The Different Types of Filipino Masses: From EDSA to Duterte
By Oliver Perater
Former President Duterte and Former President Marcos Sr. have something in common, both awakened the Sleeping Political Consciousness of the Filipino Masses. The former, however, made the masses rally behind his back while the latter made the masses rally against him. The Edsa People Power masses were driven by pure disgust for the former president Marcos. It was merely a phenomenon to remove him and his cronies without offering a better replacement. At that time, people seemed willing to allow anyone to lead the country except Marcos and his allies. In fact, it was a chance for the Communist Party of the Philippines to seize political power, but they failed to listen to the sentiments of the masses.
People were never as involved in elections as when Duterte started to participate in national politics. Actively supporting a politician without being paid is a new phenomenon. Filipino participation in elections before Duterte was not as personal as it is now. For too long, people never considered elections to be part of their lives. Other than selling their votes, elections were perceived as having no real impact on the lives of ordinary citizens. People lost trust in the government and its agencies.
After Duterte, people seem to realize that the value of their votes matters and that elections could change their lives. Duterte portrayed himself as a leader willing to kill if necessary, which appears to please a vast number of Filipinos, particularly the poor or those who came from poor families. It seems violence is one of the languages of the poor. It is evident that resorting to violence to settle injustice occurs mostly in poor communities, likely because it is the only form of justice they can afford in a society where justice is commodified and mainly reserved only for those who can buy it.
Duterte does not only speak the language of the poor, but he also managed to portray himself as a leader who could get things done, unlike most other politicians who made empty promises. He became their hero because he is viewed as a representative of the masses who seek justice against those responsible for their poverty and powerlessness. Duterte supporters were, for too long, politically indifferent due to their hopelessness in the rotten Philippine socio-political system. They had a police force, a justice system, government agencies, and successive governments that did not work for them—if not outright worked against their wishes. Then Duterte came: a man who demonstrated to the masses that the government, the police, and all other government agencies can work for the masses with the right leaders. A man who proved that justice can be achieved by ending criminality, drugs, neo-colonial policies, elite political dominance, and corruption for a better and more promising future. Furthermore, he shares the belief of the masses that these socio-political problems cannot be addressed using the same legal means that have never worked for them before.
On the other hand, unlike the Duterte supporters, most of his critics do not necessarily support a particular leader. Instead, they oppose Duterte's style of ruling based on their moral and religious standards. Unlike Duterte supporters, most of his critics do not rally behind any single politician. The similarity between the anti-Duterte people and the Edsa people is that both oppose a certain leader but fail to offer a better alternative, demonstrating a lack of political sustainability. In both instances, these types of masses were willing to accept anybody except the leader they hate.
Like the Edsa masses, some Duterte critics also prefer a kind and gentle woman, believing her to be the best alternative to a violent leader, but that does not necessarily mean she is believed to be the best leader to address the long-standing problems and ills of Philippine society long been endured by the Filipino masses.
Duterte supporters acknowledge and identify social problems that must be addressed, and although the left offers solutions, these are perceived as unfeasible due to several factors, including their inability to win, if they even have any interest in winning at all. These social illnesses are viewed as social cancers that can only be resolved by a decisive and strong leader, which for millions of Filipinos, only Duterte qualifies. For these people, it is not about universal moral standards or religious ideals, nor is it about right and wrong, but about measures that could address their immediate socio-economic troubles.
No question, Duterte’s style is intimidating, violent, unconventional, and outside moral and religious standards. However, for the Filipino masses behind him, this does not matter if it means getting closer to the goals—those morals did not work for them anyway. It is not easy to understand the masses behind Duterte, especially for those who do not belong to their world. They may be either right or wrong, but they undoubtedly have legitimate social concerns that politicians before Duterte failed to address.
- Oliver Perater is a Philosophy Professor at Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology
