Doing right only if all others do

It is not hard to see why the country is in the state it is in. Among some of the nation’s leaders, there appears to be a conviction that one does the right thing only if others are doing it too. Otherwise, what is right can go hang. When those in power reflect this cynicism in their personal life and public governance, the rest of the nation – disempowered, unin--fluential, uneducated and at risk – soon learn to spurn ethics, forget justice, ignore the law and generally give up on other notions of human responsibility.

When doing right is premised entirely on others doing it too, a nation stands a good chance of going "otso-otso", of twisting itself into ever tortuous difficulties, and suffering an increasingly irreversible tailspin, "pababa ng pababa"! A nation in crisis cannot recover where leaders do not do what is right because it is right but do it only because other leaders are also already doing it. When leaders wait each other out, nothing good happens to an embattled nation. A state of suspended animation allows for no dynamic resolution.

Presidential debates reflect this sorry situation. All presidentiables publicly endorse the idea that voters ought to know more about their candidates, that elections are vastly improved when people become knowledgeable about what their candidates believe to be the most urgent national concerns and how they propose to tackle them should they be elected. Still, asked to join a common forum where they can precisely help educate their national constituency – a people they are sworn to unreservedly serve, two of the country’s leading presidentiables seem hesitant to participate.

President Arroyo, it appears, will not do the right thing if presidentiable Poe will not do the right thing too. On the other hand, Mr. Poe and his handlers, despite their oft-avowed concern or "malasakit" for the nation and its voters, apparently have second thoughts about the rightness of contributing to their political enlightenment. Effectively, those in the Poe camp would rather have "action" speak for them once their principal is elected. But why cannot speech – their and Mr. Poe’s considered thoughts on principles of governance and platform of government – be shared with the public before election and clearly-aligned action follow upon his election? While there is everything wrong with empty talk, there must be everything right with a serious, pre-election discourse that delineates the actions an elected president intends to take. At the very least, it will enable the citizenry to see how closely an elected president hews to his campaign pronuncements.

Apart from public education, there are other reasons for joining a forum where presidentiables jointly address national issues. Unless one is so arrogant as to think that s/he has an absolute monopoly on wisdom regarding the governance of Filipinos in crisis, a presidentiable must assume that legitimate insights and perhaps even truly commendable programs/projects could also come from his/her colleagues. Only the most egomanical swellhead will refuse this possibility. Presidentiables with this psychological handicap have no credible claim to being able to unify a highly divided society. Presidential leadrship is not built on an obscene trinity of I, Myself and Me. Effective presidents know how to trust others and are able to inspire others to undertake productive collaborative work.

On the other hand, it is not good for a presidentiable to avoid collegial discourse and be suspected of gross ignorance about national concerns and the effective management of the nation’s polity, economy and general society. Unless, of course, one is truly ignorant and should not have involved oneself in presidential elections in the first place. (A university president is fond of telling colleagues about how, in an international conference, a Filipino participant was conspicuously quiet for two days running. He had not said anything, had not contributed anything to a mostly spirited discussion of regional security issues. In the third and final day of the conference, the university president advised him to say something because people were beginning to suspect that he knew nothing about the subject and should not have been in the conference at all. The participant, in cold sweat, told his president: "Sir, so far they only suspect that I am an idiot and still enjoy some benefit of the doubt. If I open my mouth, I will forfeit even that.")

In a forthcoming forum, the Philippine Political Science Association (PPSA), the Philippine Legislative Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD) and Pulse Asia, supported by ABS-CBN, will engage presidentiables in a campaign to help educate the public on national concerns and relevant electoral issues. While billed as a presidential debate, the exercise will studiously avoid heated discussions. The main concern will be to generate enough illumination for a public mostly in the dark about the genuine substance of democratic governance and popular elections. Three presidentiables have already confirmed their appearance to date.

The forum organizers remain optimistic about all presidentiables attending. This will indicate that among those who seek the country’s highest office, a consensus to do what is right because it is right obtains. It is, to repeat the obvious, right for presidentiables to try and facilitate an intelligent vote, to participate in forums where their thoughts and programs on national governance are ventilated and intelligently discussed by peers and, ultimately, by a grateful constituency – the nation’s voters.

Five seats will be reserved for the contending presidentiables. All of them hopefully will be occupied by the time the forum starts. It would be sad if any of these seats remained vacant throughout the forum. The national public might then be tempted to label empty seats, in bold letters no less: ARROGANT or IGNORANT. In all cases, these conspicuously unfilled seats might be viewed by the public as indicative of the lack of serious concern or malasakit by politicians who chase after votes but will not assist in educating voters.

Such presidentiables are probably not deserving of this nation’s presidency.