LAST week's column laid down several predicates, which my guest columnist Patmei Ruivivar eloquently articulated. On one level, she made a case for Sara's blatant contrived meltdown as a diversion from legislative investigations pinning her and her staff down on corruption and anomalies, particularly in the lower house. These inquiries were upon the behest of the Marcoses orchestrated by Speaker Martin Romualdez and merely a symptom of the brewing conflict between the Marcoses and Dutertes with surrogates Sara and Martin. Patmei succinctly injected a barbed rhetorical: "... what [is] this conflict all about. Is this about us and our country? Or is it just about them? This... is not even about us... It is not because of any fundamental differences in policy or principle..."

The UniTeam, the Marcos-Duterte political alliance, was simply designed to overwhelm and entice the naïve Filipino voters for the return of the Marcoses to power in 2022, riding on the coattails of the still popular President Deegong with the tacit understanding, now belied, that Sara's turn comes in 2028. This was not to be. Once the Marcoses are back, they will cling to power like leeches. Thus, the open conflict employing language through their respective social media trolls descending to the gutter with accusations of a first family stoned from drug-sniffing versus human rights violators and extrajudicial killers. This is more than the pot calling the kettle black. And their impudence asking us to take sides!

This bizarre public display by both camps is more than just a derivative of the UniTeam's breakdown, which at the time of its creation titillated Filipinos as a political vehicle that will propel the Philippines to greater heights. This was the political theater of the absurd. But the reality eventually overtook all of us, realizing that this UniTeam was, after all, just a marriage of convenience destined for a precipitate divorce. This alliance was not anchored on ennobling principles, revealing a bankruptcy of morals and political ideology. This turned out to be a clash of political dynasties, to quote Ms. Ruivivar, "an attempt by two political dynasties to lay the groundwork for a political fight for the 2025 midterm election as a prelude to the control of power for the next presidential elections in 2028."

Dysfunctional presidential system

On another level, today's column will attempt to put into perspective this conflict within the context of our political system and governance. Last week's column triggered corollary questions: "What's wrong with Philippine politics? How might it be fixed" (TMT, May 4, 2016). I wrote then: Everything's wrong with Philippine politics, period! This tongue-in-cheek reply encapsulates the frustrations of many a writer on where to begin to dissect the multitude of problems and reduce them into palatable morsels. The easier way to go about this is perhaps to focus on the current state of affairs, which has obstinately captured the interest and occupied the minds of our people since VP Sara's meltdown and the collapse of the UniTeam. This column will start with a synopsis of a subsequent piece, "Presidential system, patronage politics and political dynasties" (TMT, March 18, 2018).

Historical precedents

As handed down by our American colonial overlords, the concept of democracy and the presidential system of government was imposed on us, piggybacked on the 300 years of Spanish colonial patronage. It was meant to instill in our political life a novel concept of governance and thus widen the participation of a greater majority of our people toward the path to political maturity. But what took root instead were traditional practices of our earlier culture perverted by the colonialists for their own purposes and emerged as traditional political patronage (tradpol). Inevitably, these resulted in the development of weak democratic institutions.

But the most glaring defect of the presidential system of government under a democracy is that this is the embryo upon which patronage politics is nurtured. For 100 years, the system flourished, feeding upon the least desired facet of the Filipino culture — the desire for and dependence on a benefactor from the datu and sultan, heading a clan, to the Spanish patron looking over the indios, to the American "big brother," morphing into the Philippine president, "ang ama ng sambayanan," the father of our nation.

Ferdinand Macoy elevated patronage politics and practiced this to perfection during the martial law years, when "crony capitalism" came into our political lexicon. To hold on to power, "patrons and padrinos" were allowed to dip their dirty fingers into the public coffers and dispensed them to the chosen electors — thus, a new sub-species of the oligarchy was born, and another word appeared in the glossary, "kleptocracy."

Today, political patronage has become pervasive and has fomented corruption. Our electoral processes, for instance, are the overarching environment upon which political patronage incubates. Paradoxically, democracy can't exist without elections, except that in our culture, we managed to debauch the same.

Politicians, whether "wannabes" or incumbents, spend millions of pesos to gain the support of their constituents. As a result, a major consideration once elected is to recoup their expenses through all sorts of "rent-seeking activities," leakages in public funds and outright corruption — to the detriment of society's development and public good.

And in our presidential system, where the president is elected at large, he is expected to provide the wherewithal for an expensive election campaign. This opens an aperture for a corollary evil influence in our political dynamics — the oligarchy and the moneyed elite influencing the outcome. And we can only speculate on the quid pro quo.

Political dynasty vs political parties

With the constitutionally mandated term limits of elective officials, this deviant model of "public service as a private business" becomes a strong impetus toward the perpetuation of this power base — thus the birth of powerful "political dynasties."

A multitude of ills has piled up, and as a resultstunted their growth, one of the important instruments of democracy — political parties — has had their growth stunted. In truly democratic societies, political parties are meant to aggregate the various and sometimes differing aspirations of the people and mediate between the electorate and the government, translating the same into good policies of governance. Instead, the political dynasties become substitutes where power and privilege accrue to a few families.

The politics of personality sets in, and political patronage is then ingrained in the dynasty's practices of local governance, ensuring its survival.

Three branches of government

Another feature of the presidential system is the institution of the three branches of government, a republican concept reflecting the culture of American individualism and personal freedoms: the legislative (Congress — the House and Senate — makes laws), the executive (the president enforces the laws), and the judiciary (interprets the laws).

In the Philippines, this institution has broken down. A legislature that makes laws and investigates not so much in aid of legislation but as a grandstanding platform for electioneering. A lower house that exerts its preeminence under the dictates of the speaker — a "wannabe president." A judiciary that misinterprets laws depending on the interests of clients.

And worse, senators, being elected at large like the president, behave like "little presidents" entitled to contest the next presidency.

And the gridlock is palpable, preventing good governance.

A FEW weeks back, I wrote: "... Sara threatened 'to dig up the Marcos cadaver from Libingan Ng Mga Bayani and throw the same to the West Philippine Sea.' Gross, yet effective in grabbing control of the narrative. Indeed, there is a method to her madness! Thus, her meltdown in some ways was intentional... ("Dismantling the Duterte political structures," The Manila Times, Oct. 30, 2024).

I was wrong. Her meltdown was real — and an alarming one, too, diverting attention from the OVP anomalies in the use of confidential funds. But this is just one episode of what is now a teleserye, courtesy of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability. Other dramatis personae who are no less complicit have been assigned less than stellar roles — BBM, the first lady and the director and puppeteer, Martin Romualdez.

I lend my column space today, to Patmei Ruivivar's Nov. 25, 2024, Mindanao Times' "Mondays with Patmei." Her piece, "It's not us, it's just them," is a compelling assessment of the complications attendant to recent events. She has been the longtime chief of staff of Mayor Rodrigo Duterte and conversant with the Davao LGU from whence Sara cut her political teeth.

Her take:

"As the conflict among our country's political leaders escalates and reaches a melodramatic turn, who is left doing the actual work of making our lives better? Who is solving our real and urgent problems? Who is thinking of innovative ways to get us out of the mess we are in?

"Before we get carried away and plot another 'people power,' let us carefully think and analyze what this conflict is all about. Is this about us and our country? Or is it just about them?

"We have to remember that those personalities feuding now used to call themselves the 'uniteam' and were all chummy-chummy when their interests were aligned.

"When we were scratching our heads at the unlikely tandem of a Marcos and a Duterte, these politicians assured us that they were setting the example for unity. That division among Filipinos is not good for development and for our country to have an 'umagang kay ganda,' we need to unite.

"And because they seemed 'cute' together — the union of the north and the south — we ignored the warning signs of two 'nepo' babies, both offspring of 'strongmen' who grew up privileged but with childhood trauma, running our country post-pandemic.

"We were caught up in the fairy tale of two kingdoms uniting and saving the world that we did not bother looking for a detailed plan of action on how they will jointly lead us to the Bagong Pilipinas.

"And now our 'Uniteam' parents are going through a bitter separation a la 'War of the Roses' (the 1989 Michael Douglas-Kathleen Turner movie), and we are collateral damage. Who gets what in the divorce? Who will have full custody of the children? Or are they dividing us and making us choose?

"This separation is not even about us; it is just about them. It is not because of any fundamental differences in policy or principle (because the basis for unity in the first place was just to win an election).

"They just stopped being friends and are now accusing each other of corruption and incompetence. It is a contest of who spent the most money without following the rules. It is a showdown of who is more 'astig' and who is more clever in using the existing system to their advantage and how much they can get away with pushing the boundaries.

"When two factions of elites are in conflict, they often use their influence to rally support for their side, framing the struggle as a matter of ideological or existential importance.

"The nation is divided because the elites have the power to shape public opinion, whether through media influence, political leverage, or financial resources. These divisions are exacerbated by social media, news outlets and public discourse, where narratives become more extreme and polarized.

"If we pay attention to the messages from the fighting camps, they revolve around 'Protect the president' or 'Protect the vice president.' The people are being asked to take sides to protect the two leaders. Prayer vigils. Wear black. Light candles. Follow the chain of command and the rule of law. Etcetera. If the people are protecting our leaders, who is protecting the people?

"This madness needs to stop now.

"The people did not ask them to form a uniteam. They decided that because they all wanted to win and be in power. They did not set the framework of their partnership and how the people will benefit from their joint leadership because that was not the point of their 'unity.' They did not even think of us when they were allocating the resources, the opportunities and the power among themselves and their allies.

"And now that they realize they had nothing in common and they hate each other's guts, they expect us to take sides now and, worse, protect them? From what? From themselves?

"If we are indeed in a democracy, then it is supposed to be the government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Then why did it just become all about the president, the first lady, the vice president and the speaker of the House? The gang of four. Ang apat na sikat.

"They are making a spectacle of themselves and have no shame whatsoever to fight in front of all of us and the rest of the world. They act like this is their show and we are mere spectators, not the people they are supposed to serve.

"When are we getting the attention we deserve? When will our stories be told? When will our voices be heard? When will these privileged politicians shut up about their own problems and start focusing on solving ours?

"This is not our conflict. This is not our issue. We should start reclaiming our space and asserting our power and show these warring elites who is the real boss in this country. That is the real people power. Organizing ourselves and relying on our own strength to transform our country together. Not to install another perceived messiah. Because nobody will be good enough for a very bad system.

"If our structures and institutions remain the same, we will have the same problems regardless of who gets elected as leaders. Even if we pray every day and offer masses and become good citizens, our rotten system will still take us all to hell if we do not change it.

"If we continue to think that change depends on whoever is president (or vice president or speaker or governor or mayor), then we will always be vulnerable to 'budol.' The better marketer (or bullshitter) will always win.

"They are putting on this ridiculous show to keep us entertained and distracted from learning how to analyze and think critically. So, we will not think that we have the real power. Once we get our act together as empowered citizens, they can all go to hell without dragging us [down] with them."

Well said, Patmei.