A special interview with OCTA survey president, Prof. Ranjit Rye,

Video Transcript / Subtitles:( AI generated. About AI subtitles » )

* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider becoming a patron to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com

in UP, no?

About fear, no?

Yes, the fear factor.

I wanted to mention that.

No, I'll be honest.

I mean,

I really want to emphasize...

What's your position on this issue?

What's your perspective on this issue?

I mean, of course.

I mean,

we're not Russia, right?

We're not China.

We were never a full-fledged autocracy.

But, I mean,

let's be just brutally honest.

During the Gong's time,

we were kind of in what I call

a twilight zone.

And if you look at the SWS service,

I don't know if you have,

in Okta, you have done surveys.

There are a lot of surveys

that show a large plurality, at least.

I think there was like 44% or something

in the one SWS service

that said that

it's dangerous to publish

negative opinion about the government.

For me,

that clearly tells me

a huge number of Filipino,

at least a huge plurality.

I mean,

40% can be a president in this country,

last time I checked.

You know,

they're openly admitting

that they're not 100% sure

if they can be very honest

about what they're saying.

Now,

I know you coming from survey agencies,

obviously,

you're saying that

that shouldn't undermine

the integrity of your surveys.

We had Ronnie Holmes

on this podcast

who told us

all the mechanics

and the SOPs

they used to make sure

that there's no one watching,

there's no shadowing,

you know.

But at the same time,

what I'm saying is that

even if no one is shadowing you,

even if you're not Putin's Russia,

it's hard to imagine

that the fear of Duterte

did not go with the love for Duterte.

I mean,

I know I'm getting into

political psychology already

and probably we have to bring

Ma'am Clarita Carlo,

but I think there's

a lot of literature,

academic literature,

and how fear and love

kind of have a distortionary effect.

I mean,

I can give you

a whole list of dictators.

I'm not saying Duterte is a dictator,

but I can give you

a whole list of dictators

with 90% approval rating,

which didn't look totally crazy

at that moment.

And then,

suddenly opinions change.

Now,

I'm not saying Digong is a dictator.

I'm just saying

fear has a distortionary effect

or at least has an effect

in terms of approval.

I mean,

if you're going to beat someone,

rather love that person, right?

If people are dying right and left,

you have thousands of EJKs,

you'd rather love this person.

You'd rather not express.

I know this is not something

that certainly guys want to hear.

But you know,

it's something worth studying.

You know,

it's a,

you know,

Randy David

gave this,

basically argued this position

maybe three years,

four years ago,

no?

That it's fear.

It's fear that is driving

his numbers up.

It's fear

that's driving

compliance

and maybe that

is correct.

But, you know,

we still have to back it up

with actual data,

no?

But it runs against

what we're seeing now,

whether it's

SWS,

Pulse,

or even OCTA.

When you look at

the numbers of Duterte,

the preference for him

as senator,

the preference,

the continuing preference

for him to be

the next president,

even in,

even constitutionally

in D.H.Puerte.

When you look at

his endorsement power,

I don't think people fear him.

He's not,

you know,

he's not to be feared now.

In fact,

if,

we don't know

what the first quarter

will hold,

as far as his numbers

are concerned.

But,

you know,

they seem to be

still

very influential

and,

you know,

these numbers could even go up,

no?

Because of what happened

over the last month or so.

Some people are gonna

take a hit in government.

It's possible.

Right.

So,

is it possible

na hindi naman takot

lahat ng tao sa kanya?

There might be

a segment that

is.

But if people still

prefer him,

despite the fact

that he's not in power,

then it's not about fear,

Richard.

It's about,

it may be something else.

The first off,

the SWS has

a paper written by

Dr. Wood

and Dr. Tignor,

which looked at

why his numbers

continue to be high,

no?

And,

you know,

people also should look into

why they continue to be

stable all throughout

his administration

despite the various

faux pas,

faux pas,

no?

And missteps

and general fact

that, you know,

he ended very badly.

You know,

the economy ended not

with development

and democracy

but with death

and death,

no?

At the end of his,

you know,

60 years.

But we see this all around,

right?

Bolsonaro's number

kept high.

So,

we have a lot of

comparative data

that shows you

that strongmen

are very good

in actually doing

during crisis period.

I mean,

as the time goes

during the,

you know,

in the Game of Thrones,

chaos is a ladder.

Chaos is a ladder.

You can exploit

those moments.

And I think this is where

also disinformation comes in,

narratives come in,

like,

lahat na nangyaring

death.

But, you know,

Richard,

you can also say

that he put in

3 million students

to college.

Sure.

The free tertiary education,

that one thing

he passed

during his administration

made his administration,

by the way,

he never supported

it truly.

And social spending

actually went up.

Social spending

went up

during the Gong infrastructure.

He passed structure.

He passed structure

to the trillions.

Of course,

a lot of it went to corruption.

But the thing is,

some work got done.

I know.

You know,

apparently.

Okay.

Apparently,

a lot of it was,

went into,

you know,

negative bureaucratic behavior.

Sige, let's put it that way.

It's a structural

friction.

Oh, yeah.

But the thing is,

but the thing is,

a lot of people,

a lot of people,

a lot of people,

in a sense,

until COVID,

you saw signs

of some nominal trickle down

as far as the economy

was concerned.

And then you have

this free tertiary education.

That one alone

would have ensured

that he would be

the most popular

president of all time.

So,

while we disagree

with his war on drugs,

we disagree with

most of the things

he did as president,

in terms of his style,

his rhetoric,

and his,

you know,

he did get to do

some things,

populist as they are,

expensive as they are

to sustain today,

you know.

I really pity

the current administration.

They inherited

so many programs

that are so expensive,

including the,

you know,

doubling of the salaries

of our military men

and the implications

on retirement,

the MUP.

You know,

these are all very expensive

social programs

that we inherited

from the 30s.

But those,

if you look at,

you know,

look at all of this together,

together with his war on drugs,

which, by the way,

SWS

also has data.

I mean,

the public perception

on crimes

going down was real.

And they have,

they have all that study.

So, you know,

when you put all of this together,

yes, there was fear,

but he was able

to do certain things.

And,

you know,

to a great extent,

people voted

for this administration

because they wanted

a certain sense

of continuity.

As far as those policies

were concerned.

And by the way,

the China policy

was never popular anyway.

So, the president

and the new administration

was right

in their new pie vote.

And,

you know,

it's proven

to be more popular now

because people

actually agree

with the

6 out of 10 Filipinos

support

the administration's

position

in the West Philippine Sea.

So, you know,

all of those

are together.

And,

you know,

more thorough study.

I see a perfect way

that both of these

arguments could be correct.

I mean,

let me be absolutely clear.

I disagree with people

who are saying

this is a totally

manufactured popularity.

No, it's not.

There's evidence

all around the world

that strongman populism

has a kind of

quote-unquote charisma

that perfectly fits

our ecosystem.

Information ecosystem,

you know,

existential challenge ecosystem.

So, I never agreed

with some people

who said,

no, this is totally

fake news.

No.

My argument, though,

is that perhaps

someone's approval

should have been

around 60-70%,

which is closer

to the median

of other presidents

at some point,

whether it's Aquino,

Ramos, and all.

But when superlative,

maybe that's where

the fear factor comes in.

You get what I'm saying?

It's possible.

It's possible.

It's the boost.

It's the boost effect.

I never agreed.

I never agreed

with people who say

he's not.

I think he's genuinely popular.

But the superlative numbers,

the endurance

of that popularity,

I cannot separate it

from the fear factor.

That's all I'm saying.

But speaking of the future,

we know that

Sarah has been in the lead,

but we know that

other people like

Senator Tulfo,

we've seen some of the

online surveys,

we saw in Estonia.

You're putting me

on the spot, my friend.

No, you don't have

to answer that.

What I'm saying is,

it looks like a more

competitive field nowadays,

right?

But it also proves

because Tulfo is also

kind of a strong man aura,

right?

So in a way,

it actually proves

that it's a matter

of varieties

of populism, right?

This is where

I'm coming from.

Populism is really bad

for the country, Richard.

You do know that.

It's something

we can sustain

on a programmatic basis.

It's something that

in the long run

will undermine

both democracy

and development.

So we all have to speak up

and speak out

because it's sometimes irrational.

I mean,

you look at the

tertiary education program,

although it's popular

and I won't be very popular

after I say this,

it's anti-poor.

I mean,

think about it.

You'll be students

who are millionaires,

get free education.

I mean,

it has to be,

it has to be

rationalized,

right?

We can't sustain something

that's expensive.

And it turns out

that our socialized,

our flawed socialized

education program

or model in the UP

may have been

the best possible model

to sustain this program.

I don't believe

that rich kids from UP

should be given

full subsidy.

Some of them

in my class

tell me,

you know,

we don't deserve this.

We drive

very far.

You know,

Lexus, BMW,

Porsche.

Yeah,

one of my students

was telling me,

quite frankly,

I drive a car

of this kind

and it's almost criminal

for me to actually

just get this subsidy

but there's no way

for them to return it.

So,

sabi ko,

you become a good citizen,

return it back

by, you know,

serving your country.

I know it's very idealistic

but, you know,

you know me naman

in my classes.

That's how I end my classes.

It's really about

citizenship and leadership.

In the end,

what we do

as citizens,

you know,

is probably more important

than anything

government does,

no?

As far as

governance and democracy

is concerned.

And that's why

it's important for us

to find the way

for citizens

to get more engaged.

And I think it starts

really by,

you know,

with media people like you,

with academics like you

who inform

and empower

through knowledge.

And that's where

I think survey companies

find a niche,

no?

The more we inform,

the more empowered people are.

The better we do our work

with integrity,

with the best possible

methods being used,

the better we do our work

with the best possible

methods being used,

the more science

we bring into the thing,

you know,

the more the surveys

matter,

no?

In the life of our country.

So this is something

we all have to advocate

as individuals,

as members of organizations

like OCTA,

like UP.

So,

you know,

it is what it is.

we're in

interesting times,

Richard.

For the first time

in a long time,

we have factors

running the show

that are outside

of the country,

bigger than

the country.

Bigger than the

Romaldises,

the Marcoses,

the parochialism,

the personalism

that pervades

our politics.

We have strong players

in the global arena.

Yeah.

The new Cold War.

We're kind of the Berlin

of the 21st century,

if I can put it that way.

Exactly.

Yeah, yeah.

We're caught in the middle.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And it's complex,

diba?

It's extremely complex.

these are

entities that are

driving the dynamics

at the domestic level.

And for the first time,

we really experienced,

oh,

what,

what,

what,

no.

And they're taking sides.

They're influencing.

And we have,

as people,

to be conscious of this,