It’s fair to say that a lot of Filipinos love Rodrigo Duterte.
Previous presidents have delivered their fair share to contribute to the country, but the impatience of the Filipinos was very huge. Benigno Aquino III’s administration, the previous one, made huge gains in financial growth but is criticised for slow actions such as the slow bidding of many Private-Public Partnership programmes to build infrastructure around the country, despite huge budget due to increased tax returns. Hence, the underspending. During the aftermath of the typhoon Haiyan, the distribution of relief goods and recovery efforts made by the Aquino government was also very slow, with some accusing public officials of stealing from relief funds. Moreover, previous governments have been covered with many allegations of corruption and greed. Estrada and Arroyo were arrested for misuse of funds through money laundering schemes and whatnot. For Aquino, there’s a looming case against him as well about breaking the chain of command in the police’s Special Action Force which led to the Mamasapano massacre where 44 SAF agents, 18 MILF and BIFF (MILF are militants, not an acronym from the internet lol), and a couple of civilians were killed despite ongoing peace process with MILF. The peace process, together with a new basic law for a new Bangsamoro Autonomy was halted because of this.
The present administration is very unique because Duterte is very different from all these “trapo” (Traditional Politicians). Duterte, much like Donald Trump, speaks well on what he personally thinks is right. He is very firm in his words and fills the morale of the Filipino people, especially the police and army. His charisma is seen on par with how Ferdinand Marcos was, and so he is listened to by many. He may very well lead a revolution, which I think is what is happening right now. Duterte seeks federalism for the country, leads the war against drugs, is active in finding common grounds with different separatist and communist militants, and seeks to restore peace and order “within 3 to 6 months”. At this rate, I can say that his timeframe might be possible.
Due to this, Duterte is credited for a lot of good things during the past few days, including the rise of many pending laws. Many infrastructure projects were proposed as well in addition to the unfinished projects from the previous administration. Millions of drug users and dealers have surrendered, either because they believe they can be rehabilitated and start a new life starting with Duterte’s administration, they are seeking protection from drug lords/dealers and vigilantes, or they are afraid of the police and the government. Modernisation of the military is also a top priority for the administration. Many mining firms have their licenses revoked after being probed for their lack of responsibility. Labour contractualisation, which is seen as a divide between the employer-employee relationship and liability, is put into question. Besides these, a lot more has been done (enumerated comprehensively on other answers in this Quora question). He did so much within 50 days in office and I’m honestly impressed despite being a Duterte critic myself.
However, many people are starting to see a divide between pro-Duterte and anti-Duterte. His methods are highly controversial. Words, highly undiplomatic and arrogant.
Names of drug lords are announced on television as well as public politicians (ranging from town mayors to literally senators) who are allegedly connected to illegal drugs. His take on illegal drugs is more of a war instead of a public health issue. Prisons and drug rehabilitation centres are now overcrowded and he has not addressed this personally as much as he wages war on drugs. The war on drugs caused serious collateral damage by giving rise to vigilante killers known to leave placards on dead bodies saying something like “Drug Pusher Ako. Huwag Tularan.” (I’m a drug user. Don’t follow [me].).
Duterte is seen by many as undiplomatic. Diplomatic ties with the US were stained after calling the US ambassador “gay son of a bitch” for which he refused to apologise. He also called out the United Nations for meddling in Philippine affairs after UN urged the Philippines to investigate the extrajudicial killings, after which he threatened to leave the UN.
The 2017 budget was also criticised. There’s a 600% increase in the budget of the Office of the President without a clear outline of where it will be used, and a huge chunk of the Department of Health’s budget was also reduced. Intelligence fund also increased exponentially from below or equal to one million pesos for each year during the last administration, to two billion pesos next year.
Duterte also perpetuated the idea of the death penalty, versions of bills of which is now awaiting discussion. Human rights supporters, international organisations, and the church sectors are against it.
The president’s order to bury the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani/Heroes Cemetery was also controversial. He is firm with the decision despite public outcry from those who were against it, with some presenting arguments that Marcos is not fit to be buried in the Heroes Cemetery. Three petitions have been filed on the Supreme Court against the burial and will hold a debate soon on whether it should be allowed.
He made several misogynistic and foul remarks against critics. Duterte made a rape joke about an Australian missionary and has not apologised for it, simply saying people have misinterpreted him. Duterte criticised Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno over “interfering” with his job and threatened to impose Martial Law after the Supreme Court sent him a warning letter about the name-and-shame campaign over drugs. He also publicly attacked a vocal critic and senator Leila De Lima about her alleged adultery with her driver, all while exposing that the driver is a drug dealer working for De Lima (De Lima heads the Senate probe on the extrajudicial killings as the chairperson of Justice & Human Rights committee). Support from co-workers, senators, the Vice President, congressmen/women, and other public officials poured in for the victims of Duterte’s colourful words, revealing a huge divide of the President with the main branches of government.
Let’s see the public perception of Duterte and their arguments (in my opinion). Despite these negatives, he is still widely popular both online and offline.
For the people who are very much in favour of Duterte, varying arguments are always made. They either: (1) accuse the media for focusing on the negative side, (2) say his words are misinterpreted, (3) [contrary to 2] say he’s just telling the truth, (4) compare the achievements of Duterte to previous administration/s, (5) cites headlines from questionable websites, (6) say that sacrifices should be made before reaching success, (8) “you always talk about human rights but you never complain about [insert other human rights abuses]”, (7) his plans just fit very well with their beliefs, (8) accuse the critics for working for the Liberal Party purportedly master planning a demolition campaign to regain control over the Philippines (pro-Duterte labels critics as Yellowtards, formerly used only for anti-Marcoses and/or pro-Aquinos, but is now adopted by Duterte supporters for use against Duterte critics),
For the people who are very much against Duterte, they can argue about: (1) human rights abuses of Duterte when he was still a mayor of Davao, (2) human rights abuses being done right now, (3) any/all of the previously mentioned failures of the Duterte government don’t fit with their beliefs, (4) he is an embarrassment in front of the international community, (5) Duterte is against Democracy and is actually a far-left communist, (6) Duterte supporters are uneducated in contrast to those against him (anti-Duterte labels supporters as Dutertards).
For the people who slightly agree or disagree with Duterte, many are stuck in the middle, unable to form public outcry/support for fear of getting into arguments, especially from strong supporters of Duterte who often resort to the use of vulgar words such as tanga or bobo (think of the word “idiot” but with a slap on the face and a painful pull on the hair). Strong anti-Duterte critics could also be hostile in words, but they mainly stay away from the main arena, Facebook, and air their sentiments on Twitter instead.
For the non-Filipino observants outside the country, many of Duterte’s practises are undeniably incompatible with Western liberal ideology, but things like this happen in the Philippines in spite of being heavily influenced by Western media. When I talk to online friends from outside the country about this matter, it is often met with sadness and pity. But inside the Philippines, it’s just how people like it. You could search a John Oliver video about Duterte with the feedback bar consumed with dislikes from Filipinos who came to witchhunt (a common practise on Facebook in the Philippines). You won’t understand the culture as much as they wouldn’t understand yours if you believe in a liberal society like in Europe or Canada.
He is still very much popular among the masses, as stated by the latest surveys. He has the highest approval rating of any president in the country since they started measuring people’s perceptions on presidents. But if the trend of controversial actions continue, it is likely that his reputation will gradually drop. Even if his peace and order campaign lead to an all-time low crime rate, or if better infrastructure or subways are built, the gratitude of the Filipinos to him will likely diminish if liberal ideas (not of the political party) are introduced continuously (unless he tries to block the influx). The question is how low would it be.
Note: I am a Filipino. I am largely against the current president. I am biased, but I tried not to for this question. This is more of my honest view on the Filipino Internet community around politics, and so an ordinary pro/anti-Duterte in real life is calmer than how they pose online. They are free to disagree about my observances between two parties, but I think it might be impossible to disagree with all.
No comments:
Post a Comment