It is not clear what prompted deputy Malacañang spokeswoman Abigail Valte and Comelec spokesman James Jimenez to say what they did. What is clear is that they are bound to regret later what they said. In statements eerily worded alike and quoted in the papers at the same time, both Valte and Jimenez described the 130 filers of certificates of candidacy for president as a sign of a vibrant democracy.
Here is why they can only regret what they said. It is abundantly evident to everyone that not all 130 filers will make it as candidates for president in 2016. Only a few will make it to the printed ballot as serious enough and fit to be voted upon. A whole lot of the 130 will be deemed unfit for the lofty office they aspire for and dismissed as a nuisance.
But come to think of it, that is a pretty undemocratic thing to do, especially in light of the minimalist requirements demanded by the Constitution which all of the 130 are presumed to have met. And nothing is more contradictory than to praise the emergence of a bumper crop of 130 Filipinos aspiring to become president as a sign of a vibrant democracy, and yet unceremoniously kick the bulk of them out later for being a bunch of crazies.
Aside from being undemocratic and contradictory, it is also cruel to accept just about anybody with wide open arms if there is no real intention to keep all of them. Why go through the process of accepting people that you very well know you are eventually going to drop later? If the intention of the charade is to maintain the illusion of a vibrant democracy, as what Valte and Jimenez are harping about, why must it be at the expense of these people?
These people may seem like a bunch of crazies to many, but they are still just as human as everybody. They are just a little less lucky in the lottery of life. But for the grace of God they could have been Valte and Jimenez, or for that matter each and everyone of the serious contenders who, because of the accidents of their births, have seemingly been preordained to be favored with inclusion in the official ballots.
For democracy to be vibrant, a society must be able to practice it in the fullness of all its hallowed principles. Otherwise, if there are limitations imposed on supposedly democratic processes, then such democratic processes become moribund exercises. Democracy is not something to be merely described. It has to be actually experienced.
Democracy cannot vibrant if its principles are selectively applied and its benefits are not for everybody's enjoyment. It will only just fall flat on its face in the altar of truth and credibility. Democracy is never the appropriate measure to sift the mad from the sane. It is neither vibrant nor democratic to take all that you have no intention of keeping. And if Valte and Jimenez do not know what they are saying, it is best they do not take the name of democracy in vain.