Democracy offers Filipinos a mere illusion of choice

The trouble with democracy is that it gives people a false sense of power over their individual destinies. That is a dangerous delusion we are nurturing in the minds of what in reality are an utterly powerless people. The deeper agendas behind entire governments — for example, Philippine President Benigno Simeon “BS” Aquino III’s mission to secure Hacienda Luisita and, more recently, multi-million dollar gun deals allegedly entered into by Cabinet officials with rogue states — coming to light today are but a small demonstration of just how out-of-the-loop the ordinary Filipino schmoe really is.

The common but utterly baseless notion that to vote is to exercise one’s right to participate in “charting the nation’s course” is what keeps the natives blissfully placated while politicians negotiate the real deals among themselves while sipping bourbon on comfy leather seats or puttering around tony golf courses within their exclusive residential enclaves. The contract of the typical politician is not with his or her constituents. Rather, it is with his patrons and business cronies.

Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

Look no further than President BS Aquino and the way he brings to bear the full weight of the influence of his office in the service of his beleaguered shooting buddy, Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Undersecretary Rico Puno. This is a man with known and even self-admitted links to the jueteng (illegal numbers game) underworld and has hands stained by the blood of eight Hong Kong tourists killed in a botched hostage rescue effort in August of 2010.

Or behold current regional laughingstock Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III who, in speaking against the ad-nauseum-debated Reproductive Health Bill revealed not only an alleged taste for intellectual dishonesty but a perceptible contempt for the blogging community. While it may be argued that Puno is twice-removed from the so-called mandate of “the people” (being an appointee of an elected official and not a direct outcome of The Vote), Sotto’s character and qualifications have long been evident to the public well before the first synaptic discharge sparked the idea of a career in politics within his pointed head. The fact remains, Sotto enjoys and directrly represents that cherished “people’s will” that is a staple in democratic emo rhetoric. Being so, he embodies the ironic failure of that very rhetoric.

While Puno stains President BS Aquino’s glossy Daang Matuwid (straight-and-narrow path) campaign promise, the existence of a man like Sotto in the Senate brings to question the very “mandate” that put Aquino in the President’s seat.

Consider then, these two questions:

(1) How well-informed are Filipinos when they vote?

(2) How much influence does good information wield when Filipinos vote?

The above two questions are the key pillars propping up the whole point of “democracy”. Are voters aware of the real picture surrounding a politician when they come out and vote for him or her? And where information is available about a politician, do voters act on the bases of said information?

You need to be able to answer “Yes” to both questions in order to say with a straight face that your vote is an intelligent one.

It is quite evident that Filipinos did not really know the full extent of BS Aquino’s real underlying agenda and the intricate network of mutual back-scratching amongst his cadre of friends and relatives when they considered him for president in 2010 (thus a “No” to Question 1). Filipinos, however, did have a reasonably good idea of how much — or how little — his qualifications as a professional public executive stacked up against the candidates he was running against at the time. Filipinos elected BS Aquino President of the Philippines just the same (a “No” to Question 2).

By the same token:

Filipinos had no idea of the full extent of Sotto’s religious zealotry and no idea of how much of an arrogant prick the man could be when painted into a corner when they considered him as a possible Senator of the Republic (a “No” to Question 1). Filipinos, however, were well aware of his track record as a promoter of low brow attitudes as an entertainer. Filipinos then went on to elect Sotto to the Philippine Senate just the same (a “No” to Question 2).

* * *


There really is no such thing as an “intelligent” vote. It is, quite certainly, impossible to vote “intelligently”. As such “democracy” provides us no more than a mere illusion of choice. During any election, it is really not about the number of candidates to choose from. It is all about whether we truly exercise conscious and intelligent control over our vote. In that regard, democracy in the Philippines can be considered to be an epic fail.

19 Replies to “Democracy offers Filipinos a mere illusion of choice”

  1. nagresign na si puno hah. bakit kasalanan pa rin ni aquino? si gloria kasi ang pansinin nyo kasi walang pumapansin sa apela nyang maginhibit si sereno

  2. Permit me to say that democracy has been used many times against democracy offering Filipinos illusions of choice.

    This is accomplished through subliminal propaganda(black/grey), self-righteous campaign slogans(incomplete and lifted from the Holy Bible), numerous campaign promises and continuing propaganda control of a powerful communications group.

    Timely survey manipulation and control is intended to reinforce and enhance a wholesome imagery and attract attention to the “decent and clean” politics designed to swing votes and opinion despite the ugliness within. A subtle but effective way in manipulating and controlling minds.

    Observe fishball as an example. Doing the propaganda pitch about puno resigning while hitting at GMA again. Fascinating!

  3. fishball’s propaganda techniques 101
    Good for research. 🙂
    1. Assertion
    2. Bandwagon
    3. Card stacking
    4. Glittering generalities
    5. Lesser of two evils.
    6. Name calling
    7. Pinpointing the enemy.
    8. Plain folks
    9. Stereotyping
    10. Testimonials
    11. Transfer

  4. A True Democracy is a race to the bottom. It is simply put as ” The Mob Rules”. In the last two hundred and thirty years only on revolution has lead to a stable (“Democracy”)government and that government is a Republic a two party system basically. What I see in the Philippines is many parties but no diversity. BTW a great article.

  5. We have a Comedian, who is a serial plagiarist. We have a Capo of the Hacienda Luisita Mafia. Then we call this Democracy? We a Feudal Monopolist Oligarchy, masquerading as Democracy. We vote not with our heads and brain, by our emotions.

  6. Good read. As one of our Founding Fathers in America once said, ( I think it was Ben Franklin but don’t take that as gospel), “Sometimes it is better to live under a Benevolent Dictator than live in a Corrupt Democracy”

    1. I wrote about the concept of ‘benevolent dictatorship’ in an article quite a while back and this excerpt is probably the most relevant…

      The viability of a democractic system therefore is characterised by a balance between the Cost of Democracy and the Cost of Potential Corruption of a Governing Entity. This means that the more benevolent a leader, the less democracy we need and the less benevolent a leader, the more democracy we need. In effect, we can, on one end, be comfortable sacrificing individual liberties in exchange for expeditiousness and decisiveness in governance if and only if we can trust leaders to act purely in the interests of the greater community. At the other end of the continuum we can be willing to shoulder the relative costs and complex bureacracy of an ultra-representative “democracy” (such as the Philippines’) when we absolutely cannot expect our leaders to act beyond their selfish interests.

      Successful democracies are somewhere in the middle of this equation. They have reasonably trustworthy leaders and reasonably bureacratic governance.

  7. The trouble with democracy is…..

    Nothing’s wrong with democracy. What’s wrong is how people utilize democracy. How the powerful take advantage of the system. How the strong bastardize it. How the well-connected circumvent it to fit their interest.

    Democracy is fine. It may not be perfect but it gets us by.

      1. Glad to see you’re finally getting it. Remember when I said it’s the people (Lee Kuan Yew, Mahathir, etc.) and not the system (democracy) per se that makes it work?

  8. benign0
    Consider then, these two questions:

    (1) How well-informed are Filipinos when they vote?

    (2) How much influence does good information wield when Filipinos vote?

    Perhaps any average intellectual thinking individual could say that only negative answers can be made to above two questions relative to the current moral culture of Filipinos.
    Majority of voting Filipinos are not so concerned whether or not they voted the right candidate for the better future of the country and their generations to come. Their scavenging culture dictates that they are far more concerned about what they will have for just the next meal.
    Their mindset can only work within what they can quickly have rather than think further about the future. They have no capability of the so-called “thinking outside the box”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.