Let us weaponize the teachings of our UP professors for a comprehensive and coherent strategy to address any crisis, counter public cynicism, and strengthen the state as an instrument for achieving the collective goals of the national community.

Think of achieving goals through the implementation of a strong developmental state. The state must be strong, not in the sense of being authoritarian or arbitrary, but in the sense of being willful in the enforcement of its laws and resolute in the pursuit of its programs.

Its principal objective is to toughen its institutions and restore public confidence in them, free them from captivity by vested interests, and enshrine in them the rule of law. Equally important, the strong developmental state should aim to establish the conditions for sustained and equitable economic growth, so that private enterprise may flourish hand in hand with, rather than at the expense of, the realization of vital social objectives.

The University of the Philippines is for prioritizing the fulfillment of the people’s minimum basic needs, the termination of patronage as a mode of governance, the curbing of corruption at all levels, and the application of the full force of the law against drug and organized crime syndicates, smugglers, and land grabbers.

UP is for an informed moral vision of social justice, solidarity, freedom, and peace, and for the development of the Filipino people to their fullest potential, and the responsibility of the state in ensuring this.

Let us establish at the grassroots level the foundations of deliberative democracy to counter any authoritarian tendencies that might arise from a strong state.

For a strong democracy is contingent upon informed, active citizens, and on public judgement rather than public opinion. It is an enlightened opinion, a result of dialogue, and the consideration of multiple perspectives.

UP professors describe the current situation, offer alternative analyses of national problems, and on the basis of the analyses, outline a set of responses or approaches to these problems. The best they can usually do is to ask you to contrast their analyses and recommendations with that offered by the present government and/or other conventional frameworks.

The mid-term elections in 2025 are fast approaching and UP professors find the coming political exercise dry, dreary and monotonous. It will be the same exercise with the same results.

The current view on the Diliman campus is for a shift to the parliamentary-federal system as a cure-all for the nation’s ills. The change to parliamentary mode is expected to free legislation from the gridlock in which it is usually trapped, and to make the President more accountable to other politicians and more easily replaceable if necessary.

The shift to the federal system, on the other hand, is meant to release resource-rich regions from the restraints of centralized government, offer a solution to the Muslim insurgency in Mindanao, and allow the diverse regional communities enough leeway to define their respective paths to development.

But the senior academicians are cautioned by seasoned politicians that the choice of structure and form of government is secondary to the need for a strong autonomous and willful state that can carry out a development program for the whole country.

There is a danger that decentralization of political power may just provide for powerful regional elites, unchecked by national institutions, an occasion to enlarge their power base. Given the urgency of our developmental problems today, it would be unwise to weaken the state authority at this juncture by dispersing its powers.

The better idea is to study carefully — if we are serious about changing our form government — and first prepare the ground on which the new forms could grow. For example, an effective parliamentary system would require the participation of mature political parties that are not dominated by strong personalities and dynasties. (To be continued)