Pepe Alas posted: " At this very moment, our country is selecting its national and local leaders through a process that uses democracy as its framework. But it appears that representative democracy —the one that the Filipino electorate practices today— is really not for us."
At this very moment, our country is selecting its national and local leaders through a process that uses democracy as its framework. But it appears that representative democracy —the one that the Filipino electorate practices today— is really not for us. It was a dirty slugfest then as it is today.
In the early years that Spain ruled our country, the Spanish Crown experimented with indirect democracy. Here's one example...
A pueblo (today's equivalent of a municipality or a city) was ruled by a gobernadorcillo (today's equivalent of a mayor). During the early years of Spanish rule, particularly in the 17th century, all adult males nominated three candidates for the position (females back then were not yet allowed to participate in electing/nominating local leaders). A representative of the Spanish Crown (most probably the Ministerio de Ultramar) would then select one of the nominees to become gobernadorcillo who would then serve the pueblo a one-year term. As noted by the late historian John Leddy Phelan, this system proved unworkable as it caused "many disputed elections"...
I hope you guys voted wisely today.
The Filipinos evidently took their local politics seriously Some politicians vigorously pushed their candidacy for office of gobernadorcillo to the point of holding "political rallies." Support was wooed by organized fiestas in which entertainment and rice wine were supplied by aspirants to office. These "rallies" were never held in the cabecera villages themselves lest the clergy interfere.
But when we decided to kick out Spain from our lives, we opted to continue this insane practice. Indeed, then as now. Inuulit lang palá natin ang mg̃a capalpacán ng nacaraán. WHY? We never learn, do we?
No comments:
Post a Comment