GMA regime endures despite hunger, corruption

By Alejandro Lichauco

ANALYSIS

05/22/2008

Why does the GMA regime endure in spite of hunger and corruption?

This admittedly is the central mystery about this government. The Marcos and Estrada governments preterminated through forcible ouster for reasons that pale in comparison with the reasons this government should preterminate too. It was corruption and dictatorship that brought about the fall of the Marcos government. It was corruption that brought about the fall of the Estrada government. In the case of this government, corruption is largely perceived to be much worse than that attributed to Marcos to Estrada. And as for dictatorship, there isn’t any question either that this government is proving effectively more dictatorial than the dictatorship of Marcos. And yet this government endures.

But there’s something more that’s working against this government which wasn’t a factor at all during either Marcos’ and Estrada’s time. And that is the rising hunger. The Marcos and Estrada governments didn’t have to contend with the fact and problem of hunger. That fact and problem haunt this government and that’s a far more loaded issue than corruption and dictatorship combined. But still government endures and the prospect that it will preterminate is considerably less today than it was yesterday.

There was a time when this government seemed on the verge of being preterminated as the governments of Marcos and Estrada were preterminated. Dissent and dissatisfaction within the military are at an all-time high, certainly much higher than during the time of Marcos and Estrada.

As for dissatisfaction ratings, there isn’t any question that popular dissatisfaction with GMA is much higher than dissatisfaction with Marcos and Estrada.

So, how explain the mystery?

Several factors would seem to explain it, and those who continue to expect and pray for GMA’s political pretermination would do well to consider them.

The most obvious of course is the absence of a rallying alternative. In the case of Marcos, the rallying alternative was Cory. The case of Estrada, there was GMA, then the legitimate successor of Estrada and although she wasn’t anywhere the political magnet that Cory was then, she remained fundamentally acceptable to the public. She was fundamentally acceptable because she wasn’t part of Estrada’s political machine.

Those factors, however, don’t apply now. Noli, the sitting vice president and presumed successor, is hard put getting himself accepted as an alternative because he is considered part and parcel of the GMA machine.

If there isn’t any alternative within this regime, is there an alternative figure outside the regime around whom the nation would rally or at least consider fundamentally acceptable?

The question boils down to the leadership of the opposition. The accepted leader, of course, is Erap and he seemingly commands the support of a significant segment of the masses; at least far more significant than that commanded by any figure in the opposition. Erap’s problem, however, is that he hasn’t so far managed to win over a significant segment of the middle and upper class which, of course, includes the nation’s intellectuals, opinion makers and revolutionary leaders.

While that class is numerically insignificant, it holds the levers of political power. It is also from that class that the leadership of mass political action and even of revolution come. Even communist revolutions are led by members of the middle and upper classes. The leadership of the communist revolution in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam and North Korea came from the middle and upper classes. The leadership of this nation’s communist party, past and present, came from the ranks of the middle and upper classes.

And, more important still, it is to the middle and upper classes that the military establishment looks for political guidance and leadership. Important, because the political pretermination of this regime hinges primarily on the military. Unless the military withdraws its support for GMA, she will endure in the face of all and any issue raised against her. That’s the clear message of Edsa I and Edsa II.

And in the case of both Edsas, the middle and upper classes — or at least a prominent segment of it — had made clear to the military who its acceptable alternative was. Cory in the case of Edsa I and GMA in the case of Edsa II.

And lastly, there was of course the leadership of the church — described by Recto as “the most numerous church.” In both Edsas, there was the towering voice of the late Jaime Cardinal Sin. And the hierarchy was united.

There isn’t any Cardinal Sin today and the hierarchy is divided.

So do you wonder why GMA endures? This nation can starve to death but she will endure unless the required elements for political pretermination emerge and are put together, as they were Edsa I and Edsa II.

Question is, who can do that? Or what would it take to do that? Until that comes about, GMA stays. Unless, of course, the CIA steps in and does her in, either physically or politically as it did Vietnam’s Ngo Dinh Diem and Indonesia’s Sukarno. And our own Elpidio Quirino, Carlos P. Garcia and, of course, Diosdado Macapagal and, eventually, Ferdinand Marcos.

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006