December 10, 2006: Sunday
Screaming Infidelity: Loyalty and Politics
Kris John Suñga
6:46, the last trip of the PNR train for that day when at the Pasay station a dog enter followed by it’s masters. But before the dog can go deeper into the crowd the “kundoktor” voiced out “boss bawal po aso dito” to the man who is most likely to be the owner of the dog. The man obviously was struck and confuse for he didn’t really want to let his dog out of the train plus his two children saying words of concern for tagpi, bruno, itim or whatever the dog’s name is. But then, their transport money is only good for PNR tickets. There goes the distinct noise. The dog outside. The little girl almost crying. The train starts to gain speed. The dog running after the train….. until we can see the dog nomore.
Nope i did not make up that story myself but the thought of posting an entry in my frienster acct., inspired by this scenario was in my head for months now.
Now, what would be my topic? The loyalty shown by the dog to his masters equating to loyalty and politics.
Given by Mr. Webster, loyalty is marked by alliance to a person, organization etc. The very example is what made the dog run after the train. It has two types:
1) one-way loyalty
2) two-way loyalty
In politics one-way loyalty is evident in absolute monarchial governments like the sultanate of Oman, Emir of Kuwait and in dictatorship like in Saddam Husseins cabinet. On the other side, two-way loyalty would have to include the democratic and parliamentary government. Here in the Philippines we are technically exhibiting the latter for the people have to be loyal to the leaders and the leaders must be loyal to the people to have a smooth-flowing relationship between the people and the gov’t.
That is for the macro sense, but behind these clusters of leaders and people being loyal to each other, there are still fidelities that governs an individual in the micro sense. A partylist representative would have to be loyal to his party and to the ideology of his party. An appointed officer tends to show loyalty to the one who appointed him. An activist is loyal to his truth. An officer is loyal to his organization.
In this sense for me, loyalty exists in all aspects and forms of politics.
Here in our country there are three vital sectors wherein their loyalty is much considered by all the incumbent governments namely ; the loyalty of the masses, of the military and of the church. The EDSA I revolution would have to be a concrete example. Basically these three united against the Marcos’ and express their disloyalty to the said dictator and loyalty to what they percieved as justice. But on the present administration, GMA’s, though events speaks for themselves, no matter how we try, it’s as if the administration still hold strong to their seats. how’s this? Taking it from the journalists “the military remains loyal to GMA”. See how much brain that little girl has?
In the recently concluded US election. Can we say that the people of America have been disloyal to the the Bush’s administration for welcoming majority of the democrats in the house or are they considering the infidelity of the current administration to a peace loving America?
Is former secretary Avelino Cruz been disloyal to the president, the one who appointed him, in having a different point of view on the issue of charter change that fueled his resignation or is he just being loyal to his own thinking?
Can we say that the resignation of the HYATT 10 a sign of disloyalty to the administration or loyalty to their pursue to a transparent governmnet.? Was the “if we hold on” sung in unison was a bluff?
In Coup plans, is the military being disloyal to the administration or just being loyal to the their right thing to do?
You see loyalty and disloyalty, maybe we just don’t see it most of the times, still holds some answers in questioned decisions of our people. To what they believe in, to their ideals, to their motto, to what they hold is not true.
Also, i find fidelity and infidelity a must in politics considering some of our major political problems. <But before that take note that i believe that human is in nature GOOD and RATIONAL>. Taking corruption as an example. Corrupt leaders are basically being disloyal, first to the people and second to their ideals of governace (humans are naturally for the good). Turncoating, turncoats are being disloyal to his party. In terrorism, these named terrorists are being loyal to their ideologies.
Giving stress to good and right loyalty would have to be one of my considered answers in these problems. Ranking loyalty in choosing our leaders and our leaders being loyal to the people and to his ideals that put him in that position. Loyalty, if only given much push by our constitution and by our leaders themselves, we could achieve the much craved transparent government. If we could only know how to appreciate loyalty to it’s purest sense maybe the philippines is not in it’s worst state.
You may find my arguments a little vague ( i admit it)… hehehe and that these could be easily challenged by many other ideas specifically dialectical materialism but i will say this. We’ve learned yet we’re in the state far beyond nothing, we’ve learned to the extent that we usually see things as complex as we could make it, we look at things as if there’s always beyond. But while looking or seeing these things’ complexity, sometimes we are missing the simple truths, the undeniable ones, the basic truths that sometimes are enough in answering our much asked questions.