Skip to main content

Are People Who Say Systems Don't Matter Be Willing to Prove Their Claims for a Million Pesos?

People often argue that it's not the system but the people who run it. Some people have their examples like the late former Philippine president Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino III and former Philippine vice president Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" S. Gerona-Robredo. They would say that both Noynoy and Leni are "prime examples" why charter change isn't needed, just a change of people in power. Some people even say that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "inviolate". If that's so then what happened to Article XVII that makes it open to amendments? Why wasn't that even used? That means even making a new constitution isn't illegal per se--unless one did what Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. did during the martial law era!

However, if we understand simple psychological science, we need to look at basic psychology. Please, I don't need a doctorate in certain degrees, in the Greenbelt Universities, to understand that there are mistakes in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, that need to be amended! I'd like to share some interesting notes. I'm going to give some information on psychological science. I would like to ask the question now if people who say that systems don't matter, be willing to prove it for a million pesos, tax free!


I don't need to be a psychologist to understand a psychologist. I may need to talk to a lawyer if I need legal counsel. However, I don't need to be a lawyer to know that a lawyer is lying. It's like I don't need to be a lawyer to understand something went wrong with how the Vizconde Massacre Case the Chiong Sisters Case was handled! It's basic law that evidence must be examined. I'm sharing the words of Armin Trost, a German psychologist. If you think the meme above is just made, please do a Google search. 

A fatal flaw I noticed with people who say systems don't matter--is their monotony in sources. It gets really predictable when they quote Hilario G. Davide Jr., Christian Monsod, Solita Collas-Monsod, IBON Foundation, and other sources to defend their claims. I even pointed to someone what the great former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad said about the Philippines. It was an article by Alex Magno written in The Philippine Star. However, the person Confused Kintanar demanded for evidence that a parliamentary system will help the Philippines. I backfired saying, "Where is your study it will get worse." It's committing the fallacy of the Slippery Slope. That is to assume something will automatically get worse even before it's tried. Please, mentioning the Marcos Years to justify that a parliamentary system will never work! Even their quotations that it was a "parliamentary system" are pretty out-of-context! Marcos ran the administration and Cesar Virata was nothing but an executive assistant! 

The constitution of the Philippines is like an operating system. If your PC is old and broken--it can't handle a new operating system. A newer and better operating system will promote better work. When a system has a lot of errors--it can never be fully enforced. One can applaud or memorize the preamble of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, if one can't see any error that needs to be rectified, the preamble is only good on paper. The Constitution is the law of the land. Don't tell me that the Philippine Constitution isn't the system that governs Filipinos? Some people think that the only system change they need is regime change. Such mentality has been promoted, without realizing that system change means to either amend the current constitution's mistakes or write a new one entirely! 

Systems would affect the way things go. Titanium Success mentions this truth that can be applied to both business and politics:

If your business requires that kind of a person, you’re always going to be putting too much out there because you’re going to be too people dependent and you do not want to build a people dependent system. You want to build a systems dependent company.

And when you have a systems dependent company and then you put really great people on it and you give them really great training, imagine how good that’s going to be. What it does, it also takes some of the pressure off of your people. Because they are following a system where they know that slight errors aren’t going to cause this entire thing to fall apart.

In this case, the rules should be simple. They need to use sources beyond the likes of Davide and the Monsod couple. They should take their studies to neighboring developed Asian countries, starting with the ASEAN. They may want to prove it in prestigious universities in Malaysia or Singapore for a start. They also should avoid using Ad Hominems, that is personal attacks. Can they really take the challenge?

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let's Be Real: Term Limits Cause Political Dynasties to Spiral Out of Control

Inquirer There's always the obsession with political dynasties. There's also the obsession with term limits . Back in the 1990s, I remembered fearing charter change . I was afraid that the late Fidel V. Ramos might become a dictator. The talks that if a president would rule for more than six years--would be considered "frightening" or "nakakatakot" in Tagalog. I wrote an article where I wrote one staggering truth-- a  long reign isn't necessarily tyrannical and that a short reign isn't necessarily benevolent . In my discussion, I highlighted both Pol Pot and Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.--both deceased dictators. Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge dictatorship murdered millions in contrast to Marcos' regime. Of course, some people will say Pol Pot would've caused Cambodia to go extinct if he rhad eigned longer. I remember the logic that I was told back in elementary school. I was told that the reason why term limits are imposed is to prevent another Marcos-...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Animal" (2004): A Controversial Satire Against the Chiong Sister Case Inconsistencies [Warning: Read at Your Own Discretion]

After many years of self-studying the Chiong Sisters Case , I have written several entries on the matter. In fact, I created what I call an "almost-ever-updating" review on Give Up Tomorrow , which was a documentary that challenged my views. I was hesitant to write this review, as it involves another sensitive issue. Some time later, I wrote an entry discussing another aspect of the Chiong Case, specifically  the issue of the late Federico "Toto" Natividad Jr. himself . I always thought it was an unethical issue. However, I was able to watch the film on YouTube (via a poor quality upload), and it doesn't seem that anyone from Natividad's estate is interested in fighting for the film's right to be distributed , not especially that Case Unclosed already came out in 2008, now available on GMA-7's official YouTube channel . Kara David did a meticulously good job featuring the Chiong mother, the Uy mother , and even another member of the " Run for Pa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Shifting to the Parliamentary System is Better than Banning Political Dynasties

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...
Post a Comment
Read more