Cattle Mutilation

Citing the low approval ratings of President Macapagal-Arroyo, the Palace has directed government agencies to attribute all their projects to her.

“Departments were reminded to give credit to PGMA” during a Jan. 9 meeting of the administration’ Ad-hoc Communications Group, according to Ramon Bacani, education undersecretary for regional operations.

- Arroyo brand on gov’t projects pushed
   Jerry E. Esplanada, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 1/24/2009 

 

In a regime that reeks with a lot of bollocks, this one has to rank up as one of the biggest.

Surely Gloria Arroyo does not suffer any problems with name-recall; you have “Gloria Labandera,” her initials are the same as a major TV network, and her initials have been used for just about every single project where the letters “G,” “M,” and “A” can be used.  Case in point: Ginintuang Masaganang Ani Countrywide Assistance for Rural Employment and Services: GMA-CARES.  If there’s any project – or acronym, for that matter – doomed for epic fail, there’s one for you.

I’m all for giving credit where credit is due, but how much credit can you give to one person?  How popular does the President have to be?

The problem here is not Arroyo’s lack of visibility, but Arroyo having too much of it.  From Photoshopped hard-hats to her Justice League-like poses at LRT-2, Gloria Arroyo is the most visible President we have ever had.  With that said, maybe – just maybe - GMA’s popularity problem may be caused by having too much of her; both literally and figuratively.  It’s either a LOL or WTF moment.

When it comes to mutilating sacred cows, the crop (y’know there are many ways to pronounce that) of politicians we have excel at it.  There is no basketball court, pedestrian overpass, boundary indicator, or waiting shed in the Philippines that does not have at least one “Project Of” clause, or “Sponsored By” clause, or symbols or initialisms that border on the laughable and the ridiculous.  Instead of viewing these projects and needs as entitlements and products of taxpayer money, it will seem that these become mere donations out of the goodness of their hearts, at the expense of our own taxes.

To me, the project of “Presidential branding” is nothing more than an extension of a very feudal version of political egomania.  The only sacred cow in governance and in Government is taxpayer money that goes to projects, facilities, and other stuff used by taxpayers.  To “brand” a project “courtesy of” a politico, in this case GMA, is political vandalism, a lot like marking your territory.

There are many ways that is done; hyenas piss on their breeding grounds, gang members use spray paint to tag their hoods, and politicians use their names on projects so that they’ll be remembered the next elections.  The only difference between those examples is possession.  Hyenas use their own urine, gang members may opt to use their own money to buy spray paint, but politicians use taxpayer money to mark political territories.

It reeks of the kind of unethical, cruel butchery that takes place during cattle mutilation: flaying, flogging, castration, disemboweling, beheading.  It is to take credit for something that you had absolutely nothing to do with… well, except cut the ribbon as the Guest of Honor, sign a few papers, and then dub it as “Proyekto Ni” whatever-your-name-is-I’ll-see-you-in-the-elections-and-remembering-that-project-with-your-name-painted-and-plastered-and-tarped-all-over-it-I-will-vote-for-you-because-I-owe-you-one.

That brand, though, will be forever synonymous to graft and corruption.

Maybe the GMA PR strategists are going about it all wrong; projects are turned to products where we become all too aware of the President.  Maybe the less we see of her and the more we see of genuine projects that are for the people and help the poor among us, maybe GMA will be more popular.  Maybe we can do with a lot less PGMA-branded projects.

Maybe we can do with a lot less of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Popularity: 1% [?]