THE film 'The Kingdom' (2024) speaks of what could have been if the Philippines had not been occupied by Spain. Reimagining it at this time gives us a different sense of things as we face the end of 2024. The film dives head first into a world fraught with danger, loyalty and moral ambiguity.The story unfolds in a fictional yet relatable kingdom, where political tensions seep into the lives of ordinary citizens. The screenplay adeptly balances moments of intense action with quieter emotional beats, inviting viewers to ponder the complexities of power and the repercussions of personal choices. At its core, it explores the age-old conflict between duty to one's country and the yearning for personal freedom.At its heart, 'The Kingdom' questions the morality of leadership and the cost of loyalty. Director Michael Tuviera skillfully weaves in themes of sacrifice, the deception of appearances and the ever-present battle between good and evil. The film urges the audience to reflect on the nature of authority and the ethical ramifications of the choices we make when faced with crisis.The film occasionally suffers from pacing issues, particularly in its second act. Certain narrative arcs could have benefited from tighter editing, as some scenes linger longer than necessary, which might detract from the overall tension. Furthermore, while the film raises significant thematic questions, it sometimes leans on clichés that could have been explored in more depth. Despite its minor flaws, the film captures the viewer's attention and prompts reflection long after the credits roll. 'The Kingdom' is a film worth experiencing. But it does not present a certain conclusion that the nation is better off.And there lies the problem with the film. The reimagination could probably be made on point because it would appear that not being colonized by Spain would mean the islands were home to a diverse society with a rich cultural history. The Philippines was home to many ethnolinguistic groups which arrived in waves of immigration from the Asian mainland. The earliest inhabitants were of Mongoloid descent. The pre-Hispanic belief system was called anito, which included spirits like household deities, deceased ancestors, nature spirits, nymphs and diwatas. The government was patriarchal and organized into barangay, which were small political units of about 30 to 100 families. Each barangay was ruled by a datu, who gained power through inheritance, wisdom, wealth or physical prowess. The economy was based on agriculture and seafaring, especially in the Visayas and Luzon regions. Would we have been better off without religion, Catholicism to be exact?Warfare was prevalent in our country before Spain came in. It was because there were huge natural resources lacking human resources to work on it. The principal role of the datus was to extract human resources through raiding and slave-capturing. Warfare also created a patron-client relationship among different chiefdoms.What echoes clearly and hence very Filipino is the 'enduring importance of family, tradition and leadership.' And that brings us back to 2024 and the what-ifs of the Marcos administration.What if there remains unity as a governance framework, then efforts are consolidated and a common approach to solving problems are ensured. Imagine the waste of time and resources in persecuting the Dutertes? For what?What if economists and fiscal experts have the ear of the leader, then looking for fiscal space would not be a malicious exercise of using trust funds such as the SSS, GSIS and PhilHealth for infrastructure projects of politicians and then actuarial standing is honored and not breached.What if we pursue cash budgeting rather than obligation budgeting, then we will not end in deficit spending, increasing the debt to P16 trillion today. Cash budgeting predicts future cash flows, while obligation budgeting estimates the commitments a government will make in a fiscal year.What if we continue our great strides in dealing with the CPP-NPA-NDF than insisting on a different norm for the vice president's (VP) use of the confidential funds (CF), then the enemies of the state are given free will to hit the use of CF but only against the VP.What if Marcos Jr. had prioritized and successfully implemented robust economic reforms focused on job creation, infrastructure development and reducing poverty, it could have strengthened public support for his administration and improved living standards, potentially altering public perception of the Marcos legacy.What if Marcos Jr. had prioritized climate change action? Given the Philippines' vulnerability to climate change, an early focus on environmental issues and disaster preparedness could have reinforced his administration's legitimacy. This commitment might have garnered local and international support while addressing one of the nation's most pressing challenges.What if Marcos Jr. ramped up infrastructure development, then that could have led to significant job creation and economic growth, enhancing his administration's popularity and addressing infrastructure deficits.What if the Philippines had strengthened ties with regional partners, then Marcos Jr. could have bolstered the Philippines' standing in regional geopolitics, particularly concerning maritime issues with China in the South China Sea instead of being the brown brother of the US.What if Marcos Jr. focused on education and health care reforms, then he could have significantly impacted long-term development, improving access and quality of services, and potentially increasing support for his presidency.What if Marcos Jr. had addressed corruption more transparently, then it could have enhanced public trust and confidence in his leadership, and improved the overall governance landscape in the Philippines.What if Marcos Jr. started to be a leader, then there would be no pretenders to the throne and we would not have a back-to-back budgetary crisis, continuing the waste, further escalating as we move year to year to a constitutional one.Truly, 'true redemption is when guilt leads to good.' This one showed no genuine care and concern for our well-being.
