Niel Ronalph Abesamis

No further country in the world has come to characterize democracy unlike the Philippines, as time and again its democracy had been threatened and with each threat the Filipinos resolve to rise above the threat so that democracy can prevail The people power-style of revolution resonated quite well with the Philippines contemporaries, with it being cited as among the leading inspiration to the landmark Arab Spring in the Arab world. It is best exemplified in the 1986 People Power Revolution which was a return to democracy after years of dictatorship under the Marcos regime and the succeeding EDSA Dos which was a display of Filipinos say in the government. The struggle for democracy is not the struggle for a political regime. Nor is it for any specific government or political party. Democratic forces should not be confined to merely protecting the government. The exception is when the necessity to protect the government that comes from public consensus coincides with the survival of democracy itself. In other words, democratic forces must protect other essential. Democracy proved to be unstable during its early stage which is clearly showed during the French Revolution. Democratic regimes allow for the expression of the range of views held by the members of a political community. Under favorable conditions, conflict democratic regimes may not be too serious. But, under unfavorable conditions, these regimes will, it is held, be unable either to protect themselves or serve the common good. The result, then, is likely to be dissatisfaction, dissent and, eventually instability. Once opposition to the regime arises, a democracy is, again, likely to find it difficult to respond in ways that preserves itself. Democratic regimes are often reluctant to use force against their own population. And, even when they do so, they are not as likely to be as brutally decisive and potent as a dictator who is not constrained by the rule of law or popular opinion. That, we all

think, is to the good. But in our preference for benign government, we should not assume that a good government is always the most stable government. Ora Pro Nobis was basically a political film between Leftists and the Rightists. The Left-winged group is the rebels and is people who relate communist ideals. They are not satisfied with the status quo and are much more liberal than the Rightists. The Right-winged group, on the other hand, is satisfied with the status quo and believe in the saying divide et tempera. The movie featured the vigilantes being led throughout the countryside by Commander Contra to terrorize those who they identify as rebels and communists. The movie focused on the character Jimmy and his struggle against these vigilantes. His fight against them becomes much more emotional as Jimmys love interest from the past Esperanza and his illegitimate child Camilo are brought in. He becomes caught between two times, the past when he was a rebel, and the present, post-evangelist just trying to live life with his pregnant wife Trixie, an ex-human rights activist. Having an unstable democracy will result to a weak democratic institutions and thus empower paramilitary and other interest groups. This violence could have stirred a great deal of emotional conflict within the society. In addition to the threat of violence affecting the general publics quality of life, it also, in my opinion, would cause civilians to take up arms and rebel against as a last resort which is the government that is responsible for their anguish. Interestingly enough, the government, the leftists, and the rebels involved in this episode of history all probably thought their actions were ethical. They thought their actions, or lack of actions, would provide a successful outcome to whatever definition they perceived. But in my opinion, all parties involved overlooked the well-being of the people in their nation. The ones who were affected the most negatively were the innocent civilians.