The future with a lousy 1987 Constitution

How to Secure a Future with a Crumbling 1987 Constitution for the Philippines

The birth of the 1987 Constitution directly shows the passion of revolution and democracy emerging from the People Power Revolution. It was something like an infallible promise, the promise of liberty and governance anchored in justice and fairness. However, it has now betrayed cracks that do not allow the country to realize its growth. Understanding how to protect this country's future, yet operating within a constitution many believe is archaic, presents both a challenge and a necessity. 

Photo: Manila Bulletin

Acknowledgment of Constraints

First, it is pertinent to understand what makes the 1987 Constitution "broken" from several perspectives of people. Criticisms are aimed at rigid economic provisions, an overly centralized structure of government, and inability to stand changes surrounding the Philippines in the light of quick technological innovations and global economic shifts. Sometimes, these limitations constrain economic progress, hamper decentralization, and fail to address pressing issues of society.

Strategies to Protect the Future

1. Advocacy for Constitutional Reform

The constitutional revision or amendment process is the most direct mechanism for securing the country's future. Many dread the prospect of opening up the Constitution for revision as they fear this will lead to abuse, but a managed form of reforms geared toward key areas of economic liberalization and political structure may help break open growth potential together with a setting that fosters inclusivity.

2. Strengthening Democratic Institutions

This is done easily enough by strengthening the institutions tasked with ensuring democratic rule, even if it threatens to empower independent bodies such as COMELEC, CHR, and the judiciary to function both as checks against the constitutionally possible evil of abusing constitutionally provided gaps.

3. Civic Education and Participation

An enlightened citizenry is what should secure the future of the nation. Civil education and public awareness about the Constitution and its implications will build a more intense demand upon public authorities for meaningful reforms. If one knows what is at stake, then she or he is far better equipped to compel, or call to account, leaders to make changes that really benefit the common good.

4. Empowering Local Government Units (LGUs)

The 1987 Constitution can centralize much power at the national level, and LGUs can become very important in reaching the lower governance levels closer to community needs. In this scenario, empowerment of LGUs within this constitutional framework can serve as a model for participatory governance and localized solutions against issues that national policy could easily pass over.

5. Building a Culture of Accountability

The weaknesses of the current constitution must be improved. For such, an accountability and transparency culture should be established. This is implemented through the enforcement of extant laws against corruption. The freedom of information must strengthen, as well as protecting whistleblowers. With this step, the imperfect constitution still finds alignment with public interests.

6. Leadership and Vision

Leadership under the current constitutional regimes plays a crucial role in protecting the future. Accountable leaders with vision, operating within the boundaries of the broken system, can advocate for the much-needed change. This will further mean that elections favor the election of nationalists who respect democratic values, dialogue about constitutional amendment, and policies about issues both at the moment and long term ones.

7. Inclusive Dialogue

Engaging in an inclusive national conversation is one of the most pivotal steps toward a protected future. The reflections, probably one will hear are diverse voices that cut across different sectors: the youth, marginalized communities, leaders in business, and policymakers, which are more likely to highlight the diverse implications of constitutional limitations and suggest feasible futures of their review.

There is nothing to fear about reforms. Reforms should be some sign of a healthy democracy.

Conclusion

The 1987 Constitution was also a child of its time, born with the purpose of assuaging the nation's concern over the face of dictatorship. It has kept the country on its feet, but sadly, it is not fit to drive the nation forward to meet the needs of Filipinos in the present and future. Safeguarding the future of the Philippines requires a balance of constitutional literacy, civic engagement, strong democratic institutions, and responsible leadership offering change that matters. By acknowledging the limits and taking proactive measures in that direction, the nation can work towards a resilient, inclusive, and progressive future-even within the constraints of a "broken" Constitution. If the senate doesn't want to pass the RBH 6, the future generations of Filipinos to come will be hopeless and drug addicts, while the county's oligarchs and elites will continue to enjoy the broken system.

Self-maintenace

The Best Investment You Can Make Is in Yourself


Your phone battery? You charge it every night without fail.
Your car? Serviced every six months like clockwork.
Your appliances? Safely covered by a multi-year warranty.


But what about you?


Your skills—last updated when you graduated.
Your mindset—still running on the same limiting beliefs you had five years ago.
Your knowledge—stopped growing the day you started binge-watching Netflix.


We maintain everything we own… except ourselves.


Why We Upgrade Things but Not Ourselves


We’ll spend ₱50,000 on the latest phone without blinking. But we hesitate to spend ₱2,000 on a book or seminar that could protect our career and future.


We’ll happily pay ₱279 monthly for Netflix, but think ₱500 for an online course is “too expensive.”


We protect, maintain, and upgrade our gadgets and possessions, yet we let our most valuable asset—our mind—run on outdated software.


The Harsh Truth About Priorities


That shiny phone? It’ll be outdated in two years.
That trendy appliance? Eventually replaced.
But the knowledge, skills, and mindset you invest in? They’ll serve you for a lifetime, making you adaptable, competitive, and irreplaceable.


In a rapidly changing world, skills are the new currency. Technology evolves. Industries transform. The only way to stay relevant is to keep learning, adapting, and growing.




The ROI of Self-Investment


When you invest in yourself, the returns compound:


Skills make you more marketable and open new opportunities.


Mindset helps you face challenges without fear.


Knowledge gives you the power to make smarter decisions in career, finance, and life.




Every peso you spend on personal growth today saves you thousands—or even millions—tomorrow by increasing your earning potential, opening doors, and helping you avoid costly mistakes.


How to Start Investing in Yourself


1. Read daily – Even 15 minutes a day can transform your knowledge base.




2. Take online courses – Affordable, flexible, and skill-focused.




3. Attend seminars/workshops – Build skills and connections at the same time.




4. Upgrade your environment – Surround yourself with people who inspire and challenge you.




5. Invest in health – A sharp mind needs a healthy body to perform at its best.


The Bottom Line


We often treat our devices better than ourselves.
We protect them from viruses, update their software, and replace them when they slow down. But when was the last time you upgraded your own “operating system”?


Your mind is your most valuable tool. Your skills are your most important assets. Your mindset is your ultimate power source.


Invest in them relentlessly—because unlike gadgets, you can’t just buy a newer version of yourself.


The best investment you can ever make… is in you.

Let it go

Maturity Is Letting Go Without a Scene

"Maturity is when you stop asking yourself why someone isn't calling or texting anymore. You just realize the change, and you accept it, no drama, no fights. You just walk away smiling."

It's easy to say, too easy in fact—but believe me, in truth this is one of the toughest things in life. 

We are raised believing when something doesn't feel right in a relationship—whether romantic, friendly, or even professional—there is something we must do to fix it, ask questions, or fight to get answers. Although communication is key, maturity schools us in something more profound: the silence is sometimes the answer. 

Google Photo

Not Every Ending Requires a Fight

When someone stops initiating contact, our natural reaction is usually to wonder:

• Did I do something bad?
• Are they angry with me?
• Why won't they just say it?

And yet, in most situations, their reasons have nothing to do with us. Life gets busy, priorities change, feelings dwindle, and some relationships simply run their course. Pursuing explanations can sometimes cause more suffering than solace.

Acceptance Over Resistance

Maturity is knowing when to stop fighting for a spot in someone's life when they no longer make room for you. It's understanding that:

• You can't command attention at the cost of dignity.
• Others tell you where you're at in their world by how they treat you.
• Your energy is better spent on those who decide to keep you around.

Exiting with grace doesn't mean you don't care—mean you care enough about yourself not to beg for attention or presence.

No Drama, No Fights—Just Peace

By selecting acceptance over confrontation, you spare yourself unnecessary emotional exhaustion. You are spared the vicious cycle of blame, guilt trips, and apologies that seldom alter the result.

Instead, you opt for peace. You see the transformation, you adapt your expectations, and you move on without bitterness. You wish them well in your heart—though you never dare say so out loud.

The Smile That Means Freedom

That grin you flash when you walk away isn't artificial—it's a badge of freedom. It declares:

• I respect myself enough to release what no longer respects me.
• I don't require closure from you to end this book in my life.
• I am capable of moving on without bitterness.

In a world where bridges are burned with elaborate farewells, steadily walking away is a badge of real strength.

Ultimately, maturity is a matter of selecting dignity over desperation, peace over chaos, and self-respect over coercive attachments. You don't shut the door—you just cease banging on it. And that's the type of development that leaves you grinning.

State of Philippine telcos

Breaking the Barriers: Why the Philippines Needs to Support Telco Upgrades Now

Inadequate internet connectivity in the Philippines is a three-decade-old issue, and although we tend to blame telco corporations, the situation is more complex. Connectivity doesn't just "fall from the sky." It's constructed—cable by cable, tower by tower—by private entities who require access to communities in order to upkeep and upgrade their networks.

Wikipedia image

Last week, Globe Telecom made a rare public comment revealing a concealed barrier to quality internet service: unreasonable charges, excessive fees, and downright refusal from some homeowners' associations (HOAs) that are stalling critical infrastructure work.

The Hidden Roadblocks

Some gated residential villages, reports Globe, have pushed the concept of access control to an extreme:

• ₱100,000 "access fee" in one village—without even stating for how long it's effective.
• ₱5,000 daily fee imposed in another, irrespective of work type.
• Other HOAs prohibit the extension of fiber facilities outright, giving residents no upgrade choices.

These obstructions don't only hold up expansion—they block emergency maintenance and repair work. The consequence? Residents, usually at premium rates, are left with shaky connections or total service loss.

The Legal Side: HOAs Cannot Block Utility Access

This is not merely an issue of inconvenience, but also a breach of entrenched laws and policies.

Republic Act 9904 (Magna Carta for Homeowners and Homeowners' Associations) explicitly forbids the prevention of utility service providers from installing, maintaining, or disconnecting services under a ratified contract.

Department Order No. 2022-012 (DHSUD) specifically states that the permission of HOAs is not necessary for the laying of cables on existing poles, underground ducts, or other established telco infrastructure.

In other words: telcos have the right to enter these communities for legitimate service works, and HOAs have no legal grounds to block them.

Why This Matters to All Filipinos

Regardless of whether you're in a gated village or a small barangay, the effects of these blockades propagate throughout the entire network:

1. Slower upgrades – Blocking growth means delayed rollouts of fiber, 5G, and other next-gen technologies.
2. Postponed repairs – Longer closures equal more outages for residents.
3. Slowed economic development – Stable internet is essential for remote work, online learning, e-commerce, and tourism. Without it, they get left behind.
4. International competitiveness – The country is already low on international internet speed rankings. Having more artificial obstacles only makes us worse.

Why Telco Upgrades Are Non-Negotiable

Digital connectivity is no longer a luxury—it's a minimum requirement for:

• Students who take online classes
• Employees who work in work-from-home arrangements
• Businesses which operate e-commerce platforms
• Government services that depend on online platforms

Unless we keep upgrading our networks, we risk losing further ground to our ASEAN neighbors as they leapfrog towards smart cities, AI-facilitated logistics, and super-fast internet infrastructure.

What Needs to Change?

1. Increased LGU Intervention – Local governments need to ensure HOAs are conforming to national regulations.
2. Public Awareness – People should realize that improved connectivity directly benefits them.
3. Strict Penalties – Fines for HOAs stopping legal infrastructure work could discourage misuse.
4. Faster Permitting Processes – Even outside gated communities, bureaucracy by the government is holding back telco projects.

Final Thoughts

The struggle to have faster, more stable internet in the Philippines is not all about the tech—it's about breaking down human barriers. Globe's findings indicate that at times the greatest barriers are not the wires, towers, or expense, but the ones we build ourselves.

If we really want to fill in the digital divide, HOAs and local government must cease acting as gatekeepers and begin as partners in progress. The legislation is already in place—it's time to implement them and get each Filipino online.

So the next time you experience slow internet, lagging connection, you should know who's to blame first.

Mainstream media and IBON Foundation

Why Does Mainstream Media Always Choose IBON Foundation on Economic Matters?

If you've been tracking Philippine news for years, you might have observed this ongoing trend: when the economy is in the headlines—whether GDP growth, inflation, or poverty—IBON Foundation is usually quoted or featured. 

From Wikipedia

For others, though, this ubiquitous visibility brings more than curiosity—particularly because news articles and government security reports have characterized IBON Foundation as an "above-ground" arm of the CPP–NPA, the communist rebel organization that has been active in the Philippines.

Mainstream Media's Go-To "Economic Expert"

And in fairness, there is a pragmatic reason why IBON is seen everywhere. Journalists have them on speed dial because:

• They have instant press releases with information and graphs.
• They present tough, quotable opposition to official government views.
• They have a long history as an outsider's think tank promoting labor rights, equality of income, and protectionist economic policies.

And for the newsroom operating on tight deadlines, IBON is a handy option. But convenience must not stand in for caution—particularly when a source is affiliated with, as credible reports indicate, a four-decade old armed insurgency.

CPP–NPA Allegations

The Philippine Armed Forces (AFP), erstwhile military officials, and various in-depth news articles have characterized IBON Foundation as a component of the legal, underground apparatus of the Communist Party of the Philippines – New People's Army (CPP–NPA).

IBON has consistently refuted these claims, but the overlap is hard for its critics to deny:

• Parallel talking points and jargon between IBON pronouncements and CPP statements.
• Historical affiliations of some IBON members with leftist or activist organizations with links to the communist movement.
• Positions for advocacy coinciding with the CPP's political platform.

Whether or not one finds these views sympahtetic, the security issues cannot be ignored.

Same Color Politics

It's not just about economics, critics claim—its about ideology.

Some media are seen to lean in the same political "color" as IBON: left-leaning, anti-establishment, and usually very critical of U.S. relations and market liberalization.

This convergence accounts for why:

1. IBON is most frequently called upon for "alternative" data with little equal time for other economists.
2. Their criticisms are aired while voices in favor of reforms are marginalized.
3. The same anti-administration narratives are recycled across both IBON and some media.

The Risks of Overreliance

Even without the CPP–NPA charges, there are risks in having any single source of economic commentary:

• It limits the public's exposure to varied views.
• It runs the risk of infusing partisan ideology into purportedly objective reporting.
• It can harm media credibility if audiences perceive reporting as politically slanted—or better yet, sympathetic to groups linked to insurgents.

Moving Forward

If mainstream media wishes to maintain trust:

1. Expand the pool of experts – Feature economists from universities, think tanks, and business circles with a range of views.
2. Make disclosure – When quoting IBON, state its reported political affiliations so people can judge for themselves.
3. Encourage genuine debate – Allow the public to hear contrary analyses back to back, not separately.

For the people: stay skeptical. Don't take economic claims at face value—verify the source, check the agenda, and cross-reference with other sound data.

Last Thought:

Assuming the reports about IBON Foundation as an above-ground CPP–NPA organization are true, mainstream media's uncritical use of it for economic analysis is ultimately not just lazy reporting—it's potentially serving a group with decades of history of armed struggle against the state.

Equitable reporting is mediated by many voices and complete transparency if those voices carry political or insurgent affiliations.

No ID, No Entry

No ID, No Service? Why Vice Ganda's Take on the PH ID System Falls Short

During a recent episode of It's Showtime, host and actress Vice Ganda hit a sore spot when she accused what she called the "irony" of the Philippine ID system. Imitating a vexing situation common to many Filipinos, she demonstrated how some officials reject applicants who don't have a valid ID—when the reason they're applying in the first place is that they don't have one to start with.

"No ID? No ID. Kaya hindi ka magkaka-ID sa bansang 'to!"
– Vice Ganda, It's Showtime

The joke was met with guffaws and applause, but also prompted a necessary national discussion. Even though Vice's attitude was one shared by many, it's important that we look beyond the punchline here—because though the criticism is just in intent, the whole story is decidedly more complicated.

Google Photo

The Flawed Logic Behind the "No ID, No ID" Argument

Let’s break it down.

Yes, it does sound ridiculous at first: how can one be expected to show an ID in order to get one?

But what Vice Ganda failed to acknowledge is this: it’s not about being denied for not having any ID—it’s about verifying identity to prevent fraud, duplication, or exploitation of the system.

And the reality is, there are workarounds in place.

For example:

• When you apply for the PhilSys National ID, you don't have to submit a government ID—you can use other documents such as your birth certificate, barangay certification, or even school records.
• For other government IDs such as the Postal ID or Barangay Clearance, local certifying or witness validation can be substituted for formal IDs.
• For first-time claimants of SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG, a certificate of live birth, or even barangay certification with photo, can be preliminary validation.

So the system isn't as closed-looped or ironic as the skit paints it out to be. It's just poorly explained—and sometimes inconsistently applied, particularly at the barangay or municipal level.

The Real Problem: Bureaucratic Culture, Not the ID System Itself

Vice Ganda's remarks picked at a deeper aspect than mere ID requirements—it brushed against the bureaucratic culture that excludes the poor, the undocumented, and the marginalized.

These are:

• Local government offices with variable documentation standards
• Frontliners who are not trained or who inflexibly apply procedures
• Inadequate digital infrastructure in far-flung areas, slowing down ID processing
• Government agencies' duplicative roles causing duplicate requirements

These are genuine issues. But accusing the entire ID system as ironic or "useless" is an oversimplification of the issue—and also preempts its solution.

What the Philippine ID System Actually Aims to Solve

National ID system (PhilSys) was implemented to make government services easier to access, reduce red tape, and provide one verifiable identity for every Filipino—even the undocumented ones.

Some of its advantages are:

• Access to banking for the unbanked
• Faster disbursement of government assistance
• Streamlined SIM card, passport, and employment application registration
• Less corruption through biometric identification

In short, the national ID is meant to put an end to the very vicious cycle Vice Ganda was mocking. And though rollout has been sluggish and bumpy, it's a move towards having a digital, inclusive, and secure identification system for all Filipinos.

A More Sensible Approach: Fix the Culture, Not Mock the System

Vice Ganda has undeniable influence, and we welcome her populism. We applaud her advocacy for the masses. But let us avoid transforming grave national issues into memes or slogans.

Yes, criticize inefficiencies.

Yes, bring attention to injustices.

But let us also:

• Push for public information campaigns regarding legitimate alternative documents
• Urge LGUs and agencies to streamline processes
• Call for accountability on the part of agencies for delayed or refused ID issuance
• Support digital ID reform that goes to the grassroots

The answer isn't to destroy the system with sarcasm—it's to require its better enforcement and accessibility.

Last Thoughts

The ID system in the Philippines is not perfect. It is not, however, necessarily broken or ironic either. It's a tool that—if enforced well—can empower millions and bridge gaps in access to public services.

Rather than make people laugh in despair, let's make them see their rights, their choices, and their strength to make them demand more.

Because the joke is not so much the ID requirement—it's when we allow myths to dissuade real reform.

About the impeachment

Impeachment of VP Sara Duterte: What Happened and Why It Matters

On February 5, 2025, Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio became the first sitting Philippine vice president to face impeachment by the House of Representatives, marking a historic and highly controversial political episode. Philstar.com+10Philstar.com+10TIME+10

The Complaints: What Was She Accused Of?

Multiple groups filed three separate impeachment complaints between December 2024 and January 2025, by civil society organizations, religious leaders, lawyers, and victims’ families. 

Philstar.com+3Philstar.com+3Wikipedia+3

Allegations included:

• Misuse and malversation of over ₱612 million in confidential funds for the Office of the Vice President and DepEd. Philstar.com+10Philstar.com+10Wikipedia+10
• 
  
• Betrayal of public trust, graft & corruption, and undermining legislative oversight. AP News+15Philstar.com+15Philstar.com+15
• 
  
• Threats and extremist rhetoric, including alleged plotting to assassinate officials and inciting sedition. Wikipedia+2YouTube+2

The complaints consolidated into a fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by 215 House members—a clear majority above the constitutional minimum of 102—fast-tracking it to the Senate without committee referrals. rappler.com+12PCIJ.org+12Philstar.com+12

The Legal Process: From House to Senate

Once the third complaint was filed, the House leadership invoked the "third mode" impeachment rule, allowing the complaint—now treated as Articles of Impeachment—to go directly to the Senate. PCIJ.org

What comes next:

House-appointed prosecutors (11 members) will argue the case in the Senate. Philstar.com

The Senate serves as the impeachment court; a two-thirds vote (16 of 24) is required to convict and remove Duterte.

Conviction leads to lifetime disqualification from public office, though no penalties like jail time are automatically imposed. Philstar.com+1

Civil society leaders—including Caritas Philippines—have called for a swift, impartial process, warning that delays weaken public trust. Reddit

What It Signals Politically

The impeachment came amid a bitter breakdown between Sara Duterte and allies of President Marcos Jr., who once traveled together during the 2022 elections. pna.gov.ph+9TIME+9YouTube+9

Her opponents—many now aligned with Marcos—worked to quickly secure the one-third vote needed. Notably, Sandro Marcos, the president’s son, endorsed the complaint. Philstar.com+1

Still, many Dutertes maintain a strong political base. Despite impeachment, Rodrigo Duterte was re-elected mayor of Davao while detained at the ICC, and other family allies won limelight Senate seats. TIME+1

Supreme Court Intervention: A Critical Twist

On July 25, 2025, the Philippine Supreme Court dismissed the impeachment complaint—not on merits but because it violated the constitutional rule banning multiple impeachment attempts within one year. Since three complaints had already been verified, the fourth was deemed unconstitutional. reuters.com

This ruling halts the Senate trial entirely for now and strengthens Sara Duterte’s political position, especially as a frontrunner for the 2028 presidential race. reuters.com

Key Takeaways

Final Perspective

Sara Duterte’s impeachment underscores a fractured political landscape in the Philippines. While accountability mechanisms are at work, the process also mirrors power struggles between two dynasties.

Her eventual fate is now paused—not decided—pending procedural timing. The constitutional safeguard that protected her may also embolden more legal challenges in the future.

A failed system

Cracks in the Nation: When Corruption Is Made Concrete

We walk in the Philippines on streets that deceive our feet and dump our faith into the concrete. We bring our children to schools where the paint is quicker in drying than the promises. We go to hospitals more concerned about the cost than the cure. This is not development—this is deceit incorporated into the blueprint of the system.

We live in a nation where bridges curve not due to traffic but under the weight of embezzled public money. Schools are built not to develop minds but to produce invoices. Hospitals are designed not to heal the ill but to hemorrhage government funds.

When concrete walls delaminate prior to the first day of classes being taught, we know there is something amiss. When a flood sweeps over a street freshly paved only the month before, we do not have to be engineers to feel betrayed. We know. Because we live it.

Google Photo

When Corruption Becomes Infrastructure

Philippine corruption is not a theoretical abstraction or a political slogan—it is infrastructure. It is in the rebar that is too flexible. It is in the classrooms that flood. It is in the bridges that collapse after ribbon-cutting ceremonies. This corruption is not merely a moral failing; it is the gradual, public hanging of the common good—signed off in triplicate and buried in bureaucracy.

We're told not to ask questions. We're told to let the experts handle it. We're told that we wouldn't be able to grasp it. But we're paying the price—and with our taxes, with our security, and sometimes with our lives.

The Real Cost: Broken Trust

Trust lost can be more difficult to restore than any bridge or monument. Each time a shortcut is used, each time the public money is diverted to be used for individual enrichment, the nation forfeits more than money—it loses hope. The people lose trust in government, in institutions, in the very notion that things will get better.

This rot is not concealed—it pervades everything. And still, silence is promoted. Passivity is the norm. Dissent is frowned upon.

The Call to Action: Inspect. Question. Speak.

It is not un-American to demand more.

It is our responsibility to ask questions about the projects that are undertaken in our name and with our funds. We are entitled to call for transparency. To visit roads and schools. To photograph decaying infrastructure. To object when our lives are put at risk by greed at the top.

Let it be said clearly: Silence is the concrete they would like to pour over our resistance. Each time we remain silent, they make a gain. Each time we shrug our shoulders at a clogged drainage system or a collapsed classroom ceiling, they get stronger.

So we must investigate. We must ask questions. We must record. We must voice our opinions.

Because if we don't, we become guilty of the burial of responsibility.

Hope, Built with Honesty

A country isn't constructed upon glitzy ribbon-cutting and golden-worded speeches. A country is constructed upon honor, openness, and service. We are worthy of bridges that won't buckle. Hospitals that will heal. Schools that will ignite. Storm-tested roads that hold.

They aren't frills—they are rights. And we won't get them through someone else being magnanimous with us. We need to make them.

Let's make a nation in which public projects really work for the public. Let's bring down the walls of silence and put up steel-strong scrutiny. Let's pave roads not with lies—but with truth, fairness, and accountability.

Is he even relevant?

Richard Heydarian: Should We Trust His Insights?

Richard Heydarian is a name that tends to generate controversy among political and academic circles. A well-known political analyst, columnist, and writer, Heydarian is regarded for his controversial views on geopolitics, international relations, and Philippine politics. But the question is — should we trust his insights? 

Richard Heydarian, Wikipedia

This blog takes a closer look at Heydarian's background, his perspectives, and how to critically evaluate his views.

Who is Richard Heydarian?

Richard Heydarian is a political science professor who is also a prolific author. He writes for major publications such as Al Jazeera, The New York Times, and Foreign Affairs. With a keen interest in Southeast Asian geopolitics, he has also done analyses on regional security, economic patterns, and leadership dynamics.

He has also written influential books like "The Rise of Duterte: A Populist Revolt Against Elite Democracy" and "The Indo-Pacific: Trump, China, and the New Struggle for Global Mastery", which have established his position as one of the greatest voices in the industry.

Why People Trust Heydarian?

1. Academic Credibility
   Heydarian is well-educated in political science, hence having a balanced point of view towards international and regional affairs. He is frequently sought after in academia and media platforms.
2. Media Presence
   A frequent face on global news networks, Heydarian provides clear and concise analysis that makes sense of intricate political events. His skill at deconstructing complex ideas into palatable insights is admirable.
3. Independent Perspective
   Unlike pundits who are aligned with one political party or another, Heydarian comes across as an independent analyst. His frank and critical appraisal of governments — foreign and domestic — has proven his interest in free interpretation.

Reasons for Skepticism

1. Personal BiasAlthough no analyst is completely bias-free, Heydarian's strong views tend to be polarizing at times. His critics suggest that his views might be biased towards certain narratives, which may affect the objectivity of his analysis.
2. Controversial Statements
   One of the examples that generated a lot of backlash was Heydarian's statement equating some areas of Mindanao to "sub-Saharan Africa" in economic underdevelopment. Although he probably meant to highlight the economic plight of the region, most Filipinos took offense and felt the comparison was reductionist. The social media backlash was quick, with individuals condemning him for reductionism in Mindanao's complex socio-economic context. This is an example of how tone and framing can at times overpower the intended message.
3. Selective Criticism
   Certain critics argue that Heydarian's criticisms might be more selective in targeting particular political leaders or policies, and less on other pertinent views.
4. Media Framing
   As a regular media commentator, Heydarian's opinions may at times be manipulated or magnified to suit particular narratives. It is important that readers and listeners contextualize and frame his utterances.

How to Analyze Heydarian's Insights?

1. Cross-Reference with Other Sources
   Don't just depend on the view of a single analyst. Compare Heydarian's opinions to that of other reputable analysts and institutions to gain a wider perspective.
2. Take into Account the Context
   Evaluate the context within which Heydarian is presenting his opinions. Is he giving a personal view, an academic analysis, or a media commentary? Any context can shape his tone and emphasis.
3. Identify Potential Bias
   Acknowledge that biases are inherent. The trick is to recognize them and balance their influence on the argument being made. Seek evidence-based reasoning and credible sources in his analysis.

Conclusion

So, do we trust Richard Heydarian? The answer is not a straightforward yes or no. To trust an analyst is not to blindly accept — it is to critically engage with what they have to say. Heydarian's experience and knowledge provide useful insights, but they are only one of many voices you should listen to when developing your own opinions.

In an age of information overload, the capacity to think critically and evaluate perspectives from multiple dimensions matters. You may agree or disagree with Heydarian, but his political contributions offer a foundation for richer dialogue.

At the end of the day, trust isn't granted — it's developed by being transparent, credible, and providing consistent insight. Be informed, be critical, and allow plurality of thought to inform your worldview.

The Irony of UP's Paper: A Strong Case for Constitutional Reform

Dear UP: Your Own Research Supports Charter Change

The University of the Philippines (UP), our country's top institution of higher learning, recently came out with a discussion paper that has lit up the reform movement. On initial reading, the paper seems to doubt or warn against constitutional revisions—especially those on economic liberalization and structural reform in governance.

But here's the twist: if you read the paper closely, it actually supports the call for constitutional change.

Let's discuss why.

The Paper Doesn't Oppose Charter Change—It Reinforces It

Contrary to some media analyses, the UP discussion paper is not an argument against constitutional liberalization. It rather emphasizes the imperatives of:

• A Parliamentary-Federal system, and
• Open Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policies

These are precisely the pillars that constitutional reform advocates have been championing for decades.

So let’s stop pretending this paper undermines the reform movement. It confirms what we’ve known all along—that systemic change is necessary if the Philippines is ever to escape the economic and political stagnation we’ve been trapped in since 1987.

Why the Current Constitution Holds Us Back?

Here's the uncomfortable truth: the 1987 Constitution is architecturally a relic and essentially defective. It has yielded a government plagued by:

• Name-recall politics over competence
• Patronage appointments, stifling merit-based leadership
• Executive-legislative gridlock, preventing long-term policy consistency
• Policy inconsistency, courtesy of non-renewable six-year presidential terms
• Weak system of accountability, restricted to politicized impeachment
• Red tape and bloated bureaucracy, discouraging local and foreign investors

These're not political mere annoyances. They're inherent obstacles to making the Philippines an economically competitive, dynamic, and responsive country.

What Other Countries Did Right—and Why We Should Learn from Them

South Korea, Japan, and China are typically referred to as economic miracles. But let's be real about how they achieved this.

Prior to opening up their markets to global competition, they constructed well-established, centralized developmental states. They possessed:

• Long-term planning
• Policy consistency
• Effective governance frameworks
• Strong system of accountability

We, however, are attempting to open up our economy and yet holding on to a political system that is the opposite of these ideals.

In political science, this has been called a "fragile state." Gunnar Myrdal advocated developmental states that employ state power not for the enrichment of elites, but to spur inclusive growth. This takes the strength of institutions—something that the 1987 Constitution simply does not enable us to construct.

A Call to the University of the Philippines: Lead, Don't Stall

UP, you are an intellectual beacon. But with great power comes great responsibility.

Rather than doubling down on fear or vagueness, you might help spearhead a rational, fact-based debate about constitutional reform—not put it off with stale fears and reused talking points.

The hysteria about term extensions, foreign ownership of land, or alleged "loss of sovereignty" has been dismantled repeatedly. The actual threat is keeping a system that still rewards incompetence, fosters corruption, and hinders our country's progress.

UP official website

The Bottom Line: Let's Be Honest

If you take your own research seriously, then you'll have to confess: Charter Change is not a political power grab. It is a nation-building necessity.

So to the scholars and economists of UP: this is not a criticism of your scholarship. It's an appeal to put it to use.

Support constitutional reform—not for any political faction, but for the future of the Filipino people.

Final Thought

The Philippines cannot be a prosperous state with an impotent 1987 Constitution.

If we desire genuine change, it's not enough that we have better leaders. We need better systems. Systems that make people accountable, pay attention to competence, invite investment, and effectively deliver services.

That will not happen under the 1987 Constitution.

It's time we face that reality—and move on.

_________________________________>
UP's Academic Paper: https://econ.upd.edu.ph/.../ind.../dp/article/view/1552/1037

Why we need reforms in the Philippines

Why Changing the System — Not Just the Leaders — Is the Key to a Better Philippines

Introduction

Many Filipinos believe that the country only needs good leaders to fix its problems. We often say, “If only we had honest and competent officials, things would be better.” But this belief overlooks a fundamental truth: systems shape behavior more than individual morals do.

From neuroscience to behavioral economics, evidence suggests that a flawed system can corrupt even well-intentioned leaders, while a well-structured system can encourage good governance. The real solution to the Philippines’ challenges is not just electing better leaders but redesigning the system itself.

Google Photo

The Science: Your Brain Adapts to Systems, Not Just Morals

Modern neuroscience reveals that human behavior is largely shaped by the environment and the incentives it provides.

The dopamine system in our brain learns which actions lead to rewards. If corruption leads to power and wealth, politicians are neurologically conditioned to repeat those behaviors. This explains why many politicians, once they experience success through corruption, continue engaging in it. (Schultz, 2015 – Neuron)

Key Takeaway: The system, not just individual morality, determines long-term political behavior.

Behavioral Economics: Systems > Character

Studies in behavioral economics (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008) show that even well-meaning individuals make poor decisions when placed in bad systems. This is called “choice architecture”—the idea that our choices are heavily influenced by the environment in which we make them.

In the Philippines, elections are won not by the most competent leaders but by those with the best name recall, patronage networks, and financial resources. This forces even good candidates to play the game or risk losing.

Key Takeaway: The problem isn’t just corrupt politicians; it’s the rules of the game that reward bad behavior.

Real-World Evidence: A System That Rewards the Wrong Behaviors

1. Political dynasties dominate elections

74% of Congress members come from political families (Ateneo School of Government, 2019).

Weak political parties, expensive campaigns, and lack of campaign finance reform favor family-based rule rather than meritocracy.

2. Presidentialism breeds inefficiency

The Philippines' presidential system makes it difficult to remove an ineffective president, even in crises.

The separation of the executive and legislative branches often results in gridlock, delaying much-needed reforms.

3. Weak, personality-driven political parties

Party-switching (balimbing culture) is common, as politicians shift allegiances based on power, not principles.

There is little long-term vision in political parties, leading to short-term populist policies rather than sustainable development.

Key Takeaway: The current system encourages nepotism, inefficiency, and short-term thinking over national progress.

The Alternative: Structural Reforms That Promote Good Governance

Many successful countries have restructured their political systems to encourage accountability and good governance. The Philippines can learn from them by implementing

1. Parliamentary Government

The Prime Minister is accountable to Parliament and can be replaced if ineffective.

The executive and legislative branches work together, reducing political deadlock.

Party coalitions must collaborate, encouraging long-term planning over personality-driven politics.

2. Federalism with Institutional Safeguards

Regional governments can address local needs without excessive dependence on Manila.

Decentralization encourages competition and innovation among regions.

Safeguards like transparent campaign finance laws, competitive political parties, and independent watchdog institutions prevent power hoarding at the regional level.

Key Takeaway: Well-structured political systems incentivize honesty, competence, and collaboration.

Why Structure Comes First — Not Just Good People

As Dr. BJ Fogg of Stanford's Behavior Design Lab explains:

If you want to change people's behavior, you need to change their environment.

Good systems can prevent bad leaders from causing harm, while bad systems can make even good leaders ineffective.

The Philippines cannot rely on waiting for the perfect leader. Instead, it must create a system that ensures leaders are held accountable and rewarded for competent governance.

Key Takeaway: Change the system first, and better leaders will follow.

Action Steps: What We Can Do as a Nation

To create a better system, Filipinos must push for:

1. Campaign finance and political party reforms – Reduce patronage politics and level the playing field.
2. Gradual transition to a parliamentary or federal system – Ensure institution-building before full implementation.
3. Strengthening watchdog institutions – Give agencies like COA, Ombudsman, and COMELEC more independence and power.
4. Public education and civic engagement – An informed electorate is the foundation of a strong democracy.

Conclusion

The Philippines’ biggest obstacle is not the lack of good leaders but the presence of a system that rewards the wrong behaviors. To achieve lasting progress, we must stop waiting for ideal politicians and start building a system that fosters competence, integrity, and accountability.

Final Thought: Don’t wait for better leaders to change the system. Change the system, and better leaders will emerge.

Sources

1. Schultz, W. (2015). Neuronal Reward and Decision Signals: From Theories to Data. Neuron. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.04.019
2. Donella Meadows. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer
3. BJ Fogg, Ph.D. (2009). Behavior Model for Persuasive Design. https://behaviormodel.org
4. Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness
5. Ateneo School of Government (2019). The Persistence of Political Dynasties in the Philippines
6. Stanford Social Neuroscience Lab (2012). The Role of Social Context in Moral Decision-Making

No more lame excuses

Enough with the Excuses: Why Constitutional Reform is Long Overdue in the Philippines

From President Ramos in 1995 to President Marcos Jr. in 2025, the Philippines has seen at least 13 serious efforts to amend or revise the 1987 Constitution. And yet—every single time—the same tired arguments are employed to stall change.

Let us dissect these exhausted excuses and finally discuss why constitutional reform (Charter Change or Cha-Cha) is not only needed, but imperative to the Philippines.

Google Photo

The Usual Anti-Charter Change Excuses—Shot Down

1. "It will be used to extend terms!"

This specter has dogged each effort, but it's a scare tactic—no valid argument. Constitutional change can be effected without term extensions. Safeguards can be included.

2. “Foreigners will own our lands!”

False. What we’re talking about is economic liberalization—allowing foreign direct investment (FDI) in key sectors. Land ownership can still be protected through enabling laws. Singapore, Vietnam, and even China allow foreign investment—yet they’re not colonized.

3. “We’ll be colonized again.”

That's not the way globalization goes in the 21st century. Foreign partners are what we need to construct industries, generate jobs, and introduce technologies. Economic nationalism cannot be equated with isolationism.

4. "It's not a priority."

It's never been a priority for decades—and that's why we're still adrift with high poverty, low wages, and massive emigration of talent overseas. How can actual development occur if we never address the underlying causes?

5. "The issue is the politicians, not the Constitution."

Actually—it's both. The existing Constitution allows political dynasties, party switching, and power centralization. A dysfunctional system yields dysfunctional leadership.

6. "It's poor timing."

That's been the rationale for 30 years. When, precisely, is the perfect time? In the middle of a disaster? An election? The response is always "not now." That's the point: there's never a "perfect" time—we need gutsy action, now.

7. "We already have the best Constitution in the world."

That was the statement of somebody who blocked each move to contemporize the Charter. But honestly, a Charter that restricts foreign capital, permits dynasties, and concentrates Manila power is not best—it's a relic.

8. "It hasn't been properly implemented yet."

So we’re supposed to wait another 40 years? That’s a cop-out. The flaws are structural. No amount of implementation will fix anti-growth, anti-progress provisions.

9. “We don’t have budget for federalism.”

We don’t have the budget because the economy can’t grow fast enough. Federalism, if done right, empowers regions to generate and manage their own wealth. That’s how Malaysia, Germany, and the U.S. do it.

10. “We need aid, not Cha-Cha.”

Aid is temporary. Reform is forever. The greatest assistance we can offer Filipinos is a more excellent system that will not drive them out of the house just to survive.

11. "It will be hijacked by corrupt politicians."

Not if the people remain watchful. Reform won't be ideal, but sticking with a damaged system because we are fearful of abuse is tantamount to not having surgery because you fear malpractice.

12. "It's all for political gain."

Of course, some will attempt to manipulate the process. But that's precisely why we need transparency, public education, and robust citizen engagement—not fear-mongering or apathy.

The Actual Problem: Our Constitution Is Outdated

The 1987 Constitution, written in the aftermath of the Marcos transition, was composed with fear as a concern—rather than growth. It is filled with protectionist laws, Manila-biased government, and bureaucratic straitjackets that choke off innovation and decentralization.

We are living in 2025, but we are living with laws and structures drafted in the shadow of 1986. Our neighbors, on the other hand, progressed long ago.

How Other Southeast Asian Countries Reformed

• Vietnam: Opened its economy in the 1990s. Now one of the fastest-growing in Asia.
• Malaysia: Overhauled education, infrastructure, and investment policies.
• Thailand: Revised its Constitution to enhance governance and accountability.
• Singapore: Constructed its world-class economy through structural reform, not leadership alone.

The outcome?

More employment, better pay, less brain drain—and quicker development.

Benefits of Constitutional Reform in the Philippines

1. More Employment and Investments

Revising economic provisions will allow foreign capital to penetrate industries—creating jobs and better pay.

2. Balanced Regional Development

With federalism or enhanced local autonomy, regions are able to develop according to their resources and priorities, putting an end to the "Imperial Manila" syndrome.

3. Enhanced Political Accountability

Political party reform and anti-turncoat laws would promote platform-oriented politics, not elections based on personalities.

4. Better Public Services

Areas controlling their own coffers translate to quicker infrastructure, improved health care, and tailored education solutions.

5. Less Migration and OFW Dependency

With greater opportunities at home, Filipinos won't need to leave their families behind just to work.

6. A New, Competitive Economy

Brought in line with international standards, our economic laws enable the Philippines to compete equally and entice long-term investments.

Conclusion: System Change, Not Leadership Change

Let's break free from the same old anti-reform propaganda.

Constitutonal Reform isn't about prolonging terms, selling the nation, or taking over—it's about liberating the Filipino people from a malfunctioning, outmoded system that has been unable to usher in prosperity for nearly 40 years.

We owe it to ourselves and to the future to put down fear and pick up on true, fearless reform.

It's not a matter of who holds power—it's about getting the system in order so power works for people.

Ready to take action or get more involved? Join civic education campaigns, reach out to your local leaders, and assist in making the call for a better tomorrow louder through systemic reform.

Leadership matters but systems matter more

Debunking the Myth: "The Philippines Only Thrived Under Duterte" — and Why We Need Systemic Reform

A common myth keeps going around on the internet: that the Philippines was poor under Cory Aquino until Noynoy Aquino, and only under President Rodrigo Duterte did real change actually start. Its proponents point to gigantic allocations for infrastructure, free college tuition, and increased pensions as proof that "it was all possible—so why wasn't it done before?"

It sounds good at face value. But let's look at the historical realities, economic indicators, and structural framework to see what actually transpired—and why it's not so much about a single leader, but a deeper flawed system which keeps the Philippines in check irrespective of who is holding office.

Photo: LBB Online

1. The country was poor from Cory to Noynoy. – FALSE

Upon taking office in 1986, President Cory Aquino was left with a ruined economy from the Marcos regime—a debt of more than $26 billion, widespread crony capitalism, and debased democratic institutions. Her six-year term was focused on institutional reconstruction, ratifying the 1987 Constitution, reinstalling democracy but also installing restrictions still debated today.

Economic Growth:

• Fidel Ramos (1992–1998): Spurred reforms and deregulation; growth was averaged at 5%.
• Gloria Arroyo (2001–2010): Attained robust growth (4.5% average) despite worldwide crises.
• Noynoy Aquino (2010–2016): Provided 6.2% average GDP growth, investment-grade credit ratings, and enhanced global economic rankings.

FACT: Between 1986 and 2016, the Philippines was making steady gains. The notion that "nothing happened for 30 years" is contrary to facts.

2. There was no funding during PNoy's time. – MISLEADING

Noynoy Aquino's administration was known for fiscal discipline, aiming to reduce debt and corruption. Many of Duterte’s programs were made possible due to the healthy economy and stable reserves left by PNoy.

Major initiatives under PNoy:

• Sin Tax Reform (2012): Funded healthcare expansion
• K-12 Education Reform
• Infrastructure budget rose from 1.8% to 5.4% of GDP
• Social and education spending significantly increased

FACT: The Duterte administration built on these gains, not created them from scratch.

3. Duterte accomplished more than anyone else. – EXAGGERATED

Duterte did initiate important projects, such as Build, Build, Build, but most of these were continuations or renamed versions of initiatives initiated under past presidents:

• NAIA Expressway and MRT-7: Initiated under PNoy
• Clark Green City: Conceived under Arroyo
• Universal Health Care: Foundation laid by PNoy's PhilHealth reforms
• And while Duterte ramped up spending:
• The Philippine debt ballooned to over P13.7 trillion
• Only 12 of the 119 Build, Build, Build projects were finished by 2022
• Pharmally corruption scandal revealed lack of transparency

FACT: Mega budgets and boisterous policies do not always translate to mega impact.

4. "Everything was free under Duterte." – MISREPRESENTED

Most programs were not new:

• Free college tuition: Suggested long before Duterte; written by Bam Aquino
• Land distribution: Initiated with Cory Aquino's CARP in 1988
• Healthcare and veterans' pensions: Expanded but not created under Duterte

FACT: These weren’t Duterte’s sole achievements—they were part of a larger, decades-long effort by various administrations, lawmakers, and civil society.

5. LPs were just corrupt, and Duterte stopped them. – BASELESS AND DIVISIVE

Corruption has occurred under all administrations. Duterte’s term faced:

• Pharmally scandal (P10B in pandemic supplies)
• Intelligence funds with no audit
• Drug war abuses with minimal accountability

FACT: Good governance requires checks and balances, not blind allegiance to any one party or figure.

6. The Real Issue: A Flawed and Archaic System

While arguments storm about who "did more," the underlying problem is still left untouched: the 1987 Constitution, composed during an atmosphere of fear and change during the period after Martial Law, has become antiquated and structurally defective.

Primary Defects of the Present System:

• Excessive concentration of power in "Imperial Manila"
• Limitations on foreign direct investment (FDI) dissuade job creation
• Weakened political party system – personality over platforms
• Obstacles to regional progress and federalism
• Bureaucratic and slow legislation and justice system

Other ASEAN Countries Reformed:

• Singapore reformed early and is now the model of governance
• Malaysia and Thailand reformed constitutions for better governance
• Vietnam, being communist, opened up its economy and emerged as one of Asia's fastest-growing markets

The Philippines, on the other hand, is mired with a hyper-presidential, unitary system which renders true progress in slow, uneven, and unsustainable terms.

7. We Need Constitutional Reform—Not Just a New President

The fact is, even if you choose the most effective leader, if the system is flawed, improvement will always be constrained.

What we need:

• Transition to federalism or parliamentary system for local empowerment
• Economic Charter Change to entice more investments and employment
• Strengthening of political parties and anti-dynasty measures
• Decentralization of government services and funds

FACT: The Constitution should empower the country, not chain it.

Conclusion: Leadership Matters—But Systems Matter More

Rodrigo Duterte also had his part to play, but it's not true that he single-handedly changed the nation or that nobody contributed. Each administration has built on the previous one. Genuine change will not come from allegiance to any personality—it will come from structural change that will bring sustainable, inclusive growth for all Filipinos.

Until we update the old 1987 Constitution, we will just keep on electing leaders with grand ideas only to see them trapped in a slow, imperfect system.

Let's stop squabbling about personalities. Let's begin repairing the system.

Sources:

• World Bank Philippines Data: https://data.worldbank.org/country/philippines
• Rappler Fact-Check: https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/fact-check
• Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA): https://psa.gov.ph
• NEDA Public Policy Briefs
• Senate and House Legislative Archives
• Asian Development Bank Reports
• "Why Charter Change Is Essential" – UP School of Economics Discussion Paper
• Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS)

Is heavy traffic a sign of progress?

Is Heavy Traffic in the Philippines a Sign of Progress?

Introduction

The Philippines, and specifically Metro Manila, is infamous for heavy traffic. Many say this congestion is a mark of economic progress: it means there are more cars in circulation, more people living in urban centers. But is it truly a mark of progress or just an indicator of inefficiency that stands as an impediment to sustainable growth? Let's talk about it on this blog and explore whether heavy traffic is a sign of advancement or the symptom of something else deeper. 

On the surface, heavy traffic may be perceived as a symbol of progress. Metro Manila, after all, is an attractive place for businesses, creating jobs and increasing consumer spending. Increasing vehicle sales, infrastructure development, and busy streets are usually considered indicators of economic vitality. 

However, a closer examination reveals a more complex picture. Traffic congestion can also reflect poor urban planning, insufficient public transportation, and unregulated growth. It’s not just about the number of cars on the road; it’s about how cities accommodate their increasing populations.

A progressive society should aim for mobility and efficiency. Traffic jams, on the other hand, cost the economy billions in lost productivity, increase fuel consumption, and degrade air quality. Can we really call this heavy traffic a sign of progress?

Photo: Ben Briones

Debunking or refuting this claim

It is way too simplistic to argue that heavy traffic equates to progress. True progress should relate to the quality of life rather than economic activity. Singapore and Tokyo are examples of cities where urbanization doesn't necessarily go with crippling traffic. Instead, these cities have focused on efficient public transportation systems, smart traffic management, and policies that put people before vehicles.

In contrast, Metro Manila is plagued by overdependence on private cars, inadequate public transport, and urban sprawl. Even as GDP grows, these issues persist, so it is more a product of mismanagement rather than success.

Resources

For further reading, I suggest checking out:

1. Asian Development Bank Reports – Information on infrastructure and urbanization in Southeast Asia.
2. World Bank Urban Development Series -Case studies on sustainable city planning.
3. Move As One Coalition -A local action coalition that calls for change and reform in public transport, particularly in the Philippines.

Takeaways

Traffic congestion is not one of the natural indicators of prosperity but rather a messy one associated with urban development and governance.

Good and clean urban planning, a functioning public transport system, and efficient traffic management define good progress.

The Philippines, in comparison to better-functioning cities reflects the difference between prosperity and quality of life.

Conclusion

While heavy traffic in the Philippines may indicate economic activities, it ultimately points towards inefficiencies in urban planning and transportation systems. Progress has to be measured by how good a city is at taking care of its people such that growth benefits everyone. As Filipinos, we must fight for smarter solutions that are sustainable and that represent real progress, not just the illusion of progress.

Let's work to make these congested roads avenues of real development.

Author's Note:

Have you been stuck in hours of a traffic jam in Metro Manila? Very frustrating, right? Not one to accept as unavoidable, let's instead explore what we can do about changing this narrative. We need to keep the discussion flowing. Let's start chatting in the comments section.

The fight for your digital connection

PLDT vs. the Konektadong Pinoy Act: Whose Interest Really Comes First?

PLDT recently made headlines after announcing that it would sue if the Konektadong Pinoy Act becomes law. The company argues that the bill’s open-access provisions could threaten network security and create unfair competition.

Google Photo

On paper, the Konektadong Pinoy Act seeks to liberalize the data transmission market to more operators, with the promise of providing cheaper, faster, and more accessible internet for every Filipino. For a nation that perennially finds itself among the list of countries with the slowest and most pricey internet in Southeast Asia, this sounds like a step in the right direction.

The Problem with PLDT's Stance

Rather than endorsing the bill's intentions to improve internet access and pricing, PLDT seems more interested in safeguarding its own market stronghold. For decades, the Philippine internet market has been dominated by a handful of large players, and the absence of real competition has maintained prices high while speeds fall far behind international standards.

With a proposal to open up the industry to greater competition now on the table, PLDT is resisting—naming threats that, as theoretical, are legitimate but could just as easily be addressed with proper safeguards. The timing and tenor of their resistance beg an important question: Do they care about national security, or do they fear losing domination of the market?

The Price of Monopoly to the Filipino People

Filipinos have long suffered:

• Sluggish internet speeds that impede productivity, learning, and entertainment.
• Exorbitant monthly charges relative to other regional countries.
• Insufficient selection when it comes to carriers.

These problems are not mere aggravations—each one directly affects the nation's economic development, competitiveness, and capacity to be a part of a digital society.

By maintaining the market closed to greater competition, dominant carriers such as PLDT have had little reason to focus on being competitive or reducing prices.

Why PLDT Must Be the Solution, Not the Problem

If PLDT really cares about its customers, it ought to be at the forefront of figuring out how to make open-access happen, not sending lawyers at the first hint of progress. This could involve:

• Working with policymakers to get security measures absolutely watertight.
• Working with new entrants to build out the infrastructure, not shutting them out.
• Competing on improved service and innovation, not market exclusivity.

After all, a safe, affordable, and speedy internet is in the best interest of the whole country—including PLDT subscribers.

The Bigger Picture

The Konektadong Pinoy Act is more than faster home Wi-Fi; it's about digital empowerment—empowering students, entrepreneurs, remote workers, and underserved communities to be full participants in the new economy.

If we continue to let monopolistic behavior call the shots on the future of our internet, we will keep lagging behind our Southeast Asian neighbors who have championed openness, competition, and innovation.

Bottom line: It's time to make connectivity for the people a priority over the interests of the few. The Konektadong Pinoy Act is given a fair shake—with out choking it with corporate fear of competition.

Yes to constitutional reform

Why an awful system will always defeat a good individual: Understanding the power of structures over personal effort. 

Well, in that utopian world, all one needs is hard work and talent with ethics to make the cut; one should rise or fall according to the worth of one's contributions and commitment. In real life, though, structures we work within—be that at work, in society, or in any organized setup—have the power to decide who shall come out top. Bad system, with flaws in its structure and biased, will always overpower the best and most determined of humans. And here's why:

Google Photo

1. Systems Define the Rules, Resources, and Boundaries

At its core, a system is a network of interconnected pieces that define how things work in a given environment. Policies, hierarchies, workflows, resources, and cultural norms all serve as those pieces. Each determines who receives how much of what opportunities are available; each decides who makes which decisions and at what times; and each outlines who benefits most from those decisions.

No person—howevertalented or well-intentioned—must play by these rules. A bad system warps these factors in a direction that inhibits real progress, favors the few, or is simply ineffective. Consider an organization that promotes you based on whom you know rather than how well you do the job. Even when a diligent and talented employee exists in such an environment, his potential upward movement is blocked by the system, which prefers connections over competence.

2. The Inertia of a Bad System

Systems have inertia, which refers to a resistance to change born of entrenched processes, vested interests, and cultural norms. Thus, even for the best of people who are proactive, the challenges they face when trying to change or work against the system are insurmountable.

This concept manifests in quite a few daily life examples. In industries in which bureaucratic red tape hinders innovation, even the brilliance of the finest experts can get stuck in an endless wheel of authorization processes and outdated procedures. Time rolls by, and the best either give up or have endured until they conclude that no matter their efforts, it is impossible to overcome the weight of inertia of the system itself.

3. Changing Rules and Moving Goalposts

You decide to run a race, determined to win it. You train hard, perfect your technique, and visualize winning by crossing the finish line. But halfway in your actual run, new rules are introduced: you are forced to take the longer route while everyone else is allowed on the shortcut, then finish line is changed so that it's farther off, and requirements to win are made to favor a few. Win becomes impossible, no matter how capable you are, in this scenario.

This analogy can apply anywhere systems are rigged or biased. Be it in politics, corporate setups, or social strata, people who try to operate within a system where the rules are constantly changed or skewed end up badly. Their works may seem exemplary, but the structure is designed so only a few make it to the top.

4. Why Talented and Ethical People Fail

Ethics and strong principles are great qualities of a person. However, in a bad system, they work against the one human being like obstacles rather than assets. It is because in a flawed system, some wrong practices or corrupt dynamics tend to dominate. Good people who may have chosen to maintain ethics and fairness may refuse to play the dirty game that others-a group of people with fewer scruples-will enter. The end result is having the good people sit on the bench or be penalized for being too good.

Some examples of this struggle are whistleblowers in many organizations and societal systems. They decide to act for what they believe is the right thing to do to combat corruption or misconduct. But without proper protections and a system that generally supports transparency, such whistleblowers often suffer retaliation, the loss of their job, or the isolation of being a whistleblower. The very framework they trusted to uphold justice turns against them, showing even the bravest acts can be undermined by a system designed to preserve the status quo.

5. Systemic Bias and Inequality

An unequal, biased system will always be partial to certain groups rather than others, even if the individual may deserve it. Institutionalized discrimination, be it on grounds of gender, race, income levels, or any other characteristic, structures opportunities and resources in an uneven manner.

For instance, take the corporate world wherein unconscious bias directs who should be hired, who promoted, and whose ideas matter. An individual from a background of low representation may bring innovative ideas and offer exemplary performance, but a system infested with bias will undervalue those contributions, make room for those people who fit that "preferred" profile.

Even in an education system, structural inequalities play a huge part. Well-educated children with great academic achievement and good career prospects emerge from well-endowed schools in comparison to capable peers who went through poorly funded schools. However talented and ambitious the child may be, a system, which favors one group over the other, only allows a chosen few to be able to succeed.

6. Resisting the Constrictions of a Poor System

However, what is clear is that a bad system can overpower individual effort; it never suggests that the situation cannot be changed. The way forward to reform lies in awareness and collective action:

Collective Advocacy: In most cases, change requires a group of people who come together and fight against and shape the system. Whether it's a demand for good working practices by workers, demands for policy changes by citizens, or an increase in education equity by students, collective voices have power than any individual voice.

Leadership and Responsibility: Change in the system occurs when leaders demonstrate a sincere intention to change. Leading with integrity, to be more effective and better, is what the leaders have to do. Systems can be changed even by the most Herculean ones by a leader who looks for transparency, justice, and flexibility.

Building Alternative Structures. Sometimes, the only way to fight a bad system is to build a better one. For example, this can involve building startups that challenge the outdated corporate practices; community cooperatives working for equal access to resources; or organizations with emphasis on diversity and inclusion.

7. Conclusion: The Power of Change and Persistence

Indeed, bad system overthrows a good man in the short run. Systems set the rules, distributing resources. For this reason, systems set the environment that people work within. However, history teaches that resolute effort, collective action, and the boldness to challenge obtuse structures can result in meaningful change.

It is through understanding what bad systems do not allow that expectations are managed and efforts directed in the right way. It teaches individual effort but changing the rules of the game very often calls for a concerted and long-term strategy. Then, for the most talented and ethical persons, aligning with other people who share their values and working together then represents the way forward past the inertia of a flawed system.

Happy karga fellow actors!

What I Learned from the Chubbuck Technique: Lessons I'll Carry Forever

I started this acting workshop on May 3rd of this year, and as I finish up my last session of the Chubbuck Technique acting workshop on August 2nd, 2025, I find myself thinking about how life-changing the last 12 sessions have been. This is not merely an acting class—it's an exploration of the reality of the human condition, utilizing our own suffering, needs, and aspirations to craft real performances.

The 12 Tools of Acting book penned by Ivana Chubbuck is the very bible of this acting technique, which is The Power of the Actor. 

Screengrab from Direk Rahyan Carlos

These are my greatest learnings from this experience from film and TV director Rahyan Carlos, the only authorized mentor for this technique, as follows:

1. Your Pain is Power

The Chubbuck Technique instructed me to leave running from my past hurts behind. Instead, I learned to harness them into my character's goals. Through utilizing actual experiences as emotional impetus, each line and every decision feels real and authentic.

2. Fight to Win Every Scene

Acting isn't just "feeling" the feeling—it's actually going for what you're after. Every scene is a fight, and every character is fighting with everything they've got. This attitude shifted how I work in every role.

3. Substitution Creates Truth

One of the strongest techniques I learned was substitution or the "karga"—swapping the people or situations in the script for those from my life. This makes every performance highly personal and unique.

4. Inner Life Is More Important than Words

It's not what you say—it's what happens beneath the surface. The Chubbuck Technique instructed me on how to create a rich inner life for my characters, so even when they don't speak, you feel what I feel.

5. Vulnerability is Strength

Perhaps the biggest lesson I’m taking with me is that vulnerability is not weakness—it’s where true connection begins. When I allow myself to be fully seen, both as an actor and as a human being, that’s when my work resonates most.

Moving Forward

This workshop didn't only improve me as an actor; it improved me as a person. It taught me empathy, discipline, and the bravery to speak truth in my work. I look forward to applying everything I've learned to upcoming roles, auditions, and creative endeavors. Also to move to the next step of learning, the advanced class of the Chubbuck Technique. Whatever comes my way, I will be learning this technique.

Thank you to everyone who's supported me on this journey. This is just the beginning, and I look forward to showing you what's coming next.

Lights on. Let's tell more stories together.