Skip to main content

On Philippine Constitutional Reform



For years, my country, the Philippines, has lived under a plague of uncertainty, disorientation, and quiet despair. It’s not even dramatic anymore; an undeniable pessimistic prognosis.

I’ve witnessed graft, corruption, and bribery so many times across administrations, from Ramos' all the way to Marcos'. To which, the electoral process itself feels less like a democratic ritual and more like a cyclical delusion. Trust eroded not in one catastrophic moment, but in countless small betrayals.

If you know what I know, you will not vote either. Yes, I stopped voting from Ramos. Don't ask.

Halfway through a PGMN YouTube episode “The Ultimate Discussion on Constitutional Reform” hosted by James Deakin, something snapped. I paused the video, sat back, and realized: I’ve heard this same conversation for decades.

The panel was articulate, the arguments compelling, and the intentions sincere. They circled around a central thesis: the constitution needs to be changed. And on that, rightfully so, I agree.

But here’s where I step off the train. They call the problem “deep root cause systemic issues.” I don’t think that’s accurate. Or deep enough.

Because the truth is more dangerous:

Our crisis predates systems and sits deeper than laws: Our crisis is philosophical and societal.

Calling it “systemic” gives the comforting illusion that a structural overhaul will unlock a national renaissance. It implies the machine is broken, and if we just fix the wiring, the country will work as intended.

No. The wiring isn’t the problem. The operators are misaligned, the worldview is fragmented, and the nation's philosophical foundation is incoherent.

The constitution is merely a legal expression of a society’s maturity. Ours mirrors our fragmentation.

We cannot reform what we have not outgrown.

What we’re facing is not a deficient charter but a deficient civic philosophy. A nation that has not yet resolved its identity cannot stabilize its institutions. A society that distrusts itself cannot produce a constitution it trusts.

So while I agree that constitutional change is necessary, I cannot conflate necessity with primacy. Because at the root of every failed reform is an unexamined worldview, a fragile social fabric, and a people who have never been taught to imagine a nation beyond survival mode.

To say the problem is “systemic” is still too shallow. The real problem is substructure: what we believe, how we behave, how we relate to authority, to truth, to community, and to the future.

No constitution can solve that. But a society that resolves the problem at the foundation will naturally demand and then eventually create a better constitution.

This is where the conversation must go next.

Labels:

Popular

new feel

it's amazing to find something new with blogger.com interface. i'm not that enthusiastic about it though. with all this white stuff allover the screen that somehow looks over my shoulder every once in a while. well i don't want to dwell that much on this change. let's just embrace it. moving along. i'm not quite sure how yesterday went. we just moved some furniture, watched prison break and did some origami crane. and looked for some albums on toptenreviews.com  which i find interesting. massive attack's blue lines: i like!
Read more

Understanding Large Language Models (LLMs) Using First-Principles Thinking

Instead of memorizing AI jargon, let’s break down Large Language Models (LLMs) from first principles —starting with the most fundamental questions and building up from there. Step 1: What is Intelligence? Before we talk about AI, let’s define intelligence at the most basic level: Intelligence is the ability to understand, learn, and generate meaningful responses based on patterns. Humans do this by processing language, recognizing patterns, and forming logical connections. Now, let’s apply this to machines. Step 2: Can Machines Imitate Intelligence? If intelligence is about recognizing patterns and generating responses, then in theory, a machine can simulate intelligence by: Storing and processing vast amounts of text. Finding statistical patterns in language. Predicting what comes next based on probability. This leads us to the core function of LLMs : They don’t think like humans, but they generate human-like text by learning from data. Step 3: How Do LLMs Wor...
Read more

Scrolls, Not Just Scripts: Rethinking AI Cognition

Most people still treat AI like a really clever parrot with a thesaurus and internet access. It talks, it types, it even rhymes — but let’s not kid ourselves: that’s a script, not cognition . If we want more than superficial smarts, we need a new mental model. Something bigger than prompts, cleaner than code, deeper than just “what’s your input-output?” That’s where scrolls come in. Scripts Are Linear. Scrolls Are Alive. A script tells an AI what to do. A scroll teaches it how to think . Scripts are brittle. Change the context, and they break like a cheap command-line program. Scrolls? Scrolls evolve. They hold epistemology, ethics, and emergent behavior — not just logic, but logic with legacy. Think of scrolls as living artifacts of machine cognition . They don’t just run — they reflect . The Problem With Script-Thinking Here’s the trap: We’ve trained AIs to be performers , not participants . That’s fine if you just want clever autocomplete. But if you want co-agents — minds that co...
Read more