Don't expect our Leaders to be Moral--their very natures prevent them from being so

“And it should be realised that taking the initiative in introducing a new form of government is very difficult and dangerous, and unlikely to succeed. The reason is that all those who profit from the old order will be opposed to the innovator, whereas all those who might benefit from the new order are, at best, tepid supporters of him. This lukewarmness arises partly from the sceptical temper of men, who do not really believe in new things unless they have been seen to work well.”

---Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, 1562

Now I know why we feel frustrated and very sad and depressed---we expect our Politicians to show decency, when the very nature of politics is actually a negation of decency. 

As what the great Niccolo Machiavelli will tell you--there's no morality in politics, only the proper upkeep of power. If we expect our leaders to be moral, we actually expect our priests to marry.

The affairs of the state are temporal, human. Morality or ethics are more of ethereal, spiritual. Politics is all about Power, not ethics. There is even no aesthetics when it comes to Power. There is only permanent PERSONAL interests.

If we expect and PRAY that Mrs. Arroyo lifts martial law out of decency or even morality, then, we will always fail. When we pray for Mrs. Arroyo to meet God when she cheated last 2004 elections, we also failed.

Mrs. Arroyo and her fellow gangsters in government do not understand where we are coming from. We are coming from a position where morality/ethics and politics should mix when they are coming from a more realistic position that these values are antipathetic.

The language which Mrs. Arroyo knows is the mathematics of Power. One cannot defeat her by using Gandhian tactics of non-violence---these methods or tactics are useless and a waste of time. Nor if we use the English language where our opponent uses a complex Parson's language, we are being stupid.  In fact, pacific methods are sure to fail against a true blue practitioner of the Machievallian arts.

And we will always be frustrated because we always subscribe to the elitist method or what I call "paradigm of pseudo-counters". There is no victory thru the use of peaceful methods. In fact, I consider now the model of EDSA as a failed experiment, even a pseudo, Faust-ian strategy that was fostered as a counter-argument against the most effective method for change---which is Revolution.

EDSA uno and dos were not revolutions--they were accommodations. The more we hope to replicate this model, the more frustration we get because this model is simply not attuned with the times.

The times call for violent means; this is an era where the fires of passions and hatred must burn the very foundations of a discrepit and violent regime, whose language we surely do not and will never understand.

When we prepare a Priest to lead the revolt, we are venturing into defeat. When we prepare a Moralist to lead us towards revolution, we are surely going to the pits.

Yet, when a True Leader emerges, when all of those posturing to be one negates their very existence by themselves or thru the efforts of their very supporters, then, expect victory. For no one succeeds in a Machiavellian war except a Niccolo. And Sun Tzu agrees.

Puno For President---designed to fool and fail?

Chief Justice Reynato Puno's call for a moral revolution smacks of a veiled attempt by traditional forces to present an anti-thetical platform against rising public perception of systems failure. It is an attempt to re-shift the focus, from systems change to personality change. Conservative forces who are benefitting from this dysfunctional system are the primary oppositors of real systemic change through revolt, and these forces are moving to perpetuate the democratic way of change through the ballot.

There is a conscious campaign by conservative forces to disabuse the minds of the public, shifting the discourse from systems failure to personality failure, so as to stem the tide of rising dissent. This moralist call also shows how conservative forces are trying to control the developing counter-culture that threatens their very lives and power under the present dispensation. This counter-counter reflects the underbelly of dissent against the prevailing system, since people are now arriving at the conclusive presumption that the ballot is an ineffectual means for change.

The pragmatist in Puno knows that his victory as president is a long shot. Nobody has ever won in a campaign centered on a moral platform. First, people are unconvinced that it's the morals really of those in power which should be blamed for this prevailing fiasco. I know this deviates from my previous presumption and calls also for a "moral revolt", but my treatise is more on the intellectual revolt rather than a moral revolt.

Second, on whose moral code would we base Puno's moral platform? Obviously, his platform would be based on Pacheco's religious biases, which has no proven effectiveness in governance. What if this moral platform conflicts with, say, the Islamic code? How would Puno justify the use of this moral and ethical base platform in actually managing government? Surely, given the fact that morals are culturally rooted, running such a campaign attracts attribution, confusion and utter destruction of values and norms beneath or antithetical to the platform? This will surely attract opposition and worst, serious dissent which could deepen the fissures of disunity among the Filipino people.

Lastly, running under the moral platform shows a possible weaker governance style than the present one. Politics is not for the faint hearted nor the benevolent heart. Bureaucracy is full of bullshit and opportunists. What would Puno do if someone stole billions of pesos, like what Bolante reportedly did? Will he impose the death penalty? Obviously not, since, under a moralist government, it is more humane to allow one person to live and capital punishment is not considered.

Puno should not allow himself to be used by these pseudo change agents and by these conservative forces whose interests are now being threatened by the entry of New Money. The shift of wealth, from land resources to non-land and rent, are threatening the very existence of the old elites. Propping up Puno is a serious last ditch effort at finding solutions to the slowly rising influence of New Money.