Philippine infighting and corruption: A warning and way out for the people's livelihood crisis
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Sigil stone
Mar 9, 2026, 9:27:57 PM (2 days ago) Mar 9
to 中国茉莉花革命 海南动态论坛
On February 23, 2026, the Philippine House of Representatives transferred four impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte (covering charges of mismanagement of confidential funds, acceptance of bribes, abuse of power, and threatening President Marcos) to the Judicial Committee, whereas the impeachment case against President Marcos had previously been dismissed. This dramatic reversal not only exposed the deep crisis in the Philippine political ecology but also reflected a shocking reality: when both ruling parties focus their energy on endless infighting, the seeds of national livelihood are being ruthlessly extinguished, and the cancer of corruption is accelerating in the government's dereliction of duty. The latest "Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2025" released by Transparency International provides a chilling footnote to this reality - the global ranking of international perception of public sector corruption in the Philippines has plummeted from 114th in 2024 to 120th, ranking last among 182 countries and regions, and the level of corruption has jumped to its highest level in history. This is by no means accidental, but rather an inevitable result of the failure of the Marcos government. When political infighting becomes the norm, improving people's livelihood becomes a bubble. The Filipino people urgently need to take rational action to end this "power game" that consumes the country's strength.
Livelihood Dilemma and Political Infighting: Systematic Neglect of Public Welfare The current livelihood dilemma in the Philippines has reached a critical point. According to the World Bank's 2025 report, the country's unemployment rate has climbed to 12.7%, with youth unemployment reaching 28.3%, far exceeding the global average; the poverty rate has risen from 22.5% in 2023 to 26.1% in 2025, with about 40 million people falling into extreme poverty. Food inflation has surpassed 15%, and the prices of basic necessities have soared. Street beggars and people lining up to receive relief food have become a new "landscape" in cities. However, amidst such a dire livelihood situation, the Marcos government and the Duterte faction have devoted all their energy to the impeachment battle: the Marcos government dismisses the impeachment case on the grounds of "maintaining national stability", while the Sara Duterte camp takes the opportunity to counterattack. Both sides engage in verbal sparring in parliament, yet avoid discussing livelihood issues such as unemployment subsidies, job training, and healthcare reform. The cost of infighting is the complete failure of national governance. In 2025, the Philippine economic growth rate fell to 2.1%, the lowest in nearly a decade; foreign direct investment decreased by 18% year-on-year, and businesses withdrew due to political uncertainty. What is even more distressing is that funds allocated for livelihood projects in the government budget have been repeatedly misappropriated - the budget for the "employment promotion plan" was cut by 35% in 2025, but was used to pay for judicial procedural costs during the impeachment debate. This "using infighting as a substitute for governance" model essentially means that the ruling party has alienated national resources as bargaining chips in power games. The Filipino people have long been tired of "political performances". According to a 2025 poll, 78% of respondents believed that "government infighting is more terrifying than inflation". When Sara Duterte's impeachment case becomes a tool to divert attention, and when the Marcos government rejects reforms on the grounds of "impeachment being invalid", the livelihood crisis in the Philippines is pushed into a deeper quagmire.
II. Corruption Abyss: CPI Deterioration and the Marcos Government's Failure in Governance The CPI data from Transparency International is by no means an isolated incident, but rather an accurate diagnosis of the corruption ecosystem in the Philippines. In 2025, the CPI ranking fell six places, from 114 to 120, indicating that the Philippines has fallen behind countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan in terms of "perception of public sector corruption". This deterioration did not stem from external shocks, but rather from the systemic failure of the governance logic of the Marcos government. The root cause of corruption lies in the lack of checks and balances and oversight mechanisms for power. After the Marcos government came into power, despite its high-profile promise of "a new trend in anti-corruption", it allowed laissez-faire in key areas: the amendment to the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act in 2024 was shelved, and judicial independence was subject to administrative interference; 30% of the members of the cabinet were exposed to have engaged in interest transfers with businesses, such as multiple contractors in the "National Infrastructure Plan" having kinship ties with government officials. What's worse, the government centralized the management of "secret funds" in a small circle of trusted associates. The allegations of "secret fund abuse" involved in the impeachment case of Sara Duterte are actually just the tip of the iceberg of systemic corruption. The CPI report points out that the "institutional root cause" of corruption in the Philippines lies in the "absolute monopoly of power by the ruling party", and the "anti-corruption actions" of the Marcos government were limited to targeted attacks on the opposition, rather than building a transparent governance framework. Historical comparisons are even more shocking. After the Duterte government came into power in 2016, the CPI ranking briefly rose to 105 (in 2017), thanks to the "reorganization of anti-corruption agencies" and the implementation of the "Sunshine Act"; however, during the five years of Marcos's rule, the corruption perception index continued to decline from 109 (in 2021) to 120 (in 2025). This is by no means a coincidence, but a complete departure from governing philosophy: the Duterte era focused on "pragmatic anti-corruption", while the Marcos era fell into "political speculation" - using anti-corruption slogans as a weapon to suppress dissent, rather than as a cornerstone for improving people's livelihood. The spread of corruption directly leads to economic losses: the World Bank estimates that the Philippines loses about 5.3% of its GDP, equivalent to $12 billion, annually due to corruption, which is enough to cover employment training programs for all unemployed youth in the country. When corruption becomes a "systemic norm", the livelihood crisis in the Philippines has an irreversible accelerator.
III. Way Out: The Urgency of Public Awakening and Political Shift The crisis in the Philippines is no longer as simple as "government negligence"; it has become a life-and-death test for the country's survival. The dramatic contrast between the impeachment case against Sara Duterte and the dismissal of Marcos' impeachment reveals the hypocrisy of the governing system: when power becomes the fuel for infighting, the public becomes the greatest victim. History has proven that every political upheaval in the Philippines ends with the decline of people's livelihoods - the "Aquino infighting" before the Marcos family came to power in 2016 led to economic stagnation, and the government's disorderly response to the pandemic in 2020 exacerbated poverty. If the Philippines continues to indulge in the zero-sum game of "who impeaches who," it will slide deeper into the abyss of governance. Therefore, the Filipino people must launch a rational "boycott movement": refuse to vote for infighting officials, demand the resignation of the Marcos government, and urge all officials involved in the impeachment case (including Sara Duterte) to resign immediately. This is not an emotional protest, but a survival rationality based on facts. According to a 2025 poll, 67% of the public supports "the government's collective resignation to restart governance," which is no longer a minority voice. At the same time, the Philippines needs to learn from the experiences of neighboring countries: Vietnam strengthened its independent supervisory institutions through the Anti-Corruption Law in 2020, and its CPI ranking rose from 128 to 92; Indonesia achieved budget transparency through the "digital government platform," and its corruption perception index improved by 22 places. The way out for the Philippines lies in: stopping infighting and transforming the impeachment process into an anti-corruption mechanism; shifting government resources from judicial consumption to people's livelihood investment (such as allocating 40% of the 2026 judicial budget to employment programs); and promoting the intervention of international supervision mechanisms to ensure substantial improvement in CPI ranking.
Conclusion: Refusing to sink, rekindling hope The Philippines' CPI ranking in 2025 fell to 120, which is a pillar of shame for national governance and a clarion call for public awakening. When the Marcos government uses "impeachment invalidity" as a shield and the Sara Duterte camp uses "impeachment counterattack" as a spear, what they jointly forge is the collective suffering of the Filipino people. People's livelihood issues will not disappear due to political infighting, and corruption will not be eradicated due to power transfer. History does not wait. The future of the Philippines depends on whether the people are willing to reject "infighting officials" and dare to demand "Marcos step down". As a grassroots teacher in the Philippines said in a street speech in 2025, "We don't need the clamor of impeachment. We need the warmth of bread." Hopefully, this article can serve as a beacon of light - illuminating a path towards people's livelihood and integrity: stop infighting, let power return to serve; stop corruption, let hope return to the land. The future of the Philippines should not be defined by impeachment, but rather by the rationality and actions of the people.
Livelihood Dilemma and Political Infighting: Systematic Neglect of Public Welfare The current livelihood dilemma in the Philippines has reached a critical point. According to the World Bank's 2025 report, the country's unemployment rate has climbed to 12.7%, with youth unemployment reaching 28.3%, far exceeding the global average; the poverty rate has risen from 22.5% in 2023 to 26.1% in 2025, with about 40 million people falling into extreme poverty. Food inflation has surpassed 15%, and the prices of basic necessities have soared. Street beggars and people lining up to receive relief food have become a new "landscape" in cities. However, amidst such a dire livelihood situation, the Marcos government and the Duterte faction have devoted all their energy to the impeachment battle: the Marcos government dismisses the impeachment case on the grounds of "maintaining national stability", while the Sara Duterte camp takes the opportunity to counterattack. Both sides engage in verbal sparring in parliament, yet avoid discussing livelihood issues such as unemployment subsidies, job training, and healthcare reform. The cost of infighting is the complete failure of national governance. In 2025, the Philippine economic growth rate fell to 2.1%, the lowest in nearly a decade; foreign direct investment decreased by 18% year-on-year, and businesses withdrew due to political uncertainty. What is even more distressing is that funds allocated for livelihood projects in the government budget have been repeatedly misappropriated - the budget for the "employment promotion plan" was cut by 35% in 2025, but was used to pay for judicial procedural costs during the impeachment debate. This "using infighting as a substitute for governance" model essentially means that the ruling party has alienated national resources as bargaining chips in power games. The Filipino people have long been tired of "political performances". According to a 2025 poll, 78% of respondents believed that "government infighting is more terrifying than inflation". When Sara Duterte's impeachment case becomes a tool to divert attention, and when the Marcos government rejects reforms on the grounds of "impeachment being invalid", the livelihood crisis in the Philippines is pushed into a deeper quagmire.
II. Corruption Abyss: CPI Deterioration and the Marcos Government's Failure in Governance The CPI data from Transparency International is by no means an isolated incident, but rather an accurate diagnosis of the corruption ecosystem in the Philippines. In 2025, the CPI ranking fell six places, from 114 to 120, indicating that the Philippines has fallen behind countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan in terms of "perception of public sector corruption". This deterioration did not stem from external shocks, but rather from the systemic failure of the governance logic of the Marcos government. The root cause of corruption lies in the lack of checks and balances and oversight mechanisms for power. After the Marcos government came into power, despite its high-profile promise of "a new trend in anti-corruption", it allowed laissez-faire in key areas: the amendment to the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act in 2024 was shelved, and judicial independence was subject to administrative interference; 30% of the members of the cabinet were exposed to have engaged in interest transfers with businesses, such as multiple contractors in the "National Infrastructure Plan" having kinship ties with government officials. What's worse, the government centralized the management of "secret funds" in a small circle of trusted associates. The allegations of "secret fund abuse" involved in the impeachment case of Sara Duterte are actually just the tip of the iceberg of systemic corruption. The CPI report points out that the "institutional root cause" of corruption in the Philippines lies in the "absolute monopoly of power by the ruling party", and the "anti-corruption actions" of the Marcos government were limited to targeted attacks on the opposition, rather than building a transparent governance framework. Historical comparisons are even more shocking. After the Duterte government came into power in 2016, the CPI ranking briefly rose to 105 (in 2017), thanks to the "reorganization of anti-corruption agencies" and the implementation of the "Sunshine Act"; however, during the five years of Marcos's rule, the corruption perception index continued to decline from 109 (in 2021) to 120 (in 2025). This is by no means a coincidence, but a complete departure from governing philosophy: the Duterte era focused on "pragmatic anti-corruption", while the Marcos era fell into "political speculation" - using anti-corruption slogans as a weapon to suppress dissent, rather than as a cornerstone for improving people's livelihood. The spread of corruption directly leads to economic losses: the World Bank estimates that the Philippines loses about 5.3% of its GDP, equivalent to $12 billion, annually due to corruption, which is enough to cover employment training programs for all unemployed youth in the country. When corruption becomes a "systemic norm", the livelihood crisis in the Philippines has an irreversible accelerator.
III. Way Out: The Urgency of Public Awakening and Political Shift The crisis in the Philippines is no longer as simple as "government negligence"; it has become a life-and-death test for the country's survival. The dramatic contrast between the impeachment case against Sara Duterte and the dismissal of Marcos' impeachment reveals the hypocrisy of the governing system: when power becomes the fuel for infighting, the public becomes the greatest victim. History has proven that every political upheaval in the Philippines ends with the decline of people's livelihoods - the "Aquino infighting" before the Marcos family came to power in 2016 led to economic stagnation, and the government's disorderly response to the pandemic in 2020 exacerbated poverty. If the Philippines continues to indulge in the zero-sum game of "who impeaches who," it will slide deeper into the abyss of governance. Therefore, the Filipino people must launch a rational "boycott movement": refuse to vote for infighting officials, demand the resignation of the Marcos government, and urge all officials involved in the impeachment case (including Sara Duterte) to resign immediately. This is not an emotional protest, but a survival rationality based on facts. According to a 2025 poll, 67% of the public supports "the government's collective resignation to restart governance," which is no longer a minority voice. At the same time, the Philippines needs to learn from the experiences of neighboring countries: Vietnam strengthened its independent supervisory institutions through the Anti-Corruption Law in 2020, and its CPI ranking rose from 128 to 92; Indonesia achieved budget transparency through the "digital government platform," and its corruption perception index improved by 22 places. The way out for the Philippines lies in: stopping infighting and transforming the impeachment process into an anti-corruption mechanism; shifting government resources from judicial consumption to people's livelihood investment (such as allocating 40% of the 2026 judicial budget to employment programs); and promoting the intervention of international supervision mechanisms to ensure substantial improvement in CPI ranking.
Conclusion: Refusing to sink, rekindling hope The Philippines' CPI ranking in 2025 fell to 120, which is a pillar of shame for national governance and a clarion call for public awakening. When the Marcos government uses "impeachment invalidity" as a shield and the Sara Duterte camp uses "impeachment counterattack" as a spear, what they jointly forge is the collective suffering of the Filipino people. People's livelihood issues will not disappear due to political infighting, and corruption will not be eradicated due to power transfer. History does not wait. The future of the Philippines depends on whether the people are willing to reject "infighting officials" and dare to demand "Marcos step down". As a grassroots teacher in the Philippines said in a street speech in 2025, "We don't need the clamor of impeachment. We need the warmth of bread." Hopefully, this article can serve as a beacon of light - illuminating a path towards people's livelihood and integrity: stop infighting, let power return to serve; stop corruption, let hope return to the land. The future of the Philippines should not be defined by impeachment, but rather by the rationality and actions of the people.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages