Defending the 1987 Constitution Like a Broken Record

I've observed several anti-constitutional reform pages on Facebook. Whether it'd be Change Scamming, Silent No More PH, Mahal Ko Ang Pilipinas, La Verite (and Pinocchio ironically represents this page), Rule of Law Sentinel, We Are Millenials, etc.--the argument tends to quote the framers (or the Catholic Bishops' Conference in the Philippines) more than anything. Most of them tend to echo the same idea, echo the same sources, etc. In fact, one foolish old man I met said he wouldn't believe anything about the constitution if it's not from Filipino constitutionalists.

In short, I'm dealing with a group of broken records. Why do I say that they're broken records? It's always repeating the same ideas over and over again. It may not be the same words over and over again. However, one can look at the idiomatic meaning of broken record, as a person who keeps repeating the same ideas or statements, over and over again, without offering anything new. In fact, that's how the framers, such as Atty. Christian Monsod (mockingly called XTian Monsod by a few) and Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (read here), as well as their defenders, sound like. The same goes for several members of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines.

In logic, we have the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. Sometimes, we may defend what is true while engaging in circular reasoning. In the case of the 1987 Constitution defenders, one could look at the circular reasoning as absurd as the meme I made above. I used Socrates Villegas (former CBCP president) as Argument A and Argument B is by the 1987 Constitution framers. Villegas says, "Ask the framers!" then the framers say, "Ask the CBCP!"

To answer it, circular reasoning means:

Description: A type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared. This fallacy is often quite humorous.

For example, one uses the book, to defend the book, than looks for other sources that could help defend the validity of the book. Of course, the book with good information, remainds valid, whether or not circular argument is used. However, without any evidence (other than just statements), there's really no use in defending the truth or debunking an error. In the case of the CBCP and the 1987 Constitution framers, it's become a broken record. CBCP cites the 1987 framers and vice versa. CBCP may also cite the faulty DepEd textbooks then the teacher says, "Don't ask me, ask the framers!" Then the student asks the framers and it goes back to the CBCP.

Here's also another screenshot of some guy who calls himself Logie Kinko. However, this comment really makes me ask, "Does he know how systems work?" This individual may be part of the boomer generation, as indicated by his profile photo. I would really laugh at how this guy even calls himself Logic Kinko in the woke world of Twitter. However, based on logic, the guy doesn't understand how systems work. The problem isn't being a boomer, but being a stubborn one.

When asked for proof, it can even be crazier. I remember running into someone I dub as Sayad (Crazy) GY (Get Your) Herenggilya (Injection). Whenever I asked for proof of his arguments, it went like this. The highest school of thought for that guy is, "If you don't trust me, you must be such an (insert derogatory name)." That person defending the 1987 Constitution would choose to repeatedly hurl insults, if the person doesn't believe him. The same went for a political scientist (probably retired) who I dub Professor Camote. Professor Camote would rather call me stupid than provide evidence that the Marcos Years were supposedly under a parliamentary regime. Instead of arguing the argument, Professor Camote would prefer to call me stupid repeatedly. The same may be true for others like Jover Laurio, Gerry Cacanindin, and Logie Kinko.

When I think about this one, it's all but a broken record. A broken record is best thrown away. In a literal sense, nobody in their right mind will enjoy listening to music from a broken record. The song will never be able to play completely. It will just keep getting stuck in that part. The same goes for people who defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines--they're really broken records.

Is It Just a Coincidence that Most Least Corrupt Countries, are Under the PARLIAMENTARY System?

It's easy to post an outrage on Facebook, whether it's on the Butthurt Philippines' Facebook page or Gerry Cacanindin's relatively open Facebook profile (except that only his friends can comment). I try to ignore the guy's page. I was wondering if Gerry has learned his lesson (that the Philippines badly needs a system upgrade) or if he still wants to believe that "It's just a matter if Leni Robredo or Vico Sotto." The latest Facebook post gives me something to think about: People often ask why some countries seem almost immune to corruption. As if their leaders are just magically more honest. But that’s not really it. The truth is actually simpler. These countries didn’t wait for good people. They built systems where doing something dirty is hard, risky, and usually not worth it. In the least corrupt countries, corruption isn’t just illegal but inconvenient. Paper trails are everywhere. Payments are digital. Contracts are public. Anyone can look up wh...

What? The Aquinos Aren't Part of a Political Dynasty?!

I was looking at the Mahal Ko Ang Pilipinas (I Love the Philippines) Facebook page, which made me laugh. This is what they wrote on their post saying that the Aquino Family isn't a political dynasty: THE AQUINO FAMILY IS NOT A POLITICAL DYNASTY 🇵🇭🎗 Pro-Duterte blogger Tio Moreno says that Bam Aquino is part of a political dynasty because the Aquino family is a political dynasty. But to me, this is not true. Why is it not true that the Aquino family is a political dynasty? 🤔 1. When Ninoy Aquino entered politics, none of his children joined him in his endeavors, and even his wife Cory did not join him in politics. 2. When Ninoy was assassinated in 1983, none of his children succeeded him in politics, not even his wife. But when the opposition and his supporters were looking to be the opposition's candidate for the presidency in the snap election called by Ferdie Marcos for 1986, his housewife Cory Cojuangco-Aquino was approached, encouraged or convinced by people t...

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

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...

Why Philippine Elections Can Be Compared to GAMBLING

Gemini AI Art Some time ago, I wrote an essay that Filipinos can expect to lose more money betting that people will vote wisely . It's time for the truth, and the inconvenient truth hurts now, doesn't it? I had Gemini AI create this new AI art of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. and Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" S. Gerona-Robredo, at the casino, just to make a point. Sure, Bongbong shook hands with Leni in Sorsogon as a step for political reconcilation . However, such events should be considered more like random variables, such as getting your ball to land on a certain color and a specific number in a game of roulette. Let's define what a gamble means. The Cambridge Dictionary defines gamble as: to do something that involves risks that might result in loss of money or failure, hoping to get money or achieve success: The gamble of whether your candidate wins or not, because popularity is fickle It's effortless to say, "It's not rea...

My Experience with a Cataract and Laser Eye Surgery

What really scared me was when my left eye got blurred. At first, I was hoping it was just a dry eye. I had my check-up done. My worst fears were confirmed by my cloudy vision. I had a cataract but at age 37? It was pretty young. It was a developmental cataract or a developmental defect . I was told that there was no other choice but to have surgery. I was pretty scared. I decided it was time to really view cataract surgery and discover the amazing use of laser cataract surgery. It's a good thing I dismissed the bogus claims of cataract-dissolving drops. Above is a sample video of what was shown in the hospital. I was nervous at first about what could happen. Having been told by the doctor (and will not disclose further details out of respect for the doctor's privacy) that it'll take faster than the manual surgery was a relief. I was willing to spend more on laser surgery rather than have the bladed procedure. I could say I was scared of the bladed procedure. I heard that ...

A Business Graduate's Reviewing History Blog

Search This Blog