There is an important distinction that has to be drawn in the public mind between the reformists and the oppositionists.
Oppositionists are traditional politicians who want to replace the traditional politicians currently in power. To make that imminent, they maintain a constant rant about anything and everything the “administration” does.
But they rely on the same methods for acquiring power and will very likely fall into the age-old trap of money politics: using the prerogatives of power to repay those who invested in their campaigns. They seek to build their voting bases from among the constituencies controlled by local power brokers. They will cut deals with anyone to build their campaign war chests.
When they do access power, they will deliver to us more of the same. Vested interests will continue to be protected. Patronage politics will continue to thrive. The institutions of governance will likely remain weak.
Groups associated with the political Left impressed us lately with how quickly they have adapted to the methods and thinking of traditional politics. They have become among the best practitioners of everything despicable about traditional politics: the cynical populism that wins short-term popularity points at the expense of policy consistency; the shrewd horse-trading where localities controlled by their mass organizations become bargaining chips to insert their candidates in the tickets of mainstream parties; the use of the pork barrels funds to build networks of patronage and dependence.
The past week saw the leftist groups moving into the mainstream of traditional politics. Bayan Muna inserted Satur Ocampo into the senatorial line-up of the Nacionalista Party, whose standard-bearer is Manny Villar.
For its part, the Akbayan party-list has coalesced with the Mar Roxas-wing of the Liberal Party. Ironically, shortly after that coalition was formally announced, the youth wing of the Liberals — the Kabataang Liberal ng Pilipinas (Kalipi) — rejected the Roxas faction for usurping their party’s name.
By aligning with the conventional parties, the leftist groups have abandoned the constituencies working for genuine reform in the political system.
There are several efforts to keep the agenda of political reform alive against the deluge of traditional politicking. These efforts, citizens’ movements inspired by the ideals of good governance and ethical politics, are working heroically against the tide of traditional politicking.
There is an on-going effort by cause-oriented groups to build a bloc of ten million voters committing themselves to an alternative ticket of new political leaders. This effort is moving apace, using the tremendous power of digital communications technologies to expand their networks.
An impressive reform initiative animated by volunteers sincerely committed to the platform of ethical politics is called Kaya Natin. This reformist effort has projected local leaders such as Gov. Ed Panlilio, Gov. Grace Padaca, Mayor Sonia Lorenzo and Mayor Jessie Robredo as icons of the possibility of a new type of leaders coming to the fore — and rising to the top.
There are parallel efforts launched with the support of private corporations living out their corporate social responsibility. One such effort is Ako Mismo which is trying to build a large base of volunteers committing to responsible citizenship and the quest for ethical leadership.
At the moment, the reformist efforts are diverse and separate. If they could come together at some point in the imminent future, they have the capacity to coalesce into a force powerful enough to alter the terrain of our electoral politics.
Perhaps what the reform initiatives lack at the moment is a charismatic personality, universally trusted and admired, who could catalyze the various grassroots efforts into a single distinct movement with a real chance of liberating our politics from the clutches of the traditional powerbrokers.
Otherwise, we will be condemned to politics-as-usual. The only question the next elections would settle is which faction of the oligarchy takes the reins of state and rule in the old way.
At the moment, the separate reformist initiatives — absent a unifying leader — appear quixotic. They do not have the funds the traditional politicians are now spending with wild abandon to build top-of-mind presence through premature advertising. That top-of-mind presence, bought through massive spending on ads, is blessed by the survey outfits who give the traditional dynamics of popularity politics a sense of inevitability.
Like bettors in a horserace, the usual electoral “investors” consult the surveys much like one would consult an oracle. They shove money into the arms of the popular on the basis of what the polling enterprises produce. Political discourse is trapped by the pollsters. The hegemony of traditional politics is sealed by the traditional campaign contributors.
But the true line of differentiation remains that which pits the practitioners of the traditional politics of popularity and patronage against those heroically fighting for meaningful political reform and ethical leadership.
The next few weeks will be crucial. We will know, by October, if the electoral terrain remains under the control of the old powerbrokers or effectively challenged by those espousing a genuinely alternative way to practice democracy in this country.
If meaningful change is to become a possibility at all, the new forces must coalesce into a strong and credible alternative electoral force. A miracle must happen soon.