By its nature, a democracy presupposes even encourages differences of opinion in a framework of rules. Indeed, at the heart of democracy is the individual’s freedom to say and do what he or she thinks is good and right for the country, but always within the rule of law. Some political pundits even consider this freedom as the heart of democracy, more important than elections itself. Political parties ideally (as in a Parliament) are formed by like-minded individuals who want to be a more effective pressure group and unite to push a party program. Therefore, a candidate who calls for the entire nation to unite for the sake of uniting without any program of government does not understand the mechanics of political life in a democracy especially during the run-up to elections. Competing parties define political life. But what if the candidate does not understand this democratic concept of difference and competition inherent in elections? The call for unity becomes a mere empty word.
What FPJ said in Tacloban about tama na ang kalokohan at kahit anung mangyari, kung sino ang manalo, tama na ang hidwaan, magkaisa at magtulungan tayo ranks among the more foolish things said in this campaign. He may be unaware that he is for destroying democratic governance in the country. I am especially anxious because Poe’s campaign is managed by prominent persons from the Marcos regime whose sense of ‘unity’ is well known. We must ask ourselves (not this candidate because he obviously does not understand what he is talking about) if the ‘unity’ represented by dictatorship or monolithic government is what they are pushing for.
Let me give you an example of democratic discourse. Although independent senatorial candidate, Heherson Alvarez, is a good friend of mine and I will vote for him, I disagree with his views on the SC ruling on FPJ. The actor’s citizenship was not in question. What was, was whether he was natural-born. If there is anyone and anything to blame it is the ambiguous text of the Constitution. The requirement is an anachronism in this day and age when there are millions of Filipinos all over the world, some of whom can run this country better but would probably not be natural born. But the Court has spoken, so be it. It is important however that those who see the ruling differently have as much right to express their views even if they differ from those who concur.
Alvarez praised the learned justices but it does not follow that "the decision …showed how a majority of the magistrates felt strongly for a man who has committed his life to helping shape the Filipino identity". I am sorry, Sonny, but I strongly disagree that FPJ represents Filipino identity. He may be a Filipino sa puso’t diwa to some Filipinos who idolize him in movie roles. But an actor’s movie identity cannot represent the Filipino identity and certainly does not fulfill the qualities for presidency. Indeed I am sorry that the Supreme Court ruled "from a wider perspective, not limited by the narrow confines of the law". It did not help push our understanding of a society ruled by law which is what democracy is all about. Those who hail the decision say it "effectively averted what could have been a bloody upheaval" had the controversy remained unresolved.’ That is also called blackmail.
Paradoxically, the SC ruling may have strengthened his strongest rival, President GMA, who has been accused as behind the move to disqualify him or that she apppointed justices who will have no mind of their own because they were her appointees. Alvarez has his differences with Lakas-CMD and I commiserate with him but I regret that he has had to praise FPJ in hailing the SC ruling and ask the petitioners not to file any motion for reconsideration. I respect the SC ruling but that does not necessarily mean I agree with it or that others should be prevented from following the procedure of redress given by law in a democracy.
Leisure farms. At JDV’s dinner in honor of Dr. Norbert Lammert, vice president of the German Parliament, I happened to sit near Sec. ‘Cito’ Lorenzo. I seized the chance to tell him how leisure farms could be used to preserve farmland. Rep. Herminio Teves, chairman of the House committee on globalization warned the country’s food supply is threatened by the rapid decline of farms and says we have lost 790,000 hectares of farms in 11 years. Our food security is in danger. It is not just about other developments encroaching on farmlands. Farmers are abandoning their farms because their children prefer the city for office jobs. There are no feeder roads from farm to market like in Thailand or enough government subsidy to encourage farming. Paradoxically, it is the rich and the middle class who may be able to revive interest in farming. I recently visited Leisure Farms in Batangas and asked barangay officials what they think of these farms that have become a hobby for cityfolk. They welcomed the development because these ‘cityfolk’ only farm during week-ends and at times even lose interest in the farm in time but wanted anyway to think that they had left the madding crowd and gone back to nature. Ultimately, the real farmers take care of the leisure farms providing employment. The produce from these farms, mostly organic vegetables, cannot have enough markets because of the huge demand for organic vegetables they grow.
Here I thought was a likely, if unorthodox solution for disappearing farms. Partnerships are enhanced between real and hobby farmers and consequently we might be able to produce more food. There should be incentives to developers of leisure farms depending on how many farmers they employ and how much produce.An agricultural school is planned next to the market in the development, where the farmers can learn techniques from abroad. If we are to compete with foreign imports, we must be creative. Partnership between real and hobby farmers is one way.