“Is good governance just for the delulu?”
“SUNTOK sa buwan” is a term used to describe going for the impossible. Dreaming of studying at a school with extremely high qualifying standards. Applying at a company or institution known for stringent hiring policies. Traveling to a country one can only dream of visiting. Buying a lottery ticket hoping to win tens of millions of pesos.
Seeing one’s country governed efficiently, competently, and honestly by genuine public servants on both the national and local levels.
In three months, the Philippines would go to the polls again. This early, we already have a sense of the many sources of frustration that this democratic exercise promises to bring.
Early surveys to gauge which senatorial candidates would win if elections were held today are depressing. Those who will likely make it are familiar names and faces, who have gained prominence because of their last names or their earlier foray into show business, or who have styled themselves as champions of some cause by virtue of mere rhetoric.
Looking at the list of “winnable” names is enough to challenge the hopes even of indefatigable optimists.
How dare some candidates, too, be the first to break the spirit of the law against premature campaigning. We see their faces and names prominently plastered on some walls, the sides of overpasses, even public transportation! While the word “vote” is not on those posters, the intent is clear and unmistakable. And yet these are the ones who are asking us to vote for them, promising to uphold the law.
Conversely, those who have the sufficient background, experience, and fortitude to perform the role they are aspiring to in earnest, likely won’t stand a chance. They probably know it.
So why are they still even running, anyway?
The younger set might have a term for this – “delulu.” But is it an illusion, and are the optimistic or hopeful just delusional, really? I prefer to think it is an act of defiance against resignation, against “it is what it is.” It is an expression of audacity, that trying is more important than winning and that passive acceptance is the ultimate defeat.
Voters, thus, should take the cue. There is no such thing as a wasted vote. No such notion as going for the lesser evil. By all means demand a platform and require candidates to answer difficult questions. Reject the extremely popular but utterly incompetent. Heed the endorsement not of anyone but our conscience. And choose only the names of those who genuinely deserve to be elected.
It’s easy to get tired of repeated defeats to the popular, to the well-connected, to the entertaining. It could get tedious to more than feel-good motherhood statements. But outside of the big names we have become used to, there are names on our list of choices that do have something to bring to the table: actual expertise and experience, actual proven integrity, actual scruples.
Voters should go for what appears impossible, too.
And perhaps the next time, or the time after that, other possibilities – those borne out of defiance, yes, but ultimately, hope – will become likelier, until they become real. And then we can move on to the next impossibility.
adellechua@gmail.com