Philippine Democracy Online

Prof. Menelito Mansueto is a faculty member in the Department of Philosophy at Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology. He is the author of the book Decolonial Turn in the Philippine South. He has taught at the University of Santo Tomas, Far Eastern University – Diliman, Bohol Island State University, and Colegio de San Juan de Letran in Manila. He holds a master's degree in Philosophy from Holy Name University in Tagbilaran City. He has published several articles in indexed local and international journals and presented papers in Marburg, Germany, and Tokyo, Japan. He is part of the organizing committee for the SES-PUP International Ethics Conference at Waseda University in Tokyo. Prof. Mansueto has also presented research papers at the PHAVISMINDA Conferences, the Social Ethics Society (SES) Conferences, and the International Public Health Ambassador Conference (IPHA). He delivered an important paper during the Mindanao Conference on Public Health held at North...

Book Review: Labastin, B., Mansueto, M. Arambala, G., Bayod, R. & Balotol, R. 2022. Radical Politics in the Philippines. By Layne Hartsell, PhD  The people of the Philippines, throughout the modern age, have been subject to a number of major political, social, and economic events that were disruptive to their sovereignty, self-determination and development; and with severe consequences for the indigenous population today that still lives close to nature. Adding to their history is the planetary matter of ecology in the archipelago of more than 7,000 islands as Filipinos adapt and adjust to the Anthropocene. The politics in the Philippines, during the latter part of the 20th century, were positive concerning the potential for what has become radical democracy as rule from the demos, by, of, and for the People. However, as is argued in the current work, democracy became elitist thereby largely ignoring much of the population. This lack of reach caused turbulence as the 21st centu...

  By Christopher Ryan Maboloc, PhD  GWF Hegel's political philosophy is rooted in finding the rational basis for the existence of the state and man's relationship to social institutions. It can be said that Marx's critique of society is a one sided view of freedom. For instance, the French Revolution ended up destroying its main actors. For Hegel, man realizes the value of his freedom in the state. In his philosophy, the constitution is the expression of the will of citizens.  The state for Hegel is the starting point of individual subjectivity. Every citizen has a right to scrutinize any law based on his or her self consciousness. This idea of subjectivity can be explained in the three ways in which freedom is conceptualized. First, freedom as doing what I want; second, freedom as moral or the individual as the source of principles to govern one's life, and third, freedom as the expression of the ethical life, which means that freedom is fully realized when I participa...

  By Christopher Ryan Maboloc, PhD  In his Foreword to my forthcoming book, Radical Democracy in the Time of Duterte, Wataru Kusaka mentions my provocative approach to writing. I invited him to write the Foreword knowing that he is an objective reader and told him that I will take his thoughts on my work positively. Such constructive criticism is important since I actually got interested in difference politics after reading his Moral Politics in the Philippines. Many times, my critics have attacked my ideas, and sometimes my person on social media. I welcome such type of antagonism, knowing that our difference in opinion only proves the contested nature of politics in the country. Kusaka explains that my radical democracy thesis offers a way of presenting the underrepresented voices or narrative in Philippine history and politics, although he also disagrees with me on key issues. Benjiemen Labastin's article, "Two Faces of Dutertismo, Two Visions of Democracy in the Philippine...

By Christopher Ryan Maboloc, PhD  Jonathan Haidt explains that our political leanings are not rooted in reason but in gut feeling. The word "righteous," Haidt writes, is associated with the Norse word "rettviss," which means "upright" or "virtuous." The word later meant being obedient to God's will and thus, to God's judgment. Being judgmental in this sense is linked to righteousness. It then connects to being "self-righteous," which Haidt says is the normal human condition.  Haidt argues that men and women evolved from group attachments in the same way as primates. There is no flaw to this design as we all are rooted in a moralistic strife given the primordial reality of conflict between groups. In which case, differences and disagreement are normal. Since we use logical reasoning in judging human character, we easily see others as fools or idiotic, thus the labels we attribute to adversaries. In reality, it has nothing to do w...

By Christopher Ryan Maboloc, PhD  Liberal hegemony is the idea that we can make the countries in the world liberal democracies, John Mearsheimer explains in his book, The Great Delusion. He refers to the first instance of the same as the Bush doctrine. The United States as a crusader state invades a country, throws out a dictator, and begins a nation building process by imposing liberal principles of democracy. Mearsheimer says that liberal democracy actually defeated Fascism in the first half of the last century and after the Cold War ended, communism, as countries aligned themselves with the American brand of democracy, aided by capitalism and international liberal institutions. But history suggests that the crusader state approach of the US is wrong, he argues. Mearsheimer explains that as soon as the US began the process of nation building, nationalism in countries the US has occupied soon kicked in, for instance in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. The US has not made its position...

By Christopher Ryan Maboloc, PhD  Radical politics, in the works of Laclau and Mouffe (1985), is rooted in contestation. Agonism is about the acknowledgement that conflict is a reality in society. The embrace of difference, in this way, is at the heart of the meaning of radical democracy. Radicalism means the movement away from the center where the possibility of consensus or agreement is often controlled by a definite majority who often silences every dissenting opinion and authentic political engagement. The majority is actually the elite hiding under the guise of rules and a consensus that they define for the people, thus making politics conformist instead of being reform oriented. There is a need to distinguish the political from politics. Politics is institutional while the political is concerned with relations of power. Politics is what governs the status quo where the meaning of freedom is founded on the basis of norms and laws set forth by liberal ideals. The radical means ...