Yesterday was the commemoration of the coup against the late Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino. The coup happened on December 1, 1989, so it would be 30 years ago last 2019, and 32 years ago yesterday. I decided to write on this matter to finally show why PRESIDENTIALISM sucks. The irony is that the name of Cory was mentioned in the film Ang Tanging Ina N'yong Lahat - a film that showed the perils of the presidential system. The film showed why it's no joke to run a nation when Leni Loud Robredo ahem Ina Montecillo became the president and screwed things up. Cory was also made to run just because she was the widow of the late Ninoy A. Aquino - a death whose murderer may still remain a mystery. Some still insist that the dictator, the late Ferdinand E. Marcos, had nothing to do with Ninoy's death, and it was masterminded by the late Danding Cojuangco.
Until now, some people say to cut it some slack because Cory was just an inexperienced housewife. The point is it's because she's an inexperienced housewife that made her UNQUALIFIED to lead the nation to start with. One can argue that the EDSA Revolution of 1986 couldn't be possible without her. However, she was a national SYMBOL of unity at that time. She didn't mastermind EDSA or even architect it at all. In short, she should've remained SYMBOLIC instead of actually calling the shots as the nation's leader. The "motherhood approach" doesn't always work especially when one doesn't have any political experience. Yet, the presidential system even ALLOWED IT to start with. Overthrowing the Marcos Years was a good thing. However, the replacement was a band-aid solution to a battered country. Why should a widow with no political experience even lead the nation? At least, Vice President Leni Loud Robredo was a congresswoman before she became vice president!
This reminds me of an article on CoRRECT Movement that mentioned this about Cory:
Our history has examples of leaders whose leadership fell in either or head of government type and the shortcomings they had that are brought about by having to play both parts. Corazon Aquino is a notable example of someone who fit more in the head of state role as she was elected by a popular sentiment against a dictatorship that long ruled the country. But once she did her role as head of government, she alienated many people who once supported her. Her playing the role as a head of government diminished her importance as a unifying figure in those times, triggering effects that are still being felt today.
Cory herself was fitter to play a role similar to that of Hamilah Yacob of Singapore. Yacob is Singapore's president and unifying figure while Lee Hsien Loong serves as Singapore's actual leader or prime minister. A real parliament with a president doesn't have the president pick up the prime minister (such as Marcos picking Cesar Virata) and the president remains a national symbol of unity. Cory should've remained a national symbol of unity. Cory's inexperience led to disastrous results and the Philippines didn't recover. True, businesses were returned to the rightful owners. However, Cory had no idea how to truly revitalize the economy either. The foundations were weak and couldn't recover from the ill effects of the Marcos Years.
The coup of 1989 would've probably been handled much better in a parliamentary system. Maybe, the chances of it happening would be very slim because Cory herself wouldn't have acted as the chief executive of the nation. Cory would be sent to other countries as the chief representative of the Filipino people. Maybe, Fidel V. Ramos would've acted as prime minister, the late Noynoy Aquino would've probably been trained as a member of the Philippine Parliament (which may avoid a lot of mistakes he made later in his term), and the whole country would've had better politics. Maybe, Noynoy would've probably been a little more careful in handling the events. A parliamentary system may have also blacklisted Gringo Honasan from politics too. The same system may have also blacklisted Antonio Trillanes IV from politics too if ever he attempted to do the Oakwood Mutiny under a parliamentary system.
Yet, people are still stuck with the mentality of "Change the system! Not the people!" even after the bloody coup that placed Cory's life in danger. The argument that says nothing is wrong with the constitution but just the people is very self-defeating. The reason is if nothing was wrong with the constitution then why do the same idiots rule over and over AGAIN? Joseph "Erap" Estrada was able to run in 2010 again even after his impeachment trial. Ramon "Bong" Revilla Jr. just danced budots and WON in the senatorial slot. Some people wanted Kris Aquino to run for office because her brother Noynoy died too soon. Fortunately, Kris isn't running for office otherwise we may have more mayhem. Just think if Kris ran either as president or vice president - it'd be disastrous. Fortunately, Antonio Trillanes IV is still alive or Arlene Orejana-Trillanes may become the newest grieving widow to run against Bobong Marcos. The same cycle goes on and on allowing STUPID PEOPLE to run. Still saying nothing is wrong with the system? Is the system only a matter of who's in charge? Nope, the system goes beyond who's in charge to the FORM OF GOVERNANCE itself.
Comments
Post a Comment