MENTAL FARTS OF A MAD MAN

By Philip M. Lustre Jr.

This afternoon, the man in Malacanang had threatened to declare a revolutionary government to replace the constitutional government. But he laid down a basic premise - if what he has perceived as the current “destabilization” continues. A big if, indeed.

The problem with him is that he keeps on threatening, as if everybody is a simpleton, who would kowtow to his every wish. There is no discernment in his public pronouncements. Everything that comes out of his big mouth is a spur of the moment thing.

There are three things to consider in his latest public statement.

The very first issue is the state of his mental health. Considering the series of erratic public utterances he has been making over the last 15 months, the key question: Is he sane enough to stand the rigors of the presidency?

The man is Malacanang is a mad man, who has gone wild. He is perceived to have gone nuts; he is not in control of his mental faculties. A mad man is most dangerous; he could not be held accountable for his insane acts. Neither does he have a concept of public accountability.

If he is insane, will the critical sectors like the military establishment support his revolutionary government?

The second issue is the nature of a revolutionary government. By its very term, it implies that a revolutionary government is a function of a revolution.

To his eternal misfortune, there is no revolution, existing or impending. There is no conclusive revolution to justify the creation of a revolutionary government. Hence, a revolutionary government is totally unnecessary.

Cory Aquino established a revolutionary government because the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution occurred. She had obtained the mandate from the sovereign people to dismantle the Marcos dictatorship.

Cory Aquino did not abuse the people’s mandate. Her revolutionary government operated under the temporary “Freedom Constitution” of 1986. It paved the way for the re-establishment of a constitutional government under the newly restored democratic set-up.

Soon after the February 7, 1987 referendum that ratified the Constitution, Cory Aquino totally abandoned the revolutionary government and nurtured the country towards a newly restored democratic era.

The proposed revolutionary government does not have the political justification. Even the man in Malacanang could not say categorically if he is leading a revolution against the restored democracy and bring the country back to authoritarianism.  

From a conceptual standpoint, a revolutionary government operates outside the ambit of the existing constitution. As an example, Cory Aquino threw away the 1973 Constitution, which served as the blueprint of the Marcos dictatorship.

Hence, any declaration of revolutionary government is dangerous. It means throwing away the established order, paving the way for one-man rule, which is most politically unpalatable given our collective experience under the Marcos dictatorship.

Hence, a revolutionary government led by a mad man is political suicide that would only divide the nation and plunge it in a bitter civil war, the end game of which is not easily discernible.

The Filipino people could find comfort in the constitutional provision that mandates the Armed Forces to be the “protector of the people.” Given the centrifugal tendencies of the current political leadership, the Armed Forces could serve as an excellent counter force to negate those adventurist tendencies from the mad man and his minions.

The third issue is destabilization. This word is in full quotes; it comes from him.

The 1987 Constitution provides sufficient remedy against unsavory political movements and developments. It empowers the president to place the entire country or certain parts under martial law in case of invasion or rebellion. Destabilization, which is milder than invasion or rebellion, is not mentioned.

Destabilization, by its very nature is neither rebellion nor invasion. It could refer to challenges to the status quo, to the political leadership. It could mean a call for him to step down, or clamor to basic sectors, particularly the political opposition, to remove him for office.

Again to the eternal misfortune of the man in Malacanang, this kind of destabilization is legitimate dissent. It is within the ambit of the 1987 Constitution.

His problem is that he could not distinguish legitimate dissent from other political cataclysms. For him, legitimate dissent is an affront to his political authority. He does not understand that it is part of the political dynamics in a restored democracy like ours.

Now, the ultimate question: What if he proceeds with his threat and declare a revolutionary government?

Chances are, he won’t generate the political support to succeed. He would only fail. Hence, his declaration of a revolutionary government would only hasten his political downfall and removal from office.

Who is insane to follow an insane president? Who would implement it? What would be reasons to declare it? Is legitimate dissent - or the elimination of his political adversaries - a justified ground for its declaration?

There are many questions to answer before he could even declare with total confidence.

What the old man in Malacanang has said could be regarded merely farts of his demented mind. He should not be taken seriously. His concept of revolutionary government should be totally ignored.