The greater likelihood is that our politics will become even more polarized in the coming period. This will put our institutions – many of them of flawed design – under great stress.
There are many factors driving the polarization.
Economic distress is real. It will become even more pronounced as the second round effects of this crisis are felt. As the pain becomes more unbearable, people will feel that our government has failed us. That our political elite betrayed us.
There is enough basis for feeling this way. In the first quarter, government infra spending was only half of what was programmed. This is the main reason why our GDP growth plunged lower than expectation.
The slowdown is so sharp, it generates its own momentum. Forecasters are now telling us growth in the second quarter will be even more disappointing. The inertia could push us into recession.
In our dynamic region, we have become the worst performer because of our many vulnerabilities. Our debt load adds to the pressure for our currency to depreciate. One analysts now expects the peso to fall to $1:P65.
We are a country unable to feed itself. Reliance on food imports intensifies inflationary pressures. The currency’s depreciation sharpens food inflation. We are in a vicious cycle.
It is just a matter of time before the economic pain begins to express itself in the reality of politics. The political expression of economic despair will not always be rational. Most frequently, it expresses in populist distortions of possible futures. This is the peril of it all.
Populist movements are like zombies. They cannot be stopped by reasonable debate. They demand policy changes that are ultimately destructive. They tend to rally around cult figures.
The second factor pushing polarization is the proximity of the next presidential elections. The inherently bi-factional character of our local politics pushes bifurcation to the very top. Invariably, our entire political landscape is bound to be delineated between “administration” and “opposition.”
The alignments follow personal networks. Insiders align with pro-administration forces. Their rivals find a way to be accredited with the “opposition” – whoever visibly leads it. This produces the strangest bedfellows. Who would have imagined a few years ago that politicians of the Liberal Party and the Left would be so tightly aligned with the Marcos-led faction.
The last time electoral contestations followed ideological line in this country was when opinion was divided a century ago between those who wanted independence and those who wanted us to be incorporated into the United States.
Those who wanted independence prevailed. We chose a country “run like hell by Filipinos.” Had they lived through the turbulence of the past few decades, many of those who voted for independence might have regretted their choice.
The rallying points for the bifurcation going on, strangely, are the running mates in the last presidential election: Bongbong Marcos and Sara Duterte. Ironically, too, they sold themselves as the “UniTeam” – promising to be the antidote to the nation’s fragmentation.
The Marcos faction began working early, building up its designated successor to ensure regime perpetuation. The flood control scandal blew out the designated successor. Bongbong Marcos’ uninspiring leadership cut into his political capital. Today, his endorsement is like a kiss of death.
Sara, meanwhile, has been politically attractive to a large section of voters. All vice presidents do, early in incumbency. Recall Estrada under Ramos or Binay under Aquino III. Our voters tend to assume that the vice president would succeed the sitting president. That assumption is moderated over time.
As a potentially strong candidate, however, Sara posed a problem for those in the Marcos faction seeking perpetuation in power. The moved against her early enough in what can only be described as a political assassination. Her enemies tried ousting her last year, but the Supreme Court voided the impeachment instrument.
Today, another impeachment complaint has been forwarded and the Senate has formally convened as an impeachment court. Her enemies think they have found the antidote to her superior survey numbers: convict her of some contrived high crime and ban her from holding public office. This way, she will cease to be an electoral problem – or so the pro-Marcos forces hope.
The prosecutors of the House might have to do something spectacular, like levitating on the Senate floor. Those who want Sara politically dead do not seem to have the numbers in the impeachment court.
The impeachment saga may have difficulty holding public attention captive. It is like running an old movie and expect audiences to turn up excitedly. This will be a challenge.
At the moment, public attention (at least of those who have not yet given up on our politics) is focused on the Senate. The chamber has become the fulcrum of the polarization that is happening.
For as long as the coups and counter-coups in the Senate keep the public entertained, we might be able to avert the spread of polarization into other uncontrollable arenas. The impeachment of Sara Duterte and the probable arrest of a handful of senators linked to the infra scandal brings immense pressure on the senators.
Some anticipate more coups and countercoups to happen – unless tribal allegiances harden. The Senate is heir to this sort of problem. It is an institutional anomaly that the current crop of senators are seeking to perpetuate by way of a luxurious new office building.