Understanding Duterte extremists

The recent arrest of Duterte and immediate transfer to The Hague for arraignment triggered a flood of main and social media content of almost warlike proportion. The pro-Duterte supporters unleashed strong, vitriolic/toxic news and opinions attacking the arrest of Duterte, including fake news of the manner of the arrest and the extent of support of his followers. On the other side, the BBM administration, countered with the facts and legalities of the arrest detailing the testimonies of the EJK victims and some of the perpetrators. Allied with this group were liberal opposition members who are not really politically pro-BBM, but are for truth and justice to prevail under the rule of law. These are the two polar opposites in the Duterte issue. While it cannot be defined ideologically as the extreme right and the extreme left, the right has the color of autocratic strongman characteristics, while the left has the more liberal views of democracy and human rights.

The recent poll opinion survey by SWS just before/during the arrest of Duterte, showed that 51% of the Filipino respondents agree that Duterte should answer for the EJKs on the war on drugs, 25% disagreed, 14% were undecided, and 10% did not give an opinion. This was further broken into geographic areas with Visayas and Northern Luzon posting 62% and 60%, with Mindanao and NCR at 47% and 44% respectively agreeing.

Significant also is that more respondents in the rural areas at 52% agree, compared to the 48% in the urban areas. The geographic distribution reflects Duterte’s support in some provincial areas especially Mindanao, and the urban/rural divide is a reflection of the media, especially social media access of the urban as against the rural areas.

Historical data in the Philippines and even in other countries, analysis of extremist ideologies validates the SWS survey results. The graph of political ideology tends to take always the shape of a bell curve or a normal distribution. Many measurements and happenings in life when sampled in large numbers actually are distributed with majority in the center and minimally in the extreme edges. I am of the belief that political leanings/ideology are in the same character. The extremists on the left and on the right are in the flatter ends of the curve and would be in the 10% to 20 of the curve, while the 60% are in the middle portion. The moral, ethical, and economic reasons for this behavior are the universal desire of people to live in harmony with each other, and the need for truth and justice to achieve this state in a society. These are also the necessary conditions for society to progress, and be afforded life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The Duterte extremists or Duterte Die Hards (DDH) are actually composed of the 10% DDHs who benefitted from the tenure of Duterte in Davao and in the Philippines in his administration then and now. This includes the trolls. This is understandable and they cannot be faulted as it is primarily a financial reason. The other 15% are more interesting, as they are from all economic classes/brackets of varying educational backgrounds/attainment, and in professions with similar levels of achievements as the general population. While not necessarily dissatisfied with their situation, this group is disenchanted with the present societal condition and believes that they have not been recognized and given the importance/opportunity to take action or do something. They have many of the answers to society’s problems, so they vent it in social media. They have strong beliefs in their ability and command a presence among their peers, but would be hesitant to influence outside their group, or those with contrary views, in a way authoritarian in character.

The objective of extremists on either side of the curve/spectrum is to convince as many of the 60% in the middle to take their side. Strict ideology will be hard to do this, so in most instances it is the broad/wide dissatisfaction of the dominant middle that will move them to either extremes. This is why there are revolutions against despots when tyranny gets excessive, and citizens in some countries trade their freedoms for strongman law and order.

Aristotle had this idea of the “Golden Mean” as the right balance between the excesses of extremes, and it is also in the Buddhist tradition of the “middle way”. There must be something to this concept.