As values usually stand for what is proper
and correct, what is right and worthwhile, what is ideal and the like, people
should be vigilant and careful lest
their value system become but ego-centered.
These are the times that seem to promote if not actually affirm the
social liability of personalism in what
is right or wrong, what is virtue or vice – particularly in the sphere of
governance anchored on egoism. Whereas
such down right egoism would readily and eventually promote if not even
facilitate socio-political disorder in terms of individuals and/or groups
thereof simply doing what they please, a supposedly democratic government would
find it really hard if not practically impossible to work for the common good,
for the public welfare of society in general – precisely under such a
personalistic or egoistic orientation in the local/national level of governance
anchored on egoism. Whereas such
downright egoism would readily and eventually promote if not even facilitate
socio-political disorder in terms of individuals and/or groups thereof simply
doing what they please, a supposedly democratic government would find it really
hard if not practically impossible to work for the common good, for the public
welfare of society in general –precisely under such a personalistic or egoistic
orientation in the local/national level of governance.
Democracy and self-discipline are not
contradictory. True freedom and proper
regulations are not mutually exclusive.
In other words, without discipline, democracy becomes a moral difficulty
if not a downright political impossibility.
There is however a big difference between the freedom upheld and
promoted by true democracy vis-à-vis relativism
subscribed to and justified by liberalism which considers objective truths as
inimical even to what is true, right and proper. The truth is that freedom promotes choice
such that there is even the reality known as “Freedom of Choice”. So it
is that there is really no objective ethical and moral choice between what is
virtuous and what is vicious, what is democratic and what is tyrannical.
In a democratic system of government,
political authority is accountable to the people. Such accountability is by virtue of the free election
of those holding accountable public authority.
So it is that – when eventually perceived and actually proven incapable
of heading a democratic leadership – despotic public authority are ultimately
dismissed from office in due time by the people themselves through subsequent
uprising if not free elections. As it is
correctly said, some individuals can fool some people some of the time – but definitely
not all people at the same time.
To make civil life proceed well in its
over-all course towards truth and justice, peace and development – such is the
over-all commitment of those elected by the people to public offices in a true,
actual, and lasting democracy. And those
thus representing the people in general are held accountable to the same people
that gave them their respective elective public authority in a democratic
government. This however in no way means
that public officials may just remain passive agents, indolent individuals, lay
down characters. The said officials
should then have the freedom to fulfill their mandate generally in terms of
knowing and working for the common good of the people, whereas public offices
are categorically intended for public service in favor of the common good.
So it is thus provided: “The Philippines
is a democratic and republican State.
Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates
from them.” (1987 Phil.
Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 1) So it is
that in the context of the above Provision, personalism, egoism, individualism
in government are the enemies of people living in a democratic Country.
