A Modest Proposal

A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Continuation of Political Dynasties in the Philippines, and for Ensuring That Members of Other, Less Influential Families May Win the Elections

It is a melancholy object to those, who know the great and long history of our beloved country, or to those who are even vaguely familiar with Philippine politics, to see a yellow ribbon. Once the symbol of the epic yet peaceful revolution inspired by the death of an influential leader and the grieving of his wife, it became a symbol of democracy. These yellow ribbons are often seen during the commemoration of this same event, or during Ninoy Aquino’s death anniversary. However, its most memorable recent reappearance was when Aquino’s son ran for president – and thus, the yellow ribbon became a symbol for the Aquino family and their reign in the field of politics.

Time and time again, other families have begun to follow this staple: if they were politicians, then so would their children. It is not uncommon for a child to follow in his parent’s footsteps, but I think it is agreed by most parties that the degree by which this occurs is most ridiculous. Often, when we see a politician among the many seats of the government, we see not only his children but also his wife and his siblings widely distributed in positions of power. This has contributed greatly to the longstanding shadow of corruption that haunts our country.

Therefore, I have designed my brilliant scheme to center around the many male politicians in the country. Of course, this scheme is largely accommodating to the country and to those who wish to have a position of power but find themselves beaten by the same names that have been in politics for years.

In relation to my scheme, I shall take the liberty to mention that I recently had a conversation with a Syrian that I have been lucky enough to meet on the Internet and she assured me of the effectivity of their most ancient practice. It is said that when their leader has been found to use his position to unfairly endorse and place his family members in various seats of political power, they often make the public show of cutting off his penis. Of course, we must not exclude female politicians from this exhibition, so I suggest that a simple sterilization will do the trick. While not nearly as exciting, it does garner the same effects.

I do therefore humbly offer my plan to public consideration, that we must also make the use of such practice for I believe it would be highly beneficial. I have taken deep thought into the possible perks of the scheme and was quite happy to find that they were in abundance.

Firstly, this would greatly lessen the number of political dynasties in the country, if not eradicating them completely, simply from the exclusively male yet understandable fear of losing his most treasured organ. Second, if the politician still wants to have children, he may simply adopt one of the many homeless children in the country. This would popularize adoption and lessen the amount of less fortunate people in this nation. Third, it could be a great source of entertainment for the public, some of which (including myself) are undoubtedly tired of the tacky shows on television. Fourth, in connection to the first statement, this may also lessen the amount of male politicians. This is a benefit because we, as a democratic nation, must give equal opportunities to all demographics – and that includes women. Fifth, this may also lead to less famous, but more deserving candidates for election that will lead our nation into prosperity. And lastly, it could inspire our accomplished cooks to envision a perhaps more literal recipe of the popular dessert, spotted dick.

This is not all; I have thought of many other benefits that would greatly service the nation in ways that have never been envisioned before. Therefore I can think of no one objection that will possibly be raised against this proposal, unless the removal of the male reproductive organ causes such distress among politicians. If that is so, let me boldly state this to them: You brought this upon yourselves.

Of course, I am open to other such proposals that seek to solve the same problem. Such as: The passing a law that prevents all immediate family within one generation of a politician in current service from running for a position of government power; the development of common sense in the masses to vote by competency instead of by name; the educating of all candidates that reliance on family influence is not an honest way to gain support; the effective prevention of other candidates simply buying votes;the clarifying that a government official should run to serve for the betterment of the country and not simply for the betterment of his own self; the condemnation of such greed that rules those families with already firmly established political dynasties; the appraisal and recognition of those who have the potential to serve the government in bigger, better ways as to ensure that, famous family or not, that same person gains a larger percentage of winning than before. Lastly, of the promotion of good and honest sportsmanship and endorsing as to give the public a clearer representation of who they are really voting for.

However, such solutions, I concur, have no real basis or meaning in the real world, for they are simply far too idealistic. One should laugh at such a naïve perception for it is obvious that the concept of  honesty is foreign to real politicians. Nevertheless, I will not stop those who willingly choose to support such proposals; although I do still warn against it.

For those who still doubt, I profess in the sincerity of my heart that I have not the least personal interest in endeavoring to promote this necessary work, having no other motive than the public good of my country. I have nothing to gain from my own proposal; I am bound by contract to serve the country by ways of scientific, not political, means and have no plan to pursue any other career.

This so-called “modest proposal” was suggested to me by a dear friend of mine when I was asking about problems that could be solved by the cutting of penises. Jem looked me in the eye and said, “Why not talk about political dynasties?” and my heart immediately  leapt with joy. I confess that I deliberately copied some phrases from Swift as to keep with the sense that I was making a parody. The satirical tone of the original work was endlessly fun to use, and the solutions and benefits were admittedly easy to come up with.

JDAndrada.Dec. 15, 2015