MANILA, Philippines -- I am often asked about public opinion on very recent events, such as Rodolfo Noel “Jun” Lozada’s testimony in the Senate committee hearings, as though the survey group Social Weather Stations (SWS) could have a fresh opinion poll every week. As much as possible, I avoid venturing a guess. For one thing, it’s simpler to wait for the next SWS survey’s answer. For another, I stay open to any survey finding, and am conscious that making a guess can appear to favor a particular outcome.

But there are some who can’t afford to wait. In particular, earlier this week some people would have needed to guess if the Friday rally in Makati City would reach the scale known as People Power.

My standard reaction to a question like this is, first, that the likelihood is low, but not zero. Secondly, if and when it happens, these people will probably get only as much advance warning as the residents on the slopes of Mount Mayon get of an eruption of that volcano; I think they will only have time to run away.

Much as I am accustomed to the metaphor of social meteorology, I also see social volcanology as an apt description for the study of public opinion in the Philippines.

I disagree with those who think that Filipinos have turned numb and no longer feel much social outrage. I sense that much outrage is underground, and can pack as much energy as a volcano. Mount Pinatubo was long called dormant, mistakenly, because it hadn’t erupted for 600 years. But, in early 1991, volcanologists gauged Pinatubo’s mighty power on the basis of its deposits from centuries ago. So too should we consider People Power as potentially as massive as in EDSA People Poer I or EDSA People Power II.

Both EDSA I and II were brought closer to the surface by mass protest rallies, in 1984-86 and in 2000-01, but they were ultimately triggered by unexpected, highly publicized, events: the Fidel Ramos-Juan Ponce Enrile breakaway in February 1986, and the non-opening of the “second envelope” of evidence in the Joseph Estrada impeachment trial in January 2001. The former was brought to public attention by radio, while the latter was seen live on television by four out of every five Metro Manilans. (In the final stage of the trial, most Filipinos, including those who considered Estrada guilty, said they would respect a Senate decision not to remove him from office. Thus the overkill of the “second envelope” led to Estrada’s downfall.)

Of course, the timing of triggering events is unpredictable. The ability of these events to stimulate mass action is partly due to the public certainty that they were not stage-managed. People Power and volcanic eruptions are equally unpredictable.

The good citizen model. When tasked with gauging public opinion in the absence of a fresh poll, I start with the assumption that most -- I do not say ALL -- Filipinos are basically good citizens. Those who use the “damaged culture” model are wrong; they are probably nursing an inferiority complex.

Good citizens are interested in social progress, and not only in their own personal welfare. They do not turn numb to allegations of corruption of the scale to which Romy Neri and Jun Lozada have testified.

Good citizens are not concentrated in Metro Manila. They predominate all over the country.

Good citizens form their opinions rationally and independently. They are equipped with the good sense to separate truth from lies. Good citizens cannot be told what to think. They recognize partisan propaganda, and are likely to ignore advertisements placed by virtually-anonymous entities.

Good citizens maintain their core values, but revise their opinions about governance in line with new circumstances. An example of a 180-degree change was the 1992 poll showing that Filipinos were no longer discontented, as they were in 1991, with the Senate’s rejection of the RP-US treaty that had led to the departure of the US military bases. Opinions changed because the economy did not collapse, as doomsayers had predicted, in the first year without the military bases.

Resignation. How does one guess if public opinion about the call for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s resignation has changed? The “Hello, Garci” incident of 2005 made most Filipinos so unhappy that, later that year, President Arroyo’s resignation was their first preference, and her impeachment was their second preference. The people were split on change through People Power, and definitely opposed change through a military coup. Thus the President’s refusal to resign and her defeat of impeachment attempts disappointed them. Disappointment can lead to a change in people’s expectations. Is that the same as a change in people’s wants?

Charter change. How does one guess what has happened to public opinion about Charter change? In 2006, the administration shifted tactics toward changing the Constitution, but was vague as to the particular revisions it wanted. Extensive opinion polling showed some changes -- especially on economic reforms -- capable of being accepted, but others likely to be rejected -- especially on removing term limits for elected officials, and most of all on removing the term limit of the President -- in the referendum through which any proposal must pass, regardless of mode of framing it.

Eventually, the administration set Charter-change aside, so as to prepare for the May 2007 senatorial elections, which it lost, as expected. A few days ago, the idea of Charter change was revived by a group of pro-administration governors. Has anything happened to make people change their minds about Charter change?

* * *

Contact SWS: www.sws.org.ph or mahar.mangahas@sws.org.ph.

More Inquirer columns

Previous columns:
De Venecia’s survey numbers – 2/09/08
Philippines rated ‘Weak’ by Global Integrity – 2/02/08
Some relief in poverty too – 1/26/08
Will education be our future? – 1/19/08
Integrity, the ‘sine qua non’ – 1/12/08
Some 2007 survey lessons – 01/05/08