Trust Me Bro: The 1987 Constitution is the Best in the World!

-

I may be no lawyer or constitutionalist but it's time to use common sense. I'm afraid common sense is hardly taught or even encouraged in schools. Right now, I want to do this provocative entry to ask, "Fact or gossip: Is the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines the best in the world?" Yes, you read that right. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that last 2018 and I'm still laughing at it. I've decided to write this common-sense post to actually contest the idea that, "The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is the best in the world." 

I'm laughing at some things Davide Jr. had said such as, "It' is the only institution in the world where the public office is a public trust." However, this man is terribly wrong because, around the world, we see the doctrine where public office is a public trust. Thomas Jefferson also said that public office is public trust--way before Davide Jr. was born into the world! I really laughed at their claim of Davide because, for one, the Philippine constitution is somewhat modeled from the American constitution with a few modifications. I'm laughing also because Davide Jr. is already acting as if the American constitution never had Jefferson's quote in mind. Did Davide Jr. think he wrote the basic obligations of public service?

We need to understand how systems work  

I often read on Facebook stuff like, "It's not the constitution that's the problem. It's the politicians that have the problem." I would try to quote people like the late great Jesse M. Robredo. I can't be sure if Robredo himself is also fighting for the same reforms as his fellow mates. However, he said, "It's not enough for an official to be good. There has to be a system that forces them to be good." We have the late Charles Edward P. Celdran aka Carlos Celdran. Celdran was a Duterte critic but he was right about the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines in need of revision. Yet, Davide Jr. has stubbornly said, "There's absolutely no need to revise it." I really felt like laughing. 

Once again, the argument goes, "It's not the system! It's the politicians!" or "Change the system by changing the politicians!" The argument itself is very self-contradictory. I could ask, "Why is it that the politicians voted by the people are always repeatedly bad? It's been more than 10 years and I see no change." Then the blame goes to the voters. Why do you think voters are foolish? Once again, it all goes to the system. The system that encourages popularity will encourage voters to vote based on popularity. It doesn't matter if the popular person is very stupid--a popularity-based system will encourage voting for stupid people. This is where things are. Why do you think stupid people keep getting into power? If you say the system has nothing to do with it then you're dreaming. 

I would also like to add the question, "If the Philippines has the best constitution then why don't we have the best quality politicians?" They would still say, "It's the voters again!" However, systems will influence the behavior of both the politicians and the people. If the system would generate more jobs, better education, and the like then we can expect better politicians. Unfortunately, the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has failed to fix the damages done by the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines big time. 

The Philippines' economic overall performance vs. other nations

I fire the question, "If the 1987 Constitution is the best in the world, why is the Philippines backward economically?" The answers can go like as:
  1. "Well, blame it all on Marcos! If we get the Marcos wealth back, we'll be rich again." 
  2. "Blame it on the corrupt officials, not the Filipino First Policy!" 
I guess decades of teaching the late Carlos P. Garcia's "Filipino First Policy" as good for the Philippines has caused that kind of reading. Even worse, some of these people will make out reasonings like, "First world countries developed through protectionism. It was only after they stabilized they opened their businesses to foreigners." However, reading the late Lee Kuan Yew's book From Third World to First had said otherwise. Then they're going to say that it's because Singapore's corruption index is much lower than the Philippines. Did they even realize corruption in China and Vietnam isn't really that low either? Yet, China became a powerhouse under the late Deng Xiaoping. Yet, Vietnam became a powerhouse because of the late Nguyen Duy Cong aka Do Muoi.

The issue has always been that the Philippines has had the long 60-40 rule for many industries. I always read comments like, "If you let foreigners invest here, only they will get rich!" Some even suggest that letting foreign companies invest in stuff like public utilities is automatically a threat to security. Some even suggest that the government should be the one to monopolize and provide such public services. The same fools can't even understand supply chain analysis (which includes basic cost accounting) and the basic law of supply and demand. I try to explain to them but as said, they're most likely just to plug their ears and mock me. It really gets irritating and their best source can be as "good" as, "Trust me, bro." What kind of a source is that? 

I tried to explain to them the abolition of 60/40 is all about allowing foreign investors to invest without a Filipino partner. I even went as far as to mention that 60-40 is overpriced rent. An illustration is that how would you like to rent a space but you had to give 60% of the ownership of that branch to the lessor? The lessor even gets 60% of the net profit. The net profit is all profits less all expenses. All expenses deducted from the profits include rent. Nobody would want to rent if the rate is overpriced. Yet, it seems these people are only interested in making a quick buck rather than having to simply receive the right amount of rent per month. I told them that the 60-40 rule is all about equity. I can even go and talk about how they're still obliged to pay rentals, taxes, suppliers, creditors, salaries, and every necessary bill. Still, the same people will keep screaming something like, "Foreigners will invade us and take over our government! Trust me bro!"

The big difference between the claims of the two policymakers

There was a time I asked, "Who would you trust between the late John Gokongwei Jr. or Davide Jr.?" The answer is always said, "Those are two different topics. One is about business and the other is about politics. If it's lawmaking, of course, Davide Jr." Then I start to refer them over to the founding dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Kishore Mahbubani, and they'll say something like, "What? Another foreigner? Why can't you quote from a Filipino?" 

Some fool on Facebook (and his spelling is pretty bad) even said something like, "The Philippines isn't Singapore, isn't China, isn't Vietnam." I've been tagging him a few times already to defeat his disinformation. However, the guy still insists on stuff like "The Philippines isn't Singapore! It'll never work here!" or "Selling the Philippines to foreigners huh?" Ironic that the guy has a picture of him using an iPhone from a few years ago. Don't tell me his iPhone was made in the Philippines. This fool has been mistaken. He's also the same fool who still insists that it's only the politicians, not the system, that's the problem. That argument is once again very self-contradictory. I guess the guy uses the Trust Me Bro fallacy or the fallacy of appealing to confidence. 

I'm amazed that Davide Jr. warned people that the Philippines could become a colony of foreign investors. Davide Jr. used to be a former UN diplomat. Well, guess what? Mahbubani was also a former UN diplomat. Both old men went to the UN as diplomats. Davide Jr.'s statements would already reflect what Mahbubani said. In the documentary The Singapore economic model - VPRO documentary - 2009, I could remember Mahbubani said something that directly contradicts Davide Jr. Mahbubani called the idea of rejecting FDIs and believing they will rape the resources of the country as a third-world mentality. Instead, Mahbubani said that Singapore will be different. The results came in showing how Singapore went from third-world status to first-world status. Lee's book was more than just a book. It was a memoir of Singapore's success evidenced by pictures of Singapore before and after. 

All Davide Jr. could say is this. Mahbubani did more than say and showed results. Singapore's model was then followed by bigger countries such as China and Vietnam. Singapore isn't doing better because it's "way too small" as some naysayers emphasize the fact. Instead, Singapore could've remained poor if it didn't open up to FDIs. Lee defied the thought patterns of the economists of his day. Lee hired the late Albert Winsemius to help in developing Singapore. Mahbubani had proven Davide Jr. wrong all before a debate could even begin. 

At this point, are you still convinced that the 1987 Constitution is the best in the world? 

Popular posts from this blog

Was Cesar Virata's Position as "Prime Minister" the Best Proof That a Parliamentary System Won't Work in the Philippines?

-
Image
Kahimyang Project It's often said by some of the now-old folks that the Philippines was once under a parliamentary system. I had some insults from a close-minded political scientist, some former dancer of an OFW, and others whenever I said, "We must shift to the parliamentary system!" They would say, "Look stupid! We already had a parliamentary system back in the Marcos Years!" I ask for the proof and they keep using Cesar Virata. By using insults, they start to make me doubt their credibility. It's because insults and other forms of Ad Hominem attacks are often the favorite tools of sore losers .  I would like to give this an example. One of their best sources is Cesar Virata. At first, it sounds like, "Okay, we had a parliamentary system." However, we must take note that not every country that has a prime minister, is under a parliamentary system. Some of them are still presidential in nature with parliamentary features . I wonder if Mrs. Raissa
Read more

Shifting to the Parliamentary System is Better than Banning Political Dynasties

-
Image
Some Filipinos who are totally against charter change (or constitutional reform) always use political dynasties as an excuse. It's not enough that some of them should keep saying that economic charter change will mean "selling the Philippines to foreigners". Please, if they realize it, developed countries allow 100% FDI ownership--allowing foreigners to own 100% of their business . Back on the topic, I would like to discuss political dynasties and why they're not necessarily bad . Some people keep talking about the anti-political dynasty law--that is one per family. It might be because they still think the first Marcos Administration was a parliamentary system. Please, evidence has been gathered that it was never a parliamentary system, to begin with (read here )!  It's easy to talk about political dynasties. Some people were citing President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. as a member of a political dynasty. Some people also cite the Dutertes. I even
Read more

REAL TALK: The Liberal Party of the Philippines Can ONLY Become The Genuine Opposition Under A Genuine Parliamentary Constitution

-
Image
PhilStar It's difficult to talk with people who are still comfortable with what they already know, right? However, the term Dilawan need not be drowned in negativity, but it can be drowned in negativity if the brand gets marred in a popularity-based political system. The Philippines currently uses the presidential system. If we were in a parliamentary system right now--chances are Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. wouldn't be prime minister due to the difficulty involved as explained in  " How to Become Singapore's Prime Minister, Explained in 7 Steps ". That means all candidates would need to do the following: Study and specialize Wait for the call Tea sessions and panels Take a test Perform well as an MP Win the trust of your peers Prepare for office The Dilawans can call themselves the genuine opposition, march in their proud yellow t-shirts, and more. However, under a presidential system, there's no real opposition, and the platform of any party
Read more

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

-
Image
People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal .  Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir
Read more

Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohamad: Just a Matter of Strong Leadership Without a Good System?

-
Image
Jakarta Globe It's very easy to talk about how we need character change only, not a charter change. I say that having a charter change (better termed constitutional reform ) will lead to character change. The old saying of some boomers goes, "It's common sense that nothing is wrong with the system, just the people running the system." However, when I ask something like, "If that's so then why do other nations have better leaders? What about Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew?" Their answer is, "Well, that's proof that the system isn't defective, it's just the leader." This can also come from people who believe what Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that there's nothing wrong with the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, that it's the "best in the world". The arguments are clearly illogical at best . Some say that the parliamentary system worked in Malaysia and Singapore because those heading it aren't corrupt. T
Read more

The Vizconde Massacre and Trial by "Trust Me Bro"?

-
Image
As Christmas approaches, another case worth revisiting for history vs. gossip is the Vizconde Massacre. I watched Crime Investigation Asia uploaded on YouTube. I wrote about the documentary Give Up Tomorrow -- a documentary that explores the irregularities while pursuing justice for the late Chiong sisters, Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong and Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. I feel compelled to write about the Vizconde Massacre. For more than 10 years, I used to believe that Hubert Jeffry Pagaspas Webb, son of Freddie Webb, was guilty. It turns out that according to Crime Investigation Asia --it was really a trial by gossip . In my case, I want to call it a trial of Trust Me Bro.  I still read comments about how footage of Hubert in the States could've been "easily tampered". Yet, those who comment haven't presented the evidence. I guess if I asked for their evidence, they'll just say, "Trust me bro!" Granted, photo editing was still in its infancy back then so how cou
Read more

Was the Late John Regala Interviewed by the Directors of "Give Up Tomorrow"?

-
Image
The passing away of John Regala hit today. I remembered a film called Animal (2004) in  which the original title was originally Butakal meaning male pig. Regala starred as Jaco Lozano--an obvious caricature of Juan Francisco Gonzales Larrañaga aka Paco. Strangely enough, neither the Larrañagas nor the Osmeñas were heard to have ever filed a case against the late director Toto Natividad. Instead, it was the Chiong family that filed a lawsuit against Natividad. I did write about  whether or not Natividad himself was interviewed by the directors of Give Up Tomorrow . As mentioned, there was over 400 hours worth of footage and over 100 interviews done . Both Marty Syjuco and Michael Collins may have interviewed not only Natividad, the late Tony Calvento but also Regala himself since he played the film's main antagonist . In 2018, we had an incident when Niño Muhlach apologized to Paco for the portrayal in The Calvento Files . Apparently, Niño himself wasn't interviewed but was prob
Read more

Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan and Discovering More About One's Common Austronesian Roots

-
Image
I was doing some research on Taiwan finding out that the natives are indeed Austronesians . It seems that Indonesians and Malaysians may have also settled in Taiwan aside from the Philippines. A look at Mt. Alishan and Banaue Rice Terraces have a similarity. Taiwan has its famous tea terraces. Banaue has its famous rice terraces. Both are cultural heritages that must be preserved! I soon found an article which Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan. Not surprisingly, these Ifugao OFWs can point out several things that are pretty similar. An article called " A Gotad Picnic With Ifugaos Living in Taiwan " would tell of Armand Camhol, an Ifugao OFW, who met with other Ifugaos in Taiwan. Gotad is a thanksgiving festival for the Ifugaos. The News Lens International Edition What was noted by Armand at the end of the article is: The people of Ifugao value hospitality, and as a symbol of friendship, they shared their holiday with their invited guests, who, in return, sang, joined the dances, and made
Read more

Can Anti-Reformists Prove to the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy That the Marcos Regime was a Real Parliamentary?

-
Image
The previous comparison of the CoRRECT Movement was between the late businessman John Gokongwei Jr. and Hilario Davide Jr., a public policy expert. The comparison is pretty much apples and oranges which is why Kishore Mahbubani, founder and former dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) would make more sense. It's not enough to say something. If the source is just merely Merkado CTTO (read here ) then I have every right to doubt it. I tried asking for empirical evidence  they have that the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was a parliamentary government. The only evidence they have was that there was a prime minister and his name was Cesar Virata. However, further details reveal that Virata was a non-starter and a no leader. From Third World to First , Virata was even considered a candidate to replace the late Ferdinand E. Marcos, a president with powers . A challenge that I want to pose to people who still insist that the Marcos Years were indeed under a parli
Read more