called for the resignation of all the COMELEC commissioners and other officials involved in the Gloriagate scandal.
I've elaborated on this proposal here. Ito ang summary:
1) New credible/clean presidential elections ASAP once Arroyo is out. The voters will get to choose the best alternative.
2) Revamp the COMELEC immediately and replace the commissioners with people whose integrity are unquestioned.
Long term goal is to institute major reforms in the COMELEC so that a repeat of 2004 election fiasco will not happen in the future.
Read the whole thing, Max and stop playing dumb.
Here's de Quiros's latest article to counter Max Sullivan's stupidity:
Abat's (mis)adventure in fact simply strengthens my argument about (clean) elections as the only alternative to GMA. In a trick-mirror sort of way, Abat shows up the fundamental flaw in the call for a transitional government in all its permutations. Which is: What's to prevent anyone from saying he has the answer to the country's problems? What's to prevent anyone from saying he has the interests of the nation at heart? What's to prevent anyone from claiming he has the right to lead the nation?
That is not for anyone to say. That is not for GMA or Abat to say. That is not for you or me to say. That is for the people to say. That is what we have elections for. That is what we call ourselves a democracy for.
GMA stole the vote from the voters, let's give the vote back to the voters.
As I keep saying, by all means let's have a caretaker government after GMA. But completely transient and only to assure clean elections-not least by putting the current Comelec commissioners, chief of them Virgilio Garcillano, behind bars. That is all the extra-constitutional thing we need to do.
The constant objection to this is that it will not go far toward reforming the country. My constant answer to that is, oh, but it most assuredly and monumentally will.
Not least, it will arrest our fall from democracy, the way Satan fell from heaven. That is no mean thing. We do not have a democracy anymore, not in mind, not in body. Just last Friday, I saw again something I never thought I'd see after Edsa. One Philip Casey wrote in the Opinion page: "Let's just let the President do her job. I don't care whether she cheated or not, but had she really cheated, well, glory to her: she saved the country from still greater shame by doing so!" I leave others to unburden themselves of their emotions over this statement. Suffice it for me to say that it obviously never occurred to the writer that that is an argument not just for seizing power but for keeping it forever.
But my point is: Aren't the groups proposing an (indefinite) transitional government, not just to prepare for elections but presumably to reform the country, not falling into the same trap? Aren't they saying: "We don't care if we take over without a mandate, but if we do, well, glory to us: we're saving the country from greater harm by doing so"? Is it just me, or is no one truly noticing how the future of this country is now being debated as though the people do not exist? Contrary to rumor, the problem of who to replace GMA is not the hardest thing to solve, it is the easiest. It is to let the voters decide who to replace her.
The notion that that would only bring us to where we were, ignorant voters voting for the "wrong" candidate, is a dangerous one. The day we start thinking of the citizens as being stupid, as being unprepared to chart their own future, is the day we lay out the welcome mat to dictatorship. It is exactly the same argument our colonial masters used against us, saying they had a right to keep us in bondage because we were unprepared to be free, we needed tutelage. It is exactly the same argument sexists and bigots use against women and people of color, saying they may not be given equal rights because they are unprepared for equality, they still need time. The only thing worse than voters voting "wrongly" is that they are not allowed to vote. Or have their vote stolen from them. That is why we are where we are today.
The solution is still: Oust GMA (by people power and/or civil disobedience), and call for (clean) elections. All the rest is just Abat idea.
Amen.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment