Consider new faces
One characteristic of a democracy that distinguishes it from a monarchy is the vast opportunities it offers for ordinary men and women to rise to leadership.
That goes against the perpetuation of power in the hands of a select few in royal realms.
Politicians in the Philippines, nevertheless, have made a gaping cavity of that loophole of democracy in which persons from the same family in effect get to pass the baton of governance to their relatives.
What has come out in many places are rubber stamp electorates that put into office persons from the same family tree.
Not that the people have a choice, especially when contenders for positions, from administration and opposition parties, come from the same stock–spouses and cousins, nephews and nieces, sons and daughters.
It may be late in the day, but Filipinos must realize that progress often depends on the infusion of the branches and instrumentalities of the government with new blood.
Earlier this election year, the Commission on Elections under the leadership of Chairman Sixto Brilliantes conducted a purge of party-list groups that had become playthings for second (or third, or fourth) lives politicos whose reigns in office were terminal.
That was commendable.
Outside the party list competitions, in choosing candidates for the other posts, voters must be willing to give fresh faces and unfamiliar names a try especially if their credentials and background of service prove them suitable for the positions they pursue.
In town hall meetings with candidates, voters must dare to ask candidates from political families the hard questions.
Do they have relatives who are already sitting in elective government positions?
Do they have a background of excellent public service?
Are they aware that they can render service to the community without having to be elected into office?
Have they explored those alternative routes to serve?
Do they understand that no family, no matter how sterling the record of their patriarchs or matriarchs, has a right to corner elective offices?
Don’t they believe that power is best used by those who are not enamored of it; by those who see it as a burden to empower others than to aggrandize self and family name?
New names must be asked the same questions and more: What led them to politics? Did they discern well? What are their plans? How will their ways be better than that of the traditional politicians?
We must not conclude that this nation of 90 million people cannot find outside the famous political clans servant leaders worthy of election.
Special effort must now be made to give a hearing or a reading to newbies who have mustered the courage to downplay the cynical philosophy that to enter politics is to dive into dirt.
New names must be given a chance, if only because it takes a level of purity to enter a field of endeavor that has not unjustly earned a bad reputation without being turned off by it.
The search is on for the ones who will govern and serve instead of have a field day politicking, the ones who can bring development with the help of new lenses rather than rule with a view to keeping power in the hands of a few.
