A new dimension of patronage politics

Reports have it, that El Shaddai's Bro. Mike Velarde will be endorsing 18 senatorial candidates this coming elections – so as to give his flock a "wider selection" of whom to vote. Be it 18 or just exactly 12, the question is: Doesn't this undermine the capacity of his followers to choose for themselves? Though his endorsement is not as potent as compared to Iglesia ni Cristo's, which couldn't even guarantee a 100 percent compliance of its followers, this simply disregards the basic principle of human behavior — free will.

Even if we knew we could have had better leaders but never did, because the electorate allowed themselves to be paid off, joined the bandwagon, chose the lesser evil or were enticed by the glitz and glamour of showbiz and media personalities and as an enlightened leader we would just want to provide our followers a list of those we think could best serve our country, but don't we just create another dimension of political patronage. Politicians would be beholden to their endorser, just as they are indebted to those who funded their campaign. And the cycle of our social dilemma just adds another form.

Can't Bro. Mike just pray or enjoin his followers to make an "enlightened choice" rather than limiting their choices. I'm sure he has some basis why he endorsed them, but why would he only endorse BUHAY Party-list, which has his son, Rene Velarde as its representative in Congress? If the Supreme Court disqualified party-list organizations which had one way or another obtained funding from the government, why won't anyone petition to disqualify party-list organizations which front for religious organizations, which the Party-List Law (RA 7941) prohibits? Wherever El Shaddai goes, BUHAY's campaigns follows. But no politician would actually do that, lest they lose their endorsement — another evidence of political patronage.

El Shaddai's anniversary celebrations have now become a part of every politicians' social itinerary, and a having a front seat at the stage is like being in the ring with Manny Pacquiao right after his victory over Erik Morales. From that front seat, they can be easily seen "fervently praying," and of course media won't miss the chance of capturing it, for the people to see and make them believe that they are "God-fearing persons."

Wouldn't it be much nicer if we would see these religious leaders educate their followers rather than influence them on whom to vote. It's like teaching them to fish, rather than giving them fish. A good leader who has shown good leadership, could entrust his followers the future of their organization or country, because he has set standards for everyone to follow.

I had a college professor who puts so much trust on his students, that come examination time he doesn't keep a close guard on them, believing that he was able to teach his lessons well that there's no reason for them to cheat during exams. But of course, this is abused and democracy too can be abused. But we have not choice but to contend with it, as Winston Churchill puts it "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the forms that have been tried." I could only hope that these religious leaders do not abuse their influence.