Is it really to live dangerously in a "really developing country"?
The event brought by the Duterte administration seemingly made the people rethink their initial decision. For last 2016 people heard much about his promise of change, and almost saw "unity" despite his blood-soiled record, what more of promoting "inclusive" development particularly that of his infrastructure program, free education, and even subsidies targeting the needy.
However, as months passed, these "changes" he promised turned out to be carryovers from past administrations, with rephrased terms and some further editing, all enough to say that the regime has its own program that's trying to be "distinct" than those of its predecessors. Be it "Build Build Build" or the TRAIN law, the desire for a "comfortable life for all" turns out of a continuity of what's was.
How did this note say so? By hearing those apologists claiming about the progress, and the "justness" coming from various unpopular laws and policies makes one say no wonder why people chose to protest in the streets for they have enough of rising costs of commodities, high taxes, and a government pretending to be for the people and by the people. Some time ago, Duterte said that the TRAIN law did helped the people most, but that same TRAIN law is all but a rehashed, rephrased laws including that of VAT that still carries much burden to the side of the taxpayer. Even that "Build Build Build" program the administration boasted much is all but a continuity of past infrastructure programs including those initiated by the private sector such as San Miguel, what more that this supposed to be supported by TRAIN end depending on foreign loans same as that of his predecessors. Unsuprising for the fact that these rehashes are debt and interest driven. Of course there will be a semblance of growth as jobs created, new bridges and roads been built, but again brought by loans and of interest-seekers trying to make profits from a presidential promise. Let that example be a part of a desire to create a “comfortable life for all” even for a moment- for again as any other administration every walk of life will carry the debt that’s growing.
Such bullshitries would think that Duterte's way of administering makes the country in a state of 'Vivere Pericoloso'. How is it? For the fact that the order clings to their view of things, people see it as a continuing past that's repressive, disenfranchising, unjust. It's more than just the debt, the extrajudicial action, the mishandling of the situation, profiteering, or the threats being babbled by the president who once spoke of "change". Everyone has to live "dangerously" even in this time various coalitions with their standard bearers trying to take Duterte's place. Of course, those who supported their "dear father Digong" will support Bongbong Marcos and Sara Duterte all because of loyalism to both two leaders "whose political will involves defying the odds"- that again will continue the majority of the folk living dangerously.
But does it mean other candidates will follow suit? Maybe save for De Guzman and probably Robredo, familiar ones would rather chose "continuity" while pretending to make some "changes". The latter of course, are just "offering crumbs" meant to satisfy people "even for a time" as they consolidate interests and upholding an ever-rotting order, that again, makes people live "dangerously". They have to "mellow Dutertism" and yet retaining the aspects of "Neo-Arroyoism" in economic matters. Of course, they would say best that the press, including social media and its comments shows how these folks having a noble right to complain about the regime including that of how people having living dangerously under Duterte or its handpicked successor(s), "It has every right to do so" as one may say, the way they condone its own ranks with their trolling, red-tagging, "alternative facts", and the likes just to defend their idol and its soiled legacy.
But until when that condoning? With the passage of the "Anti Terrrorism Act" and the creation of the "National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict" that "condoning" becomes a time for the apologists of the order to harass people who strongly against the views of their "dear father Digong" and his policies. The law, being passed in a time people restrained in their movements due to the pandemic, has made the latter an alibi to disrupt protests, "tag" individuals, reminiscent of the "Congressional Committee on Anti-Filipino Activities" of the past, and claiming they’re defending the republic and democracy. Cannot also forget how these apologists harassed writers like Maria Ressa, wrongly arrested individuals like Dr. Natividad Castro, or killed like Chad Booc. These would say are all “in the name of order” as envisioned by Duterte, what more this may be continued under his handpicked successor if elected.
With this somehow would say that in a "really developing country" like the Philippines, people has to live dangerously. The "semifeudal-semicolonial" character, with the oligarchs, banksters, and bureaucrats all collaborating just to make things difficult for the labouring folk. They would curb the law just to maintain their interests, what more they would fool the folk by means of piecemeal "reforms" and half-hearted programs (including infrastructure and welfare programs) all meant for political patronage pretending that of "public service."
Perhaps to be honest, there are some people from the other camp who is sensible to talk to, and at times they talk about being against the oligarchs, if not yearning for radical reforms that would trigger social changes; however, the more they look positively in their idol this makes them look they’re too tied to “continuity and order” than that of fostering real changes they envision especially in a goddamned society. Marcos once babbled against the oligarchs of old, yet, did he replaced them with his own allies while apologists claiming about nationalisation. And now with Duterte trying to mimic that of his idol, describing ABSCBN's closure as "defeating oligarchs" and the like, how come he was mum over Lucio Tan and the Ayalas? Is the "Build Build Build" program really succeed its purpose despite forcing the folk to carry further the debt brought about by the program? Did Rice Tarrification Law benefited farmers when in fact made smugglers to smuggle more rice from abroad? Was Duterte's implementation of agrarian reform law did benefited farmers in a time landlords cling to their interests like those of Lapanday/or those threatened by Villar and its Subdivision seeking spree? True that there are laws passed during this administration that did benefited all, even the subsidies did benefit despite not enough to sustain everyday needs; but the fact that the regime left this country in debt, isn't it that shameful for any public official to leave trillions of pesos in debt, what more that it is justified by claiming it is for development? Of course everyone wants a developed country- but at what cost?
For now the “legacy” the administration talks about (and observed by many) is all about debt, corruption, and repression- and this is what the next generation will inherit. What’s the point of passing a tax reform law only to found out that a big chunk of the national budget is meant to pay loans? Maybe next would be letting foreign-sounding bigwigs, as local interest-seekers alike take over utilities if not the entire economy and stop acting "being for the people altogether". That again unsurprising that while pretending inheriting a better Philippines, that the next and coming generations will inherit its own trillion dollar debt. "Vivere Periculoso" indeed, as expect bureaucrats and its groupuscle of trolls justifying two and fro their idol's "legacy" only to found that an angry folk is difficult to bring the "legacy of debt" to everyone’s graves.