The Poor Vote as Thinking Vote? A Persistent Problem in Our Political System

 

[Note: This is a reply to carpediem123 in Conrado de Quiros’s article “Grand restoration” in the PDI-Disqus (7/2/2012). He described the masses as "the majority of about 70% seething non-income tax paying, corruptible, feeling entitled, mal-educated, gullible, economically challenged, proverty-stricken, one kahig-isang tuka, squatting, mendicants, illegal vending, no values, questionable morality, star-struck, tele-novela watching, tabloid reading, game show addicts, your kasambahays, drivers, security guards, house boys, gardeners, cooks, waiters, bakers, laborers, truck drivers, taxi drivers, jeepney and tricycle drivers, pedicab drivers, junk pickers, fishermen, miners, loggers, forest dwellers, etc., etc.= MASSES." For him, the vote of the masses are "really responsible for putting all these maggots, vermin, school drop-outs, two bit actors, dynasties, families whose business is to raid the government coffers, good for nothing politicians into positions of power.” Read the rest of his comment below which I reproduce for easier reference. Thank you. – jsalvador.]

--oOo--

I would rather worship the moon which provides light during the night than the far away beauty of Venus.

Well, this is not actually a reply against your [moonworshipper] position but a rejoinder to carpediem123's comment.

I would not be so quick to judge the intelligence, or lack of it, of the masses. In 2004, the study conducted by the Institute of Philippine Culture of theAteneo de Manila University revealed that the poor vote is a thinking vote.
It said:

THE POOR, who make up the bulk of Filipino voters, have been blamed for the sorry state of electoral politics and the low level of election discourse. Pundits, analysts, and media commentators say that because of poverty, many voters are vulnerable to patronage, vote buying, and simplistic messages. The masa vote is popularly perceived to be dumb, unthinking, and prone to manipulation. 

But the results of 16 focus-group discussions conducted by the Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) of the Ateneo de Manila University shatter these stereotypes. Instead, the discussions, which were held in urban and rural poor communities in various parts of the country in March and April, show that the poor vote is a thinking vote.  

I really find the complaint of carpediem123 a legitimate one but it is discriminating to the masses as it further pushed the poor outside the periphery of our national life. The poor are already subjugated, abandoned, exploited, and marginalized Filipino people. 

If we just stop and listen for a while, we will hear the poor saying, "PINOY din po ako... TAO din po ako."

--oOo--

Having said about the poor as pinoy at tao din, I agree with carpediem123's diagnosis of Philippine politics: it is seriously ill; it is dysfunctional.

Carpediem123 aptly asked: "With this reality, do you ever wonder why despite your protestations, vile and shouts against the wind your opinions do not count for anything? As long as the above demographics percentage share doesn't improve in favor of the middle class numbers upgrading from the masses, Erap and his ilk will perpetuate themselves in power."

Trapped in the system which has seemingly no exit, carpediem123 confronted us: "Any suggestions, please. Enough of these complaints. You simply do not have the numbers to directly effect any kind of change." Yes, he's revolting against democracy; our type of democracy! -- "One man = one vote. The bane of democracy." Was he hopeless? I don't think so. He positively said so: "However, we could influence minds. Let us put our collective intellect to focus on how to remedy the ills of this country."

Like carpediem123, we are frustrated, tired and disgusted by the system as well. He proposed to enter into the system, like how the progressive movements like Bayan Muna, Akbayan et al managed to find their way into the system (as if they abandoned their revolutionary agenda; they, too, must survive!), to "take it apart and reshape it from the inside. Use their bag of tricks against them."

His attacked against politicians who are shaped by the intellectuals (see my comment on intellectuals as idea workers affecting public opinion to reshape public policy) sharply hit the heart of the problem: “Let the politician who still have an iota of nationalism left in him to make it a habit to refer to this publication for solutions coming directly from the horses' mouths instead of their cordon sanitaire whose advice and opinions are laced with venom and vested interests. Hopefully, they would get inspired, stay on the straight path and narrow and do the right things.”

After all, these intellectuals, these journalists will continue to create ideas devoid of any sense of public accountability (an idea strongly forwarded by Thomas Sowell in “Intellectuals and Society”), carpediem123 explained “These columnists; they will continue to spew out their two cents worth all the time without any real solutions. They need to do this. This is their source of living. And it is easier to criticize than to offer any solutions. Otherwise, they wouldn't last a month and run out of ideas.”

The cry of protest of Carpediem123, in my mind, echoes our collective aspiration for real change in our society, particularly in addressing the seemingly unbridgeable gulf between the rich and the poor, in promoting greater transparency and accountability in governance. The Aquino Administration may have captured our dream and aspirations as a people in his campaign slogan “Kung walang corrupt walang mahirap” but this slogan should not remain as a slogan for life; it must guide the leaders of our nation to shape our social reality without discrimination, without exemption. The fight against corruption must not be selective because selective justice is no justice at all.