Notes on Democracy: Failure of Candidates, not Elections
What happens when students don’t like what they see?
The DLSU student body always expects issues to pop up during campaign season, but no one expected the 2021 General Elections to blow up this hard.
The campaign period during GE2021 last week flew by fast with issues regarding sexual harassment from both parties, uninformed political takes, and bombshell statements of people coming forward with negative experiences experienced from candidates. Not only did the student body have to face the “trapo” workings of both parties while being sent ingenuine private messages, this-or-that Instagram stories, and self-gratifying posts about life breakthroughs, the student body became a witness to the upsetting reality behind the campaign period facade. With this comes the lowest participation of students in an election I have seen in my stay in the University: the last day of voting for the General Elections as of 6:00:00PM PHT have seen an underwhelming University-wide 39.31% percentage of votes, with the Brother Andrew Gonzales College of Education and the School of Economics (sectors of the university with the smallest student body) reaching the 50%+1 threshold. This unfortunate percentage stands beside a 60.02% University total during the make up elections that happened earlier this year, resulting to the DLSU COMELEC extending the voting period.
No matter how many “exercise your right to vote” posts both Alyansang Tapat sa Lasalista and Santugon sa Tawag ng Panahon make, their calls will fall in deaf ears because they have singlehandedly demoralized electoral participation in the university. With many students hoping that the USG as a play-pretend Philippine government will see leaders that get the job done without resorting to trapo tactics and corny electioneering, I think Tapat and Santugon have become a mockery of the thing they swore to destroy this GE2021. On a personal note, what has happened in the past week is a different story if you are partisan or not: if non-partisan, last week saw the death of participation in campus politics as a voter; if partisan, last week served as a wake-up call that what you’re doing as a party is not what the University needs. I then bring a question to a participatory democracy at the university level: what happens when students don’t like what they see?
Blue and without a clue
With voters seeking to elect students representative of their needs during another incoming academic year during a global pandemic, Santugon has tailored their battlecry to be one Lasallian community for the nation. However, their campaign has seen to have made Lasallians more divided, with voters seeing dubious fast talk answers in an interview done by the Lasallian and allegations of plagiarizing platforms. Controversy popped up when candidates from the blue slate said No to Face to Face Classes in 2022 amidst the upcoming Multisectoral Alliance and current USG efforts that aim towards this; the party also said no to Student Aid for all students amidst members of the student body sharing posts saying that they would benefit from a house bill that seeks financial aid from the government; lastly, a Yes to the controversial Visiting Forces Agreement that resulted to complacency in the murder of Jennifer Laude. Platform wise, controversy also spread when a Facebook user involved in the ongoing revival of Samahang Lasalyano (an alliance of student councils in teritiary schools), called out the party for having a platform that seeks to revive De La Salle-Federation of Student Councils due to lack of research. While researching for this post, I also saw a comment regarding their excused absence platform in which the original proponent claims a “coincidental resemblance” to their platform.
According to Ang Pahayagang Plaridel, 96% of students look into candidates platform and that involves a runners plans for their batch, college, and in the university as a whole. This not only factors in on a candidate’s thoughts on politics inside the university, but outside as well with both parties banking on the 2022 Elections as a stepping stone for political engagement. Personally, it has been more than obvious why there is a hesitancy in voting for Santugon candidates during the elections. Although they win seats, I believe it leaves a bad aftertaste to the student body as their student government, when lead with flying blue colors, see remnants of traditional politics that they see when stepping outside the university. This reflection of what they see in the likes of Bong Revilla dancing budots and winning a seat in the Senate is what students see when the blue party campaigns for its candidates with a mediocre campaign that is supplemented with electioneering the student body is tired and dissapointed of. But what happens when a party that has a above-average platform goes against the blue but is stained as an institute filled with bullying and hate?
The red dread
While Tapat — for many years campaigning as the anti-thesis of Santugons trapo behavior — has presented campaigns that continue off soon-to-be former USG President Ragudo’s platforms, hesitancy to vote for the red party has risen because of its fielded candidates. In revelation after revelation, certain candidates have been key players in causing trauma to students in the university with one aspiring Batch Legislator accused of sexual harassment and aspiring USG President barring a supposed candidate from running for Vice President for External Affairs due to their diagnosed mental health problem being a hindrance to the party’s campaign. This Batch Legislator’s harassment allegations came after Santugon’s candidate for Engineering College Assembly President faced allegations of sexual harassment. With both of these candidates withdrawn for the race, questions about both parties and the quality of the candidates they fielded came into light. Not only were candidates questioned, but the state of the parties were questioned by the students as well. When the supposed VPEA candidate of Tapat came out with a statement regarding discrimination towards their mental health, critics came to support their mental health concerns and called for the party to address issues regarding their work ethic and party dynamic that causes triggers to one’s mental health. Not only did members of the student body share this sentiment, former Tapat members shared their stories that echoed claims of apathy and negative work environment under the party.
In the same poll conducted by Ang Pahayagang Plaridel, 88% of students look at leadership skills of candidates as a means of deciding who to vote for in GE2021. However, it seems like the party that seeks to be the anti-thesis of traditional politics in the University and in the country express the same prejudice and empathy leaders of our country have. While only 38% of students look at a candidate’s party when deciding to vote, the party serves as a tangible item one can look at in regards to what they represent. If what the student body sees of Tapat is a party that goes against a broken and oppressive system while expressing remnants of that same system, I believe that this heightens hesitancy in students to vote and participate in the elections. Personally, it makes sense to abstain or not vote at all if the party that’s supposed to counter the trapo style of politics the blue party embraces is a party that is ingenuous and apathetic.
To vote or not to vote
With an extension of voting period being used to lure the student body to vote in the USG election, will students take the bait? We’ll have to wait and see. However, this rough and chaotic week brings questions regarding the state of political participation in the university level. Whether the COMELEC declares a winner or declares a failure of election, we have seen political participation to be a carbon copy of what happens in Philippine politics rather than serving as an alternate universe of what could happen in the future. It is not the student’s fault if they hesitate to participate: the reason because no matter how friendly or progressive, these GE2021 candidates remain out of touch with what the student body needs. I personally agree with criticisms on participatory democracy theory that representatives need to be chosen in order for it to be practical. I do believe that these prospects for student representation need to be ones that uphold the general will a-lá-Rousseau to be voted and become genuine student leaders. If the tides changed and both parties fielded candidates that addressed the needs of their constituents (e.g. Ragudo [Tapat] as USG President and Nievales [Santugon] as CLA CAP in the 2021 Make-up), students would definitely participate in the university elections in high numbers. However, by the looks of the numerous tirades of criticism in both parties and fielded candidates, it’s safe to say that the GE2021 did not have a failure of elections, but a failure of candidates and parties because they sadly do not reflect the wants and needs of the student body.
Bibliography
Cunningham, F. (2002). Theories of democracy: A critical introduction. Routledge.
Nuncio, G. & Romero, A. Pulso ng Lasalyano. Ang Pahayangang Plaridel: Propaganda GE 2021. https://www.plaridel.ph/propagandage2021/
Sarao, J. (2014) Dysfunctional campus politics: The future begins here. Rappler. https://r3.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/52228-dysfunctional-campus-politics-future-begins-here
Notes on Democracy is a series of blog posts concerning reflections on the state of democracy in the country and the state of emergency it brings towards personal crises. This is in partial fulfilment in my Democracy and Politics of Change course; views are my own and don’t reflect the organizations I belong to inside the University.
