Everyman and the enemy of the parent
published 4 February 2008
I’ve been writing this column for 14 months already and I have deliberately stayed away from politics. To be able to comment— meaningfully, if I may add—on the political issues of the day is a daunting task.
Opinion columnists are perceived to have an insider’s view on things. They are expected to know facts and happenings surrounding issues, juicy stuff that cannot be obtained from simply surfing the Internet or watching the news. They sometimes predict what will happen, even before official announcements are made.
Indeed, well-entrenched political opinion formers are the ones who have breakfast, lunch or dinner with the VIPs or are on first-name basis with decision makers of the land (or the opponents of the decision makers). To juggle that kind of schedule and achieve that kind of network would perhaps require many years—decades, even—to have been on the scene.
But I’m what you would call an everyday person. Except for mornings when I step out early to meet someone with a worthy business or human interest story to tell, I keep house. I putter about doing mundane chores and play “Teacher Mommy” with the children.
The difference is when I do all these, I’m likely to be tuned to the news, local or foreign, in a way some people tune to music video, movie or crime channels. It’s not really something I have to do—I just happen to like knowing what’s going on. And then in the afternoon, I commute to the newsroom, where I sit on my desk and do my job—which happens to be editing the op-ed section. When my page is done, I go home.
I take pride in being attuned to what ordinary people think and feel. And what they feel is that “what you see is what you get” just doesn’t hold here.
Take this latest row on the speakership of the House of Representatives.
I was perhaps still in high school when Joe de Venecia first assumed became speaker. And now, after so many years, he may just lose that post. Then again, he may not. And that’s just the point. Who can really tell?
There’s a subplot that injects a bit of filial drama to this issue. It’s believed that what started the ouster plan was the surfacing last year of De Venecia’s son, who linked, among others, the First Gentleman to the aborted national broadband network deal with a Chinese company.
(Again, we will probably never get to the bottom of the ZTE scandal, among others. It’s deplorable being robbed of closure, but that’s not the point I wish to make in today’s column.)
And indeed it has become a war of the offsprings, with presidential sons, Reps. Mikey and Dato Arroyo now in the open, signing a manifesto supporting a change in the House leadership.
This is a significant development, because while there have been previous threats to unseat De Venecia, it’s only now that the two young Arroyos are keeping no secrets anymore. At least it appears that way. This completely shatters the President’s silence on the matter.
As I’m finishing up this piece, there are last minute talks—a game of golf, and cocktails, I hear—that are meant to decide what will eventually happen. They say politics is like show business because nothing is what it seems. I think it’s like Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates. You never know what you’re going to get.
***
But there is a more important issue that may be glossed over if the public focuses on the power joust—really an insignificant, though highly consequential, matter.
Reports have it that most of those supporting the ouster of De Venecia are the younger set of lawmakers. They are first-term congressmen turned off at the way things at the House are being run. They are said to be concerned that the Lower House is suffering from a serious image problem. And that they want to change that.
“Change,” of course, is the operative word. The younger set has all the time and the ascendancy to propose this and actually do soething about it.
On the surface, this is cause for celebration. About time, really, and in fact long overdue.
But lest we forget, behind them is the force of veteran politicians, too. And Rep. Prospero Nograles isn’t exactly young and dynamic. Watchful eyes must not blink. Even when the De Venecia issue finally dies, and if and when a new leader is installed, the clamor for meaningful change should not die or even fade. It’s up to the neophytes, and let's exclude for a moment the Arroyos, because this really isn't about them, whose records are not tainted by broken promises, to make sure the fight against traditional politics and all the folly that goes with it, not just against one person or a bloc of a few, and not just in the House of Representatives—is on.
Shall we give them the benefit of the doubt? Is it too naïve to expect them to refuse being co-opted into the accepted way of running governments and, eventually, just become younger versions of the same type of leaders they so despise?
***
We are onlookers but ironically, these are our own affairs they are talking about. They will be crafting laws to govern how we live. They will decide how much of our money goes to each agency. They will, among themselves, apportion funds among schools, roads, salaries, and, God forbid, their own pockets. Hey, it’s ONLY our lives but it’s their political survival. We would be miserably medieval if we didn't think anything was wrong with that.
This is why more Everymen should speak up. By joining the clamor, we can exert enough pressure on our contemporaries in politics to lead this nation better than their parents did.
