The Rise of Fascism under Duterte

THE RISE OF FASCISM UNDER DUTERTE

Randy David offers an incisive explanation for the rise of fascism in the Philippines under Duterte. I believe account of the disenchantment of the Philippine electorate with liberal democracy is accurate. Unfortunately, his analysis also underscores the ideological ignorance of the electorate, in particular, about democratic values and principles, the salutary economic effects of genuine democratic systems, and the deleterious ramifications of authoritarian rule, which in Duterte’s case is not simply fascist but an especially thickheaded variety.

David’s account of “reactionary populism” also applies to the rise of Adolph Hitler.

‘OTHERING’ AND REACTIONARY POPULISM

By: Randy David - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:07 AM October 06, 2019

…From letters and well-meaning comments I receive from the overseas Filipino community, I get the sense that many of them have bought into the idea that the times are different, and that the persistent problems we face call for urgent solutions that cannot be provided by conventional leaders.

In the advanced countries where they work, they readily assume the righteous attitude of the dominant population that feels besieged by the influx of immigrants and refugees from war-torn societies. They view themselves as hardworking and peace-loving migrants who have made immense contributions to their host country — in contrast to the new immigrants who freeload on the generous social services of their adopted country.

This mindset — sometimes referred to as “othering” — easily becomes a generalized moralistic worldview that then is applied to large segments of Filipinos back home who seem unable to rise from their poverty. Some of them may even be their relatives, who, unable to finish school, spend their time hanging around with the same kind of people. Before long, they get involved in drugs, first as users, then as pushers. Soon, they graduate to more serious crimes. They are the “others” — who, as far as this worldview is concerned, are beyond reform. The threat they pose cannot be dealt with in the usual way. The kind of leadership that is required must have the willfulness to carry out drastic “final” solutions.

This is the stuff of populism, more specifically of reactionary populism.

An early book on populism by the British political scientist Margaret Canovan describes populism as “an appeal to the people which deliberately opens up the embarrassing gap between ‘the people’ and their supposedly democratic and representative elite by stressing popular values that conflict with those of the elite: typically, it involves a clash between reactionary, authoritarian, racist or chauvinist views at the grassroots, and the progressive, liberal, tolerant cosmopolitanism characteristic of the elite.”

Reactionary populism seeks to avenge this elite betrayal through a leader, typically an outsider to the political establishment, who personifies — and not merely represents — the collective resentment of the downtrodden, the exploited, the oppressed and the forgotten.

Typically, a charismatic strongman rides on the widespread disenchantment with conventional politicians and, indeed, with politics itself, and offers himself as the savior, redeemer, the punisher, the protector of the people or, in President Duterte’s own memorable rhetoric, “the nation’s last card.”

The strongman affirms and gives expression to the people’s darkest thoughts and inclinations. As one American observer, referring to Donald Trump, aptly put it, populist politics “speaks to our collective id.”

Unlike conventional politicians, the political outsiders who ascend to power via the route of reactionary populism are not subject to the same expectations and criteria by which the performance of elected officials is conventionally measured. None of them feels obliged to present a coherent program of government. Rather than viewed as a failing, their manifest disregard of the basic rules of modern governance is treated as a necessary counterpoint to the phlegmatic intellectualism of the modern politician.

As in our experience with Mr. Duterte, there is almost no reliable metric available by which we can assess the strongman’s performance, except by the brutality and contempt with which he deals with the perceived enemies of the people. It is almost as if, given the magnitude of the task before him, the people are prepared to grant him unlimited leeway, rather than admit to the grave mistake of having made him president. Total trust is what the strongman demands from those who have chosen him to lead the nation, the kind that people blindly give when, faced with complexity, they believe there is no alternative.

public.lives@gmail.com

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/124427/othering-and-reactionary-populism#ixzz6VRV18KGS

THE D DECADE

By: Michael L. Tan - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 04:08 AM December 27, 2019

…The Oxford English Dictionary has the most apt definition of populism — as a “political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel their concerns are disregarded by the established elite groups.”

The populist regimes today are different from the authoritarian regimes of the 1970s (Ferdinand Marcos and martial law being one of them). Those of the last century were almost always very right-wing and aligned with the United States. In the last decade, we have seen populist regimes that are not always easy to define ideologically.

The regimes do share some common values, mainly intolerance and impunity, with populist regimes creating scapegoats to feed into social discontent and distrust. In the West, the scapegoats have been migrants, refugees, Muslims. In the Philippines, this has been mainly through the demonization of “drug addicts” and the red-tagging of anyone who dares to hold dissenting views. Populist leaders sometimes end up more murderous than the dictators of the 1970s by explicitly calling for armed responses.

Today’s populists continue to use the guns, but have expanded their arsenals by weaponizing modern (mis)information technologies, social media in particular, to create fake news, to slander enemies, and to stoke sensationalism, mistrust and anger.

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/126148/the-d-decade#ixzz6bPANWuBB

ACTIVATING THE RULE OF LAW   

By: Randy David - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 04:50 AM February 16, 2020

…The Duterte style appears to be a blend of at least two things. The first is a unique way of engaging audiences that combines tough talk with crass humor, and self-righteous moralizing with an oversimplified view of the world. And, the second is an unfaltering will to act that eschews reasoned discussion of any issue.

This style seems to serve him well regardless of the issue. It could be the jailing of Sen. Leila de Lima, the cancellation of the Inquirer owners’ contract of lease on a government-owned property, the cancellation of the “onerous” contracts of the water companies, the renewal of the franchise of the ABS-CBN broadcasting network, the withdrawal of the country’s membership in the International Criminal Court, the abrogation of the Visiting Forces Agreement, or the so-called pivot to China and the concomitant refusal to assert the favorable arbitral tribunal ruling on the West Philippine Sea. Or, to take a more recent instance, the issue could be the fairness and wisdom of imposing a travel ban to and from China in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak.

Whatever reasons he gives for his decisions, they rarely rise above his personal feelings or grudges. He shows no patience for nuanced arguments or for the need for careful study by experts. He delights in being able to interrupt all debate by the mere issuance of a decision, leaving his spokespersons and members of his Cabinet to either soften the blow or to find a legal and nonpersonal justification for the decision.

As the surveys show, this style of governance appears to work most of the time. The public doesn’t seem to care about the issues. Sometimes, as in the case of the public’s attitude toward China, the popular view may even be at odds with the President’s own thinking. Yet, the people continue to believe in him, to hang on to his every word, to laugh at his jokes even when they are improper, and to break into applause whenever he rants against the “enemies” of the people.

…Like other populist politicians in the world today, Mr. Duterte speaks to the people’s deepest unexamined resentments. Thus, even when they can’t identify with the undisguisedly personal reasons he gives for his actions, they find a way to portray these actions as necessary. In this, they are not very different from Solicitor General Jose Calida — ever prepared to flash the most improbable moral justification or legal norm in order to give the boss’ wishes a veneer of constitutionality and correctness. 

[public.lives@gmail.com]

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/127411/activating-the-rule-of-law#ixzz6ip4BzMcW

“The law used to perpetrate crime and to sanction impunity for crime is the misrule of law.”

“Propaganda is the gruel eaten by prisoners of the state.”

“The right to information is a necessary check against the abuse of power. It is an essential means whereby the oppressed seek, pursue, and obtain redress for just grievances.”

“You can’t have fake news and democracy, too.”

Link: https://poetryofgonzalinhodacosta.blogspot.com/2018/07/politics.html

“DUTERTE LEGACY”

The real Duterte legacy is impunity, misogyny, the collapse of institutions, the breakdown of the rule of law, the loss of our territory and independence to China, and the death of thousands of Filipinos in his drug war. Are these in the exhibit?

cathy a. alvarez, @katipunera

Philippine Daily Inquirer (January 20, 2020)

The “DUTERTE Legacy” project institutionalizes fake news in the Phl. It has made fake news writing part of official governance. BEFORE, they were like thieves in the night, who posted and spread fake news. Now, they do it openly and w/o moral compunction.

Philip Lustre, Jr., @IpeLustre

Philippine Daily Inquirer (January 22, 2020)

“Duterte legacy”—spoken too soon, I’d say. He’s far from finished yet.