Totally Inday Sara: Life Under Full Blown Totalitarian Rule By 2028 and Beyond

After thirty years of living in the Philippines as a man with Middle Eastern ethnic origins who chose to be naturalized as a Filipino decades ago,

I still have yet to grasp why most Filipinos and their political analysts still cleave to the inappropriate categorizations of political behavior. Most still tend to say that that political behavior is rightist (favoring the status quo or the elite) and leftist (favoring those who are ruled or the masses).

It makes for a messy categorization and thus, doesn’t enable people to rightly choose the kind of leader to handle the reins of governance properly.

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

Instead of saying a leader is a rightist or leftist, I propose that Filipinos look at their leaders as either demonstrating the behavior of one who is for totalitarianism where people are mere resources that must be controlled or one who is for individual freedoms, protecting people from the control of a political elite with a system of laws enabling them to rule themselves.

Over the past three decades, the Philippines has experienced significant political changes, with shifts in leadership reflecting a battle between republican ideals, characterized by the rule of law as well as the protection of individual liberties, and totalitarian ideals, marked by the rule of men as well as the enforcement of collectivism.

This article aims to examine each of the following Philippine presidents and ascertain whether they leaned towards republican or totalitarian principles: Cory Aquino, Fidel V. Ramos, Joseph Ejercito Estrada, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, Benigno Simeon Aquino III, Rodrigo Roa Duterte, and Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

After this very brief survey of these succession of leaders, I wish to present a coming divergence in the path of Philippine political development where the country must choose between House Speaker Martin Romualdez (representing republicanism) and Vice President Inday Sara Duterte Carpio (representing totalitarianism).

1. Cory Aquino – The Republican Icon:
Cory Aquino, the Philippines’ first female president, symbolizes the spirit of republicanism. Her ascent to power following the Marcos dictatorship represented a restoration of democracy and the rule of law. She promoted the 1987 Constitution, which enshrined principles of human rights, checks and balances, an independent judiciary, and a strong legislature. Aquino’s presidency marked a significant milestone in safeguarding democratic institutions and ensuring that the rule of law prevailed.

2. Fidel V. Ramos – Striving for Republicanism:
Fidel V. Ramos demonstrated a commitment to republican ideals throughout his presidency. He emphasized economic reforms and bolstered institutions to promote foreign investments, transparent governance, and an independent judiciary. However, Ramos’s presidency faced challenges in fully realizing republican principles due to various political controversies but overall aimed to strengthen democratic norms.

3. Joseph Ejercito Estrada – A Slide towards Totalitarianism:
Joseph Ejercito Estrada’s presidency witnessed elements of both republican and totalitarian approaches. While initially enjoying widespread popularity, allegations of corruption and autocratic tendencies marred his administration. Estrada’s refusal to be accountable for accusations against him and his eventual impeachment showcased a deviation from republican principles, casting shadows of a more autocratic rule.

4. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo – Struggles with Totalitarianism:
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s presidency faced significant scrutiny, with allegations of electoral fraud and human rights abuses. While she implemented some beneficial economic policies, her administration’s actions suggested an inclination towards totalitarian tendencies. Suppression of dissent, manipulation of institutions, and questionable governance decisions undermined democratic values and weakened the rule of law.

5. Benigno Simeon Aquino III – A Mixed Bag:
Benigno Aquino III’s presidency represented a mixed approach to governance. While he championed some republican ideals, such as transparency and good governance, his administration also faced challenges in fully addressing corruption and improving accountability. Nevertheless, Aquino’s tenure saw attempts to strengthen democratic institutions.

6. Rodrigo Roa Duterte – Totalitarian Leanings:
Rodrigo Duterte’s presidency veered towards a more totalitarian approach. Known for his strongman persona, his administration’s focus on the war on drugs raised concerns regarding extrajudicial killings, deteriorating human rights, and a lack of respect for the rule of law. Actions like attacks on press freedom and advocates further solidified perceptions of Duterte as prioritizing the rule of men over the rule of law.

7. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. – Potential Totalitarianism:
As the son of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr., Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s political lineage raises concerns regarding potential totalitarian leanings. Despite efforts to rehabilitate his family’s image, questions surrounding human rights, corruption, and dictatorship persist. With these factors in mind, the potential for a return to totalitarianism under his leadership cannot be dismissed. Although, we must note, that being not of the disposition of a typical totalitarian leader, he has stronger tendencies veering towards republicanism.

The political landscape of the Philippines has witnessed a dynamic interplay between republican and totalitarian ideals. While some leaders, such as Cory Aquino and Fidel V. Ramos, have championed republican principles and strengthened democratic institutions, others, like Joseph Estrada, Gloria Arroyo, Rodrigo Duterte, and potentially Ferdinand Marcos Jr., displayed concerning tendencies towards authoritarianism. Understanding and acknowledging the different governing styles of each president is crucial for the Filipino electorate as they navigate their country’s democratic future. Upholding republican principles and the rule of law remains essential to safeguarding democracy and ensuring a brighter future for the Philippines.

Moreover, I would propose that during the times that the Philippines veered strongly towards republicanism, the country made the strongest gains in terms of economic growth. Though it would be argued that the Cory Aquino years were characterized by economic doldrums which persisted until the third year of the term of her successor, Fidel V. Ramos, it must be noted that the economy yielded unprecedented growth in 1997 onwards.

Upcoming Divergence: Totalitarian Inday or Republican Martin

Vice President Inday Sara Duterte, the current mayor of Davao City in the Philippines, has gained significant attention for her strong leadership style and uncompromising approach to governance. While some may argue that her leadership represents a form of totalitarian rule, it is essential to examine her policies, actions, and the context in which she operates to understand the implications of her leadership style.

Totalitarian rule is characterized by centralized control, suppression of opposition, and the use of force to maintain power. In the case of Inday Sara Duterte, her leadership style exhibits some characteristics that align with this definition. She is known for her no-nonsense approach, often displaying a tough and authoritarian demeanor. Her strong-handed tactics have gained her popularity among those who appreciate her ability to get things done efficiently.

One of the key aspects that critics point out is Duterte’s suppression of opposition. She has been accused of stifling dissent, particularly through her alleged involvement in the harassment and intimidation of political opponents. There have been reports of journalists and activists being targeted for their criticism of her administration, raising concerns about freedom of speech and the right to dissent.

Additionally, Duterte’s leadership style is often associated with the use of force. Her administration has been criticized for its heavy-handed approach to law enforcement, particularly in the context of the infamous Davao Death Squad. While she denies any direct involvement, the extrajudicial killings that occurred during her father’s tenure as mayor of Davao City have raised questions about her commitment to human rights and due process.

Furthermore, Duterte’s consolidation of power is evident in her family’s political dynasty. Her father, Rodrigo Duterte, served as the mayor of Davao City for over two decades before becoming the president of the Philippines. This concentration of power within a single family raises concerns about the lack of checks and balances and the potential for abuse of authority.

However, it is crucial to consider the context in which Duterte operates. Davao City has long been plagued by high crime rates, corruption, and inefficiency in governance. Duterte’s tough approach can be seen as a response to these challenges, with her focus on maintaining law and order and improving the city’s overall security. Her supporters argue that her leadership style is necessary to combat the deeply entrenched problems that have plagued the city for years.

Moreover, Duterte’s popularity among the Filipino people cannot be ignored. Despite the controversies surrounding her leadership, she has consistently received high approval ratings in various surveys. This suggests that there is a significant portion of the population that sees her as an effective leader who can bring about positive change.

Inday Sara’s leadership style exhibits elements that align with the definition of totalitarian rule, it is essential to consider the context in which she operates. Her tough approach and consolidation of power raise concerns about suppression of opposition, use of force, and lack of checks and balances. However, it is also crucial to acknowledge the challenges she faces and the support she receives from the Filipino people.

House Speaker Martin Romualdez on the other hand most closely represents true republican leadership.

In a world often marred by political turbulence and personal agendas, the concept of true republican leadership seems like a distant ideal. However, House Speaker Martin Romualdez has emerged as a beacon of hope, embodying the principles of a government ruled by laws rather than the whims of men.

Martin Romualdez’s tenure as House Speaker has been marked by his unwavering commitment to upholding the rule of law. He firmly believes that a country’s progress and stability can only be achieved when its leaders adhere to the principles of justice, fairness, and equality. Romualdez consistently emphasizes the importance of respecting and abiding by the laws that govern society, ensuring that the nation is guided by a system that transcends the personal interests of individuals.

Romualdez has been instrumental in fostering a culture of transparency and accountability within the legislative branch. He understands that a true republican leader must be accountable to the people they serve. Under his leadership, the House of Representatives has implemented measures to enhance legislative transparency, such as live streaming of sessions, public consultations, and the publication of lawmakers’ statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth.

Moreover, Romualdez has championed the passage of landmark legislation that promotes good governance and accountability. By advocating for these reforms, he has paved the way for a more open and participatory government, where the laws are accessible to all citizens and the actions of public officials are subject to scrutiny.

True republican leadership requires the ability to bridge divides and build consensus, and Romualdez has demonstrated his commitment to fostering unity and bipartisanship. He recognizes that a government divided against itself cannot effectively serve the interests of the people.

Romualdez has been successful in encouraging dialogue and cooperation among lawmakers from different political affiliations. By promoting an inclusive and collaborative approach, he has facilitated the passage of crucial legislation that addresses the needs and aspirations of the Filipino people. His ability to forge alliances and find common ground has proven instrumental in achieving tangible results for the nation.

In an era where personal interests often overshadow the greater good, House Speaker Martin Romualdez stands as a true embodiment of republican leadership. Through his unwavering commitment to the rule of law, transparency, accountability, and unity, he represents a return to the fundamental principles that define a government ruled by laws, not the whims of men.

6 Replies to “Totally Inday Sara: Life Under Full Blown Totalitarian Rule By 2028 and Beyond”

  1. Keep trying funk! Someone somewhere will believe you anyways. But, mind you, the numbers wouldn’t be enough to dislodge those who have known VPISDC & for decades – especially when some f*c*ing outsider is trying hard to smear her excellent reputation.


  2. Mambo mambo Romualdez doesn’t quite have the same ring to it. Is this author AI generated? The fellatio in the last few paragraphs might as well contain any other dude’s name. The stock photo sandnigger in the profile is also pretty low effort.

    1. Yes, that stock pic is funny. Also, the cucking- simping is funny in last few paragraphs- he has to try much harder for acceptance bc he is snd will forever be a foreigner. Maybe move to dumaguete with the AUS UKers and do monetized videos expressing the love for all things Pilipino. Hopes, changey, if this if that yammer. It feeds delusions/denials/deceptions.

  3. Hey Guys,
    We won the War instead of ridiculous articles maybe this Blog should take a rest!! Until the Yellows come back which hopefully will be never. I’ll be taking a break from this Blog!! Love u guys!
    PS Is Marcos actually doing anything? There’s nothing really to ready about!

  4. It means nothing. Ph is a us colony period. They embrace us food-diabetes-obesity and worship their degenerate /debased way of « life ». Ph Will Not and cannot change kiddo.
    It was a nice creative writing exercises though.

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.