Skip to main content

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. 

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

A Parliamentary Philippines with Mandatory Weekly Questioning Will Be Better Than Its Mandatory Yearly Presidential SONAs

Rappler I must admit that ignorance of the difference between the parliamentary system vs. the presidential system is there. Some people still insist on the myth that the first Marcos Administration headed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s late father, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr., was really a parliamentary system. In reality. the Marcos "parliamentary" years during the Martial Law era, were still presidential (read why  here ). A simple research would show that Cesar Virata was called by the late Lee Kuan Yew, as a non-starter and no leader. LKY would know how a real parliamentary system works. Sure, it's one thing that those who consider themselves Dilawan, voice their criticisms. However, the big problem of the Dilawans is their focus on political idolatry rather than solutions. I can talk with the Dilawans all they want that we do need to shift to the parliamentary system and some of them still cry foul, say that it'll be a repetition of the first Marcos Admi...
Read more

The Foolishness of Complaining About Stupid Voters and Stupid Candidates, While Insisting the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "So Perfect"

I was looking into the Facebook page of Butthurt Philippines . Honestly, it's easy to complain but what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions? The art produced by its administrator shows some problems. However, if the administrator here believes that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "perfect as it is" (and he seems to be throwing a "saving face" by saying it was just sarcasm, and I failed to detect it) then it's really something. It's one thing to keep complaining. Complaining can be good. However, what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions. Even worse, complaining about the quality of candidates for the upcoming 2025 midterm elections , while still saying, "It's not the system it's the people!" Please, that kind of thinking has been refuted even by basic psychology and political science! It's really good to point out the three problems. Distractions? Check. Keeping people hopeless? ...
Read more

Don't Expect a Mahathir-Type Leader, Under the 1987 Constitution!

ABS CBN News Happy 100th birthday, Mahathir Mohamad! It's something that not so many people live up to 100, or more. The late Fidel V. Ramos passed away on July 31, 2022, at the age of 94. Ramos's advanced age may be the reason why the Omicron variant (which isn't supposedly fatal) ended his life. I'm posting this image of Ramos and Mahathir for one reason--Ramos wanted charter change back in the 1990s. However, plenty of anti-charter change commercials came in, the late Raul Roco said we only need a change in people, and we have Hilario G. Davide Jr. (who's in his late 80s but still active), and the idea that having a president who will rule for more than six years, is supposedly scary. Please, have they even thought that the late Pol Pot ruled Cambodia for just four years, but carried millions of deaths , that would make the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s 20-year reign  look tame (read here )? I've read posts on Facebook saying the Philippines just needs l...
Read more

Why I Believe So Many Filipinos (Especially Boomers) Misunderstand (and Blindly Oppose) Charter Change

Okay, I'm no political analyst or historian. That doesn't mean I should just shut up and not share my opinion. I felt like I needed to publish this piece. This is where I want to examine another issue. I've noticed some people on Facebook are sharing the quotes of Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Some would try to do Ad Hominem attacks on me because I'm no constitutionalist (which I admit that I'm not). Just because I'm not a constitutionalist, doesn't mean, that I can't quote from the experts . Do I really need a degree in law at one of those prestigious universities in the Philippines? Sadly, some people are supposedly smarter than me but are the ones spreading nonsense.  Understanding charter change We need to see the definition first to understand why so many Filipinos, especially boomers , are so against it. The Philippine Star   gives this definition of charter change: Charter change, simply, is the process of introducing amendments or revisions to the ...
Read more