Can we defeat corruption? (1)
The great writer James Baldwin once warned about how injustice could have a debilitating psychological effect by inducing a profound sense of “helplessness and this gnawing uneasiness [which] does something, at length, to even the toughest mind.” Last week’s flooding, which rapidly inundated the main arteries of the city and unleashed all sorts of dispiriting imagery of suffering and humiliation, had a similar effect on many of us.
I noticed this even among my most perspicacious friends, including a prominent political analyst, who, just a week earlier, was publicly giddy about the prospect of accountability for some of the worst politicos in the country. Right before the floods, we had discussed a potential turning point in our struggle for democracy. Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial had shown a growing promise, as authoritative surveys indicated how the majority of the public was receptive to evidence of abuse, while several senators signaled openness to defection from the pro-Duterte ranks. Just as dramatic was the prospect of several more senators facing justice for their abuse of power, not long after seemingly invincible legislators were seamlessly put behind bars.
The flooding, however, had a deeply demoralizing effect. “Man, this country is hopeless,” my political analyst friend texted ahead of our meeting, lamenting how he had missed multiple meetings throughout the opening hours of the day due to the de facto closure of roads. Days later, he was still wrestling with lingering exasperation when we discussed future political prospects. “I was just so frustrated with the flooding situation,” he admitted.
Even more surprising, however, was a bolt-from-the-blue message from another longtime friend, who bizarrely implied that my staunch advocacy for better economic policies implied a degree of complacency about good governance issues. Having just arrived home after navigating horrendous traffic throughout the whole day, I almost snapped at him. After all, I repeatedly made it clear in these pages, as I did in countless other platforms, that “[a]bsolutely, corruption is evil” and that “corrupt politicians, who stole taxpayer money and oversaw shoddy projects costing countless lives, should be held accountable. Heads have to roll. Justice must be served.” (See “Hundred years of war on corruption,” 11/25/25).
If anything, I advocated for more radical anticorruption measures, including mass civil disobedience should the powers that be insulate “big fish” involved in massive corruption. (See “‘Philippine corruption’: Reform or revolution?,” 1/6/26) Just before the recent flooding, which reignited public outrage over the trillion-peso flood control corruption scandal, I returned to the theme of fighting corruption by arguing that “The Marcos Jr. administration—itself a product of the Duterte-led UniTeam—should be held accountable for historic corruption levels in recent years. Culpable Cabinet members and close allies need to be held accountable.” (See “The Duterte-Discaya legacy,” 8/11/26).
For any public thinker with dozens of works on relevant national issues, it’s extra-frustrating to see how even educated and well-informed acquaintances so easily misread one’s advocacy or, worse, don’t seem to even bother to check a portion of your body of work. Never mind that I repeatedly made it clear how my interventions were in favor of a comprehensive solution. Thus, there is nothing mutually exclusive between advocating for good governance and good economic policies. But our predicament cuts beyond the lack of nuanced public debates.
Our current state of affairs perfectly captures what political historian Anton Jäger has described as “hyperpolitics”: a distinct form of systematic political impotence, whereby civil society is quick to mobilize on the back of public outrage, but extremely ineffective in bringing about transformative change, which requires institutionalized reform and sustained organization.
My generation alone, for instance, stood witness to multiple revolts against corruption, from “People Power II,” which deposed then President Joseph Estrada, to the “Luneta Protest,” which called for the abolition of pork barrel funds under former President Benigno Aquino III, to, most recently, the “Trillion Pesos March,” which called for the abolition of new forms of pork barrel pump-priming, dodgy flood control projects.
And yet here we are in late 2026 with no indication of transformative budget reform. In my next column, I will discuss why the only way to effectively combat corruption is through a comprehensive package of reform, which transcends Kantian Moralität (individual morality) in favor of a Hegelian Sittlichkeit (public morality), which promotes a prosperous nation-state based on the twin pillars of freedom and order.
—————-
richard.heydarian@inquirer.net
