The Curse of Ignorance and Malice in Leadership
Leadership is a delicate balance of competence and integrity, and the absence of either often leads to catastrophic consequences. Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa once remarked, “It is better to be ignorant but pure of heart than intelligent with malicious intent.” Meanwhile, English writer Samuel Johnson offered a more nuanced perspective: “Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, while knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful.” These statements capture two sides of a debate about the traits society values—or tolerates—in its leaders. Yet, both leave unanswered the question of what happens when leaders lack both competence and moral integrity, a combination that is far too common in politics.
Dela Rosa’s sentiment appears to romanticize ignorance, suggesting that a leader’s good intentions can compensate for their lack of knowledge or ability. While this perspective may hold some appeal in an idealized world, it is dangerously naïve in practice. Governance requires more than good intentions—it demands competence, expertise, and strategic thinking. Ignorance in leadership often leads to weak, misguided policies that fail to address systemic issues. Worse still, Dela Rosa’s statement has had the unfortunate effect of turning people into fools, encouraging them to believe that ignorance is excusable in public service. This narrative conveniently ignores the reality that Dela Rosa himself contributed to.
Dela Rosa is no innocent bystander in the failures of leadership. As a former police chief and now a senator, he was a staunch defender of former President Rodrigo Duterte and his soiled legacy. The bloody “war on drugs,” a cornerstone of Duterte’s administration, left thousands dead, fostered a culture of impunity, and drew widespread condemnation for human rights abuses. In defending Duterte, Dela Rosa not only perpetuated this dark legacy but also betrayed the public trust by aligning himself with policies that prioritized fear over justice.
Ironically, Duterte attempted to cast himself in the mold of the late Senator Jose Avelino, known for his brutal honesty about the nature of power. Duterte once declared that he was willing to go to hell “so that people will live in paradise.” This echoes Avelino’s infamous remark:
“Why did you have to order an investigation, Honorable Mr. President? If you cannot prevent abuses, you must at least tolerate them. What are we in power for? We are not hypocrites. Why should we pretend to be saints when, in reality, we are not? We are not angels. When we die, we will all go to hell. It is better to be in hell because in that place, there are no investigations, no secretary of justice, no secretary of the interior to go after us.”
Duterte, much like Avelino, framed his actions as a necessary evil, suggesting that his willingness to embrace damnation was a sacrifice for the greater good. However, this self-styled martyrdom collapses under scrutiny. Far from leading to a “paradise” for the Filipino people, Duterte’s tenure deepened societal divisions, fostered lawlessness, and left behind a trail of broken families and communities. His invocation of hell as a refuge for the corrupt and the bold only underscores the cynicism that permeated his administration.
This scenario highlights the devastating consequences of combining ignorance with malicious intent. Leaders who lack the knowledge to govern effectively but possess the willingness to enable harmful policies are doubly dangerous. Their actions not only fail to solve societal problems but actively create new ones. The damage inflicted during Dela Rosa’s tenure as police chief and Duterte’s presidency serves as a stark reminder of this dynamic, as communities were left grappling with violence, fear, and a weakened rule of law.
The phenomenon of leaders feigning purity while engaging in corruption is particularly troubling. It reflects a society that values image over substance, allowing mediocrity and malice to thrive under the guise of respectability. As some have noted, “A fool who pretends to be clean is the worst kind of fool.” Such leaders undermine the very foundations of governance, eroding trust in institutions and perpetuating cycles of injustice.
Yet Avelino’s candid acknowledgment of political realities also serves as a warning. His words challenge citizens to confront the uncomfortable truths about power and its abuses. While his cynicism might seem like a justification for wrongdoing, it also highlights the urgency of demanding more from those in authority.
To break free from this cycle of ignorance and malice, societies must demand leadership that embodies both competence and integrity. Knowledge without integrity breeds exploitation, while integrity without knowledge leads to ineffectiveness. True leadership requires a balance of both—a commitment to public service grounded in expertise and ethical principles. Anything less is an affront to the responsibilities of governance and a betrayal of the public trust.
Ultimately, the combination of ignorance and malice is a curse upon any nation. It erodes the fabric of society, leaving citizens disillusioned and institutions weakened. Leaders must be held accountable, not just for their intentions but for their actions and their results. Avelino’s grim honesty, Duterte’s hollow promises, and Dela Rosa’s enabling of abuses serve as a collective warning and a call to action: the time has come to stop excusing incompetence and corruption and to demand leadership that is capable, just, and truly worthy of the people’s mandate.