President Duterte Quotes

President Duterte said kill the addicts, and the addicts died. He said kill the mayors, and the mayors died. He said kill the lawyers, and the lawyers died. Sometimes the dead weren’t drug dealers or corrupt mayors or human rights lawyers. Sometimes they were children, but they were killed anyway, and the president said they were collateral damage.

Rodrigo Duterte was not the first politician in the world to declare war on a domestic issue. Wars on poverty, pornography, hunger, obesity, cancer, and drugs have been launched and fought by presidents and potentates long before Duterte moved into Malacañang Palace. None of these wars have so far been won. None of that matters, because for the politician, the declaration is a victory

Filipinos have built many cities, expressways, subways, railways, and airports elsewhere in the world as OFWs. The pandemic gave us the best talent pool one could ever ask for. Build, Build, Build gave OFWs an opportunity to serve their country if they wanted to. Although we couldn’t match the salaries they received abroad, many stayed to ensure that Filipinos would get to use infrastructure that they only saw in photos before. We are on the right track. The Philippines can be a trillion-dollar economy. President Rodrigo Duterte already laid the grounds to make this possible. It will be up to us to make it happen.

President Duterte said kill the addicts, and the addicts died. He said kill the mayors, and the mayors died. He said kill the lawyers, and the lawyers died.

A pessimistic orientation does not seek accommodations with the system. We share the goal of the undercommons, which “is not to end the troubles but to end the world that created those particular troubles as the ones that must be opposed” (Halberstam 2013, 9). Moten and Harney don’t play the liberal game of reform; they are constantly reframing the problems at hand. What questions we ask are crucial—for bad questions yield worse answers, ones that compound the problem. On prison abolition, their intervention is decisive and reconfigures the coordinates of the debate: for them, it is “not so much the abolition of prisons but the abolition of a society that could have prisons, that could have slavery” (Moten and Harney 2013, 42). How do you abolish a society? How do you fight state power? Is anti-statism, ethical (that is, nonviolent) anarchism, the only solution? Is it a solution? Or do you dare to seize power, as with the example of Morales? A universal politics takes these questions to heart. For this reason, its skeptical negativity is put into the service of a more virtuous end: locating antagonisms, rather than settling for conflicts or pseudo-struggles. Its challenge is to sustain the antagonistic logic of class struggle, and avoid the comfort of static oppositions. The cultural Left has its enemies (Trump, Putin, Le Pen, Erdoğan, Modi, Duterte, Netanyahu, Orbán, Bolsonaro, Suu Kyi, MBS, etc.)—and, conversely, notorious leaders blame liberal media, demonizing bad press with the “enemy of the people” charge—but nothing really changes; the basic features or coordinates of the current society remain the same. Worse, the liberal capitalist system is legitimized (only in a free democracy can you, as a citizen, criticize tyrants abroad and, more importantly, express your outrage at the president, politicians, or state power without the fear of retribution) and the cultural Left is tacitly compensated for playing by the rules—for practicing non-antagonistic politics, for forgoing class insurgency and not engaging in class war (Žižek 2020f)—rewarded with “libidinal profit” (Žižek 1997b, 47), with what Lacan calls a “surplus-enjoyment” (2007, 147), an enjoyment-in-sacrifice. That is to say, cultural leftists, with their “Beautiful Souls” intact, enjoy not being a racist, a misogynist, a transphobe, an ableist, and so on. Hating the haters, the morally repulsive, the fascists of the world, is indeed an endless source of libidinal satisfaction for “woke” liberals. But what changes does it actually produce?

Prior to the term of President Rodrigo Duterte, average infrastructure spending for the past five decades was only at 2.5 percent of the country’s GDP. The 2015 IMF report found that the Philippines had a lower public investment in comparison to other members of ASEAN. We all know that Build, Build, Build is a program that is not only necessary but is in fact long overdue. If the Philippines is to achieve its full potential, then it must do something to cut losses due to traffic congestion in Metro Manila, which has gone up to ₱3.5 billion a day. It was at this point that Secretary Mark Villar presented the plan to decongest the 90-year-old EDSA, a 23.8-kilometer circumferential highway, which has long exceeded its maximum capacity of 288,000 vehicles a day.

The EDSA Decongestion Program, which is composed of 23 projects amounting to over ₱383 billion is well underway. Secretary Villar is confident that President Duterte’s promise of decongesting EDSA will be delivered before the end of his term. Five years after, major road and bridge projects have already been completed including the NLEX Harbor Link Segment 10, the Radial Road 10 Exit Ramp, the Mindanao Avenue Extension Segment 2C, the Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3, the Fort Bonifacio-Nichols Road (Lawton Avenue) Widening, the Estrella - Pantaleon Bridge and the Bonifacio Global City-Ortigas Center Link Road Project, among others.

As a student, I dreamed of a nation without roadblocks. I didn’t realize that 10 years after, I’d be part of President Rodrigo Duterte’s Build, Build, Build team. And since July 2016, according to Secretary Mark Villar, DPWH has completed 29,264 kilometers of roads, and 5,950 bridges.

Several years after Typhoon Yolanda struck the Philippines, international development organizations remained to help in the recovery and rehabilitation process. In my mind, it was difficult to talk about sustainable development when students had to risk their lives just to go to school, when farmers and fishers had to take whatever the middlemen were willing to give because transportation of their produce proved too difficult. A number of municipalities could only be accessed through boats. Whenever it rained, families would have to make a decision whether to risk their lives or lose their income. It was at this point that I realized that if we were to achieve real and inclusive economic growth, then a good infrastructure network was necessary. I would have never thought that in a matter of years I would join President Rodrigo Duterte's Build, Build, Build team.

In 2016, President Rodrigo Duterte embarked to build the Luzon Spine Expressway Network, a 1,101-kilometer expressway network, which would connect the northernmost and southernmost parts of Luzon. By building a 655-kilometer expressway network, Department of Public Works and Highways Secretary Mark Villar aims to complement the existing expressway grid spanning 385 kilometers. The goal is to increase the road network by threefold.

Critics have said that the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte should shy away from Build, Build, Build if it were to solve the COVID-19 pandemic. I disagree. The government must not choose between health and economy but rather make mutual compromises that would further health, recovery, job security, and long-term economic potential.

In 2016, when we started Build, Build, Build, critics said that the EDSA Decongestion Program is mathematically impossible, that it could not be done, that President Rodrigo Duterte was overpromising, and that Google Maps did not support such assertion. They failed to see the bigger picture — the possibility of a 90-year-old EDSA back to its original 1930s form, a future where Filipinos do not have to debate about Metro Manila’s “true midpoint” and a reality wherein every city in Metro Manila can be accessed within a 20 to 30 minute time frame

Recently, Filipino politics kinda looks a lot like the United States,” he continued, rolling his eyes and gesturing with his hands. “You’ve got a president who was Trump before Trump was Trump, and you have relationships with people close to him with SCL and Cambridge Analytica. And you had a lot of data being collected—the second largest amount of data after the United States being collected in the Philippines. Also if you look at how SCL and Cambridge Analytica operated in a lot of countries . . . one of the things they talk about is that they use . . . they don’t go into a country as Cambridge Analytica. They don’t go into a country as SCL Group because it’s too obvious. So you use local partners—” “Proxies,” I clarified. “You use proxies,” he continued. “. . . They’re on camera admitting this. They go into countries, set up bullshit companies that are just fronts and they send in staff. It makes it very difficult for regulators or opposition parties to actually identify what’s happening. And as they also have admitted, once an election is done, they just get out. So they’re in. They’re out. They’ve got their guy in, and then you know they can come back and ask for favors.” “Okay,” I interrupted, “Alexander Nix [the Cambridge Analytica president] came to the Philippines at the end of 2015 before the campaigns began, and there was a photo of him—”13 “Yeah, he met with people there,” said Chris. “—the staff of Duterte,” I finished. “Yeah! What do you think he was doing there?” Chris asked.14