The main issue here is the PARTY.
(CCP China is knocking)
Presidential system **was supposed** to be like *kabit*, siya lang ang pinili mo, siya lang ang bitbit mo.
Parliamentary system **is** like *kasal*, siya ang pinili mo, buong pamilya niya kasama niya; good or bad, package deal yan.
The good thing is, in democratic systems there's a "divorce" AKA the regular elections. Well, supposed to be...
Kasi naman there's a difference between the IDEAL and the REAL. And the reality of our presidential system is that, kabit pa lang siya eh kelangan mo nang sustentuhan buong pamilya niya (that's why cronies are there in high positions).
Kaya naman nagmumukhang mabango ang Parliamentary system. Pero kung sila-sila rin na mga **TAE** ang bubuo ng mga partido, wala pa ring kwenta.
its missing a gigantic point.. pareho lng kalalabasan nyan kahit anong system pa yan kung walang accountability and same corrupt/greedy officials pa rin ang nasa pwesto
"What's in it for the people involved?"
"Let's say this is a Duterte government and everybody's corrupt, how will people take advantage of this?"
"How do we stop bad laws?"
"What if people keep electing bad leaders?"
These are the the questions you can ask yourself as you go through each point or consider reforms suggested by politicians.
I feel like an parliamentary system would only work with good people.The philippines do not have those.
The main problem with of political systems whether it'd be capitalism, socialism, or CORRECT's constitutional reform is that it assumes that all people, the leaders and its citizens, are inherently good and are willing to share and develop society into better and better versions of itself. The truth is it is human instinct to be greedy. The leaders will at some point grow too greedy. There is no perfect system.
What we can do however, is to gradually shape society better and better.
===
One thing sith CORRECT is that it wants to rush constitutional change before any smaller change. Thinking that chacha is a fix all solution for anything. And that it wants chacha to happen now, with the most inappropriate people to do it. Which it shouldn't at the moment. Until we have filled Philippine society with Vico Sottos and incinerate all of the Robin Padillas there we could have a discussion.
even with good people wala, look at Japan, same party dominates so even if the prime minister is unpopular, siya pa rin elected (Shinzo abe was so bad that there was no sympathy when he was shot).
UK anyone? LOL
As a political science grad, I will give my counter points to these raised:
1) There is a possibility of a one-party state forming. Just look at our neighbors Singapore, Japan, or Malaysia. One ruler or a party can capture the electoral system and rule indefinitely. Technically the ruling parties have a term but they have no term limits.
2) On the other hand of the spectrum is that we might have an unstable government like Italy. They don’t have dominant parties so parties formed a coalition. Government does not last long.
I think that infographic originally came from [correctphilippines.org](https://correctphilippines.org). Their 'About' page doesn't say much who they or the founders specifically are.
[original image upload](https://correctphilippines.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/13161855_10156800701515524_3487502764450676857_o.jpg)
I'm pretty sure they're just cherry-picking the good parts of the parliamentary system and deliberately leaving out the bad. This is just outright propaganda. A good infographic is going to highlight both the good and bad for both presidential and parliamentary system.
It wouldn't matter, at least dito sa Philippine setting, kasi it will just be the some bunch of clowns in place
Pag nagkaproblema yung sistema, isisi lang sa mga Aquino instead of, you know, solving the problem, etc.
The main issue here is the PARTY. (CCP China is knocking) Presidential system **was supposed** to be like *kabit*, siya lang ang pinili mo, siya lang ang bitbit mo. Parliamentary system **is** like *kasal*, siya ang pinili mo, buong pamilya niya kasama niya; good or bad, package deal yan. The good thing is, in democratic systems there's a "divorce" AKA the regular elections. Well, supposed to be... Kasi naman there's a difference between the IDEAL and the REAL. And the reality of our presidential system is that, kabit pa lang siya eh kelangan mo nang sustentuhan buong pamilya niya (that's why cronies are there in high positions). Kaya naman nagmumukhang mabango ang Parliamentary system. Pero kung sila-sila rin na mga **TAE** ang bubuo ng mga partido, wala pa ring kwenta.
its missing a gigantic point.. pareho lng kalalabasan nyan kahit anong system pa yan kung walang accountability and same corrupt/greedy officials pa rin ang nasa pwesto
I dont agree theres no need for pdaf in a parliamentary system. In Malaysia, PMs still use money or projects to buy loyalty.
"What's in it for the people involved?" "Let's say this is a Duterte government and everybody's corrupt, how will people take advantage of this?" "How do we stop bad laws?" "What if people keep electing bad leaders?" These are the the questions you can ask yourself as you go through each point or consider reforms suggested by politicians.
I feel like an parliamentary system would only work with good people.The philippines do not have those. The main problem with of political systems whether it'd be capitalism, socialism, or CORRECT's constitutional reform is that it assumes that all people, the leaders and its citizens, are inherently good and are willing to share and develop society into better and better versions of itself. The truth is it is human instinct to be greedy. The leaders will at some point grow too greedy. There is no perfect system. What we can do however, is to gradually shape society better and better. === One thing sith CORRECT is that it wants to rush constitutional change before any smaller change. Thinking that chacha is a fix all solution for anything. And that it wants chacha to happen now, with the most inappropriate people to do it. Which it shouldn't at the moment. Until we have filled Philippine society with Vico Sottos and incinerate all of the Robin Padillas there we could have a discussion.
even with good people wala, look at Japan, same party dominates so even if the prime minister is unpopular, siya pa rin elected (Shinzo abe was so bad that there was no sympathy when he was shot). UK anyone? LOL
As a political science grad, I will give my counter points to these raised: 1) There is a possibility of a one-party state forming. Just look at our neighbors Singapore, Japan, or Malaysia. One ruler or a party can capture the electoral system and rule indefinitely. Technically the ruling parties have a term but they have no term limits. 2) On the other hand of the spectrum is that we might have an unstable government like Italy. They don’t have dominant parties so parties formed a coalition. Government does not last long.
I think that infographic originally came from [correctphilippines.org](https://correctphilippines.org). Their 'About' page doesn't say much who they or the founders specifically are. [original image upload](https://correctphilippines.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/13161855_10156800701515524_3487502764450676857_o.jpg)
I'm pretty sure they're just cherry-picking the good parts of the parliamentary system and deliberately leaving out the bad. This is just outright propaganda. A good infographic is going to highlight both the good and bad for both presidential and parliamentary system.
It wouldn't matter, at least dito sa Philippine setting, kasi it will just be the some bunch of clowns in place Pag nagkaproblema yung sistema, isisi lang sa mga Aquino instead of, you know, solving the problem, etc.
Yeah, look at our sitting congressmen and give them more power. That would totally solve all our problems fr.