The issue here will be getting the dynasties to let go of their control. There is going to need to be some dramatic changes happening. And that is why I believe, despite his alleged other faults, the man from Davao seems to be the only one with the balls or independence to do it. The likes of the Ayalas who control Roxas will oppose it to the bitter end because it will mean the end of their ability to dominate, Henry Sy will oppose it as well because it will bring an end to contractualization of employment that is his back bone as well. Thus, no more malls. Instead they will be forced into infrastructure. PLDT’s days as a monopoly provider of connection services will begin to disappear. Meralco will be forced to compete. This is something that will terrify people from the start, as it will be accompanied by a major revamp of business and employment. But when the dust settles, you can guarantee that there will be less poverty, and less unemployment. My biggest concern here is the lack of educational ability of the average Filipino, is going to create demand for skills they will not be ready to provide, simply because the educational systems here are so far out of touch with what is needed to meet that demand.
Some claim if Duterte starts his administration as a revolutionary form of government, it’ll just be another martial law regime in the Philippines.
I don’t think it will lead to martial law. Why I say that it, it is not the general populace who need controlling, it is the 1% who currently run amok destroying this country with their lack of vision, forethought or planning to create a more progressive society. The ones who need to be confined are the Oligarchy, who are the ones making the decisions now, as they make them based purely on what is best for them, and not for the greater Philippines collectively. They simply see the people as being there to serve them, not the other way around.
I was recently asked, “What kind of government can control the Oligarchy?”
The answer is really quite simple. A Federal Parliament does.
Australia. In fact, the majority of the least corrupt countries do. Or they use variations based upon it. Denmark, Singapore, New Zealand, Canada and Great Britain, to name a few. If memory serves, in the list of least corrupt, of the first 25 or 30, the only country that is not using it is the United States. They are federal presidential, while all the rest are some form of parliamentary system.
What makes parliamentary systems so superior is the control mechanisms in place. The ability to remove poor performers without much effort quickly and without always causing the need for an election is the real secret. The other factor is the confrontational way parliaments work, they expose everyone, and often brutally. When they make a mistake, that forces people to perform, because they are answerable immediately, not just on election day every 6 years or whatever term they have. Mess up today, tomorrow a member of the opposition will expose it publicly, a vote of no confidence follows and if you lose, you are out of a job, or if you are the leader you could be forced to call for new elections.
Because each state has its own state legislature, and although the federal government may make decisions relating to the wider American nation and its foreign policy, decisions on what happens in each state is decided by the state legislature, not Washington DC. And the U.S. is not the strongest nation economically right now. Its days of being the only financial super power are long gone.
Now some will argue that the Philippines was under a parliamentary form of government during the martial law period, and its form of government is not for the Philippines. This is not true.
The so called “parliament” during the martial law years was in name only. The Prime Minister and the Head of State cannot be the same person. The people who were appointed to the parliament and not elected in party based elections. It was more of a committee system decided and controlled by then president Marcos. Marcos did the world and the Philippine a serious dis-service by calling it a parliament, it most certainly was not.
It was a Parliament in name only. But in reality. It was dictatorial in nature. Much, the same way the Philippines today, claims to be a democracy. But in reality, is anything but. Again… In name only.