Lelis, Princess

AB Journalism 1A
The Contemporary World
Reflection on Suffrage

The Philippine’s Chain of Flawed Democracy

Elections are integral to democratic governance. Through the mechanism of

elections, politicians are held accountable for their actions, and are compelled to
introduce policies that are reflective of and responsive to public opinion. Ideally,
elections serve as a ‘major source of political recruitment, a means of making
government, and of transferring government power, a guarantee of representation, and
a major determinant of government policy (Heywood, 2000). These do not, however,
prevent the distortion of the will of the electorate in a ‘flawed democracy’.
In the process of electoral politics, the Philippines' experience is enlightening. In
the Asia-Pacific region, democratic progress is taking place. The quality of democratic
representation as a result of elections has long been questioned over a century after
American colonial authorities introduced electoral and party politics. The elitist aspect of
Philippine political politics has been reinforced by clientelism, nepotism, fraud, and
violence, among other things. This was compounded by the fact that democratic
elections were briefly superseded by 'demonstration elections' staged under duress
during Marcos' dictatorial regime. In February 1986, the Marcos regime was deposed,
ushering in a period of democratization. Nonetheless, President Joseph Estrada's
election and subsequent dismissal in January 2001 serves as a continual reminder of
Philippine democracy's ongoing "defects."
The Filipino people has been divided into two factions since President Duterte
took office: the Duterte Diehard Supporters (DDS) and the Dilawans. In essence, the
two factions reflect supporters and opponents of Duterte's administration. The
contentious terms "DDS" and "Dilawans" were not chosen at random to replace the
otherwise benign phrases "supporting" and "non-supportive." The terms were used in
the 2016 elections to galvanise the campaign and encourage voters to show not just
electoral support, but also loyalty and loving devotion: the DDS to their Tatay Digong,
and the Dilawans to Mar Roxas, then-President PNoy's chosen successor, who was
lauded as the son of EDSA heroes Ninoy and Cory Aquino. Rather than calming down
after the campaign, the demonization game intensified. Even in the midst of a
pandemic, President Duterte would lament and plead to the public, polarizing the
population - Huwag kayong maniwala sa mga dilawan, oposisyon (Don't believe the
yellows, the opposition). The term "dilawan" has come to represent anyone who is
critical of the President's leadership. One is either a dilawan or a loyalist to President
Duterte. There isn't supposed to be any depth, no middle ground, and no public
discussion. In just such a polarized environment, the candidate who can capture "the
political middle" is likely to obtain the most votes. Why? Because being in the middle
enables you to get votes from both the DDS and Dilawan camps. After all, elections are
about numbers, and if a politician can garner votes from both factions, he or she may
have a winning formula. Gaining the political middle, especially for the "opposition,"
could mean denying the Duterte party another guaranteed majority win.
My concept of a political middle, on the other hand, is not exclusive to electoral
interests. It's also not about "neutrality," because my concept of a political middle
includes anti-polarization public dialogue. I believe that our society needs to move away
from the divisive polarization that the Duterte administration has cultivated in order to
forward its authoritarian agenda. The DDS-Dilawan division is pointless at this time,
especially with COVID-19 ravaging our entire nation. We are all citizens in need of
health care, income, education, shelter, and food; we all want to feel safe and secure in
the face of a pandemic. Now that the upcoming presidential election is fast approaching,
it is evident that as a nation, we are not fighting as one, we are still divided by several
colors and as much as possible, I want to eradicate the colors and just start to focus to
just one goal – vote as a nation, for the nation and for our next generation.
In 2022, we need a president who would empower us to think of ourselves —
and each other – as Filipino citizens, not as politicians' obedient subjects. Someone
who will shift public discourse away from divisive, polarizing framing and toward
problem-solving approaches. This is important because, if we do not address our
country's serious and pressing problems immediately – and cooperatively - we may not
have a country at all.
Leni Robredo is, undoubtedly, my political middle. She isn't, however, my bottom
line. (And, just to be clear, I am not a part of her team – or, for that matter, any team.) In
the framework of Duterte's polarizing governance, which has resulted in the loss of so
many lives and the accumulation and non-resolution of societal problems — COVID or
no COVID – my bottom line is this country's existence and wellbeing. We need to
recover from both an economic and political downturn, and I believe Leni Robredo is the
finest person to lead us through it.
Philippine democracy is on its way out. Please let us use the elections in May
2022 to breathe fresh life into it.