It is time to reform the way ‘reform movements’ are run in the Philippines

There are reform movements and there are people critical of said reform movements. Perhaps it is time that certain “reform” movements learn from their critics. That assumes of course that there is such a culture of learning within said movement. Indeed, the template had long ago been set for “movements” that behaved more like cults of personality than like an organisation underpinned by ideas.

The ascent to power of President Benigno Simeon “BS” Aquino III in 2010 was a good example of a campaign built around a cult of personality — specifically the person of BS Aquino and his pedigree as son of national “heroes” Corazon “Cory” Aquino and Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. As if nothing had been learned from all that, Filipinos went on to elect more politicians in subsequent elections on the bases of personality cults. To be fair, perhaps the inclination to do so is all but ingrained in the very fabric of the Filipino people so much so that this phenomenon is mirrored not just in national politics but in the pygmy political scale of one or the other “movement” or “group” that populate the country’s chaotic political landscape. We see it in the petty intrigahan in Filipino expat communities abroad and in the monomanic paranoia of the Facebook “activist” scene.

In such communities, groups, cliques, and “movements” constituted supposedly by “like-minded” folk goose-stepping to tacky taglines and slogans, there is very little evidence of learning and evolution arising from learning. This is because like-mindedness breeds inbred ideas and goose-stepping to prescribed taglines snowballs into momentum that with time grows exponentially in its imperviousness to adjustments in direction necessitated by external feedback.

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

Interestingly, the 2013 elections have proven that the likelihood of social media “activism” ever gaining significant traction outside the cliques of self-important netizens to move the broader society of Filipinos remains a pipe dream over the mid-term future. It showed that in the Philippines, there is still no substitute for sensible and practical ground work that jumps off from mere “enabling steps”. A good set of principles to frame such concrete action are as follows:

1. Pursuing a policy of inclusion and openness when it comes to discussing proposed changes affecting the entire country.
2. Consensus building rather than antagonism
3. Parliamentary behavior.

In short, espousing inclusiveness and a policy of encouraging robust debate puts a “movement” or lobby group squarely on a stable foundation of continuous self-correction and checks-and-balances that mitigates any risk of the organisation descending into cult-like behaviour. Most imporantly, a clear and coherent forward-looking strategy that takes into account how problems will be solved long before they emerge will go a long way towards a movement getting set up to succeed.


The success of change initiatives are hinged on the ability of its organisers to include the views of all who want to participate in it and draw strength from all its members. To successfully do this, a system should be put in place that supports vigorous debate amongst both members and observers and, at the same time, ensures that valuable meaning and insight is routinely harvested from the discussion. After all, a system is only as good as the bottom-up emergent properties of the elements that compose it.

Many successful organisations implement one form or another of parliamentary procedure in all their discussions to ensure all voices in the group are heard while, at the same time, order is enforced and a focus on the issues is maintained. Indeed, this is one of the strengths of parliamentary systems of governance in the general sense. There is emphasis on debate and consensus and less on leadership and directing. The lesser emphasis on the latter implies that organisations, communities, and even states that practice parliamentary governance successfully tend to be the more mature, the more serious, and the more intellectually formidable of the lot.

In a parliamentary form of government, for example, there is no real leader but primus inter pares where the leader in such an initiative plays the role of an arbiter more than a dictator as far as discussions are concerned. After a decision has been reached, the leader of such an initiative takes the role of overseeing the implementation of the decision.

Usually, parliamentary procedure works best in groups that are created specifically for discussions that are meant to produce a consensual decision on matters submitted to it. It is usually in organisations where a lack of an ethic around the principle of primus inter pares exists and where a focus on arriving at consensual decisions can be observed that disenchantment and factionalism tends to fester leading to the eventual collapse of that organisation. How many such “movements” in the activist scene in the Philippines have failed because they neglected to practice such simple principles? Too many. It is time we reform the way “reform movements” are organised and run in Philippine society. The time is now.

131 Replies to “It is time to reform the way ‘reform movements’ are run in the Philippines”

  1. Looks like you finally wisened up to the whole Constitutional Reform thing, huh, Benign0? 🙂

    You used to have an aversion to my “shifting form of government” initiative because you felt my “promote the Parliamentary System” initiative detracted from your “culture ALONE is culprit” thesis.

    Now, you’ve decided to fully embrace the Parliamentary System framework that I was pushing because you erroneously think that I run a “cult of personality” when obviously I do not, and you want to use the concepts to negate what you erroneously think is my “style of leadership.”

    My advocacy is all about the ideas. The Three Point Agenda is simple to understand, and the advocacy is NOT ABOUT ME.

    Your friends Kritz and Farol, unfortunately, like to make it look like it’s about me, and that’s because both of them are losers (as in literally LOSERS of the financial loser type) and they simply do not like the fact that I am just heads and shoulders more successful than they are. To them, bringing down my advocacy is their way of trying to bring me down because for them, it is a PERSONAL THING.

    To you, it was more of a fear that your “culture ALONE is culprit” ideas were becoming passé as my solution-oriented ideas became more popular to the point of reducing your ideas’ relevance. That’s really what your issue with me was, Benign0.

    So anyway, that being said, I don’t think you’re the kind who would dwell too much on the personality side of things unlike your loser friends the pauperized and carless Kritz on the one hand, and the pathetic jobless Farol on the other.

    In any case, I am amused that you decided to adopt my ideas of the Parliamentary System as a means of going against me. I’m fine with that.

    Honestly, I don’t really care if you like me or don’t like me. What matters to me really is that you end up agreeing with the facts as they are which are the facts that I always state — and one of those facts is that Parliamentary Systems which are collegial are superior to Presidential Systems which are “unilateral.”

    Thanks for supporting Parliamentarism, Benign0. It means a lot to me.


    1. Lol! Funny the way you manage to make all things all about YOU Orion. You should check out this article:

      Do Filipinos suffer from narcissistic personality disorder?

      But an excessive dose of fondness for our own greatness could be bordering on insanity and delusion of grandeur. It can actually affect the way we deal with the people around us.

      And by the way, in case you hadn’t noticed, this article was inspired by the brilliant comments Paul Farol posted on the GRP Community thread here. So perhaps, take the time to see past yourself and thank Paul instead of me.

      As for Ben Kritz, well, I think he was spot on when he characterised you as someone who really isn’t fit to run any “reform movement” of consequence:

      What astonishes most of the current Get Real group is that, despite varying degrees of disagreement with the specific CoRRECT agenda, no one has ever taken the plainly contrarian view that its components are completely invalid. They are certainly debatable, but worth debating nonetheless, in the same way that other ideas—the administration’s “do something other than Charter change” position, the economic liberalization advocacy of major business groups, and various ideas for progressive legislation—are worth debating. Because what is being proposed, nothing less than shaping the entire future of the Philippines, is so important, every idea should be subjected to intense scrutiny, and every idea should be expected to evolve as our collective understanding grows.

      That, unfortunately, is unacceptable to Dumdum and his ironically named CoRRECT movement, whose initial attempts to respond to criticism with some semblance of rhetorical maturity have devolved into gutter tactics intended to silence critics, including publicly divulging personal information about Get Real members and their supporters—including, in some cases, their spouses and children—and most recently, threatening legal action to take down the Get Real Post website, on the flimsy grounds that it “incites ethnic hatred.”

      As you’ve exhibited in that above comment of yours, you simply aren’t above focusing on personalities, people’s personal circumstances, and using information that was given to you in confidence for your own self aggrandisement — traits of a person that, as I alluded to in the article, are the sorts who surround themselves with weak minded fools and turn what should be a coming together of ideas into more of a cult of personality.

      Tsk tsk. Your followers should think twice — and I think many of them already are.

        1. A well known dirge, I suppose?

          But anyway, whoever set those atrocious lyrics to the sound of braying asses should be applauded for a lack of taste so profound it is comical.

          You should include it in your stand up repertoire.

      1. He sounds like an IT programmer focussing on the ‘system spec’ and defending his ‘lines of code’, rather than understanding the needs of the user or planning the implementation.
        Thats why we used to keep the tech guys in darkened rooms and away from users. They confuse them and have no knowledge of customers, marketing or people skills

        1. This is a totally unfair attack on Orion. Don’t you realize that you are attacking the messenger here rather than the ideas? CoRRECT is just one of those groups that promote con-ref. The details of implementation and how this reform agenda can benefit the country has been discussed since it was first broached by ex-president Ramos and so it has been, what, twenty years? However, the mass media as a collective voice of the idiocracy has muddled the issue and has dismissed it outright as a means for those in power to perpetuate their hold to power. The merits of parliamentary system and how it could be implemented in the country has not been discussed. Beside, parliamentary system is not a totally new political system for the Philippines. It was attempted under martial law, but it failed because it was put in place in a dictatorship rather than in a democratic framework of government.

        2. Miriam, how convenient of you to point out an unfair attack but fearfully avoid Orion’s vast track record for personal defamation!

          If Ku-Wreck could in some remote way be called a party, it’s the members who must do the sorry job of reigning in its leader’s malicious caprice.

        3. Miriam, you political naivete astounds me.

          People won’t buy into ideas until they buy into the person who espouses those ideas.

          In this sad state of affairs revolving around Dumdum’s Defamation Derby and Ku-Wreck, the victim is clearly the movement for a shift to a parliamentary form of government.

        4. A failed strategy is reflective of a flawed leader, or a flawed strategy is reflective of a failed individual.
          Either way i would assassinate the messenger and get a more savvy and pragmatic ‘leader’ otherwise you will throw out the baby with the bathwater and be consigned to academic oblivion

    2. At this point, Dumdum, you’ve already the butt of all jokes within that small powerful clique of reporters and journalists in Makati.

      Those personal defamation attacks on me have damaged you more and Ku-Wreck than you can ever imagine.

        1. The CoRRECT Hymn is from the Communist/Socialist Internationale

    3. Ang kapal din ng mukha nitong si Orion. Tagal ng sinasabi ng mga GRP writers that they are not against CoRRECT.

      After insisting that CoRRECT was a GRP initiative in the first place, he is now taking all the credit for the idea to promote the shift to a parliamentary system. Ano ba talaga? You are too inconsistent!

      1. I’m not taking all the credit… I am simply saying that Benign0 went against it because he felt that the ideas I was presenting were taking the attention away from his personal agenda which was to “prove that Filipino Culture is flawed.”

        As I said to Benign0 numerous times, I do not even disagree with that and I totally agree with him that Pinoy Culture is flawed. But I simply went further than that and sought a way to improve Pinoy Culture, and it turns out that changing the System (how things are done) changes the behavior of the players/participants so that their culture changes too.

        I merely pointed out in my very first comment on his article that in contrast to Benign0’s general “anti-solution” stance (and his original opposition to my push within GRP for the Parliamentary System), he has now decided to embrace the Parliamentary System’s features.

        As I said, I don’t care if Benign0 likes or hates me. I just care that he now agrees that the Parliamentary System is superior to the Presidential System and that the adoption of the Parliamentary System can improve things in the Philippines.

        1. Nah, it’s very simple, Orion. I challenged certain assumptions and premises you used in your thesis which you then construed (and still construe) as “going against you”. That is the very essence of what Ben Kritz writes about in his article — that every idea should always be subject to critical evaluation and debate. For you challenges are automatically “attacks”. For most of us normal people they are mere opportunities to refine said ideas.


          and your starting to sound like a whining bitch, so give it a rest, u kno? This is not your HOME turf and ur gonna lose, so why not wait until they are in your TURF and maybe you’ll have half-a-shot at getting somewhere.
          From the looks of what you’ve written so far though, I DOUBT IT!

          U KNO, the fact that a guy doesn’t have a car doesn’t mean anything. WHAT ARE YOU DRIVING HOT-SHOT? a PRIUS? nothing wrong with that but now at least you know what you sound like, u kno? LOL, A DOUCHE-BUCKET!

        3. Nope, Benign0, it’s not so much about going against me per se that was the issue.

          You went against an initiative that our group had earlier agreed on as a PREVENTIVE MEASURE to prevent the repeat of the May 2010 elections.

          Remember who first brought up the whole “let’s push for Charter Change” initiative?

          It was our ex-member “ANTONIO DE MORGA.”

          Morga pushed for that idea and everyone (you were quiet though) threw their support behind it because the “Let’s make GRP push for Charter Change” initiative made a whole lot of sense and it would give GRP an opportunity to prove that it was not only about criticism and dissing the Philippines or Filipinos but was actively looking to push for solutions as well.

          That was the consensus. Moreover, the whole group chose me to spearhead that campaign as I happened to be the most passionate member on that topic and had done the most extensive research on it.

          When you suddenly went out of your way to attack that advocacy IN PUBLIC instead of asking your questions in private as we were supposed to be a team, you violated the cardinal rule of teams: no friendly-fire.

          Internal dissent is absolutely fine, Benign0. Internal debates are absolutely fine. But that’s not what you did.

          Instead of keeping the discourse internally so that GRP would not look like we were having some kind of a rift or a friendly-fire incident, you went out of your way to attack an article that your own colleague (me) wrote.

          I never even wanted to respond because it pained me to have to disprove and correct a colleague IN PUBLIC such that the colleague would be revealed as not having done his homework. In short, I didn’t want to argue with you in Public because it would reflect badly on the team: GRP.

          You know how loyal I was to GRP and to you. But you did your Public Friendly-fire attacks anyway. And that wasn’t just one time. You did it so many times.

          And Ben Kritz followed it up as well.

          The two of you really don’t know what TEAMWORK is all about.

          It’s like being on the same basketball team with two people who would rib their own teammates just to get the ball and score. That’s kind of what the two of you were trying to do there.

          Never mind that your understanding of the phenomena and the concepts were just off and totally wrong. (I told you that if we had discussed it privately within the group, you would have your answer anyway, but not show people that you didn’t know anything about the topic)

          You showed that you didn’t understand “CETERIS PARIBUS” and you didn’t understand “Probabilistic Causality.” You didn’t understand also how systems influence behavior and thus influence the formation or reform of culture.

          Later on, your articles on FDI which revealed your aversion to solutions that were meant to increase FDI inflow in the Philippines in order to CREATE JOBS showed that you didn’t think FDI inflows would be helpful because you erroneously likened FDI with OFW Remittances.

          Once again, you proved that you don’t know the difference between the two and you cannot appreciate the difference between how FDI tends to be way more productive and investment-focused whereas OFW Remittances are, by their very nature, meant to be for consumption.

          FDI is for MNC’s to use in productive spending, and involves an exchange of value. The MNC hires an employee who is expected to work according to the standards and specifications pre-negotiated prior to the commencement of work, and in return, the employee gets paid a salary. Non-performance by the employee can mean losing his job and thus losing the salary.

          OFW remittances, on the other hand, are NOT SALARIES. They are “free money” given by a family breadwinner to his family back home. The breadwinner takes that portion from his salary and remits it over to his family for them to specifically spend on their most basic needs: food, shelter, utilities, transportation, tuition fees, etc.

          There is a difference though… FDI money paid by an MNC as a salary to an employee in the Philippines is money that the employee has control over. That employee is presumably in the same place as his own family and thus has control over the way that money is spent.

          An OFW, on the other hand, has no such control as the spending is done away from his/her view.

          See the difference?

          There is a psychological difference between what happens when the family breadwinner is in the same location as his family versus when the breadwinner is far away. The locally-based breadwinner is – as mentioned – more likely to exercise control over how that money is spent because the breadwinner is actually present, whereas the OFW who sends money is absent from view and cannot see his family when they spend the money he remits to them. The family back home also does not get to see the breadwinner toiling and working hard to earn that money. In all likelihood, they see his pictures of him with his other Filipino friends enjoying themselves because who wants to show pictures of themselves while they’re feeling miserable? This is why the OFW Phenomenon is a really bad situation to be in.

          Having more FDI and more MNC’s coming in is – ceteris paribus – far better than keeping the status quo where Filipinos are forced abroad because jobs are scarce back home.

          It is also important to note that having breadwinners be with their families tends to improve the general work ethic or “attitude towards work” that people have. Children who grow up with parents who are around are able to see their parents getting up to go to work and talking about finances and setting examples of frugality or self-discipline. Children who grow up WITHOUT PARENTAL GUIDANCE as one or both of their parents are working as OFW’s abroad tend to take these concepts of discipline and frugality for granted if no one is around to instruct them on it and all they see is a steady monthly in-flow of “free money” coming from Western Union.

          In a situation where a breadwinner is with his children, instead of Western Union, the breadwinner can tell his children “for me to earn the money I spend for your tuition and for your food, I have to work hard…” Little gestures like these may seem irrelevant to you, Benign0, but they actually do make a huge and profound difference.

          Now you know how FDI and OFW Remittances are different? Hmmmm?

        4. @Orion: For someone who espouses “reform” and presumes to lead a “movement” you certainly seem to be imprisoned in an eternal wallowing in your retrospective regrets and incapable of a healthy regard for PROSPECTIVE possibilities as is evident here…

          You went against an initiative that our group had earlier agreed on as a PREVENTIVE MEASURE to prevent the repeat of the May 2010 elections.
          Remember who first brought up the whole “let’s push for Charter Change” initiative?
          It was our ex-member “ANTONIO DE MORGA.”

          Morga pushed for that idea and everyone (you were quiet though) threw their support behind it because the “Let’s make GRP push for Charter Change” initiative made a whole lot of sense and it would give GRP an opportunity to prove that it was not only about criticism and dissing the Philippines or Filipinos but was actively looking to push for solutions as well.

          That was the consensus. Moreover, the whole group chose me to spearhead that campaign as I happened to be the most passionate member on that topic and had done the most extensive research on it.

          When you suddenly went out of your way to attack that advocacy IN PUBLIC instead of asking your questions in private as we were supposed to be a team, you violated the cardinal rule of teams: no friendly-fire.

          Internal dissent is absolutely fine, Benign0. Internal debates are absolutely fine. But that’s not what you did.

          From this thing above that you monomanically repeat everytime we get into a discussion about these things, it is easy to see that you harbour a perverse sense of entitlement that whatever you imagine was consensually “agreed” by the group makes said idea immune from critical evaluation WITHIN the group by any of its members.

          Personally I do not see myself subject to whatever “rule” you imagine had come to effect following that “agreement” you imagine happened that time. So tough luck. You will just have to deal with the FINALITY of that simple fact.

          As Ben Kritz say: NOBODY tells me what to write or what not to write within reasonable bounds of decency. And when it comes to anything to do with decency, you, Orion, have long ago lost any sort of moral ascendancy to pontificate about decency. Life’s a bitch ain’t it? But unlike you, most ADULTS know how to intelligently deal with most sorts of bitchiness life might throw at them.

          As for the rest of your characteristically kilometric post, I might apply a bit of your style and ask you to simply read up on our impressive portfolio of brilliant insight on the matter of how Pinoys simply suck at ensuring any capital thrown at them is well-spent.

          Check it out here! 😀

        5. mr. dumdum, may i ask you a few questions?

          would you ever consider stepping aside and let other members of your group to lead the initiative?

          would you do that if and when it is proven that maybe you are actually hurting the initiative’s chances of actually getting realized?

          would you do that if a large enough number of your members (real members not fake accounts) ask for it?

        6. I think Orion is relying too much on Probabilistic Causality, rather than testing his ideas and making direct observations on the ground.

          If there is a really scientific mind behind this, it would have to agree that it’s thesis is weakly supported by mere academic texts — all secondary sources.

          Probabilistic Causality is interpreted to reflect imperfect knowledge of a deterministic system but other times interpreted to mean that the causal system under study has an inherently indeterministic nature.

          As far as real politics is concerned, there is no substitute for seeing how people (politicians) will use the said political system and produce the said result.

          The fact is, the many variables so far unaccounted for by Orion, may actually lead to a result much different or even the complete opposite of what he claims.

        7. It takes great skill to wield probabilistic causality, otherwise it just ends up as a pile of haka-haka and hula-hula.

          It’s like the usual chismis of the chismoso, diba Dumdum?

          You’ve got a knack for being the palengkero, you should include it in your act in Singapore.

        8. Morga. On that episode, I recall the reason for his leaving is… who know who. Because, “if you don’t agree with me that parliamentary system is superior to the presidential system, or with anything I say, I’ll PM you till your eyes bleed!” And he PMs others in the group things that tend to destroy the person in the others’ view. I fell for that earlier, won’t now.

        9. I’ve always wondered what happened to Morga. She was a very valuable writer because of her inside information. It seems someone managed to turn her off too. Tsk tsk…his arrogance has turned off a lot of people, indeed.

        10. Not just the PMs, but a very long argument thread. As long as Orion believes you don’t understand him (and if you do understand him, you should TAKE HIS SIDE OR AGREE WITH HIM FULLY) he will pepper you with annoying arguments like the above, even if you do understand what he says, though you choose another standpoint. If you disagree with him, he’ll treat you like a traitor in the group.

        11. Orion, I hope you can drop the belief that winning an argument automatically grants credibility (hence, the kilometric posts to try and cover everything and WIN). It does not, since even if an argument wins, it can still be flawed, and can still fail in practice. The desire to win arguments, and perhaps humiliate people, is bad practice and can turn people against you. It’s better to win people over arguments.

        12. wow pm attacks? may i see a sample of orion’s pm attacks? im presuming that since those are private messages those would have been really nasty.

        13. We have an entire library of them. The more interesting thing to note about these PM attacks is the lists of people he copies into these PMs. 😉

    4. Let this be a warning to the members of CoRRECT. It seems people shouldn’t trust Orion with personal information because he has this habit of using it against them when they become critical of his behaviour. Mag-ingat kayo.

  2. Good luck with that.

    JOKE: What is a ‘MOVEMENT”?

    Seriously though, the people who run the country want things just the way they are. They prey upon ‘movements’ as soon as they start to gain popularity in order to ‘short-circuit’ the idea before it comes to pass. They are good at it too.

    Imagine, for a moment, a Filipino Parliament in session?

  3. Great article BenigO on the parliamentary system of government. While the prime minister is just first among equals in this form of government, he must also maintain party discipline, because the ultimate aim of this sort of political system is to get things done. Obstructionists, especially those that sow intrigues in order to undermine the power of the prime minister are going to be subjected to some reprimand and if need be, expelled.

    I have read the CoRRECT agenda of reform and it appears that the movement cannot simply be dismissed as a cult of personality, because it is based on solid ideas of reform. Unlike the Aquino phenomenon which occurred in the wake of the death of his “popular” mother, the CoRRECT movement does not invite the same emotionalism and blind following. Orion may have leadership style that does not please the leadership of GRP, he nonetheless is effective at articulating the intricacies of the CoRRECT ideas of reform. I think that is why there are still lots of members who believe in him. His direct hits on the personalities who disagree with CoRRECT could be corrected, and he certainly is not dictatorial. He does not expel members from the group for example all because they question the ideas. Instead he patiently explains to people what each component of the agenda means.

    Therefore, Ben Kritz who is still in the mode of discussing the details of con-ref and questioning other ideas to promote progress in the country should be glad that Orion in fact, has done a lot to research about con-ref and does explain his research to people, although on occasion, he does lose his temper. The thing with Ben Kritz’ position, even though reasonable at first glance is that, he tends to deny the urgency of a systemic change in the country. While it is true that it is a great idea to exhaustively discuss other alternative ideas to con-ref to move the country forward, the country is at a stage where it should really seriously consider a shift to parliamentary system of government. And Orion and the CoRRECT movement has so generously made this clear to all why this should be so.

    Other ideas that could immediately address the dearth of foreign investments like the modernization of our airports and focusing more infrastructure to connect all regions of the country in a network of bridges, ro-ro, highways, etc. should be on the immediate agenda. Financial assistance to struggling businessmen in the forms of micro-finance in every village, like what the parliamentary Thailand has done during Thaksin’s regime, all these options should be done impromptu. However, the task of shifting to parliamentary system should not be relegated to “let’s talk about” it forever kind of drag. An advisory council of sorts could be studying this option now seriously and taking account all issues and then present this to Congress or Senate or to the president. I thank CoRRECT for all the work it has done on the con-ref agenda of reform.

    1. Sus! Movements aren’t credible because of what is written. It is credible based on what it has done and what has CoRRECT done?

      It is not a registered organization with the Comelec, last I checked.

      Moreover, it has no formal working relationship with any legislator, which would have bolstered its claim to be working on moving their agenda forward — which is actually legislation.

      And instead of winning support for its cause, people are avoiding it like the plague chiefly because of the acts of personal defamation launched by Orion Perez Dumdum.

    2. @Douglas Melgar: As you said, there is ample articulation of the ideas that CoRRECT espouses that have been published on its website. This is quite evident in principle. No disagreement there, dude and I hope I will not have to repeat myself again regarding that aspect of this discussion.

      However, there is a big leap from principles to practice. In practice, CoRRECT leadership and its members have exhibited cult-like behaviour in many instances — something that you will not find anywhere in GRP artifacts and in any of the GRP members and contributors. We have a big archive of evidence to support this and what Ben Kritz published on his Manila Times article is just the tip of the iceberg of what is a big body of documented (both external and internal) communications between our loosely-organised group of contributors and inner circle members (we don’t really implement any sort of hierarchical command structure) and Orion — a lot of which you and most members of CoRRECT have not seen.

      Unlike Orion we have always kept what has been discussed in confidence where it should be — in confidence. Compare that to the manner with which Orion and his lieutenants have repeatedly used information he obtained during the time that he was privileged to be privy to all this to defame us, slander our spouses AND DRAG OUR CHILDREN into his many tirades both on public forums and in private messages.

      Don’t think for a moment that all you have been told by Orion constitutes EVERYTHING you need to know about this quaint conflict. The fact of the matter is you and even his closest cronies within this “movement” he calls “CoRRECT” know very little about the sort of person he is and what he is capable of.

      Unlike the CoRRECT “movement”, GRP (which by no means claims to be any sort of “organisation” much less the sinister club Orion makes it out to be) contributors and associates maintain a highly-disciplined approach to communicating ideas and relating with our audience. We may not adhere to this discipline perfectly but we possess that rare degree of self-awareness to pursue this as an on-going aspiration. That way we continuously evolve rather than succumb to imprisonment by a body of dogma. You only need to step back and compare with a clear mind, dude, and not be too complacent working with, thinking with, and acting with incomplete information.

      You and Orion will note that whilst Orion’s comments are welcome here, we have set the site to subject his and a number of accounts associated with him to MODERATION and REVIEW before these are released for publication. This is because he and a number of his lieutenants have repeatedly broken the blanket trust between the site owners and the general commenting community by publishing stuff in clear violation of this site’s Terms of Service.

      You, on the other hand, Mr Douglas Melgar, exhibit none of that behaviour and I trust you will continue to maintain the sort of behaviour that we find is not consistent with the behaviour of the average CoRRECT member.

        1. CoRRECT is not a rigid organization, it is a movement, and that is why we don’t have a hierarchy of officers. The membership is quite loose, not a single person in CoRRECT is obliged to swear loyalty to the leader. Orion happens to be the one person who started the movement and we all have latched on to it because it is by far the most well-researched con-ref presentation of ideas online. Let us not get carried away here, this movement just like any movement could fizzle out, but the minds the site has opened to the value of a shift to parliamentary form of government have increased, already similar blogs have been opened by the converts and they are getting younger and younger. That is a good sign that CoRRECT is going to last; not necessarily at the same form it is now, but in whatever form the converts want their sites to be.

          Personally, I don’t have the time and the same commitment Orion has to devote to the advocacy online. This is also one reason why I appreciate Orion’s leadership. Apparently, there are already CoRRECTORS on the ground who are reaching out to those in power for the ideas to seep into official thinking.

        2. from what i’ve heard, a number of correct followers are already talking about leaving the group or getting mr. dumdum to change his ways. unfortunately it seems none of them have the balls to call out mr. dumdum so it’s option A for a lot of them.

    3. WHAT UTTER BULL-$#!T, HA HA HA How does someone generously tell people something? OR the things that need to be done…IMPROMPTU? WTF?
      UR hearts in the right place, but ur head is somewhere else, u kno?

  4. Wow, I totally agree with your comment Douglas. Let me add that piecemeal reforms should definitely be discussed, but there is a time when everybody should just stop discussing and start putting pressure on those who have the access to the levers of power to shift to parliamentary system. It seems to me that the CoRRECT movement is doing just this, their ideas are getting some exposure through journalists like Carmen Pedrosa. Even Dr. Villegas’ has recently written a letter to Aquino to go for Cha-cha as soon as possible. Slowly, but surely, all the voices for con-ref are congealing into a coherent advocacy in the public sphere. Glad to see the recent trends in favor of con-ref.

      1. In the media, well Dr. Abueva, Dr. Villegas and others have also written articles in favor of parliamentary system. I am sad to note that most journalists in the country are too lazy to do research on this form of government. Most opinion writers are good at whining and carping and well, criticizing the system and those in power, but hardly provide any comprehensive solution to our nagging problems of governance.

        Paul, I know this has turned into a personal battle between you and Orion. I want no part of it, and I resent a little your insistence on discrediting the validity of the CoRRECT advocacy all because you hate Orion personally.

        1. Well, I do hope you understand that CoRRECT’s character is being judged mostly on the behavior of its leader and members.

          And most of the flak is really the fault of members who have let such shenanigans go on.

        2. Sure, “Miriam”. You want “no part in it” because you prefer to turn a blind eye to the already clearly-evidently disturbing character of the leadership of your cherished “CoRRECT” movement. Why latch on to it anyway? There are many other movements out there led by far more qualified, experienced, and emotionally stable people who espouse the same principles. Why choose the one embroiled in something you yourself assert want “no part in”? That’s just silly — no crazy — to say the least.

        3. Paul,

          CoRRECT is a freewheeling movement, the members have no control over “some members” who have personal fights with other people in the online community. I hope you understand that.

        4. Miriam, I apologize if at all you feel slighted, it is unfortunate that Orion has to hide behind your skirt — assuming you’re the one wearing it — leaving you to answer for the criticisms against CoRRECT.

        5. miriam,

          please reflect on this:

          “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)

          of course, with evil, i’m referring to orion’s unethical practices. not necessarily him per se. i’m an optimist so i believe there’s still hope for him. he’s still young.

      2. Miriam, you’re contradicting yourself and other members of CoRRECT.

        If it is a freewheeling movement, it is not a serious group as avowed by its leader Orion.

        I think this is just your way of making an excuse, in other words, palusot — another dysfunction that we should get rid of.

        Why doesn’t CoRRECT make a stand for correct and civil behavior?

        1. We do have a stand for civil behavior, Farol.

          But we also believe that we have the right to defend ourselves against unfair trolling and gross misrepresentation of our advocacy and our people.

          There are three main anti-CoRRECT members of GRP (YOU, Kritz, and Benign0) who actively write tirades against us, there are distinctions between your styles.

          […Content in violation of site Terms of Service (TOS) removed….]

          In essence, you can’t really attack CoRRECT’s ideas, so you try to attack the fact that I have sometimes had to give you a dose of your own medicine.

          You attacked me personally so I attacked you personally in return. You started it, I merely retaliated.

          And so you attempt to use my act of retaliating against you in the same manner in which you attacked me as if it was a reason that “CoRRECT is not worth listening to.”

          People are smart enough to see that you are the unfair people who started your attacks and they generally can see that I’m only out to defend my Advocacy and/or myself when you attack me unfairly.

          Bottomline: CoRRECT’s ideas are sound and the only way for you guys to attack us is to erect strawman arguments and attack those grossly misrepresented depictions of what we stand for.

          That’s all you guys can do.

          You guys are stuck on your pesonal agenda.

          I really wish we could just move forward and stick to ideas.

          But since you guys have a personal vendetta against me borne out of your personal envy and jealousy, that’s why you guys are stuck in forever trying to attack an Advocacy whose ideas are sound, so all you can do is MISREPRESENT THEM.

          Grow up, guys. Trying to bring me down isn’t going to negate your loser status.

          But if you drop all your crap and try to HELP in pushing for Constitutional Reform, then eventually, the environment in the Philippines will change for the better so that it will be easier for failures like yourselves (you and Kritz) to pick up the pieces and succeed at getting out of “loserdom.”


        2. For Orion, it is always about “retaliation”. Tsk tsk… 😀

          See this is typical Orion style…

          Grow up, guys. Trying to bring me down isn’t going to negate your loser status.

          But if you drop all your crap and try to HELP in pushing for Constitutional Reform, then eventually, the environment in the Philippines will change for the better so that it will be easier for failures like yourselves (you and Kritz) to pick up the pieces and succeed at getting out of “loserdom.”

          He will encourage people to “help” while calling them “losers” at the same time — thus the title of my article: that reform “movements” need to be reformed. And part of that reform should involve a really hard evaluation of the leadership of said reform “movements”.

        3. Yo, Orion….is your last name really ‘DUM-DUM’?
          the ‘you did this, so i did that’ CRAP coming out of you is really making you sound like a whining BITCH! give it a rest dude, UGH!
          OMG, re-read what you’ve posted here, EE-GAD MON!

        4. Orion, cite an instance where I personally attacked you.

          Did I ever bring your family into the discussion?

          Did I ever make up lies about you?

          I have never, ever brought up your personal life… relations… gender orientation… and other such personal circumstances up.

          Hirap sa iyo Orion, you are pathologically dishonest.

          The thing is YOU were the first one to publicly and personally defame me.

          But the fact that it is ALL ON RECORD at GRPc doesn’t seem to matter to your pathologically lying brain.

          You are always the first one to call people idiots stupid and resort to all sorts of ad hominems when you’re losing an argument — which you frequently do because you can’t admit to using so many fallacies to prop up a mistaken notion of the parliamentary form of government.

        5. CoRRECT’s ideas? Really? Kayo lang ang nakaisip na mag-push for parliamentary shift?


          Sa lahat ng mga Atenista na nakilala ko, ikaw na siguro ang pinaka… ewan…

    1. @Miriam

      If you are tired of all the personal conflicts, then why are you tolerating Orion’s bullying? If you think you are an important member of that group, you have every right to give Orion an ultimatum to stop his behaviour or else you will leave the group. Why don’t you do it? You seem to be kissing Orion’s ass instead. If it’s easy to replace a leader in a parliamentary system of gov’t, why don’t you demonstrate it by removing Orion as your leader?

      1. To answer your question,Dude, I have voiced out my disagreements with “some CoRRECTORS”, including Orion. And they tell me the same thing that BenigO said, I am not aware of the origin of their conflict. The whole thing is too personal and that is why I am sticking to the defense of the ideas of CoRRECT, and am also letting GRP leaders know what I am told in confidence by the leaders of CoRRECT. Their ungentlemanly way of dealing with their “personal” opponents is something that is indirectly practised by Paul Farol as well. Consider blogs like “Jail Carlos Celdran”, when Celdran is obviously a close friend of “some CoRRECTORS”. Note the quotation marks, it means only a handful are doing it and others have said their piece, but as I view the exchanges between “some CoRRECTORS and GRP leaders” outside of the CoRRECT agenda, that is why, I am still for CoRRECT. I have nothing to worry as a member of CoRRECT, my personal life is sort of an open book already to my friends and I don’t intend to make enemies here online.

        Those “some members” insist they are not doing anything illegal. Anyways, I believe in the CoRRECT ideas and I thank Orion for all his efforts at researching the merits of parliamentary form of government. His personal battles with the leaders of GRP are his alone to fight. Can’t you tell I pay more attention to the message rather than the messenger.

        1. ///Their ungentlemanly way of dealing with their “personal” opponents is something that is indirectly practised by Paul Farol as well. Consider blogs like “Jail Carlos Celdran”, when Celdran is obviously a close friend of “some CoRRECTORS”

          This is clearly a mistaken attribution, that FB Page is NOT mine.

          For all you know, Carlos had it made in order to have some justification to launch a personal attack against me.

          Moreover, it is also quite clear that Kristine Panlaki is actually Orion’s or an Orionite’s dummy account.

          Orion’s history for making sock puppets goes a long way back… Rey Refran, Dr. Jose Rizal II… etcetera.

          And what ungentlemanly and personal way have I dealt with Orion?

          Did I ever bring up his sister ballerina into the discussion like he brought up my wife countless of times, when clearly THAT has nothing to do with the Ku-Wreck’s agenda?

        2. Just remember this quaint piece of advice among leadership practitioners:

          Don’t buy into leader + Don’t buy into vision = Get another leader
          Don’t buy into leader + Buy into vision = Get another leader
          Buy into leader + Don’t buy into vision = Change the vision
          Buy into leader + Buy into vision = Get behind the leader

        3. @Miriam

          Ang labo ng sagot mo. What does Paul Farol’s article about Carlos Celdran have to do with Orion and your movement? That is a separate issue. You are basically proving that your group is just a cult. Meaning, kapag sinabi nung isa na na-offend sya dun sa sinulat ni Farol, eh you are all going to attack Farol already.

          You’re not making any sense at all.

          Pareho lang kayo ni PNoy with his KKK. Kapag Kaibigan, kamag-anak or kakklase, ok lang kahit bully basta kakampi and you will turn a blind eye to his bad behaviour.

          Orion is already committing criminal acts with his personal attacks on other people and it’s still ok with you. You should have severed ties with Orion a long time ago with his behaviour.

  5. Bumbum and correct just don’t get it, and clearly are far from parliamentary in their thinking or actions.

    In the end they will throw out the baby with the bathwater, and maybe then rational service will be resumed.

    If the question is, how can the philippines achieve progress and greater prosperity for the poorer sectors of society, then a shift to a parliamentary system is not only not the answer but it doesn’t even figure in the top 50, and it is a mechanism not a solution per se, and like any system which is badly implemented or without the checks and balances, and the ‘right people running it, can be used and abused as much as any other system, as seen in india, and regrettably even in UK.

    Correct would be well advised to be less academic and more pragmatic in their approach, deconstruct the component parts of the problem and come up with solutions and coherent arguments backed by research rather than taking a hypothesis and blindly following it like some religious cult oblivious to reality and impervious to logic.

    1. Exactly, Libertas! The behaviour of CoRRECT’s members contradict what they are trying to sell.

      Who will trust them if they are vilifying other people? No one, I hope. Mga sablay mag-isip.

    2. Did you make an effort to educate yourself by reading the articles on the CoRRECT website Libertas?

      1. The articles on the site confirmed my impression of an academic approach without contextual reference, or research relevant specifically to the philippines and to the economic, cultural and social interdependencies and implications.
        The fragmentation of parties within the philippines and lack of discipline/allegiance/ideology alone would undermine the fundamentals of a parliamentary system.
        An analogy is an IT system which operates effectively in one environment but once ported across to a different platform causes undue and unforeseen problems.
        The principle is to design what is most appropriate not buy into a glossy brochure.

        Sounds like there is little/no direct practical experience of parliamentary systems but reading text book theories which can end up trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

      2. whoever this ‘Dumdum’ is he is using a concept called “Probabalistic causality” to define another detractor of his’ intellect, wtf?
        anybody can gather info, use an alpha level on the info gathered and its null hypothesis and come up with a ‘statistical probability’, but SO WHAT?
        Anyone who took stats 101 could do it, and to insult someone by saying the person ‘doesn’t understand it’ is akin to saying someone does not know the meaning of the word “MAYBE”.
        The guy known as “DUM-DUM” realy is a “DUM-DUM DUMMY DUMBASS” for saying these things, and to attack someones’ intellect or lack of understanding by doing as such just points to his own “LACK OF INTELLIGENCE”, so please tell the “DUM-DUM-DUMONE” to go home and insult someone who really is an idiot. That is, generally, anyone who listens to any of the non-sensical BS coming from his mouth for more than a moment.

  6. “There’s nothing I enjoy more than listening to a highly trained
    intelligence leapfrogging common sense and coming to the wrong
    conclusions. It gives me renewed faith in parliamentary democracy”.
    (Wilt on High, 1984)
    Tom sharpe – author/political satirist who died yesterday

    1. Oh, hi there Mr./Ms. Libertas. Thanks for sharing some words of wisdom from someone who just died. Death certainly has a way of reminding us that all this bickering is nonsense. It is best to work together for a solution to our country’s problems. FYI, you may check out the CoRRECT website for articles to enlighten yourself of the CoRRECT solution to our continuing sorry saga of poor governance. We all do care, and Mr. Orion has contributed so generously to the debate with facts and empirical evidence. All your doubts will disappear I am sure once you finish reading all the recommended articles.

      We don’t claim to be connected to the powers that. Honestly, it gives me the shivers in the spine just to think of having to deal with those senatongs, and tongressmen, I would rather engage the public online, over here, my friends, writing letters to journalists and editors than deal with those loser politicians. See ya.

      1. Orion is also working hard to vilify other people, I heard. In fact, you could say that he and his minions are working harder at badmouthing their critics than pushing their advocacy forward. Where do they find the time to create websites dedicated to mocking Paul Farol and GRP?

      2. you don’t want to deal with senatongs and tongressmen? then who do you suppose will help get your advocacy moving in the legislative branch?

  7. So much for the discussion. Typical hijack of a thread to promote yourself if I am CORRECT. Is it me or was CORRECT from the movie Team America.

  8. Hey, just an observation, you guys are claiming he’s the bully, but there’s like 5-6 of you and there’s just one of him.

    1. That’s because you are making unfounded ASSUMPTIONS about the group dynamics you IMAGINE is going on in the background here. Fact is, most of us are independent minded folk here who don’t PM each other and hatch plots against one another in private unlike some people I know.

      Just stick to the topic, dude, and take what is tabled here in the public domain AT FACE VALUE and spare yourself unnecessary stress.

      And btw, there would’ve been more folk here on what you consider to be “on your side” if they learned some manners and behaved properly. That’s just tough luck for you that most of your ilk simply are incapable of acting like mature adults.

  9. Ladies and gentlemen, while we fight here using our keyboards there are more important battles to be fought outside of the desktop.

    Therefore, please practice the following: do away with the ad hominem attacks; criticize ideas instead; build a healthy level of solidarity; practice forgiveness; and spend more time experiencing the life of the elite, middle classes, and the masses. Without such steps, the probability of the failure of what your movements do and your chances of doing the wrong things increase greatly.

    More power to you and may you find success the changes you want to happen. May you be able to restructure the world in a way that will make poverty and evil less possible.

  10. Good article, benign0! I especially liked this bit:

    “Many successful organisations implement one form or another of parliamentary procedure in all their discussions to ensure all voices in the group are heard while, at the same time, order is enforced and a focus on the issues is maintained. Indeed, this is one of the strengths of parliamentary systems of governance in the general sense. There is emphasis on debate and consensus and less on leadership and directing. The lesser emphasis on the latter implies that organisations, communities, and even states that practice parliamentary governance successfully tend to be the more mature, the more serious, and the more intellectually formidable of the lot.”

    Now while the prime minister is in principle the first among equals, that is not to say that he cannot instill discipline within the party. Obstructionists, especially those who attempt to sow intrigues on the party leadership, are subjected to reprimanding or expulsion. Party leaders discipline all the time, or they would have difficulty getting their agendas pushed through.

    Furthermore, it is not necessarily the personality that is important in party leadership under a parliamentary system, but the party leader’s ability to debate in favor of the party’s platform.

    * * *

    I live in Denmark and I am well acquainted with how the parliamentary system here in Denmark works.

    GRP’s discontent with Orion’s leadership style kinda reminds me of the way the Socialist Red-Green Alliance Party expressed their displeasure with the way the Danish People’s Party was being led by the latter’s leader, Pia Kærsgaard.

    These two parties are in the opposite ends of the political spectrum, the former being an alliance of communists and socialists, while the latter being right-leaning social conservatives. Over the years, the Danish People’s Party had been gaining in popularity, a fact that the Red-Green Alliance hated. The Red-Greens like to attribute this to Pia Kærsgaard’s popularity and hated her for it, calling it popularity politics.

    When an incident occurred that required Pia Kærsgård to exercise disciplinary measures, her leadership style was criticized not by her own party, but primarily by the Red-Greens. A few from the Danish People’s Party did express discontent with her leadership style too. She too was prone to passionate outbursts of personal attacks. But she was kept as leader not because of her personality, but because of her ability to debate in favor of her party’s anti-immigration platform.

    * * *

    My point is this… I don’t think there is anything cult-like with CoRRECT™ simply because they happen to have a very outspoken personality in Orion. His leadership style may not please GRP, but he is very effective in articulating the intricacies of the CoRRECT Movement’s advocacy, and THAT is why there are still a lot of members who still believe in him in spite of his tendency for personal attacks or passionate outbursts.

    Of course, there are quite a number of CoRRECTors (myself included) who have expressed their displeasure with the way he sometimes goes about with personal attacks. Yet, he is no dictator and has not expelled members simply for expressing this view or question his ideas. In fact, in many forums I have encountered him patiently explaining what the CoRRECT Three-Point Agenda is all about.

    Personally, in spite of his flaws, I’m grateful that he has spent years of his life doing research to come up with solutions to make the Philippines a better place.

    1. I think Benign0 was talking about it for groups and movements not national government but I don’t want to put words in his mouth. Parliamentary government in the Philippines would be complete chaos. Think of People Power run amok. You said you live in Denmark and how long did it take them to choose a Prime Minister like two years. My friends there joked about not having a leader. Think of it a Prime Minister can call elections at any time. The house can call for a new Prime Minister at any time. Does anyone else see how bad this would be in a culture that elects sport hero’s, clans and actors to represent them. Not to mention that the Parliamentary system is ripe for an institution of corruption since there are virtually no checks a balances. While a constitutional republic may not be perfect and has issues with gridlock (which can also be a good thing) the checks and balances curb corruption dramatically. Also give more power to limit governments power with a stable election cycle.

      1. @Jim Arndt, you are confusing Denmark with Belgium. Belgium indeed had the political crisis in 2010-2011 where it took them a record of more than a year to choose a PM. Denmark has had no such crisis.

        The crisis in Belgium was not due to the parliamentary system, but more on the fact that Belgium is a multi-party state using proportional representation as its electoral system, and the election at the time resulted in the election of a very fragmented political landscape with no single party able to gain a majority. This was exacerbated by the fact that Belgian law required a new government to first win a confidence vote before beginning its rule.

        In Denmark, there are fewer parties than in Belgium, and a government is allowed to begin rule without the necessity of a vote of confidence first – so we here in Denmark are not likely to fall into the same trap as the Belgiums did.

        Parliamentary countries with a two-party system are even less likely to fall into the same trap the Belgians fell into, as two-party systems allow for a much more efficient change in government after elections. I have read the Draft Constitution proposed by the Arroyo’s Constitutional Convention led by Dr. Jose Abueva, and it is sets up a two-party system precisely to avoid a Belgian-like crisis.

        Anyways, I digress…

        I don’t think you quite understand exactly how a parliamentary system works. I notice that many of your caveats against the parliamentary system seem to be based on the mistaken assumption that whatever current flaws that apply in the current presidential system would also apply in the parliamentary system. They DON’T, because these are two completely different systems.

        First of all, your fears about celebrity-type politicians getting elected in a parliamentary system is unfounded. Parliamentary systems are built up around parties, not personalities. The system dynamics simply do not allow personality based politics to flourish in the same degree as in a presidential system. It is all about where the system encourages competition. Presidential systems encourage competition between personalities. The extreme consequence of this is seen in the Philippines where celebrities end up being voted into office. In parliamentary systems the competition is between parties rather than personalities. So parties will be FORCED to compete based on party platforms and ideologies instead of personalities. They will have no choice but to do so because if they’re inconsistent, they won’t be able to resonate with audiences who are supposed to share their ideals and thus vote for them. Wishy-washiness and being inconsistent can mean having less electoral success. Remember also what Benign0 has written in his article above, that in a Parliamentary System, in order to get decisions made, there are a lot of debates that need to happen. That’s why the parties will be forced to have consistent platforms. Otherwise they’ll end up in friendly-fire attacks. Having consistent platforms that everyone in the party must adhere to means less chances of friendly-fire since everyone from the same team will be supporting the same agenda.

        Secondly, you claim that the parliamentary system has “virtually no checks and balances”. But you are mistaken. There ARE checks and balances, but not in the gridlock prone set-up you’ll find in a presidential system. Instead, it is set-up in such a way that the Opposition always has access to whatever the Government is doing, whether during Question Time or in Ministerial meetings. While the Majority has a Government Cabinet led by a Prime Minister, the Minority has an Opposition Shadow Cabinet led by the Leader of the Opposition. Each Minister of the Government has a corresponding “Shadow Minister from the Opposition” watching over him and attending the Meetings of the Minister in his Ministry. The Minister of Defense, when conducting meetings for the Ministry of Defense has the Shadow Minister of Defense from the Opposition attending and looking at the proceedings and noting all the decisions. So basically, in a parliamentary system, it is about having more eyes watching every move that the government makes, rather than separating different branches of government that can compete with each other for legitimacy as it is in the presidential system. This is why parliamentary systems are statistically less corrupt than presidential systems, because there are more eyes watching government.

        I strongly urge you, @Jim Arndt, to do a bit more reading on the parliamentary system before dismissing it entirely based on faulty assumptions.

        1. The Parliamentary system is set up the corruption is much more likely. Denmark, Belgium whatever it still shows how it can run amok in very stable societies and you want it for a very immature Philippine society. Like I said gridlock can be good, but I would rather have gridlock rather than corruption. You can never guaranty who gets elected, you going to outlaw hero’s and actors from running for office? It is just the opposite that there are less eyes watching and when a single party takes a large majority the PM can stay in power for decades, aka quasi dictatorship. People get confused with no set election cycle. Parties in general make debate not the form of government. Currently there are virtually no parties because they are different flavors of the same ice-cream and again you can guaranty what parties will be formed unless you outlaw certain parties/politics.

        2. Denmark is one of the least corrupt countries in the world.
          The reason is not simply the political system it employs but due in the main to a culture of simplicity of life-style ( not driven by greed), homogeneity ( not tribal), core values of respect, tolerance and work ethic, and a free and independent press.
          It also has a high gross national income per capita so in all respects is the polar opposite of the philippines.
          If everyone in your group quotes basic text books out of context tgen i think you need to expand your horizons of knowledge – try social engineering and political psychology to gain a greater insight into the realities of change.

        3. These guys hastily draw dubious conclusions on the basis of a perceived correlation and then quickly apply said conclusion to establishing an imagined causal relationship between their proposal and the aspired-for outcome. Classic example is “this Denmark is good, it uses a parliamentary system, therefore parliamentary system is good” crap sandwich they want everyone to eat.

          Quite simply: evidence of correlation does not necessary determine causality.

        4. Denmark the most michelin restaurants per capita in world ( including Noma – worlds best/2nd best restaurant).

          Philippines – not even 1 michelin star in whole country.

        5. Parliamentary system is good, but it’s not foolproof. In the Philippines, good ideas can be messed up royally, simply because incompetence rules here. You can’t say, “that’s impossible, parliamentary is so good.” You have to consider the possibility.

      2. @Jim Arndt, glad you saw the point in my words some people here missed. I should have put it more explicitly that I was referring to the spirit of parliamentary procedure from a broad perspective and its ability to be scaled from the small to the macro. Also I did emphasize too that the procedure and system works best for groups and communities that exhibit maturity, are goal-oriented, and INTELLIGENT.

        1. this guy “DUM DUM”s assertion that you do not understand ‘Probability Causality’ is a good example of what you are talking about (Shit sandwich). The guy is an idiot and it is he who fails to comprehend the word MAYBE as well as all the other halves of what he says that equals= “SO WHATS”.He and his self obsessed ass can conjure up some “DUM DUM” shit, HUH?
          He is the epitome of an earache.

        2. Earache is an understatement. Imagine these kilometric commentary style of his multiplied a hundred fold. If you happen to be a target of his renowned tililing rampages, you will see them in your FB timeline, in the online forums you happen to co-habitate with him, and,WORST OF ALL, in your private email inboxes with a whole cast of morons copied in as his “witnesses”.

    2. @Kristian

      You said: “Personally, in spite of his flaws, I’m grateful that he has spent years of his life doing research to come up with solutions to make the Philippines a better place.”

      OMG! Orion spent YEARS to come up with his articles? Mahinang klase pala yang lider nyo. He’s not a real intellectual if he had to spend YEARS researching about the parliamentary system of gov’t. No wonder he is very sensitive when he gets criticized.

      I think he’s just exaggerating. His articles are so long-winded and he tends to focus too much about himself in his articles too. Boring.

    3. guys, are you blind? cant you see that kristian is actually orion playing good cop? the writing style is the same mnus the ad hominem. but you know what? this only shows that arguing in a civil and respectful manner like what orion did here as kristian is the better approach. keep it up orion. there’s still hope for you.

      1. Now, to complete Orion’s transformation, all he has to do is come out with a sincere and detailed apology, naming the people he has offended and asking forgiveness for specific acts he has done.

        It should follow this template:

        I Orion Perez Dumdum apologize to (insert name here) for (insert offensive action or statement here).

        Mind you though, this is really for Orion’s sake and not mine or any one else’s.

        This act of apology and contrition is being prescribed more to benefit his battered psyche and hopefully lead to his restoration.

        1. This should be published as a blog and a digitally signed copy of each apology should be emailed to each and every person he has offended.

  11. Reform gone wrong? Perhaps Black and White and De Lima are examples of people with honest reform intentions that fell by the wayside. Once they joined the government, they got gobbled up and most likely couldn’t do what they had intended. Last we hear of them, they recite Malacanang scripts. Next, you hear many key people resigning, like Benito Ramos from NDRRMC and that guy from Philhealth.

    On the Constitution, Ben raised the question of questions – with the vagueness of the Constitution itself on how to put together a Constitutional Assembly, how could you start it up?

    1. I also think real reform efforts shouldn’t really be burdened by rules like “no friendly fire” or “don’t write anything against my piece, OK?” It’s like cooking the game. Ideas should really be tested by fire and people should be allowed to write what they want.

  12. Lots of fiction writers here?

    My suggestion: get a column in the papers yourselves so you can reach a wider audience. Aside from what I posted above.

    1. The post I was referring to has now been removed. All for the better I guess. It was full of defaming information.

      1. Yeah, I was looking for it too and that was the post I replied to. But good thing it’s gone now because most of them are all about personal defamation that is not related to the topic constitutional reform at all.

        Oh, and I saw a familiar name there. Jetthro Hernandez. Didn’t he used to write for AntiPinoy.Com a few years back? And if what Paul Farol said that Orion was also the blog writer Jose Rizal II, then it is quite a let down. I’ve always enjoyed Jose Rizal II’s articles because he uses a more sensible approach to issues. I can’t even connect the two together because they are so opposite…

      2. Sorry guys, the comment had to be removed because it was off-topic, inflammatory, and irrelevant to our goal of moving things along. It would have simply bogged us down in pointless discussion…

  13. Oh look! More people digging out personal information on people and talking about with each other in a manner like rumor mongers do. Maybe it won’t be long and Orion will dedicate another blog post with all of Ben Kritz’s “skeletons in the closet” that they were able to dig out, just like what he did with Paul Farol.

    The CoRRECT advocacy was really good. But with members like this? It certainly is a big turn off.

    1. Implement the ideas if the ideas are good, no need at all to stick with the originator of the idea.

      In correct’s case, wala namang idea na original and really, what is needed aren’t ideas but people who can ably implement them.

      Problema dyan, sobrang dami ng maling nagawa si Mr. Dundung, to thw point na dumarami lalo ang ayaw nang makinig tungkol sa conatitutional change.

      Among business reporters at reporters in political beats, ang tingin kay dudung eh cracked pot.

      1. Pero what is surprising marami nag-iisip na justified lahat ng ginagawa ni Orion.

        I kind of felt everything started to fall out of place at lumaki na ulo niya when the spread has gone through Facebook.

        I’ve seen how everything fell apart with AntiPinoy & GRP where Warlito “BongV” and Orion had a disagreement on the extent of constitutional reform. BongV decided to stick with the principle that EconLib should be enough for now even if you don’t change to Parliamentary System, but Orion kept insisting that his 3-Point Agenda should go hand-in-hand (EconLib was the 1st point of the agenda) and the ONLY solution to the Philippines problem. I remember him saying that he’s passionate with his advocacy because it took him years of research and already tinkered with all other possible reforms and finally refined to the 3-point agenda which for him is already PERFECT. So basically you’re not allowed to question this PERFECT solution unless you also have years of research that can back-up your claims.

        1. Correct me if I am wrong, but it does seem that in every major conflict, Orion has been at the center of it and usually he says the other person started it first.

  14. Logic and experience would suggest a 3 step approach would be more practical and achievable each building upon the previous and determining the optimum solutions for the next step.

    Economic liberalisation
    Social transformation
    Political reformation

    1. Economic liberalization is already a given and there is momentum going in this direction.

      What is much more interesting to me at this point are the details of a “post econ lib” landscape.

      1. I’ve always been wondering: what if the Constitution had been opened for changing, then suddenly a group comes in and says, “change 60/40 to 100% Pinoy only!” We might have to deal with that too.

        1. Well, such a process for 100 percent liberalization should be submitted to a democratic process where concerns and issues of primary stakeholders are heard and the proposal is voted on.

        2. And in that process, one can present to the other party the benefits of the other side – 100% foreign equity in a company – without calling the 100% Pinoy side stupid, racist or traitors or anything like that. There was one person in the community who was at first against foreign ownership, for the usual arguments, that local industry will be overcome. I said, FDI can help local industry grow. He then said an “OK thank you” that seemed more accepting of the idea.

        3. I think calling people stupid and idiot tends to go against the principles of free and open discussions, for reasons that should be painfully obvious.

          Protectionists have legitimate concerns which cannot be and should not be completely dismissed because they are stakeholders in the economy. They should not be badgered into silence.

        4. Very true. We certainly need an approach that’s win-win, something that Stephen Covey would advise.

        5. @Paul Farol, Not to be contradictory BUT it is exactly the core principles of ‘free and open discussions’ that make the insults ‘Permittable'(for lack of better term at the moment).
          The users of the insults however are USUALLY the ones with the most bankrupted opinions, in-correct info and the lowest intellects. I am sure you see it here quite frequently (I do): when the onion-skinned amongst us who can not accept being ‘schooled’ (even when it is for his/her own benefit) get to feelin offended. And it is USUALLY because of their own stupidity, ironically.

        6. “…without calling the 100% Pinoy side stupid, racist or traitors or anything like that.”

          Oh, I remember a FB acquaintance who belongs to a certain reform movement. Said FB acquaintance posted stuff on Constitutional Reform, his friend posted doubts. My acquaintance and his like-minded peers rained kilometric arguments and not-too kind epithets on the poor sap. LOL.

    2. @Gerry, as I have previously stated, this is not a matter of being onion skinned or having hurt feelings.

      At least, for me, it is a matter of whether those claiming to lead a movement to shift to a parliamentary form of government can actually conform to the rules that govern most parliaments.

      Specifically, do the members of the group act under a set of principles?

      Do they decide on their groups actions based on the procedures usually used in a parliament (aka parliamentary procedure)?

      Do they subscribe to parliamentary code of conduct and behavior?

      More to the point, looking at Orion Dumdum’s behavior and the behavior of those who have supported his acts of personal defamation, doesn’t it suggest that CoRRECT cannot abide by the parliamentary principles and ethics?

      In my view, if CoRRECT were a party under a parliamentary form of government, Orion’s acts and behavior would be deemed to have been sanctioned by the members of the party.

      If it is a loose movement, as it is claimed, then on the other hand, it IS NOT at all being true to its mission of espousing parliamentary principles, conduct and procedures. So how can it be a credible advocate of a shift to a parliamentary form of government?

      Strangely enough, it is the likes of Benign0, Ilda, and Ben Kritz who have exhibited parliamentary conduct — despite the fact that it is claimed they are against a parliamentary form of government.

      It is ironic that they should be the models for the CORRECT parliamentary behavior, more than CoRRECT.

      On another note, being onion skinned denotes being easily offended.

      I, for one, am not easily offended even when I am directly insulted.

      However, there IS a difference between mere insults and actual personal defamation that is actionable in court.

      Moreover, in as far as personal defamation and personal insults are concerned, the one using these tactics are usually the ones who stray from the issue being deliberated.

      That is why it is a fallacy, or a flaw in rational thinking.

  15. hahahaha! orion got fired at microsoft? akala ko world class ang utak nito. hahahahaha!



  16. Both Cory and NoyNoy did/do probably had/have the best interests of the country at heart but neither of them did/does have the capability of actually governing the country. Now their daughter/sister wants to parlay her name into the governorship of Tarlac?

    1. Those two never had any best interests for the country.
      They only helped enriched their KKKs and further sped up the ruin of this country and now their STD infested satan spawn wants to run as governor.
      I recently visited Tarlac and suffice to say, it wasn’t that impressive since it was dirty and dilapidated.
      So much for “tuwid na daan” when in fact they can’t EVEN take care of their home territory.



    Dustin Paz
    I have a question:

    How personal `attacks’ are related/connected with the formulation of an individual ideas and principles?

    Please answer me according to the question I posed. I will automatically ignore off-topic answers. Thank you.
    Share · 7 June at 13:12 via Mobile

    Anne Mariquit likes this.
    Ilda Pro Good question. You should ask Orion that.

    Just in case you are not aware, Orion and his minions have created sites dedicated to vilifying Paul Farol and GRP members. Orion is also constantly harassing us with private emails with some CoRRECTORS copied in on the email. In his emails, he writes private information about us that has nothing to do with “ideas”. There’s also this CoRRECT member going by the name of Trevor who threatened to file complaints against GRP owners and writers.
    7 June at 13:20 · Edited
    Dustin Paz Really? Woah. That’s kinda rough. Do you think why Orion did that? There must be something that made him go `berserked’ to attack some of you.
    7 June at 13:25 via mobile
    Ilda Pro Are you saying that his personal attacks are justified? He keeps insisting that GRP has been attacking his advocacies but there’s NO solid evidence that we have. And why is he attacking me in the first place? What did I do to him? I’ve never met a man who attacks a woman quite like Orion.
    7 June at 13:40
    Dustin Paz No, I was only asking what could be the reason why he did that. I’m not totally aware of what’s what now. Back then, both GRP and CoRRECT are mutual. Now, it became different. That’s why I came in such inquiry. So, to my question, what do you think was the reason he did that? I’m currently asking Orion about that right now.
    7 June at 13:45 via mobile
    Ilda Pro Well, Orion doesn’t like anyone criticising his views. That’s all there is to it. If you criticise his ideas, he will treat you like an enemy.
    7 June at 13:47 · 3
    Dustin Paz Ow. So bad. Let me ask po, but I’ll try not to offend anyone, pero what will you do po if you’re ideas are criticized?
    7 June at 13:50 via mobile
    Ilda Pro Well, I certainly won’t use the same tactic as Orion is using.

    We’ve been telling Orion and his minions that we are not against his advocacies but they don’t want to believe us. What we are against is their tendency to strong-arm or bully other people who don’t agree with their views.
    7 June at 13:54 · Edited
    Ilda Pro Mind you, I’ve never met Orion in person but he talks about me with other people like he’s been to our house and met everyone in the family. He makes comments about our lifestyle and insinuates a lot of stuff that are far from the truth.
    7 June at 14:03
    Dustin Paz That’s kinda sad to hear. Well, are you still open to fix things with that Orion? As prior to what I had observed since I came back to refresh my awareness to the current issues, this gone far now, I guess. So, I came with such small question. I’m siding to no one here. Just a guy here asking what’s what.
    7 June at 14:20 via mobile
    Godo Baja CoRRECT needs a leader with integrity and the one who could bring the movement into the right direction of helping the country not from self proclaiming to be the pioneer of this and that… that was why i left CoRRECT page because i can’t see the bright direction. If they want to help the government, sculpt in the mind that the government is the people, whatever you do the people should benefit that endeavor not the few individuals. If they still do, it is like we go back to the Marcos era where only few benefited from the government.
    7 June at 14:21 · Edited · 3
    Ilda Pro Dustin Paz: What do you mean by “fix things”? Orion is the only one using personal attacks against us. As far as I am concerned, we have always been about ideas. I’m sure you are open to questioning ideas, right?
    7 June at 15:19
    Dustin Paz Yes, of course I am and always. Just be polite and respectful, concrete ad reasonable enough to question my ideas, because it came from one’s mind, so no one has right to conduct it. Also, if my ideas are opposed on a personal basis, ignorance is my better solute for it. Further argument only makes the road narrow and foggy. When you fight back, there came the risks.
    7 June at 22:34 via mobile
    Soffy Stone you’re right…Mr. Paz.
    8 June at 09:37

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.