Today’s column title does not refer to a building or a bridge, although there is a serious need for relational bridges among some political candidates, especially those aspiring for the presidency. Unlike a Senate seat where there are 12 chances of winning, there can only be one president and one vice president.
Truth be told, half of those running are either “political point shavers” or “lead spreaders” whose candidacy will only result in taking away much needed votes from the real or serious contenders. The only benefit to the “political point shavers” or “spreaders” is that they all walk away with cash prizes and added public recognition as a “ran once” or “has been.”
Meanwhile, several small, recently revived political parties have been busy getting together, forming alliances and making a big show of their new found unity tickets, etc. The most vocal and visible among these are the pro-Marcos/Duterte groups, while their rivals have politely stayed on the sidelines quietly observing – or so it seems.
I recently found out from a well-established land developer with friends in Team Pacquiao that there are still continuing talks among representatives of Vice President Leni Robredo and Senator Manny Pacquiao on how to hammer out an alliance that makes everybody happy. My source claims that it has been an almost impossible task, given how the representatives cannot think outside the box and understandably don’t want to be the one suggesting to their candidate to give way to the other or compromise. That for them would be defeatist if not treason.
The businessman told me that the wheels of the deal are so stuck that a suggestion has been made for Vice President Leni Robredo and Senator Manny Pacquiao to simply meet up just by themselves. The view is that if Robredo and Pacquiao relied mainly on their handlers, both camps will only be united in losing the elections because their handlers are too political and anchored with pride. On the other hand, people on the sideline believe that VP Leni and Sen. Pacquiao are such polite and decent individuals that respect would be the cornerstone of their F2F consultation.
As I listened to the businessman, I was reminded of the Bible verse in the book of Luke that, to me, speaks of the Big Picture, the problem with short sightedness and failing to appreciate long-term benefits in exchange for momentary sacrifices.
First and foremost, I don’t agree with “lawyering up” or sending in negotiators if it is “my” political future or reputation which is at stake. Lawyers and tacticians give assessment, advise, strategies but in the end one must, out of respect and recognition of their stature, face a potential ally or adversary, as the case might be. But even before doing that, wisdom dictates that the main player or leader makes a full accounting, studies the cost and what he or she is willing to “pay” to achieve the goal or win the battle.
“For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down and study the cost, whether he has enough to finish it? Lest, after he has laid the foundation and is not able to finish it, and all who pass by seeing it begin to mock him, saying, ‘This man began to build, and was not able to finish.’ Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king, Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is notable, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.” Luke 28:28-33.
Perhaps what these parties should collectively engage in is “imagineering” or visualization of what life will be if so and so becomes president or any of the other candidates. Anyone joining this political derby would surely have the manpower and data to draw scenarios of how politics will be, what the state of the economy will be and, most important of all, what kind of life will the “losers” have under the thumb of their political enemy.
Will there still be a so-called political plurality if the same players keep winning and stuffing Congress with their pets? What payback or revenge will your opponent or his or her family extract from those who fought and tried to deny “them” the victory? The worst of all, will you be able to put up with the vengeful minions of your opponents once they drop kick you out of the circle of power? Some people fear the humiliation of defeat but lose sight of worst things such as letting the wrong people get the right jobs or win positions in government that will directly impact the very lives of a hundred and ten million Filipinos.
I make this suggestion because it is often said that in order to know what matters most to you, you need to learn what angers you the most. What you hate, that is what you need to fix the most.
After the “imagineering” or “visualization” sessions, comes the logistical comparison in terms of funds, potential votes, network. After they each come up with their pile, they can do an imaginary pile of all of those assets combined together. At this stage they would both come to realize their potential strength and victory together.
In closing, they should read Proverbs 4:9-12 (NIV): “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor: if either of them falls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls and has no one to help them up. Also if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone? Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not easily broken.”
* * *
E-mail: utalk2ctalk@gmail.com