You've been downvoted to oblivion, probably because you phrased your assertion wrong.
There is a large province of the Philippines called "Davao" which, 20 years ago (more or less), was a haven for terrible, corrupt people. Were you to make the mistake of going there, you would be kidnapped, held for ransom, and executed if your family/friends could not pay. This was pretty much a guarantee. So, more or less, you wouldn't go there.
Enter a man named Rodrigo Duterte. Mayor of the biggest town (also called Davao). He instituted martial law, brought in the military, and started executing police, drug dealers, and local officials who were corrupt.
Today, Davao is one of the safest and nicest regions in the Philippines. His daughter, now the mayor, carries on in his tradition, but since the corruption is largely gone, I don't think she gets around to executing too many government officials.
The country noticed this. In the last 12 months, he was basically drafted against his will to be the president of the Philippines, on the hopes that he would repeat the process on a national level.
He is doing so. He was sworn in sometime in June, and has begun executing the people responsible for corruption in Manila and other northern regions of the country.
Now one can argue all sorts of things in this case. It leaves an unsavory taste in my mouth and those of some very smart people I know. But at some point it ceases to be civil society policing itself, and becomes civil war. We simply hope that the chieftans disband when the civil war is over (Duterte is probably one of the few authoritarians who will actually do so, so I hold out hope).
I don't think the United States has quite reached the level of corruption the Philippines has, but I see it heading that direction. It's best to think what we will do if it goes that far. Maybe today the death penalty for being a corrupt government official is too much, but the status quo penalty of: "get paid leave until it blows over" is, I think, too lax.
There is a large province of the Philippines called "Davao" which, 20 years ago (more or less), was a haven for terrible, corrupt people. Were you to make the mistake of going there, you would be kidnapped, held for ransom, and executed if your family/friends could not pay. This was pretty much a guarantee. So, more or less, you wouldn't go there.
Enter a man named Rodrigo Duterte. Mayor of the biggest town (also called Davao). He instituted martial law, brought in the military, and started executing police, drug dealers, and local officials who were corrupt.
Today, Davao is one of the safest and nicest regions in the Philippines. His daughter, now the mayor, carries on in his tradition, but since the corruption is largely gone, I don't think she gets around to executing too many government officials.
The country noticed this. In the last 12 months, he was basically drafted against his will to be the president of the Philippines, on the hopes that he would repeat the process on a national level.
He is doing so. He was sworn in sometime in June, and has begun executing the people responsible for corruption in Manila and other northern regions of the country.
Now one can argue all sorts of things in this case. It leaves an unsavory taste in my mouth and those of some very smart people I know. But at some point it ceases to be civil society policing itself, and becomes civil war. We simply hope that the chieftans disband when the civil war is over (Duterte is probably one of the few authoritarians who will actually do so, so I hold out hope).
I don't think the United States has quite reached the level of corruption the Philippines has, but I see it heading that direction. It's best to think what we will do if it goes that far. Maybe today the death penalty for being a corrupt government official is too much, but the status quo penalty of: "get paid leave until it blows over" is, I think, too lax.