Published
THINKING PINOY
By RJ NIETO
RJ Nieto
I was mostly apolitical for most of my life, but I, like millions of other voters, caught the 2016 Election Fever. That’s why the erstwhile politically apathetic RJ started a personal (mostly political) blog called “Thinking Pinoy (TP)” . I was extremely idealistic at first, seeing issues with a black-and-white, good-vs-evil, right-vs-wrong lens.
I guess it worked after the public saw a spunky political commentator who stood in stark contrast to the generally vanilla, play-it-safe opinions of mainstream journalists. Having less passionate opinions is a bad thing, but the public was looking for something they haven’t seen before. But my batting average, however, was pretty low, and it got quite frustrating after some time.
The frustration turned into anger: there was a time when I lashed out at every politician who disagreed with me.
I have changed a lot since then.
I am still spunky, yes, but I think I’ve mellowed as I learned along the way, after a friend taught me that “Politics is a battle not of positions, but of interests.”
International Relations scholar and Maastricht University associate professor Sass Sasot taught me to argue based on the “why” and the “how” and not the “what.”
Take, for example, that time when I fought for the unlikely approval of a certain highly controversial senate committee report, so every senatorial vote mattered, and a senator I know was supposed to abstain.
To facilitate discussion, let’s call him/her “Charm.”
I wanted him to vote affirmative, but he wanted to abstain.
The 2015 TP would’ve argued why it’s morally right to vote “yes” and even resort to publicly humiliating Charm if he doesn’t get his way. But instead of considering “what” Charm’s stance was, I tried to find out the “why”, and I learned that she was avoiding reprisal from Big Business.
I was interested in pursuing justice while he wanted political survival.
Our positions issue contradict, but our underlying interests don’t. Hence, if Charm wants the Carrot of Political Survival, then changing his mind requires a bigger and yummier carrot.
I knew for a fact that the senate committee report concerns an issue that’s close to the heart of several million voters, and I also knew that Charm was well-funded and gunning for re-election.
Thus, I dangled the carrot of increased popularity.
I called Charm and told him that the Big Businesses affected aren’t his campaign contributors. I also help him discover for himself that the Big Businesses concerned have already decided to funnel their finances to another senatorial aspirant. Charm already has enough campaign contributors, and his biggest priority should be to enhance his own popularity.
I said, “What’s all that money for if people won’t vote for you anyway? You stand to gain a significant number of votes by supporting this measure.”
Long story short, Charm changed his mind and supported the committee report.
Duterte’s approach to the South China Sea Issue is similar to how I treated the senate committee report.
China and the Philippines both want the South China Sea? The positions clash, but the underlying interests don’t.
The Philippines is interested not in war but in the exploitation of the sea’s resources. Similarly, China isn’t interested in war even if it can, and it instead to secure South China Sea trade routes.
That’s why China is receptive to joint oil exploration with the Philippines, even if the Philippines insists on sticking to the 60-40 ownership rule. The Philippines gets to benefit from the sea’s resources while assuring China, through the economic partnership, that it will not lose access to South China Sea trade routes.
Again, the positions clash, but the interests don’t.
The positions-vs-interests approach to political analysis spares us from tons of frustration and yields more significant results. Yes, hold tightly to what you believe is good and just, but approach political dilemmas with an amoral lens. It’s easier to find new allies if you appeal not to a would-be convert’s moral code, which differs immensely from person to person, but to that person’s interests.
Over the years, I learned this bit of diplomacy that, to some degree, tamed the reckless swashbuckler in me. I guess this is also why I do not post as many exposés as I once did.
In TP’s early days, I used to write heavily researched 3000-word articles daily that ruffled the feathers of so many political actors. But now, I just publish one or two articles a month because I manage to get my way without having to wage an online war.
I have learned to use diplomacy, to focus on interests rather than positions, before resorting to literary bloodshed.
We are all aware of that social media behemoth who suffered a humiliating loss in 2019: let’s just say that I learned from her egregious mistakes. It’s unfortunate that she hasn’t learned yet, but I thank her for committing the mistakes in my stead.
Successful politics isn’t about proving to everyone that you’re right and somebody’s wrong. Instead, it’s about definitively demonstrating that a course of action furthers not just your interests, but also those of the person next door.
For reactions, email TP@ThinkingPinoy.net or leave a comment at Facebook.com/TheThinkingPinoy.
https://news.mb.com.ph/2020/02/08/carrots-and-sticks-and-the-amorality-of-politics/
No comments:
Post a Comment