Philippine politics and economics

[Soapy Smith]

There is a notion floated by some in this thread that it was the poor Filipino masses that supported Duterte most enthusiastically, whereas the elites are his most conspicuous critics and most likely to have voted for his opponents. This is part of the argument in which those of us who criticize Duterte must be getting our perspectives from the traditional blood-sucking elites with whom we frequently hobnob. It turns out that exit polling in May by the Social Weather Stations showed that this is bass-ackwards.

https://understandingdigong.wordpres...uterte-part-1/

A few excerpts:

"The SWS exit poll showed that almost half, or 45.9% of the ABC socio-economic segment of the population voted for the Mayor from Davao. This segment, which is the combination of the upper class (AB) and the middle class (C) comprise about 10% of the population.

Viewed from the education angle, the exit poll revealed that 49.2% of college-educated voters went for Digong."

Remember, only 39% of the electorate voted from Duterte, so elites, and especially educated elites, voted disproportionately for Duterte rather than his opponents.

"The SWS exit poll also showed that four out of ten (39.6%) of the the D segment (lower middle class) and over a third (35.3%) of E segment (lower class) voted for him."

Since the total Duterte vote was 39%, this means the lower middle class was substantially less enthusiastic about him than the three higher classes, and the poorest class was least inclined toward Duterte.

Another explanation of the same data:

http://interaksyon.com/article/12757...ed-for-duterte

"MANILA. The massive win of Davao City's Mayor Rodrigo Duterte in the presidential race cannot be simplistically framed as just a "revolt", or protest vote of sorts, against the elite by the toiling masses or the working class exhausted by six years of the "manhid at palpak" (insensitive, goofy) under Daang Matuwid. . . .

Nearly half (45.9%) of those who said they voted Duterte came from the A-B-C socioeconomic class [Note from Soapy: this is a misstatement, but the next two points are correct]; and less than a fifth from the same class (18.9%) said they voted for Mar Roxas, whose image is that of a typical heir or hacendero. Just 16.4% of this class said they picked Grace Poe. . . .

One analyst interviewed on radio had earlier advised commentators to be ready for the fact that many of the rich and influential actually voted for Duterte. The theory: the issue of peace and order is one that resonates with the affluent, who want assurances that a strong leader will prevent crimes against lives and property."

Here is an interesting analysis from an American publication, the Jacobin; unlike much of the Western media, this journalist took the time to consult well-informed observers like John Sidel, Patricio Abinales, Ramon Casiple, and Alfred McCoy.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/p...neoliberalism/

This lefty argues that Duterte is not a man of the masses; he is just another member of the elite--but from a provincial elite network rather than from the dominant Manila networks--who has played his politics very shrewdly.

"We should understand Duterte as a larger-than-usual version of the strongman, a not-unusual figure in Philippine politics. Political scientist Patricio Abinales's work on Mindanao describes the strongman as a regional representative of more powerful, Manila-based actors. Strongmen amass power through clientelist networks, control over vital enterprises and, "most important of all, a monopoly of the means of coercion and violence."

In this analysis, Rodrigo Duterte is an "outsider" in Manila, the representative of a less powerful, more provincial layer of the Philippine elite. Some of his allies, like proposed minister of finance Carlos "Sonny" Dominguez, also come from Mindanao-based clans or studied together with Duterte.

But after the elections, other establishment parties and turncoats from the incumbent government quickly joined Duterte's coalition, anxious to preserve their access to power and public resources.

Leftist trappings aside, this is the clearest way to understand Duterte: a regional boss who managed to strike it big by winning the presidency, pushing aside a sector of the traditional high elite. The most significant change his election promises is that Manila's elite has been partially replaced by another, more provincial segment of the country's oligarchy."

One takeaway: Duterte is, at least among Filipinos, a very shrewd politician. He is able to sucker the masses with a disingenuous frontstage performance in which he looks like one of them, while backstage, he's actually aligned with wealthy property owners who want protection from poor criminal elements.

"I am, by calling, a dealer in words; and words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind. . . . Not only do words infect, egotize, narcotize, and paralyze, but they enter into and colour the minutest cells of the brain." Rudyard Kipling, 1923.

[Soapy Smith]

Hope the SMC proposal gets serious consideration from the Duterte administration, cause it was shelved during the prior reign. http://manila.coconuts.co/2016/11/02...irport-bulacan. GE.

The location makes more sense than either Clark or Cavite.

[GoodEnough]

Hope the SMC proposal gets serious consideration from the Duterte administration, cause it was shelved during the prior reign. http://manila.coconuts.co/2016/11/02...irport-bulacan.

GE.

[Cool Traveler]

Irony. Of course. Part of deal of purchasing those rifles was that the Philippines would be getting military aid, which will then be used to pay for the aforementioned rifles. All part of a corrupt defense industry. So, if the purchase of weapons does not happen, so would the aid. I wonder if Duterte put those together.

Fact he has to face is, Philippines is tied economically with the US. Take for instance United Health. 5 years ago, United Health opened an office in Manila, with 50 employees. Today they have close to 15,000 employees in the Philippines, all servicing US healthcare. United Health Philippines does just about everything from invoicing, to customer service.

Wonder, how far Duterte is willing to take this, just because years ago, the US embassy in Manila dissed him by denying travel visa to travel to the US.

Any else see the irony in trying to purchase 26,000 assault rifles from a country you despise? At any rate, a US Senator has killed that deal and the country will not be permitted to purchase the weapons.

I saw an article today that the Philippines instead is turning to Israel and plans to purchase 20,000 equivalent assault weapons from the Israelis. Given the strong and special relationship between the US and Israel however, I wonder if the US Government will request Israel to demur as well, in which case it's likely that the Philippines would approach Russia. Like AV, I'm curious as to why a civilian police force would need 20,000 automatic weapons to confront drug dealers and common criminals given that in developed countries, police typically carry only sidearms..

[Roll Aides]

Having lived in Thailand for a short time, I would offer a subjective reflection that there is one thing that sets political troubles there, and political trouble here, apart; and that is that Thais seem to totally render farang excepted from any trouble that might be going on internally. There could be a full-on armed coup there and I would not hesitate to walk down the street, other than in an active protest area. It's sort of like being a visitor from Mars, you are appreciated and in fact protected for your trade value, you are not expected to understand or interact with the local scene, unless you idiotically go out of your way to involve yourself. That's sort of safe.

As an addenda, I have seen some very strong opinions expressed here, some exceedingly articulate, others less so. I do not personally pretend to know a lot about politics, and I pretty much view the proceedings of mr. Du30 with a bowl of popcorn and a disbelieving grin; but that is not what I wanted to say.

My field report, if you will, is that I live in an unimportant barangay of a small regional capitol, as I have for almost five years now, and there are no drug killings here that I have noticed. No one I know is particularly concerned about the current administration. My neighbors do not look at me suspiciously when I go to buy beer, nor do I fear them. No persons that I know of, or have heard of, or have read of, have been shot for supposedly or actually being drug dealers. There is no aura of oppression, or panic, of any kind. In short, the actual difference (other than the news) in my day to day life and the lives of those around me, is zero. People I know go to their jobs; they go to school; they run their shops; and perhaps most relevantly, a minority of them have sex with aging overweight foreigners for very little money, which is fine with me.

And yes, people do get shot here. They get shot all the fucking time. It's the Philippines. But, I have not noted any change in the rate of the shootings, whatsoever, post-dueterte.

Now I have a USA Passport, and if that becomes an issue then I will surely leave, and experiences undoubtedly will vary according to locale; but in point of fact, I cannot see what all the fuss is about. Because if someone offends your political sensibilities and you have to go Galt to reconcile that with your belief framework, then fine. But seriously, the experience on the ground here, in my little patch of the world, has changed zero. And, I see it changing zero, unless the US visa thing happens. If you have personally been affected by the 'EJK,' then I sincerely apologise in advance. My point is simply that, from the point of view of a nobody, nowhere, here in the Philippines, life pre-dueterte and life post-dueterte, are exactly indistinguishable, except perhaps for some extremely entertaining news reports.

That time he called Barack Obama the son of a working girl, I almost choked on my San Miguel; you can't pay for that shit.

Monger on, brothers, and relax.

[GoodEnough]

I agree with Soapy that the article is well-written, but it fails utterly to capture the nuances of the country's relationship with the US. Yes, the sanctimonious Steve Rood (who I think has been here forever) is correct, that the remittances flowing from the US--both from OFWs and FilAms--are enormous, and any dramatic disruption of the revenue flow would severely disrupt this economy; not only the families who depend on the remittances but the GOP which derives much of its foreign exchange from the same source. Yes, it's also true that in a poll conducted a few months ago about 92% of Filipinos expressed a positive attitude toward the US, which is unsurprising, given the extent to which US products and services have permeated Filipino society. But having said this, the article ignores the flip side of the equation which is a sense of national shame that so many of its citizens must leave the country and thus depend on the kindness of strangers. Scratch the surface of an average, semi-well-educated Filipino and you'll often find some resentment directed at the richer, more developed countries that provide the best hope for economic success for many Filipinos. Interesting, that alone among ASEAN countries, this place seems to need someone or something else to blame for the lack of development.

The core truth--sensed rather than quantifiable--is that the society in general has a mixed attitude toward the States. Filipinos to some extent, recognize the imbalance in the not-quite-equal or some-are-more-equal-than-others relationship and often resent it in the same way that less monied family members might resent richer relatives on whose largesse they partially depend. For those Filipinos, who have lived their lives in a third-world country that's been an historical unknown for most of the world, watching a pigmy kick a giant in his crotch gives them a sense of rare national pride, and helps enables them to admit that they've felt bullied. The positive response to Duterte's taunts didn't arise in a vacuum; he's exploited a feeling that existed but had lain dormant.

I believe, though I cannot prove, that Duterte's election sparked a movement among people who have felt victimized, rendered voiceless, and enfeebled for centuries, and in this scenario, the US is an easy target: first because conflating US victimization and the drug war provides the GOP with a White Whale that can serve as an effective focal point for the anger of the population. Second, because the creation of an enemy can deflect the attention of masses of people from the enormity of development needs with which the country is afflicted.

Duterte is not a fool, but a clever politician. He knows full well that he cannot possibly address the "needs deficits" that have manifested themselves in virtually every sector, nor can he eradicate the political dynasties (and concomitant corruption) that have characterized the society for centuries. He can, and to an extent he has, however, created effective alternative theories of blame. It's the fault of the US, and the West in general, that the country hasn't achieved its potential and / or it's because drugs have become the epidemic that stifles the country's development. It's an effective means of creating an external "other" to whom the status quo can be attributed. My fear is that now that the "enemies" have been defined, the next few years will witness an ever-descending spiral of additional venom and more killings, and in the end, nothing much will have changed for the average Filipino.

It's interesting as well that the article mentions almost nothing of the potential ramifications, for the Philippines, of its self-severance from the US. The simple fact is that the US could get along fine without Filipino OFWs, without exports from the Philippines, and without access to the country's naval bases. US call centers here could, within a year or so, easily pull up stakes and relocate to another country eager for their business. Duterte has taken a "so what?" attitude to such a possibility, but I doubt that the millions of Filipinos whose economic lives would be affected would be so blase. It's my ardent hope that macho-sounding US Congressional representatives, anxious to prove their manhood, will not seize on this as an excuse the exacerbate the tensions that Duterte has created.

One of the key tenets of authoritarian regimes throughout history has been the creation of external enemies whose eradication is critical to the survival of the state, and the conquest of which depends on a singleminded, father figure whose identity becomes existentially intertwined with that of the country. I can see the seeds of that happening here, now that the country has evidently coalesced around its strong man, and now that the enemies have been identified. Conversely, the president does not, as yet, have the power to rule by decree, and is still dependent on Congress for funding and policy approval, so the end is not fore-ordained.

GE.

[Soapy Smith]

Balanced and well researched article from The Atlantic. Enjoy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...states/506108/

Balanced, perhaps, and some news getting out to the West is better than no news. A good read. But I think it was not necessarily accurately researched.

"surveys show that most Filipinos distrust regional rival China, and overwhelmingly trust the United States. Much of this amity stems from the long, shared history between the two countries, dating back to the end of the Spanish-American War in 1898 when the United States replaced Spain as the ruling colonial power. . . ".

The first sentence may be correct, and there may be some amity based on a shared history, but the idea that the "United States replaced Spain as the ruling colonial power" creates a naive impression that Filipinos embraced colonization by the United States. Not even close to true. In fact, the U.S. took control of the Philippines by military force after dispatching Spanish forces from Cuba and the Philippines. Not exactly a relationship built on "amity," and this is a source of historical grievance for educated Filipinos in addition to Duterte. It is also likely that Americans view the historical relationship in more romantic terms than do Filipinos.

"The U.S. government has also taken the lead in humanitarian assistance, providing over $37 million after Hurricane Yolanda in 2013, which killed over 10,000 Filipinos. ".

Wrong on at least two counts. The U.S. military, including naval vessels and air force groups were among the first to render foreign assistance in the vicinity of Samar and Leyte, but the UK has provided substantially more aid in the wake of Haiyan (Yolanda) than the U.S. Secondly, the 10,000 deaths were an early, presumably inaccurate, estimate from some local official on Leyte Island, but official records later reported that known deaths were approximately 6,300.

These are small details, but they illustrate the way that romantic misinformation about the Philippines is often passed around among American media sources. I suspect that this occurs because Western journalists are too lazy to seek accurate information, and it is just too easy to cite earlier Western journalists' work without ever confirming its accuracy. This underlying ignorance is consistent with GE's suggestions that Western news media couldn't care less about news from the Philippines until somebody like Duterte makes it colorful.

[Wicked Roger]

In the post Snowden era people not observing proper infosec have no one to blame but themselves regardless of country of residence.

http://eff.org/

I look forward to your posts on the Thai board lambasting the Thai government and HR issues etc, be interesting to see if you have the same view in a country that likely has some similar issues as PI. But are you as brave as you are here?

Speaking of which the UN seem to be at loggerheads about D30 and the EJKs. While you say 'state sponsored killing. With no support to back up your claims (apart from the fact you are scared silly and thus irrational IMHO) the UN rep in this article articulates the real position well. And she is the country's ambassador.

http://thestandard.com.ph/news/headl...-lauds-ph.html

[Amavida]

Despite the dry academic title, a pretty good backgrounder.

http://www.newmandala.org/duterte-ba...olitical-gain/

[Amavida]

And, given recent news about crackdowns on internet communications there, a little caution tapping into ISG from Thailand might be in order.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/...spike-arrests/

In the post Snowden era people not observing proper infosec have no one to blame but themselves regardless of country of residence.

http://eff.org/

[Soapy Smith]

I am a little surprised that long-standing and esteemed members of the ISG family (GE and AV to mention two by name) are seriously contemplating pulling up stakes and moving to somewhere like Thailand which is, IMHO, much more potentially unstable and certainly less predictable given the uncertainty with the royal succession and the red shirt brigade loitering on Bkk's doorstep.

And, given recent news about crackdowns on internet communications there, a little caution tapping into ISG from Thailand might be in order.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/...spike-arrests/

[Dg8787]

Oh dear, god will not be happy! 😀.

"Hindi ako nag-ano ng Amerikano. Sabi nila, na you should be thankful na bigyan ng armas. 'T*ng*and*. Fifty years, kayo ang nakinabang sa aking bayan. Lahat ng mina hanggang ngayon, inyo. Lahat ng mga pineapple plantations sa Mindanao, inyo. Tapos maingay pa kayo. P*t*ng*and* ninyo. Leche. Eh, galit ako eh," he said.

The President was referring to the US State Department's decision to stop the sale of 26,000 assault rifles to the Philippine National Police.

http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/11/02/1...anti-us-tirade

God is forgiving and understands there will be relapses.

[Amavida]

Balanced and well researched article from The Atlantic. Enjoy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...states/506108/

[GoodEnough]

Why does a civilian police force suddenly need an additional twenty six thousand military assault rifles?

The point was another example of your hero further ramping up anti US / anti West sentiments.

Any else see the irony in trying to purchase 26,000 assault rifles from a country you despise? At any rate, a US Senator has killed that deal and the country will not be permitted to purchase the weapons.

I saw an article today that the Philippines instead is turning to Israel and plans to purchase 20,000 equivalent assault weapons from the Israelis. Given the strong and special relationship between the US and Israel however, I wonder if the US Government will request Israel to demur as well, in which case it's likely that the Philippines would approach Russia. Like AV, I'm curious as to why a civilian police force would need 20,000 automatic weapons to confront drug dealers and common criminals given that in developed countries, police typically carry only sidearms. Further, given the lack of adequate training that typically characterizes most attempts at professionalization here, one has to wonder whether those weapons will result in additional casualties of innocent civilians.

I keep remembering a brief conversation I had years ago with an ex-cop from Washington, DC who was the head of security for the US Embassy in Manila. We were at an event with then US Ambassador Kristie Kenney, which was notable for the presence of spiffily-dressed Philippines Marines, all of them carrying automatic weapons. I asked him if the Marines were very proficient with the weapons, and he responded that proficiency with weapons requires constant practice, but that the Philippines couldn't afford the cost of ammunition. He then asked if he had answered my question. He had, and I doubt that the situation has changed significantly since that discussion of 5-6 years ago.

GE.

[GoodEnough]

I would have thought that GE and AV have lived in the Phils long enough to know that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

I can only presume that there surely must be other factors (hitherto unexplained) apart from the ascension of Du30 to the Presidency that would prompt the disruption of a stable domestic arrangement and a shift to somewhere else.

RK, as I've said in my last few posts, I have no immediate intention of leaving, and feel no immediate concern for my personal safety. As you quite rightly said, in my case I'm too settled domestically to want to disturb the current situation unless it becomes truly untenable, and I doubt that it will come to pass. The only reason for me to leave would be if live here became significantly more difficult for those with US passports. Unlike AV, I do not have young chldren whose welfare I must consider. I also agree with you about the potential instability in Thailand. From what I've read, the situation there may remain unsettled for years, though I don't believe that the Thai Government has done anything to discourage falang from remaining in the country.

On another front, I received a message today from the US Embassy, warning of possible kidnapping attempts targeted at Westerners, on the island of Cebu, and urging Americans to avoid the place. While I recognize that such warnings from Western Governments to their citizens are fairly routine, still it might be worthwhile paying attention, particularly for those of you in Cebu or who are contemplating going there. As the message was contained in an email, I cannot embed a link, but anyone who is interested can read the warning on the US Embassy Manila website.

GE.