- IT IS a mistake to think of President Duterte as Donald Trump without the orange skin and the ridiculous hair.
- He is not only not a bigot, as he himself said; he also has real, quantifiable achievements in his two decades as Davao City mayor.
- Even Mr. Duterte’s bitterest critics will not deny these achievements. They may argue about scope and impact, but accept these feats.
- In contrast, Trump has built a reputation and created wealth based largely on deception: the shady deal, the lease of his name, the scam.
- To be sure, the Duterte record is shadowed by the killings in Davao City, often attributed to the Davao Death Squad.
- But the President and the presidential candidate are likened to each other because of their use of intemperate or offensive language.
- First-time candidate Trump, however, lacks the discipline to stay on message, even when his self-interest is at stake.
- His references to “wanting to punch” people are also hard to credit; his tough-guy act depends on the presence of bodyguards.
- Mr. Duterte, on the other hand, uses foul language when he thinks it necessary to drive a point. (All too often, unfortunately.)
- And no one questions whether Mr. Duterte is capable of committing violence, with or without bodyguards.
- It is also a mistake to think that President Duterte is not an effective communicator, simply because he does not meet “usual” standards.
- Many make this mistake because they think he is too vulgar, or unaware of language registers.
- Or because they do not like what he says, and cannot accept what he is saying at face value.
- Or because they haven’t had enough practice decoding his statements and confabulations.
- Some make this mistake because they don’t like him to begin with; they see him as a man of violence, using words as masquerade.
- But there is a reason he connects with the masses. It’s not just the message; it is also the messenger.
- Whether it is defined as old-fashioned charisma or a celebrity’s X factor, the President has it.
- Some people are immune to his appeal, to his self-deprecating jokes or to his surprising courtesy; but others are vulnerable to it.
- He is, in the Clintonian formulation, someone an ordinary citizen can imagine having a beer with.
- Unlike Bill Clinton, though, he is also seen as a powerful person who will use that power to fight, even literally, for his friends.
- The President meets the Keynesian idea of a “practical man”—someone who sees himself as “quite exempt from intellectual influence.”
- But practical men are “usually the slaves of some defunct economist”—or the followers of old-school politicians.
- It was revealing that Mr. Duterte’s inaugural address pivoted around two passages attributed to Franklin Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.
- He could have quoted John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King, but they weren’t factors yet in his formative years.
- This explains the continuing hold of Ferdinand Marcos on him, and the role of state-inspired violence.
- This is a mystery to those who know that President Duterte worshipped his mother, who was a leader of the anti-Marcos struggle in Davao.
- But Mr. Duterte is a product of his times, and his times had an outsize figure in Marcos—in his view, the country’s best president.
- For him, Marcos was a lawyer who bent the law to his own will, because he needed to reshape a broken society.
- In this light, Marcos was only undone by the people around him, and by the excesses of the late years.
- This perspective rationalizes the concentration of power, and the instruments of violence, in one man’s hands.
- Mr. Duterte’s formative years help explain why he was eager to forge peace with communist rebels, even though they no longer pose the same threat.
- They help explain his attempts to appease Nur Misuari, even though the Moro National Liberation Front already agreed to peace in 1996.
- These are part of a worldview shaped many years before; now he is in a position to make it real.
- His understanding of law and order, of crime and punishment, also comes from this formative time.
- It helps explain why, for all his avowed love of the poor, he embraces a now-discredited strategy that kills many of the poor.
- Mr. Duterte’s use of a legal axiom during his State of the Nation Address made him sound foolish, but it is a mistake to think that he is not an able thinker.
- This perception is more a matter of preconceptions about accent or language than anything else.
- His friends and allies swear that he is good at strategic thinking; the new members of his official family regard him as truly open-minded.
- Thus, the tension in the Duterte era: His received assumptions formed during the key years are in conflict with his openness to new ideas.
- The killings his victory inspired reflect his worldview. How do we square this with proof that one cannot save society by killing it?
* * *
These theses are also written as tweets. On Twitter, I am @jnery_newsstand.
READ NEXT
The edge of ‘Imperial Manila’
MOST READ
LATEST STORIES