The rather supercilious demand in the Inquirer.net editorial for substance from the leading presidential contender Noynoy Aquino has gone pfft in the end. The word to the wise, given in the most condescending way, was no more than a call for a formal “makeover” of Noynoy’s presidential campaign, namely:
1. Raise money to fund an expensive election;
2. Fashion the LP into a credible electoral machine;
3. Craft a political platform that is “democratic, relevant, effective and one that would unify, rather than divide, Filipinos”;
4. Keep the support of the Catholic hierarchy; and
5. Make the campaign a learning opportunity for Noynoy.
Just like the Inquirer, many in FV are observed to be reading too little of the Noynoy/Mar (Roxas) tandem and the Liberal Party platform where the substance of their political philosophy inheres for now.
I have had the chance to expound again on this aspect of the current political debate highlighting the political substance of Noynoy with this post of mine at mlq3’s website:
One should note for example the stated belief in the LP platform in “social market economy,” the economic system that pays obeisance to the market only nominally and this affirmation: “Market should be our servant and not our master.”
The LP platform likewise provides clear intimation in terms of going the way of industrial democracy, a “dead horse” practically in American industrial relations nowadays.
Both Mar Roxas, the LP President, and Noynoy Aquino, the LP Executive VP until his announcement to be likewise the party’s standard bearer, have (presumably) signed on their party platform; it bears their approval.
Now, Nonoy’s acrid assessment of the malaise of our society is rather unreserved, almost uncouth: “matindi ang kabulukang bumabalot sa ating lipunan.” This painful frustration that Noynoy couldn’t hide is matched only by his passion for social justice as reflected in quality legislative measures he has initiated. One example is Senate Bill No. 1370 that would grant annual productivity incentive to workers in the private sector at 10% of the company’s net profits before taxes.
In the explanatory notes for Senate Bill 2036 that Noynoy has also authored (the measure seeks to impose higher penalties for non-compliance of the prescribed adjustments in the wage rates of workers), he has called attention to the constitutional mandate to the State “to afford full protection to labor and (guarantee) that workers shall be entitled not only to security of tenure and humane conditions of work but also living wage and participation in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits . . . .”
The public policies like the above that Noynoy champions in the Senate are also spelled out in the LP platform such as the undertaking therein to:
“. . . ensure that every employee has a right to participate in decision-making in their enterprise” and “set up a program for Industrial Partnership to help companies and their employees find the precise form of partnership which best suit them.”
“ . . . legislate to establish the right of every private sector employee in a substantial company to have access to a share in ownership and/ or in the profit they help to create” and “encourage profit-related pay, employee share-ownership schemes and employee buy-outs.”
“. . . spread employee ownership and participation” in order to “encourage wages to be set according to the profitability of individual firms.”
Given the profound political philosophy, goals and visions evident in the LP platform as well as in actual measures being pursue to implement them, aren’t we in fact seeing in Noynoy and Mar a tandem not merely promising honesty and good governance but of Weberian charismatic “bulls in the China shop” in the pursuit of a unifying ideology geared up to break away from traditional authority?
It’s been moreover pointed out in another relevant post that certain of Nonoy’s legislative initiatives, radical as they may seem, are indicative of his being “not simply a Jeffersonian democrat Ninoy was (or anthropocentric Cory was). He is his own man.”
These estimations of Noynoy based on facts are over against the unflattering claim in the Inquirer editorial based on suppositions: “Noynoy, of course, is the best medium of his message: he is his own best personality. But he should disabuse the public of the notion that he is ‘nice’ but lightweight, a little less glib than his father and famous show-biz sister, but with none of the former’s substance and the latter’s entertainment value. This would involve nothing less than a presidential makeover.”
Au contraire, the substantive Noynoy at this stage of his political calling is somehow antithetical at least to the glib, intractable and, yes, formal Ninoy, the “Wonder Boy” of Philippine politics before Martial Law clipped his wings (Although, Ninoy, incarcerated for more than seven years, was transformed into a statesman whose commitment to liberty, democracy and social justice has grown to become essentially visceral rather than merely nominal or theatrical).
A contemporary commentary of a sliver of our history during EDSA II hopefully will explain the juxtaposition being made:
If the forces that had opposed the dictatorship of Marcos and formed the core of the People Power I movement had been for the most part as clandestine in their inception as the secret revolutionary movement founded by Andres Bonifacio against Spain, the second people power was public and global from the start. At the height of the uprising, inq7.net has claimed its website was the 11th most visited in the Internet world. The Filipino Diaspora (many of whom were driven out in self-exile by the excesses of Marcos), fomented by the excitement and exigencies of the moment, joined the revolt as “virtual” rebels firing forth their two-cent worth of fireballs in various Philippine oriented websites that proliferated.
It was during this open season against the beleaguered Erap that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA), then the Vice-President of the Philippines, left the Estrada Cabinet as Social Welfare secretary to join the snowballing movement. GMA, an economist, educator and journalist, and who won the vice-presidency by seven million votes, one of the largest margins in Philippine history, thereafter sought to form a coalition representing various segments of Philippine society with a view to proposing a national agenda that would address the many ills afflicting the nation. For one who had long been seen as a potential presidential successor, her move though perceived by many to be quite belated was propitious.
I was however among those who did not withhold suggesting her proposal betrayed her lack of deep-rooted visions. And drawing a Ninoy Aquino analogy, I thought that, in hindsight, while Ninoy knew that he needed as much power to transform the nation as Marcos had wielded to secure his dictatorship, Ninoy himself did not seem to have planned long enough to bequeath at least his own vision if the Marcos regime would call Ninoy’s gambit of ultimate sacrifice ala Rizal.
My supposition was if GMA, then so close to the vicissitudes of power, was just about to formulate her own national agenda, it should make one wonder if she was really ready for the national leadership or she was just coasting along well within the same dismal system that has failed the nation. If she was ready for the job, shouldn’t her preparation include some serious short- and long-term strategies for pursuing radical, if not revolutionary, solutions to all the malaises long scourging the country and its people? (Excerpts from Build or Perish!)
Like GMA, Noynoy may have been pushed into the vicissitudes of power ahead of his time. But his youth informed by the martyrdom of his father which tormented the entire nation and his political career forged by an enduring devotion to democratic values bequeathed to him by his mother, and in the face of his relatively unblemished political career, it would be unwarranted for anyone to claim that, his radical reformative-bent notwithstanding, the commitment of Noynoy to democracy, liberty and social justice is only formal rather than substantive.
Let me editorialize a bit myself. What I’m seeing is that the campaign of Nonoy Aquino and Mar Roxas represents the politics of vigor and the ideology of adventure (to appreciate this requires seriously vetting the public policies they’ve championed and the platform of Liberal Party that they head); on the contrary, Villar, Erap, Escudero and Teodoro almost uniformly embody the tired and tried political credo of preserving the status quo – the old and the familiar that serve only the few.
Indeed, Filipinos deserve more than we give them credit for. On the whole, they have been wising up (as those surveys confirm) to know the difference and therefore should be expected to place their political bets upon those who they think will give them a chance at change for the better without the need of violence.
Those who blame for example the ethnic traits of ordinary Filipinos for the sorry state of affairs of the country are unwittingly (but largely dumbly) serving as apologists for the status quo. They belong to that segment of our society that is the real enemy of change.
Popularity: 8% [?]
Indeed, the jeepney continues to embody the status quo that imprisons the Filipino spirit — one where form almost overwhelmingly trumps substance. So it is hardly surprising that those who earned their stripes as “experts” within a tradition of mediocrity in the way we practice the noble governance system called “democracy” now aggressively downplay the role of substance in a politician’s proposition to the electorate.
By encouraging the notion that our ethnic traits (the cards that were dealt us) play no role in (and are not considered as key factors that contribute to) the sorry state of our society, we are in effect, propagating the national delusion of grandeur that prevents us from addressing at their roots the big issues that plague our society.
The Ondoy disaster is almost poetic in its spectacular representation of the last several decades of Philippine history — one where a coating of sophistication and modernity was painted to mask a massive rot. The disaster that struck in late September not only destroyed this coating — the manicured villages built on natural floodplains, is one example. It also washed up to the surface for all to see, decades of accumulated human refuse lodged into decrepit infrastructure.
The gloss of “heroism” and “martyrdom” painted around the ugly rot known as Filipino politics distracts from the whole point of political exercise and instead has been successfully pitched to the ordinary Pinoy as an end in itself.
Some people here talk about the idealism of finding that “servant president” to lead us while the irony of their lack of focus on the service to be provided by such a person seems to escape them. The governance service to be provided by the Chief Executive who will be serving his/her term from 2010-2016 is the ball we as voters have to keep our eye on. The last several decades of our history is a testament to our FAILURE to keep our eye on that ball.
Rather than talk about WHO one will vote for, we should talk about WHAT the task at hand is for whoever our personal choice will be to lead us from 2010-2016, and demand that they tell us HOW they plan to execute that task as our country’s Chief Executive over that period.
To be able to step up to that ideal regard for our responsibility as participants in a democracy, we indeed need to dig deep into the fabric of our character as a people and understand our the cultural inclinations and predisposition that we need to overcome in order to do this.
Benigs, these excerpts from my very first post in FV will probably help explain where I’m coming from:
__________
(D)emocracy can really get problematic when the great mass of sovereign particles cannot get past subsistence level to be free from want. So when the needy bargain with their votes or go blindly by the bidding of their political lords (because power over basic needs is power over will) the free expression of the sovereign will is violated.
(If you want to keep your eye on the ball, try to appreciate that this is where we’re stuck today): The Philippine economy is not growing enough to create surplus not only to provide and hold economic safety nets but also pay for certain essential infrastructure, physical and social, such as a meaningful program for a high-quality universal education in order to produce a large population geared up for a modern economy and an enlightened citizenry, the essential ingredient for a working democracy.
Creating the good society that democracy aims to pull off often involves a decision to conserve long-held beliefs, values, traditions and institutions, or, otherwise, revolutionize them. Whether to undergo transformation or not, it could be driven either by fear of a change for the worse or by hope for the better. Those with something or so much to lose will most likely lean toward conservatism and those with little or nothing to lose but their blighted station will veer toward radicalism. There are however well-intentioned individuals from across the political and social spectrum who will not shun adventurism to experiment on other pathways to progress.
At this stage of nation-building however, the burden of resolving, sans violent upheaval, the economic scarcity the country is facing is upon the laps of those with effective power or those who have access to various institutional sources of power. These powerholders are essentially the society’s elites . . .
The change agents could in fact be new breed of productive men who must feel relatively deprived, not materially but morally, because they are challenged (or humiliated) out of individual and national pride for being elites in an economic basket case. Once this self-importance or sense of country is stirred, the decision to attain modernity will come easier such as on what approach to take in employing the country’s resources to attain economic growth and development or how to allocate the economic surplus if and when created, depending on what ways of thinking they are willing to keep or unsettle. Even more specifically, on whether goods and services should be produced according to the autonomous decision of the individual wealth producers and entrepreneurs or government bureaucrats and specialists drawn in into those decisions in the context of public/private sectors coordination or partnership?
__________
On the other hand, the Ondoy disaster tells us that what’s needed to handle it (before and after disaster) is a competent, apolitical and fully-funded bureaucracy that will plan, design and implement solutions to the problem for the long term. Blaming those who are essentially victims of the system in place should be seen as a copout.
You have the anti-investment anti-economic growth rent-capture protectionist 1987 constitution to thank for. Compliments of Cory Aquino’s selected Con-Con delegates.
And you still have the oligarchs in control of the land – thanks to the bungled CARP. No thanks to Aquino.
And here you are – supporting a candidate who will keep on doing the same tired old things – and you expect different results.
a Limahong platform for the 21st century? No thanks – tissue paper does a finer job at wiping arse.
Inquirer does a Benig0.
@BrianB:
Isn’t it about time that mainstream media did ask the candidates for such things like platforms? :)
———
@Abe:
(1) What’s wrong with thinking people being responsible enough to demand substance from those with political ambitions?
(2) Tell us why (and how), based on your post’s imperative title (which goes diametrically opposed to Inquirer’s editorial), focus on form is better than on substance. (Aside: I suddenly recall watching a cable news item where there was this exposé on people selling buns filled with processed/dissolved cardboard in China. Can’t imagine how those could’ve gone down no matter how yummy they might have looked.)
(3)
Then by all means, Noynoy should impress us all with a preview of what he intends to do (AND HOW) from 2010 to 2016. After all it’s not like he’s shocked to be supposedly pushed where he is by the sambayanan.
He has had all the time to be wishy-washy, to seek discernment, to leisurely have a one-on-one time with comeback artist extraordinaire Erap while Ondoy was drowning people, even to party with Raymond Gutierrez during Ondoy’s visit. Surely his being “pushed into the vicissitudes of power ahead of his time” isn’t as shockingly sudden as you phrase it.
(4) Please tell us why (and how) preferring an unprepared, silently overwhelmed candidate (note: it doesn’t have to be Noynoy in particular) who couldn’t admit that his tail is really between his legs under all this pressure, makes for a better-run Philippine government, as opposed to choosing someone who is prepared and qualified and experienced.
(5)
Then Noynoy should have no trouble spelling out in clear tangible terms what his platform is that topples the status quo and hammers into shape the future that he envisions, if he does envision something different at all. A show of substance first, form second, should be impressive and most entertaining, wouldn’t you agree?
Plus, with a focus on substance, Noynoy’s hardcore supporters will actually have something better to sell than honesty, pedigree, the 900-pound gorilla in the room that is democracy, and all sorts of vaporware. That should make everyone in Noynoy’s camp look good, not to mention him being the center of it all (or is it Kris?).
Just curious, but why would you persistently downplay what your dear candidate should be flaunting in the first place? Is it because it isn’t there?
Filo, please read the piece again before you go red in the face.
In case you didn’t notice, Filo has always been red in the face. >:) And why shouldn’t he be, the lack of substance is truly harmful in our country. Focusing on form than on substance is like saying, it’s better to lie than have the real thing. Masama pala ang magpakatotoo, no?
Chino F, the post is supposed to satirize the Inquirer editorial that was intended to preach substance but wound up focusing on form instead.
I see. I’m afraid your attempt on satire did not hit me. I hope you are more in favor of substance over form after all.
They have seen the power of The Force.
Yes, but Noynoy is not the droid they’re looking for.
More like the Hutt they need? ehehehe
They have seen the power of The Force.
Would this be the dark side?
Because I’m pretty sure you’re a sith lord wreaking havoc on The Republic? LOL.
Oh, the Republic is doing a pretty good job of imploding – on its own, the Sith assistance not needed.
Does Noynoy have any other opinions or advocacy apart from legislating socialist notions on the country’s free enterprise? For all the long-winded praise, the justification for claiming Noynoy is qualified by reason of a good plan is short on details.
BenK, for one, running a country is not about earning a Ph.D. Good political leaders start with visceral commitments to certain belief systems such as popular sovereignty or social justice. Others, the so-called conservatives, for instance, believe in cutting taxes and limited government. In a representative democracy like ours, “power” lies in political parties. Even Danding Cojuangco has created and maintained his own political party to throw his weight around. So, if you are looking for political manifestos for the Nonoy/Mar campaign, read the LP platform.
last time i saw the lp platform it was just a bunch of motherhood statements strewn together. it’s only works as a general guideline. what noynoy should do is come out with a more specific set of plans.
Like this one?
Cheche Lazaro (of Vera Files): And plan for your first 100 days, what will you do? Hit the ground running?
Gibo: You have no choice but to continue with a lot of programs like the infrastructure programs that need to be continued and management day-to-day of the security situation. Number three, you have to plan your legislative agenda, the most important thing. Your first budget, your legislative agenda. That legislative agenda would include the constitutional convention law, the support for the new Philippine education road map because basic education must be reengineered. And I want to experiment also legislatively with universal participative health care, if it is feasible. Meaning to say, everybody participates. I mean, what’s for a rich person to contribute 100 or 200 pesos per month to a participative delivers on health care so there’s more for everybody, not merely in terms of buying medicine and providing care but for providing reimbursements for doctors and nurses, so there’s an incentive to stay and participate in the system and I want also a legislative proposal for student loan program rather than scholarships. I want a revolving student loan program, probably five billion pesos, get that from the national treasury, park it in the SSS, not SSS funds but SSS facilities. Student wants to study, comes in, you give the student and SSS number which should be a GSIS number, too, and give him or her the loan. Once that SSS number comes out because he or she is employed, then you deduct and you have an incentive to study because you have to repay the loan and you can service more people. You give scholarships to those who are really deserving because of high aptitude and to those subjects that are not too popular but the country needs like international relations, public policy and planning.
between the two cojuangco candidates, gibo knows what needs to be done. noynoy is clueless. but he’s the one the hacenderos want precisely because he has no platform. as he has no platform, it will be easy to make him do their bidding.
Absolutely! Like this one – what is Noynoy’s alternative? Haven’t even thought about it?
If that’s what you call 21st Century political platform, I’d gladly register as a card-bearing member of the APP (the Anti-Pinoy Party).
Abe:
it’s not what i’d call a 21st century platform.
but it certainly has more substanc AND form than a vacuous appeal to pedigree and winnability :)
based on the About Statement:
i’d say you are a charter member of Anti-Pinoy Party. :D
Where’s the beef? Nowhere to be found!
The broad concerns of Aquino and Acosta, however, sparked no enthusiasm in certain sectors, among them a farmers’ group, which said they wanted to hear concrete programs for Bicol’s farmers who are into coconut farming.
Felix Paz, regional chair of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP-Bicol), said the coconut farmers wanted to know from Aquino what livelihood programs and other support mechanisms he had in mind that would directly help them.
Paz said there were no categorical answers from Aquino.
BongV, if you know something about the science of politics, you should appreciate by now that political parties created modern democracy. So, democracy as we practice it today is unimaginable without political parties. It is therefore the party, not the individual politicians, that serves as the principal vehicle of the people to control the reins of government such as by organizing the policy-making branch of the government to insure party control of policy making. The party recruits the candidate, not the other way around. So, if you are looking for political manifestos in connection with the Philippine 2010 presidential elections, the staring point is the political party platform. It is therefore critical that you should vet the LP platform if you want to be fully guided as to where Noynoy and Mar would be leading the country should they both win the elections.
Certainly, I would understand if you cannot come up with your vaunted 21st century political platform on short notice. Such is not easy to turn out especially when it is something that’s supposed to proceed from your innermost emotions (your gut, so to speak). If you do not believe in what’s actually professed, it would be nothing but empty shibboleth.
Now, if you are serious in forming your APP for example (and why not, you are doing a good job as their “acting” press secretary), would you at least care to tell us in a couple of sentences, the three top substantive issues you want to be addressed in the forthcoming elections, and then explain to FV readers why you belong to one side of the debate or the other? I’ll be glad to listen.
“One should note for example the stated belief in the LP platform in “social market economy,” the economic system that pays obeisance to the market only nominally and this affirmation: “Market should be our servant and not our master.”
Abe baby, both these guys most especially Mar Roxas and the guys who were around Cory are once again at the forefront of the Noynoy campaign.
These guys like Estanislao, Paderanga and the others are doctrinaire free market wing nuts. They present themselves as equilibrium scientists.
Your opinion of Noynoy has no basis in fact.
Economic development drives societal development. The economic policy framework of the Noynoy/Mar tandem is pro market with minimal state intervention.
The sad part is a social market place is only possible with a surplus economy that can adequately fund an effective government.
The neo-colonial aspect of the Noynoy/Mar tandem is most prominent amongst all the candidates.
J_AG,
I agree (contrary to Benigs’ position on the matter) that “Economic development drives societal development.” But before we go any further, let’s go definitional first. For instance, define “neo-colonial” for us. And then try giving specific instances why you think that the Nonoy/Mar campaign could be in pursuit of neo-colonial political economy and why it is in front of the others in that pursuit.
When the Philippines signed the Bell Trade Act one most interesting aspect of that treaty stipulated that the we had to ask permission from the President of the U.S. on the most important strategic issue of monetary policy. The exchange rate policy.
Japan and Western Germany to aid their reconstruction efforts were allowed to impose a mercantilist exchange rate. Both were later given debt condonation.
The supposedly high growth rates were simply due to the massive extraction of resources.
By 1972 when the U.S. defaulted on its debt in gold we went under the IMF-WB and effectively transferred our sovereignty over fiscal and monetary policy to the IMF.
The developing economies then were all forced to move to a dollar reserve system.
Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan were allowed to maintain their independent fiscal and monetary policies to sustain their mercantilist development model. This was due to the need to maintain markets and keep these countries in the Western camp. India and China to this day never completely opened their monetary system to the global financial system. All these five countries are now the main industrializing economies on the planet.
Our pattern of trade still continues to be the export of crude resources.
We are a net importer of capital. We are a net importer in merchandise trade. What is more critical is the fact that today we also are a net importer of food.
We cover our deficits mainly with labor exports and debt.
Hence we are still mainly an economy that lives of the primitive accumulation from the land and debt. The labor value added chain is still primitive. What you see that is seemingly first world is based on capital dependency from foreign sources.
When the allocation of scarce resources is determined by the imposition of an export orientation by so called multilateral institutions that is a throwback to then industrial policies of the British empire that led to the American revolution.
Just look at Manila today compared to what it was when the reconstruction was completed after the war. The natural migration from rural to urban has led to the creation of the slum world. No industry to absorb the migration process that we see in the the other Asian countries.
It was the industrialization process that led to the creation of states.
Capitalism led to the creation of more specialized forms of the division of labor. That led to governments intervening with private capital to set up the schooling and training system to provide the skills needed by industry.
In this country we promote the training and schooling of people primarily for the labor export market.
Guess the lineage of both Noynoy and Mar? They are sons of the most backward class in terms of economic development. The landlord/comprador class.
I will not get into the almost criminal aspect of the BSP monetary policies. A country will not be able to wean itself on dependency unless it gets the power back for issuing its own currency. One cannot be half a virgin. Either you are sovereign or you allow yourself to become a whore. I prefer the more open market system in allowing the same monetary system as HK or Singapore. Free banking system without a Central Bank. Banks can choose any hard currency (Dollar, Yen or Euro) as their reserves and issue a domestic currency based on it.
No nationality restrictions on investments.
You need a collective sense of country first before one can move to a mercantilist nationalist policy framework.
Pinoys are simply not hard wired for nationalism.
J_ag,
Everything that you’ve said above makes a lot of sense to me.
As a matter of fact, I do believe that if the depth as well as nuance of this particular issue is the only one that is the subject of debate in the political platforms being demanded of the 2010 presidential hopefuls, about 90 percent of what’s essential and substantial would probably be covered including, for instance, poverty alleviation, migration from rural to urban, improvement of employment opportunities, funding for disaster response, industry-based educational program, diasporic brain drain, and the like.
In a nutshell you seem to be saying that Mother America has treated RP like a stepson. In public, mother and stepson have continually professed undying endearment to each other but in reality the latter’s oedipal love is basically unrequited. We know that while WWII enemies like Japan and Germany were forthwith given huge dough for a genuine chance to reconstruct, for decades Filipino veterans who fought side by side with GI Joe had to beg for crumbs and RP itself to recover from the ravages of war was given a diet of conditions such as those, as you said, imposed under the Bell Trade Act (e.g., the surrender of our “sovereignty over fiscal and monetary policy” to US-dominated financial institutions).
That seems to be the very essence of colonialism where the master is psyched to continue carrying the burden of caring for the “half-devil, half-child” colonial subjects (and I agree that neo-colonialism is simply such continued domination sans conquest, if that is what you mean). Unfortunately, like the way benignO and gang argue about a cultural dichotomy, the White Cadillac Filipino Establishment walls itself off from the jeepney Filipino, and so the exclusive club members think the denigration by the master does not apply to them (during the Friar era they avoided the appellation by being Hispanized; today they think they are Whited basically by being assimilated into Western ways).
Look at Forbes’ list of Filipino wealthiest. How many of them are or could be “hard wired for nationalism”? And how many are part and parcel of the money and banking oligopoly? Now, if they are happy because they make easy money (well, without causing pollution) under the rentier regime (more than half of the national debt belongs to them), will they even care if RP has no effective control over our monetary system? Why risk, they may reckon, into manufacturing, if money can be made out of rent-seeking (see the report of WB economist Alessandro Magnoli Bocchi) and payment of those rents is mandated by law?
Still my question is: What makes you think that Noynoy and Mar might be oblivious of this malady or that assuming that they are as smart as you are, they could not be expected to do something about it should they win political power because (to employ what seems to be an overused argot by now) they are “pedigreed” to react that way?
But didn’t Mar (as DTI secretary) once threaten to withdraw from WTO (a successor of one of the Bretton Woods triplets – the IMF/WB/GATT) and Noynoy, as has been pointed out, walk the talk of “industrial democracy”?
On the other hand, please enlighten us further on how you can reconcile your suggestion about “government intervening with private capital,” and “(sustaining) mercantilist development model” with a view to attaining industrialization with your “(preference for) more open market system in allowing the same monetary system as HK or Singapore” and “No nationality restrictions on investments”?
Abe,
Yes, the pretentious diplomatic dance can be viewed as pathetic or amusing, depending on one’s point of view. And underneath is the history of bitter little offenses, one way or the other. It is like a family feud, simmering, where one must attend weddings together and put on a good show for the neighbors, but neither is having much fun.
The US has undoubtedly been thuggish in that uniquely self-involved American way. I have no idea how decisions got made after WW II as to where to invest or run banking, but I do know that Japan and Germany were industrial societies, whereas the Philippines was agrarian. The US needed trinkets, perhaps, but not turnips. Or upon providing cash, maybe they found that in Japan and Germany, it was hungrily applied, whereas in the Philippines it seemed to disappear . . . leaving hunger in place.
As to the stepchild model, well, today the Philippines is grown up and behaves alternately as thief or beggar, whimpering as to its sorry plight and blaming everyone else for its lot in life. I do believe there is a more constructive way but, alas, no one seems to be around to provide counseling except Benign0.
Joe
Joe, things could get a bit different if benignO could be as passionate as you in defending his country and compatriots (the “bitter little offenses,” notwithstanding) the way you do of your beloved USA.
Imagine for example if he could be as proud as you using “NinoyPinoy” (as in “JoeAmerica”) as his monicker instead of being an anti-Pinoy “heckler” (his self-description) from Down Under.
If there was nothing to heckle at – there wouldn’t be any heckles at all.
How’s your Pinoy Supremacist Party :)
Abe,
I agree that the constancy of condemnation gets a little overbearing, and it would be nice if FV great minds stretched a little to try to find, themselves, the goodness that is here. Instead of demanding that others prove themselves, then ripping it. Any cloth can be ripped; the weaving, however, is not so easy.
Joe
That’s what happens when you get your metaphors mixed up. The Philippines will be treated like a juvenile as long as it behaves like a juvenile.
That was because for every one valid Filipino vets claim, there were 1000 fraudulent claims – and yes, they are Filipinos. Then you wonder why the spigot is tightened?
On the contrary, the challenge is not to be satisfied with the jeepney, and move forward with more innovations, more proactiveness, more thinking so that the Philippines will have its own Hyundai, or Proton Wira, or Tata – smart vehicles; to have smarter mass transit systems instead of flooding the roads with jeepneys. You seem to be arguing for retrogression. That sort of thinking – of apologizing for retrogression – needs to be bombed straight back to the Stone Age.
The Filipino’s wealthiest will not give up its priveledges. Therefore, you have to engage in hard-nosed negotiations in the political arena and legislate measures that will redistribute the wealth – specifically, remove the rent capture protectionist policies that have been a drag on the economy. That means you have to mobilize the non-wealthy who have the numbers to get the job done. But if the non-wealthy aren’t up to the task – your wealthies will be laughing all the way to the bank. Struggle or perish.
The answer lies in Hacienda Luisita – land versus paper… paper? rocks vs bullets?
It remains correct that Noynoy is far from assured to win May2010 elections. What is in the minds of the millions who will vote is what the Inquirer editorial has written. … the “Cory Magic” lingering and weaving a powerful spell even if the source of the magic is already dead. The death of President Corazon Aquino last Aug. 1 and its aftermath have become an occasion not only for the biggest outpouring of Filipino national grief . . . it has also forged a national solidarity that now appears to have gone beyond her funeral. . . .Now that Cory is dead, her name has become even more hallowed, her magic even more potent. It appears set to catapult her only son to the presidency. Maybe yes, maybe no.
Noynoy is known as Cory’s son. The capabilities of Noynoy to lead is an enigma. The next months will, by default, result in the Filipino voter getting to know if they will find it in their interest to entrust Malacanang to Noynoy (or if it is Erap or Villar, Perlas or Ebdane who gets elected to replace GMA as next president).
One of the criticisms Noynoy should expect to hear more of is this : Noynoy’s lack of ability to make things happen.
Noynoy has been unable to transform into laws the legislative causes he has championed.
you say: ” But his youth informed by the martyrdom of his father which tormented the entire nation and his political career forged by an enduring devotion to democratic values bequeathed to him by his mother, and in the face of his relatively unblemished political career, it would be unwarranted for anyone to claim that, his radical reformative-bent notwithstanding, the commitment of Noynoy to democracy, liberty and social justice is only formal rather than substantive.”
how do you know all this? did u talk to him or something?
No, I have not talked to Noynoy at all. But I have had the chance to interview Ninoy’s mother and sister during Ninoy’s incarceration about his politics and how it somehow affected his family.
That is many years passed already. Your knowledge of Noynoy is not that much and a whole lot less than the regular Filipino since aren’t you living in Texas for over twenty years?
Abe,
Thought provoking, as usual, but I disagree with two points you make:
(1) “Those who blame for example the ethnic traits of ordinary Filipinos for the sorry state of affairs of the country are unwittingly (but largely dumbly) serving as apologists for the status quo. They belong to that segment of our society that is the real enemy of change.”
How can harsh critics be advocating the status quo? You have to decide what aspects of your ethnicity you want to keep and what you want to lose. In the US, racism was an ethnic trait. It took years of hard work to change behaviors. Laws had to be passed to force an end to it. But it started with recognition that it was wrong to make blacks ride in the back of the bus. Tossing trash all across this beautiful Philippine landscape is an outcome of an ethnic trait – thoughtless disregard for the well-being of others — that deserves ending.
(2) “On the whole, they have been wising up (as those surveys confirm) to know the difference . . .”
I’m not sure they (Filipinos who can vote) have been wising up. I think many who support Mr. Aquino are just being emotional and simplistic. Rather the starstruck glow of popular panache. But the door is open for those among them who are indeed wiser to articulate a demand for specific action steps from Mr. Aquino that assure that the energy of the “moment” gets applied to the best interest of the Philippines.
Joe
Right on Joe! Right on!
The people who want to shake up the status quo are the apologists of the status quo – someone has been smoking Thai sticks – and it ain’t Joe America.
Joe, thanks.
Anyway, “harsh critics” of who? You endorse the status quo if you put the blame of the country’s sorry state of affairs to the victims of the system in place.
And how’s Filipino slum-dwellers tossing trash fundamentally different from American capitalists being the worst polluters on earth or European industrialists denuding the forest reserve of Europe?
Wasn’t the whole world stars-truck by Obama? You voted for (or supported) him didn’t you? In fairness, let me ask you this: What “specific action steps” did you demand of him beforehand?
The status quo is that the leadership came about after the voters selected a candidate over other more qualified more upright candidates. They knew they were voting for a crook – and then after electing a crook, complain that they were robbed? Only in the Philippines!
They are victims – if they did not choose the people who are now in the seats of leadership. But since, obviously, they chose the leaders – they are victims of their own stupidity.
Demanding that voters address the stupidity of selecting leaders based on emotional appeal is not endorsing the status quo – it is a call for change.
Now these are the perfect examples of the real apologist-for-the-status quo views Abe takes to heart:
Filo, all I can say at this point is: “Filipinos are worth apologizing for.”
Abe:
Stupidity is worth apologizing eh? it figures :D
Abe,
Always good to try to grasp your perspectives.
So criticism should be directed only at the government that promotes economic policies that drive people into such desperate poverty that they become thieves; but we cannot criticize the thieves, for they are just doing what they have to do. And if we are true patriots, we should remove the bars over the windows for easier entry, out of consideration, of course. We should not engage the thieves in our effort to overthrow the incompetent economic managers.
American capitalists and their ilk have, in their grand polluting ways, given us the standard of living that allows so many people to have comfortable, secure, even lavish lives rich with education, jobs and recreation. When they learn of the untoward effects of their wasteful ways, they work mightily to change. Slumdwellers give you shit in the pristine rivers.
Re. Obama, yes, star-struck (highly impressed) with his rare commonsense, personableness, intelligence, tact, and good thinking – in other words, substance. We did not have to demand platform. He volunteered it, telling us what he was going to do (close Guantanamo, get health care fixed, get us out of Iraq, engage other countries instead of going it alone, repair the broken economy, etc), then, once in office, he set out forthrightly to deliver on what he promised.
Refreshing concept, eh?
Joe
Joe, poverty – and the powerlessness and indignities that statistics and narratives by the dominant group alone fail to capture – is a symptom. So is the much whipped-up “government” a hand-puppet of the very root cause of the cancer (“kabulukan,” says Noynoy) of the Philippine society. If you haven’t done it yet, please do read Rizal’s Noli and Fili. Maybe for a start, you could check this FV entry of mine where the following was expounded:
Re Obama: Like Obama, Noynoy is a powerful communicator. Watch the campaign.
Been watching the campaign. He is a powerful communicator – sure he communicates a lot of empty platitudes.
Mike Velarde is a powerful communicator, too. So is Apollo Quiboloy, Felix Manalo. Rasputin was a great commnicator, too.
The status quo is that the leadership came about after the voters selected a candidate over other more qualified more upright candidates. They knew they were voting for a crook – and then after electing a crook, complain that they were robbed? Only in the Philippines!
Not quite.
Then there should be no protests at all for any elected president in the Philippines (and the world) since it is assumed that he/she is what the people want and they are accountable to it. Gloria, Obama, Bush, Saddam, Karzai, Marcos.
Hey there’s statutory rape in other countries, so statutory rape in the Philippines is nothing to be critical of.”
I think it should be more of “Hey there’s statutory rape in other contries, so statutory rape should not be considered as a national past time of Filipinos”. LOL.
Marcos was already a crook and a criminal before he became President. Erap was already known to fraternize with unsavory characters.
You cannot say the same about Obama and Bush.
Supercilious my foot. The editorial is rightfully critical, and shows what many here have been seeing all along: Noynoy is somewhat depending on his pedigree, and has much to live up to. He only has less than a month to do it and get his act together, so he won’t disappoint people if ever he gets up there.
Correction: less than six months, not less than a month.
And this:
“Those who blame for example the ethnic traits of ordinary Filipinos for the sorry state of affairs of the country are unwittingly (but largely dumbly) serving as apologists for the status quo.”
This sure is baligtad. Oh well, what’s new.
Sa palagay ko lang, Abe M encourages those who feel empathy towards NoyNoy to stay the course — huwag magpapalit ang ulo — all the way into the polling booths come May2010. It is “Noynoy-for-President” for Abe, and this agenda, to me, explains why Abe looks at people who say that voters should vet the candidates harder and to ask them for their proposals and game plans as “being an apologist for the status quo”.
Mike H,
The brief explanation is actually made in my reply to JoeAm above: “You endorse the status quo if you put the blame of the country’s sorry state of affairs to the victims of the system in place.”
Unfortunately, Mr. Margallo, a closer study reveals a logical connection between the actions of these “victims” (namely their electoral choices and habit of throwing trash anywhere, and more) to the country’s sorry state of affairs. Or let’s just say one citizen’s throwing trash in the sewers causes another citizen’s village to flood, as well as their own. And saying this supports the status quo? Whoa, your statement to Joe is just plain self-contradictory to the core.
I guess all you want to say is, “Noynoy or bust, shut up you critics!” But without critics, what is the use of critical thinking?
Cory considered herself a victim of the GMA administration.
Kris Aquino thought so, too. But Cory was architect of her
own problem when Cory decided to be among the leaders who
pulled a coup against President Estrada.
GMA’s illegitimacy began with Hello Garci in 2004, not with EDSA Dos in 2001. Cory did not participate in Hello Garci so she cannot be the ‘architect of her own problem’.
. . . a closer study reveals a logical connection between the actions of these “victims” (namely their electoral choices and habit of throwing trash anywhere, and more) to the country’s sorry state of affairs. Or let’s just say one citizen’s throwing trash in the sewers causes another citizen’s village to flood, as well as their own. And saying this supports the status quo? Whoa, your statement to Joe is just plain self-contradictory to the core. – Chino F
Chino, what about industrial waste? And why are those people riparian residents in the first place and not living in normal dwellings?
Industrial waste happens because companies with factories have to give people their consumer goods. Not really the people’s fault, but they still consume the goods.
The riparian residents – if you’re referring to squatters – chose to be there. No one told them to squat there. They came to Manila with the illusion of the “Manilan Dream” in their star-spangled eyes (I doubt the the first generation squatters were Manila natives at all), only to find out that it’s not as easy as they think. Then the politicians happen upon them and keep them squatters to in turn keep them subservient. The subservience can come out in elections or in manpower (bodyguards, katulong, saboteurs, etc.).
Sometimes too much rhetoric means less substance. As joe would put it:
So how about a pithy synopsis for we who are limited to that dastardly English language, and an an even pithier opinion of what it all means from your highly pithy and astute mind?
bwahahahaha.
You endorse the status quo when you do nothing to shake up the victim mentality.
Gloria and Gibo blames slum dwellers:
http://www.bulatlat.com/main/2009/10/17/victim-blaming/
That’s because the Liberal Party platform reeks of mothballs. Panahon pa ni mahoma, mampur at limahong ginawa. it’s the 21 century for gadzooks, and the LP is serving a 1950s paradigm – ano ba yan. Late by half a century!
BongV, how should an avant garde 21st century political platform look like?
Abe
Is Noynoy’s platform the LPs platform? Or vice versa? Or rather… must noynoy’s platform be the LPs platform?
Abe:
Do you need a seminar from Nick Perlas?
Abe, you contradict yourself.
You encourage people to bypass proper vetting in favor of listening to their gut which is pretty much how pinoys have done it for so many decades (read: status quo) yet you call others “the real enemy of change?” Puh-leeze. Talk about soiling oneself and staring at someone else in the elevator.
We are addicted to Politics. It is the SHABU of the people. People
get high when election comes. Fueled by some self appointed Political
Analyst. Seems that ONDOY has not yet awakened us. We need more
natural calamities like : Tsunamies, Strong Earthquakes, Volcanic
Erruptions, etc… to awaken us.
Noynoy has done well to support the RH Bill even at the risk of losing the vote of the Catholic Church. The PDI Editorial instead wants him to pander to the clergy. What kind of advice is that which combines putting together a platform but at the same time encourages the candidate to compromise on his principles?
I’m sure it’s advice based on the premise that Noynoy wants to win, ’nuff said. Supporting the RH Bill may be a good point on him, but let’s hope he and his party won’t just focus on winning and would focus on a really substantial platform.
On that score, his support of RH at the risk of losing the Catholic Church support is a good sign, don’t you think?
It may be. But let’s see that in the platform. And if ever he gets elected.
The Inquirer reports that Noynoy says his support for Reproductive Health is misunderstood.
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20091019-230802/Noynoy-meanders
[I hope that before the year ends, Noynoy agrees to an interview to answer similar questions like what he plans for his first 6 months in office.]
VERA Files is putting the spotlight on Gibo Teodoro.
http://www.verafiles.org/index.php/first-person/363-teodoro-we-need-a-healing-presidency?start=2
Q: And plan for your first 100 days, what will you do? Hit the ground running?
A: You have no choice but to continue with a lot of programs like the infrastructure programs that need to be continued and management day-to-day of the security situation. Number three, you have to plan your legislative agenda, the most important thing. Your first budget, your legislative agenda. That legislative agenda would include the constitutional convention law, the support for the new Philippine education road map because basic education must be reengineered. And I want to experiment also legislatively with universal participative health care, if it is feasible. Meaning to say, everybody participates. I mean, what’s for a rich person to contribute 100 or 200 pesos per month to a participative delivers on health care so there’s more for everybody, not merely in terms of buying medicine and providing care but for providing reimbursements for doctors and nurses, so there’s an incentive to stay and participate in the system and I want also a legislative proposal for student loan program rather than scholarships. I want a revolving student loan program, probably five billion pesos, get that from the national treasury, park it in the SSS, not SSS funds but SSS facilities. Student wants to study, comes in, you give the student and SSS number which should be a GSIS number, too, and give him or her the loan. Once that SSS number comes out because he or she is employed, then you deduct and you have an incentive to study because you have to repay the loan and you can service more people. You give scholarships to those who are really deserving because of high aptitude and to those subjects that are not too popular but the country needs like international relations, public policy and planning.
. . .
Q: Why should we vote for you?
A: Because I provide a balance. Kasi po, ako’y nagtataglay ng balanse ng pagsulong sa reporma at pagsulong ng kinakailangang programa. Ako lang po siguro ang naghayag ng pangangailangan ng pagpapatawad, pagkakaisa, pag-uunawaan para sa kinabukasan at hindi pagbebengansa. At dahil po sa importansya ng kapayapaan sa ating bansa, na araw-araw ko pong nakikita, hindi po nadarama ng mga tao sa Luzon, Visayas at bilyun-bilyong na sanang pagkakabenepisyuhan ng ating bansa kung matahimik ang Pilipinas–hindi nila nararamdaman kasi na tahimik tayo dito. Pagka hindi po nasolbahan tong problema na to, hindi nasolba, napakalaking mawawala sa ating bansa at siguro sa eksperiensya ko na may mga desisyon din tayo na nagagawa or napupunta sa ating balikat na mangangahulugan na baka may mamatay o may mabuhay, napakalaking maturing experience po nito at ito po mga katangian na mabibigay ko sa ating bansa.
Q: Totoo ho bang kayo ang pinakamayamang cabinet member? Nagdoble daw ho ang SAL ninyo?
A: Nagdoble po since February po ng last year sa kadahilanang namatay po ang aking ama.
Q: Meron ho kayong minana?
A: Meron po.
Q: Bilang isang tatay ngayon sa anak mong sampung taon, right? Yung relationship niyo ba ng anak niyo kapareho nung tatay?
A: Ibang-iba ho. Ibang-iba.
Q: Anong pagkakaiba?
A: Unang-una, ang parenting, kahit sa sinong magulang na ngayon pinanganak ang anak, napakalaking deperensya. Ang tatay ko ho, ni hindi nagpunta sa isang PTA meeting nung ako’y–nakita ko siya sa eskwelahan, sa eskwelahan ng limang beses–kada graduation ko. Dun ko lang siya nakita.
Q: Kayo?
A: Eh participative parenting ho ngayon at saka democratic parenting ho ngayon. May mga karapatan ang kabataan ngayon na walang karapatan nung araw. Pagdidisiplina lamang ay ibang-iba na. At ang lawak ng talino ng kabataan ngayon.
—
Q: So you’re a hands-on father?
A: Kami pong dalawa ay hands-on parents talaga. Ni hindi ho nagkayaya yung anak namin in the traditional sense. Until he was about eight years old, one of us was with him at all times.
Q: Really? Wala siyang yaya, yayo?
A: Meron hong katulong lamang na tumutulong sa amin sa mga kagamitan pero hands-on ho talaga kami. Kahit sa Kongreso, alam nila I’m hands-on dahil minsan ho, pag napupuyat, nagkakapuyatan ho nung araw, nung 11th Congress kasi ssa budget, sa majority, assistant majority leader ho ako, nagpapaalam ako nun, alas-dos ng madaling araw dahil turno ko na ho.
Q: Magbantay ng bata?
A: Oo.
UP n,
So how about a pithy synopsis for we who are limited to that dastardly English language, and an an even pithier opinion of what it all means from your highly pithy and astute mind?
Joe
i wish noynoy would grant interviews, write press releases, give some speeches, so we can know more about him from the man himself.
GabbyD, here’s an interview from March 2009.
Here is a Valentine’s Day 2003 interview:
http://uw2.abs-cbnnews.com/images/news/microsites/ondspot/Nonoy02142003.htm
And here is Cory and NoyNoy, together.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8c_8Le7X1A
all of this is pre-decision to run.
what about some info about his thoughts about plans for the future? those are rare, and i was hoping to see more of that soon after he decided to run.
alas, not yet.
i’m not even asking for a complete platform. even just a big picture interview, some evidence of what his priorities are, and whether how that intersects with the party platform.
i’m aware of that GabbyD. Nevertheless these pre-decision interviews at least provide some baseline information so i thought it may be useful in that way.
Joe’s Totally Objective Assessment of Barak Hussein Obama and his Beautiful Wife Michelle and their Dog Joe Biden:
The Very First Ever JTOAOBHOAHBWMATDJB Survey results!!!
Those who think US President Obama is weak, or, at best, ordinary:
Abe Margallo
Supremo
Darwin25
Blackshama
Denicio
Ilda
Those who think he is an extraordinarily capable President:
Joe
Therefore, it is declared that Mr. Obama is an abject failure and should never have run for President in the first place. It would be better to have that 80 year old panicky flip-flopping geezer with a bad ticker and worse temper. He would have righted the economy in seven days, like the Lord made earth, whilst simultaneously nuking Bin Laden’s cave and directing the fledgling democracies in Bagdad, Kabul and Islamabad as if they were Tommy Jefferson’s model toys. The national symbol aimed at the European Onion, Russia, China and all UN countries except Israel would be the finger. All truly patriotic Republican Americans would be given free health care while recalcitrant leftist pinko Dems would be sent to a thriving Guantanamo for waterboarding. Palestinians would be directed to move their national boundaries to within a two meter stretch of the Jordan River and adopt the national anthem “O’ When the Saints Come Marching In”. Drone spy planes would hover over Hollywood to keep an eye on threats from intellectual terrorists Ben Afleck, Bill Maher, and the ghost of Audie Murphy. The graft-endowed Philippines would be re-colonized and taught how to speek da gud Engliches with troublesome Mindanao leveled as one big strip mine.
Primer would be appointed Resident President.
Joe
Joe, why did I top the list on the con side. I am an Obama fan. Check out this and this.
Abe,
Aieeeeee,
My fault, for sure. Let’s just say the survey methodology was a little, ummmm . . . loose. Good to know you are a right-thinking Filipino (heh, most of the time).
Joe
@Joe
I didn’t say Obama was weak. He’s just a politician to me. I even acknowledge his intelligence and charisma.
Ilda,
You are listed because you think Obama is “ordinary”.
The world is filled with wrong deeds because it is easy to commit wrongs and hard to stop or correct them. A thief can spend 5 minutes in a jewelry store scooping up gold and diamonds, but it takes an alarm system to guard against him, a police force to catch him, a justice system to try him, and penitentiaries to hold him.
Politics and blogging are no different. It is easy to tear people down with name-calling or distortions and extraordinarily hard to correct the inaccuracies. It is easy to shout “Liar”, and in our sound-bite era, that shout echoes across the globe. It is not easy to get to the truths of complex matters. The facts have to be presented in all their gory details and the audience is significantly smaller than the sound-bite crowd.
When the underlying motive is intentional damage or deceit, it is extraordinarily destructive behavior. Partisan politics the way it is done in the US – Democrat or Republican – is destructive.
Republicans are taking it to a new low as they cater to the conservative Christian wing and the money that is there. They are engaged in a form of corruption that is just as ill-gotten as that practiced in the Philippines. The Republican National Committee (RNC) recently issued a fundraising letter that said Republicans are patriotic Americans, suggesting the rest of us are not. Prostituting patriotism to raise campaign cash.
I’m hoping 2010 is another bloodbath for Republican legislative candidates, a ball peen hammer between the eyes that will either wake the RNC up or put it out of its misery. Integrity is hard work. They should do some.
My writing intends to ridicule those who look for an ideal world and, in doing so, overlook the integrity of intention and hard work that is right in front of them. Many simply succumb to sound-bites. I don’t think you are one of those people, but in always looking for something better, you deny the good of what is there now. Therefore, you don’t commit to defending that good.
Of all the writers on FV, Bert is the only one who seems to understand this important point. Patriotism is a commitment. It is not easy.
Joe
@Joe
Hmmm…you make it sound like I have to love Obama before you can love me back (or in the case of Noynoy supporters, I have to love Noynoy before they can love me back).
I thought we’ve gone through the Obama thing already? But obviously you are harbouring some kind of ill feelings. I looked again at all my replies to you and I can confirm that I did not mention the word “ordinary”. I did say he turned out to be just another politician. Let’s dissect that statement shall we? Obama is a politician, is he not? He is just another politician to me because he is limited as to what he can do with some of the problems he has to solve given the circumstances. An example of this is the war in Afghanistan & Iraq, the global financial crisis, health care issues, etc, etc. These are problems that were there even before he came into office.
So, therefore, it doesn’t matter how many times he said “Yes, I can!” He still needs to work around people who will oppose him and the stuff that are unpredictable (read: bombings in Iraq or Afghanistan or whatever). He’s just like another politician to me because he does not have a magic wand that can make all his problems disappear in a minute. So, if someone with as much calibre as Obama can’t even solve his country’s problems as quick as he wants to, what more someone with less calibre as Noynoy?
You gotta admit, Obama’s got star power and that’s part of his appeal to you and the majority of his supporters. I can understand where you’re coming from because after all, he is a good looking man and married to a good looking woman and now a celebrity even. I am not affected by all this you see so therefore, I am not an Obama fan and I hope you don’t hate me for that.
No two people are the same Joe. I have my opinions and you’ve got yours. We have to agree to disagree sometimes. You make it look like it’s good (Joe & Bert) versus evil (Ilda)just because I am not a fan.
Thank you very much, Joe!
I’m flattered, but loving ones country and people is actually easy. It only take a heart, a will, some pure emotion of gratitude for having one root and no other, and a sunny outlook to see the positive and the beautiful.
Reading from your writings, I honestly believe that you’re as patriotic as anyone inspite your awe of the beauty of Biliran.
Thank you, my friend.
I ought not be meddling in affairs between two people close to my heart but can’t help it.
It hurts me, and I’m jealous, that Ilda is aligning herself with the anti-pinoys who are truly anti-pinoy, by self-avowal and by their writings as well. But, as far as I can discerned from her writings here in FV, I can feel her inner anguish..manifestations of sincere concerns and love for her people and country over her affiliation to a group here in FV.
Ilda,
Well, love does not come into play here, but respect does. I respect you immensely, because you discuss issues forthrightly. My criticism is actually against name-calling and partisan politics, and is nothing against any of the people on my survey list.
I have my own score card on Obama, with plenty of strikes against him (the latest being the $250 social security payment, issued because there will be no cost of living increase in 2010; I will receive the $250, but think is a tad ridiculous because the cost of living did not go up, thus no increase payments is deserved). But on balance, the dings are minor against the accomplishments.
History will judge him. We won’t. I just agitate for responsibility and integrity, among other blatherings.
Joe
Bert,
I long ago learned that it is possible to love more than one woman at the same time, but it is extraordinarily dangerous to admit same to ANYONE. I am reasonably confident I can be patriotic to both the US and Philippines unless either country finds out about the other. Then I may be in deep doodoo. They are so possessive, these countries of ours . . .
Joe
Joe,
I may be forthright with my feelings while others, you, for example, might be a bit shy, which would make me a more emotional kind of guy than you are, I guess, but my conscience is clear, Joe. My heart is indeed close to Ilda, who is not, with that kind of inner and outer beauty, who indeed is not. But, I have said it already..you are as close to my heart as she is. I love my fellowmen, Joe, women and men.
Do you think that’s kind of a handicap? Or for that matter dangerous?
As to possesiveness, well, our two countries are possessive alright. But so am I. Nothing to do with insecurity, but jealous too.
“I love my fellowmen, Joe, women and men.
Do you think that’s kind of a handicap? Or for that matter dangerous?”
hehehe. I first thought it rude to interrupt this “interesting” exchange but, nah, this is a public forum.
So, Joe, is Bert’s love for humanity a handicap, even “dangerous”? Couldn’t wait for your American brand of wit to post a riposte.
Apanfilo,
No riposte. Bert is what I would call an artist, emoting this way and that, playing his guitar and singing love songs. Others are scientists or computer nerds, whacking away at their facts. All a part of the fabric that makes life way fun . . .
Joe
No one has a monopoloy patriotism.
Did Christ apologize because there were gamblers in the temple?
Did he look at how nice the temple was?
Did he praise how nice the robes of the people in the temple were?
No, he was enraged, he sent the gamblers packing out of the temple!
Was that motivated by hate? Hell no, he loved his father’s house so much, that he drew the line and cast the gamblers out.
In same manner, I love my country, too – and it enrages me to see idiots who drag this country down further into the pits.
Now that you mentioned interviews.
As a Noynoy supporter I was disappointed by his his reason for being a no show in the FOCAP forum about the UNDP goals for poverty and maternal health.
His excuse was villar was not there. Wassup with that?
He could have further articulated his support for the RH bill, or maybe he is heeding the advice from somewhere to avoid escalating it further and totally lose the catholic church’s support.
He could have further articulated his platform for social justice. But Nada, nill.
I know some people downplay talk shows and forums,but if we are to concentrate on form, Pumorma man lang sana sya.
The Cebu Daily News reports that NoyNoy has been trying to get an appointment with Bishop Vidal to explain.
http://www.cdn.ph/photostore/news_details.php?id=3959
Mike,
Thanks for the link.
Now on that last forum he attended.
I said before that saying pag-aaralan ko pa ang mga bagay bagay is better than madali lang yan ganito ang gagawin.
I think I have to take that back.
The topic was about Local Governments and he is a senate committee chairman.
What was he doing during the debates for bills concerning local governments, i am sure there are a lots of bills,some may not be necessarily under his committee, but he has a lot of literature at his disposal like the transcripts of the committee news and committee reports for instance aside from the copies of bills.
I don’t care if the others did not do well in that forum, Noynoy is my concern.
============================
Like GMA, Noynoy may have been pushed into the vicissitudes of power ahead of his time. But his youth informed by the martyrdom of his father which tormented the entire nation and his political career forged by an enduring devotion to democratic values bequeathed to him by his mother, and in the face of his relatively unblemished political career, it would be unwarranted for anyone to claim that, his radical reformative-bent notwithstanding, the commitment of Noynoy to democracy, liberty and social justice is only formal rather than substantive.
=============================
Does the fruit fall far from the tree? Ang sabi ng barbero ko, hindi nangangahulugang ang bunga ay nahuhulog malapit sa puno. Can the same rhetorical argument be applied to Noynoy’s sister Chris? Hehehe…
I can see differences between NoyNoy and Gibo just on their tax policies. NoyNoy’s mindset is to confiscate and to punish —- the 10%-tax on business-owners is to penalize them and the 10%-tax is then “returned” to the victims — the employees.
Gibo P100 or P200-health-tax proposal makes no assumption on the evil of those who have higher incomes. The tax on the more privileged is to support a health-program for all citizens (most beneficiaries being the under-privileged).
Wow mindreader.
NoyNoy is correct. Business owners are all crooks! If they are making a profit, it is because either they cheat their customers or they cheat their employees.
And you know what, any Pinoy who makes more than one-million-a-year, for sure these people are crooks.
Wow, this is bigotry against business, dude. If this is Noynoy’s agenda, it may hurt the economy. He should’ve followed a wealth tax system, like a tax on people who earn a certain amount (like umpteenth million) a year, instead of just taxing all business-owners. Is this how the US wealth tax is?
Really – one million a year is only $20,000 a year – Pinoy nurses make $60,000 a year – are they crooks?
Napakaugok naman ng statement na “any Pinoy who makes more than one-million-a-year, for sure these people are crooks.”
Inquirer wrote of Loren Legarda’s 6-point program. This is Loren, about corruption.
Third, the new administration must really crack down on corruption, which wastes the country’s limited resources, destroys institutions and undermines the trust of the people and of the international community, including foreign investors.
This up’s the ante. Mar Roxas is now obliged to say:
And Noynoy can say “… really really really! Really! Cross my heart and swear to die.”
Joe,
Truth to tell, I am playing with the idea of running for mayor of Antipolo City or a congressman in one of its two legislative districts.
But not until I have my wife convinced of such wishful thought.
How does that come to you, well-meaning Joe?
On second thoughts, consider this a joke. Ha ha.
Primer,
It comes to me that you have a superior sense of humor, would make a fine mayor or congressman, and perhaps your wife has a good left hook. I suggest congress, as it needs more humor and better perspective. Make sure you run using other people’s money, though.
Joe
There is a stinking joke in this one, but here is an idea on where to get “other people’s money”:
http://filipinovoices.com/senate-hearing-bayani-fernando-admits-pocketing-public-money/comment-page-1#comment-90870
Mr. Bert, cite specific examples of what you consider to be “positive” about the Philippines, plez.
Maybe start with your Top Three, to make it easy.
:-D
Okay, benigs, glad to oblige.
I don’t know about you and your group, but these I’m going to blurt out here are my perspective of what are positive and beautiful about my country and my people.
1. The people. I am a good family man, benigs, and my family is a happy family. Take out some here, and some there, by and large, that’s about the embodiment of the typical Filipino family. I live in an environment of a happy neighborhood, not as clean and impecable as might be there in Australia, but my neighbors, we know each other, and we care for each other, and while you may see the next guy a pisser on the wall, I see the same guy who can be relied upon to help when I’m down and need one. And I to him.
2. The government. Well, you can see Gloria has taken us down to the gutter, but, we are a democracy, and as a democracy we are not doing so bad compared to other Asian governments, the wholesale oppression of the people by the government is not happening inspite the large scale corruption because there are those of us who are ready to “surge-the-gates” even if some would rather just mumble “let’s move on” or “wait for 2010″.
3. The places. Oh, those beautiful places!
I can rant on, and on, and on, and on.
It will bore you.
Ah now I get it, just like my dogs. I think they are the happiest dogs on the planet. I feed them scrap food, they get to stay at a nice dog house and I pet them. I guess what the Filipino people need is a benevolent master.
Bert: What do you tell your children?
You risk making them unhappy, I understand this, so maybe you do not tell them there is a lot of room for improvement about your life and your neighborhood.
@Bert
I can’t believe you enumerated them. That would be lost to him in three seconds. His pessimism can’t take it.
Must… have… negativity… loathing…
LOL
I just wonder why to these people, happiness makes one unproductive and uncaring.
The people:
Do not follow the law, don’t bother to see that it is enforced – then when catastrophe strikes, act like deer in front of headlights. Should I be happy that this same neighbor who peed on the wall, is also the same neighbor woh throws plastic into the gutters and rivers, and there are thousands more neighbors like him. Unfortunately, when the moonsoon comes, it would be nice if only those who trash the environment get to have their houses flooded, but unfortunately, even if I keep the environment clean, there is a million more Filipinos who will throw trash without blinking an eyelash.
“Entitlement/Victim Mentality” – oh poor victims of the oppressed, see how oppressed and hopeless they are. they expect favors without feeling that they need to return them. once in awhile someone falls into a situations needing pity – but the Victim Mentality has a permanent odor – one that says “my life is worse than everyone else”. guess what, you are responsible for your actions – not government, not your neighbor, not your childhood, not your school, not your congressman, not your mayor, yes YOU – you are responsible for your own debts, your savings account balance, your retirement plan, for making all of these better – not your barangay tanod.
The government is a reflection of flawed thought processes of the Philippine electorate. How in the world can you say te GMA was clean when as VP, she categorically state in public that she will not run then ran just the same. That should have raised major red flags – if she can categorically lie in public, do you have any idea what else she can lie about. You had it coming. Face the consequence of your flawed choices brought about by a highly flawed selection process. What are you going to do, everytime your flawed thought process generates the expected flawed results – keep on “surging the gates” – then what you will rally some more if get the reputation for “political instability”? Use the kukote naman ng di nangangamote.
What places? Those used to be beautiful – in the 1950s perhaps.
Only 35% of forest cover left is not beautiful – it is catastrophic.
In 1998 it was reported by Earth Watch that 30% of the Philippine coral reefs are dead and 39% are dying – what’s left are in a very bad state – how in the world can you call that beautiful?
Bring it on.
After am done with it, it will be very amusing, informative, and hilarious :D
Edward,
I want to laugh with you, but I just can’t this time. I am sad, sad for these people, my countrymen too, living in the limbo of their what you called self-loathing and negativity. I’m realy sad now. What can we do…maybe it’s in their nature?
@ Bert
Don’t let the negativity rub off.
I have read Filipinos commenting somewhere showing this kind of attitude. A foreigner (A British) had to say that we should believe on ourselves more (which was embarassing).
But I also see more and more of positive-thinking Pinoys who see not only of the negative.
“I just wonder why to these people, happiness makes one unproductive and uncaring.”
We don’t mean all happiness. We refer to the false kind of happiness, like when a squatter man has many children with two women. He only works at a menial job, and with his meager salary, he can give only small meals to all his children, and they are thin and sickly as a result. His “wives,” although they live together, quarrel sometimes, and it spreads to the children (they quarrel too). The man gets drunk with friends every weekend, as his only escape. He may get violent and hit his wives when drunk, even if he’s kind when he’s sober. Some people like this can claim to be happy, but their actions actually are destructive to society. This is not happiness if you ask me.
Of course, people can be happy with ordinary, inexpensive lives, but they have to see whether this happiness comes with another kind of cost. I’m sure the happiness you mean may be different from this (like for middle class people with better jobs, fewer expenses and little or no vices to ruin them), but not all kinds of “happiness” can be right.
“Bert: What do you tell your children?
You risk making them unhappy, I understand this, so maybe you do not tell them there is a lot of room for improvement about your life and your neighborhood.”-Mike H
Mike H,
I told them the good things, and to do only what are good and what are right and proper. When we were together. Are you expecting that I did my educating my children via FV? I have four kids, Mike, all proper and good, all professionals and financially successful.
Keep in mind that here, I am just answering benignO’s request:
“Mr. Bert, cite specific examples of what you consider to be “positive” about the Philippines, plez.”
benignO was not asking me what I do with my life, or what I told my children. Ok na? Good.
And guys, benignO was not even asking whether I approved of people pissing on walls. Otherwise I would have answered, ‘pissing on wall, it’s bad habit..very bad”.
Loving one’s country is easy… the country doesn’t do wrong, it’s the people who do. And loving people (the wrong way) is too easy when you blind yourself to their faults and don’t take them to task on it. Yes, let’s look at the positive and the beautiful, but never use them to hide the negative and unsightly. If you can use a garden as an analogy, a gardener snips out out the unsightly rotten branches, leaves and weeds. He leave only the beautiful by snipping out the ugly and harmful. Unfortunately, our people are not into doing that for their country; they prefer letting the unsightly stay alongside the beautiful, and say that it’s still beautiful. And in the end, that’s ugly.
If you let that guy piss on a wall, he’d better be dependable all right when he’s called to clean up his mess. And logically, that wall pisser is less likely to be a dependable person you’re down, since he has the gall to piss on someone else’s wall instead of his own, and that means he’s willing to let other people down for his own comfort! If I were that guy’s friend, I’ll keep pestering him to stop pissing on walls. Would you let him piss on your wall?
Chino:
If I had a neighbor who pisses on my wall – I’ll return the favor and piss on his wall, too. I’ll drink a 12-pack Of Bud lite and sprinkle it all over.
Will even raise the ante, and piss on his front yard, back yard.
Though, I might actually knock on his door and ask to use his restroom… :D
What are the odds Bert accepts the pissing-on-the-wall by his good neighbor because it is not Bert’s wall but the San Lazaro Hospital’s walls that the pisser pisses on?
Problema na nila iyon, basta hindi ako!!
Palampasin mo na, hindi ka naman ginagambala, eh.
Haha, that’s in your face, Bong! An idea that came to mind, if I were cruel enough (hehehe), was to put there a pan or something with two hidden electrodes, attached to a high voltage line. When the guy pisses, it connects the two electrodes, closes the circuit and he gets the shock of his life! I was told this was how some Americans executed German WW2 convicts, in a (darkly) fun way, only that the poor German strapped to a chair and forced to piss into the electro-urinal, hehehe.
Don’t worry about you boring me, Bert, as how I personally feel about you or what you say is not the whole point of and therefore irrelevant to this discussion.
But this is a nice start.
You set the standards for what is “positive” about the Philippines; i.e. (to paraphrase your points above):
(1) Filipinos are good family-oriented people who, despite possessing the occassional need to p1ss on walls, can be relied upon to help out within his/her immediate community;
(2) You see the government as a good thing (“not bad” compared to other Asian government — like Burma’s perhaps) because it is one that the Filipino people keep in check via a blanket threat to overthrow it extra-constitutionally; and,
(3) The country is physically beautiful.
Based now on the above baseline “as-is” state of the Philippines, what then are your aspirations for your country? Do you foresee a further improvement on top of those “positives” you cite above happening over the next five to ten years? Or do you see a Philippines that is largely the same (as far as those three points are concerned) after another five to ten years have passed?
Enlighten us, plez.
Heheh, now I can smile, you always made me smile, benigs. Unlike your other guys here who make me sad.
Now, to your questions.
Aspirations? Predictions? What’s that to you if I have them? And why should my aspirations for my people and my country relevant or important to FV readers? Remember that I am just a simple guitarist. My main purpose of sticking out here in FV with you guys is to learn from you bright and brillinat dudes. And, indeed, I learned so much. I have no aspiration to teach, or preach to, you anything, except perhaps if you want to learn the rudiment of guitar-playing.
Still, what can I do but to oblige you again, benigs. Pasensya na, these are very plain and simple answers to your questions. Your tsewarewarewaps might just call it “motherhood statements”, whatever that means. So be it.
Here goes: My aspirations for my people and my country are all those positive things that will happen. I will leave the negatives for you and your tsewarewarewaps to ponder upon and wish for. That’s all.
My prediction on what might be happening over the next five to ten years? Depends on what kind of president we elect in 2010. If we elected an honest and clean president but chnages his mind and attitudes after sitting on the throne in the palace by the Pasig River like our President GMA, then we’re doomed.
We’re doomed because, even if there are those of us who are ready to “surge-the-gates”, there are those who will just mumble, “let’s move on”, or “wait for 2016″.
Ah I get it, bahala na.
That’s one. More coming.
That’s a good response, Bert, as it shows how you view Pilipinas and what you want for the future of your children. Pinas has many more citizens like you; Pinas also has a lot of citizens who venture as OFW’s; Pinas also has the followers of Villar and Erap who vie for your vote.
UP n,
In addition, Pinas also has many citizens who will let the president drag the country into the gutter and, like typical bystanders, just looked on.
And, UP n, it’s good too that Pinas has many citizens like you. Well, the oligarch is a different breed altogether, they will make this country richer.
And will make Pinas citizens like me poorer.
Hold your horses – there’s a prescribed process – one used by civilized people in a civilized country observing the rule of law.
Oh, Didn’t you guys vote for Congressmen who are supposed to represent you? Where these guys responsive to your calls for Impeachment? When they chose to not impeach Gloria – suddenly you did not vote for them? So surge the gates na naman? Ba’t si GMA lang, How about your congressmen, you mayor, your councilor who have been heaping praises on GMA, and taking her gifts as well – you will not surge their gates, too – why? kamag-anak mo? kaibigan mo? Eh sama sama naman pala kayong mga kunsintidor e… And now, you are looking for a scapegoat to take the blame – anyone except, you – how convenient – and irresponsible.
“Surge the gates” seems to be the solution of people who can’t make up their minds about their leadership, and just want this leadership to do their bidding. So if the leaders stop doing the bidding, the gates are surged. It’s a step back into barbarism.
Pretty interesting how we keep complaining about our leaders when in fact we voted them into power. More compelling is the fact that the Chinese-Filipinos have been the victims, an object of derision and racism–we call them names like “intsik-beho tulo-laway” and yet, under the same government, same climate, same surroundings, they continue to thrive and prosper. Where do you think the problem really lies?
BongV, Chino F, AsiaWest,
Popular sovereignty, or the principle that the people are the ultimate source of power, inheres in our constitution. It is also enshrined in the American Declaration of Independence which provides: “. . . Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government . . . .” This constitutional principle is neither barbaric nor uncivilized. It lies at the very core of democracy and rule of law.
AsiaWest,
Clinton Palanca, himself a Chinese-Filipino and an Oxford postgraduate, has written the following: “The ideal of the ethnic Chinese who is integrated and thinks of himself or herself as Filipino while retaining Chinese cultural identity does exist, but so does the bigot who sees Filipinos as inferior and adopts a ‘sojourner’ mentality and an instrumental attitude toward the Philippine economy.”
I do admire and respect many tsinoys who belong to the former. My wife is a tsinay and one of my best friends is a tsinoy with whom I collaborate on a number of community projects for underprivileged Filipinos. But the latter deserve to be called “intsik behos.” Rizal, who was also of Chinese descent, called his “other” pejoratively as “the Chinaman.”
Palanca noted these further: “The descendants of the older Chinese mestizo classes, who had previously downplayed their Chinese ethnicity, are now suddenly rediscovering the Chinese aspect of their ethnicity. The generation of Chinese-Filipinos who had emigrated in the first half of the century in the years leading up to the communist takeover of China and their descendants are now held in higher regard. But what has the potential to become respect can easily swing the other way to distrust if the power of the Chinese-Filipinos is seen to be too dominant — or, more to the point, if they are seen not as Filipinos, but as an ethnic minority group who has gained an incommensurate degree of influence.”
Now, you claim and wonder that “under the same government, same climate, same surroundings, they continue to thrive and prosper. Where do you think the problem really lies?”
One problem lies in the fact that the supposed level playing field you are talking about is a myth. For instance, the Chinese and the Chinese-Filipinos have easier access to “capital markets” from the various financial institutions controlled by the market-dominant minorities than the run-of-the-mill Pinoys.
This footnote (in Build or Perish!) provides a fuller treatment on the matter:
So the Chinese are somehow to blame for finding ways of overcoming their early disadvantages? The real point is that Pinoys, when faced with examples of something successful, usually fail to absorb any lessons from them for whatever reason. Instead of bewailing the ‘unlevel playing field’, you’d be much better off examining how it got that way and doing the same.
The Chinese here are not unique; go to almost any country in the world, and you’ll find some, doing exactly the same as they’ve done here. And they’re not the only ones – I come from a city that is a patchwork of successful immigrant communities, Chinese, Jews, Koreans, Vietnamese, Hispanics, Poles, even intra-country immigrants like the southern blacks. Filipinos, too, although perhaps to not such an obvious degree. I personally am related to or friends with many successful overseas Filipinos – so why can’t the domestic ones absorb their lessons, either? With so many examples of success near and far, there’s no excuse for this country to be in the mess it’s in.
BenK, you are a very educated person and have lived in the US. You know that if in the US you say “The real point is that [Blacks], when faced with examples of something successful, usually fail to absorb any lessons from them for whatever reason,” it could get you into some legal trouble.
Please enough of these sweeping negative generalizations against Filipinos. It doesn’t help and it glosses over the real problem we want to address.
Try seeing the difference of such statement of yours from this one: “With so many examples of success near and far, there is no excuse for the elites of our country to allow it to lag behind?”
Obviously one is prejudiced against a racial group, the other a valid indictment based on fact.
Abe:
Where there’s smoke there’s fire.
Put out the fire.
And if you examine the history of our more successful neighbors (whether capitalist or socialist), you will see that levelling the playing field was one of the first (if not the first) steps.
Dude, that’s like accepting a challenge to a fistfight and then whining about getting beat up because your foe had bigger muscles.
Is our goal as a people in this global community to COMPETE in the community or is it to withdraw into the cofort of our mediocre standards of achievement?
The Chinese people, and the way the come together as a cohesive commercial force in the Greater China sphere is the result of thousands of years of socio-cultural evolution. Unfair, you think? Perhaps. But then there it is. What do you propose we do besides that crybaby approach you describe above?
“Get real” and please put more muscle into your argument, Benigs. Mukhang “motherhood statement” ang dating.
But to your question on how to improve our “mediocre standards of achievement,” I subscribe to J_AG’s suggestion, that we need to get ourselves “hard wired for nationalism”; although if I may add, this critical requirement should be demanded more from the elites of our society, who, as I indicated above “must feel relatively deprived, not materially but morally, because they are challenged (or humiliated) out of individual and national pride for being elites in an economic basket case” the expectation being that when “this self-importance or sense of country is stirred, the decision to attain modernity will come easier” from these segment of our society with the real wherewithal to make things happen.
getting “hard wired for nationalism” is a matter of replacing ANTIQUATED Values, Atittudes and Lifestyles ( winnability, pwede na, impunity, gut) with UPDATED Values, Atittudes and Lifestyles ( ability, rational thinking, excellence, responsibility).
Can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The people have power, but not absolute power. Else they would be dictators. There is such a thing as tyranny of the majority. And even if the people have power, that doesn’t mean they can do anything they please. “Surging the gates” is more of an abuse of this power, rather than the use thereof. It’s a last resort though, as seen in 1986, I would agree with that. But it’s destructive if the people like to make it a first resort. If people can remove government if it becomes destructive, what happens if the people become destructive? It’s crap when you say, “the people are never wrong.” They can be wrong… and have been.
By the way, I believe Asiawest’s point is not that Chinese-Filipinos are better. It’s just that most of them are doing better. Know the difference? Meaning they are practical, they don’t just give in to the dictations of the people and they just make good decisions in life. And it’s not just Chinese-Filipinos. It’s Americans, Swedish, Norwegians, anyone who knows how to apply sound principle and are right in the head. In comparison, most other Filipinos don’t make sound decisions in life and politics, and thus, they’re in the dumps. It’s not a racial affair.
May I add this from the Declaration:
So far, I see transient causes being made the reason for street rallies against GMA. These could be handled by other means.
Moreover, when America made their Declaration, they were going to war, not going to the streets. And the Declaration was directed against the British, not the local government, so I believe it isn’t as applicable to the Philippine situation.
Chino,
Our legal system adheres to the principle that the people are sovereign (although lately, I have started to have reservations about the philosophy behind this way of thinking).
Anyway, a sovereign is supposed to be supreme whose power is absolute and illimitable within its territorial jurisdiction. The sovereign can therefore deprive one of life and liberty in the manner it prescribes.
As has happened in EDSA I, the sovereign has changed the rules of the game (has done away with the existing constitution by adopting a new one for instance) as it pleased.
Again, for the same argument as set forth in my reply to BenK, it is a “racial affair” when you say that “Filipinos don’t make sound decisions in life and politics, and thus, they’re in the dumps” but not when you say that “our financial institutions controlled by Chinese-Filipinos discriminate against non-Chinese when it comes to extending business financing.”
Moreover, when America made their Declaration, they were going to war, not going to the streets. And the Declaration was directed against the British, not the local government, so I believe it isn’t as applicable to the Philippine situation. – Chino F
Chino, if you know US history, the actual war between Britain and the colonists was preceded by various people power protests, such as the colonists’ resistance against the Stamp Act and Quartering Act.
Mr. Abe, I invite you to hold on to and probably increase those reservations about “people power,” since that’s where I started. People are the sovereign, but I see it more as power shared with the government, not really power over it. Government is no genie for the people, it still sets the rules. And another premise of democracy, as I see it, is that power should be limited. This includes both government power and the power of the people.
Chino, my reservations about the current acceptation of “sovereignty” is related to how the “state” vis-a-vis “society” is conceptualized. As this thread is dying, if I have the time, I will blog about it in FV perhaps to connect some dots.
Mr Abe,
Your explanation for the disparity in our country seems to entail that coming as a foreigner, particularly a Chinese foreigner, into our country carries certain advantages which locals do not enjoy. Given the success of locals in other countries, it behooves us to ask, why the locals of other countries like, say, Malaysia (composed of native Malayans and Chinese not so different from ours) or, for that matter, even other former Spanish colonies, have been able to rise above similar conditions while we so far haven’t?
In regards to the term “‘genetically’ risk-takers“, I’m not sure how literally or figuratively you expect us to interpret this, but I would prefer blaming it on “culture” which I can change, rather than on “genes” which I cannot change, aside from the fact that a link between ability to take risks and genes neither have scientifically nor otherwise been established.
Asia West,
You are misinterpreting what’s clearly written. It says: “Those [people of any racial stripe] who opted for the life of exile—the Jews who wandered everywhere, America’s founding fathers and the Pinoy immigrants and OFWs are, I think, of the same variety—are generally, and maybe “genetically,” risk-takers . . . .”
Actually, Malaysia has attempted to level the playing field when Prime Minister Mahathir pursued what some commentators called affirmative action for the disadvantaged bumiputra majority, to temper the economic dominance of Malaysia’s Chinese minority.
Mr Abe,
While I agree that OFWs tend to be risk-takers, I do not hold the converse to be true–that risk-takers tend to be OFWs. With the huge population of Filipinos, I wonder why there are not enough risk-takers in there to change the character of the society?–Mitigating cultural factors perhaps?
Also, why could we not propose solutions like what Mahathir did for Malaysia? (It may not have to also be affirmative action)
With the explanation you proposed regarding the Chinese of relatively more recent entry gaining a head start with help of another Chinese who arrived earlier, it appears that at some point in the past, some Chinese newcomer has managed to outdo the natives of the Philippines to gain a foothold to the benefit of succeeding Chinese immigrants to our country.
Also, you seem to either ignore, downplay, or fail to take into account that Filipinos are disadvantaged not necessarily by Chinese immigrants but by Filipinos themselves.
The lack of a level playing field occurs in other countries such as US, and yet the Chinese continue to break ground and thrive there too, but not to the extent that they gain the upper hand as they do in the Philippines.
Let me also mention an observation I had during my junior and senior years in college. Most Filipinos tend to ask where they plan to be employed after they graduate, while the Tsinoys tend to ask what business they are planning to start and how after they graduate. I suggest strongly we reinvent ourselves and redefine our place in the world–enough blaming extraneous causes why we fail. Reality in this case is what we’ve made it to be. Analyses should rather penetrate inner substance rather than just outer form.
AsiaWest,
Voting does not preclude complaining later on. In other words, everybody has to do their job before, during and after election.
Should the people be blamed for the imperfect (read: elite-driven) democracy? Maybe, but it’s one thing to heap opprobium on the masses for their lack of discernment and another to realize that the public really has very limited choices, if you can call them choices at all. It’s one thing to blame the people for their lack of civic duty and another to see that educational and economic opportunities are simply not there for a sense of civic duty to take root.
Why are Chinese-Filipinos prosperous? Because they are an entrepreneurial people, perhaps part of the legacy of the very old Chinese civilization. So how do we make Filipinos more entrepreneurial? Through education, definitely, and availability of more small business loans, perhaps. And we have to do this in the context of a democracy–imperfect though that democracy may be at the present–because, like it or not, that’s how Filipinos want it done (unlike the Chinese). This brings us back again to the question of who really wield the levers of power (i.e., agents of change) in this imperfect democracy.
When you have limited choices – you demand for more choices, you don’t sit in the corner and say “poor me, look at me, i have limited choices”. You look for other like-minded people, get organized – use the “bayanihan spirit” to demand for more choices – and even to the extent of providing a choice.
When you see “educational and economic opportunities are simply not there for a sense of civic duty to take root” you demand, you select leaders who can deliver the goods, you don’t sit in the corner and say “poor me, look at me, i have limited choices”.
There are attitudes and practices that generate success. And, there are attitudes and practices that generate failure.
Which still boils down to the habits adopted by the founding fathers, the immigrants, the Jews, the OFWs – attitude, practices, and lifestyles.
When the founding fathers, the immigrants, the Jews, the OFWs adopted Values, Attitudes, and Lifestyles (VALS) conducive to success, they succeeded.
When founding fathers, the immigrants, the Jews, the OFWs adopted Values, Attitudes, and Lifestyles (VALS) conducive to failure, they indeed, failed.
Abe’s line on “genetically – a risk taker” has racist undertones that would make Hitler proud.
The people are the source of power. When power is wielded irresponsibly, guess who has the ultimate responsibility of getting things back in shape? No running away, no hiding from the responsibility – owe up to the responsibility, or perish!
“The people are the source of power.”-BongV
Aper, BongV. How true. That’s why when nothing works against the abuses of the government, there are those of us who are ready to “surge-the-gates”. We failed. We failed because there were those who would rather just mumble, “lets move on”, or, “wait for 2010″.
apanfilo,
Voting does not preclude complaining later on. In other words, everybody has to do their job before, during and after election.
Neither does complaining excuse voters to vote without first doing their homework and demanding to exhaust all information (such as the platform or concrete plans-of-action) from their candidates to evaluate them intelligently before voting.
In countries like the US, buying certain items does not preclude one from returning any them, but it surely becomes an issue when this privilege is abused or not taken as a last resort. Similarly, if this becomes a chronic (Edsa I, II, going III, etc) or widespread (down to how we vote for our local officials) habit, which is been the case in our country, then not only is complaining costly & less, if at all, effective, it also does not absolve one from not taking every opportunity to resolve any lack of information about candidates before they vote for them.
Should the people be blamed for the imperfect (read: elite-driven) democracy? Maybe, but it’s one thing to heap opprobium on the masses for their lack of discernment and another to realize that the public really has very limited choices, if you can call them choices at all. It’s one thing to blame the people for their lack of civic duty and another to see that educational and economic opportunities are simply not there for a sense of civic duty to take root.
Looking for root-causes is not the same as blaming. But everyone including the masses are not exempt from contributing towards solutions instead being part of, or even aggravating, the problem. One neither needs education nor tons of money, but just common-sense, in deciding whether to spring for more kids or not, or throwing garbage anywhere in our surroundings–Being poor and ignorant is not a good enough excuse for dragging the rest of the country down any further.
Why are Chinese-Filipinos prosperous? Because they are an entrepreneurial people, perhaps part of the legacy of the very old Chinese civilization.
Benign0 refers to this as “culture.”
So how do we make Filipinos more entrepreneurial? Through education, definitely, and availability of more small business loans, perhaps. And we have to do this in the context of a democracy–imperfect though that democracy may be at the present–because, like it or not, that’s how Filipinos want it done (unlike the Chinese). This brings us back again to the question of who really wield the levers of power (i.e., agents of change) in this imperfect democracy.
Filipinos tend to immerse themselves in ideals and rhapsodic sentiments without balancing them out with hard-nosed good-sense pragmatism which the Chinese have a lot of. Being one of most promising not only in Southeast Asia but greater Asia during the 50′s, and then becoming a chronic laggard afterward, points to some other explanation. What you’re saying are consequences & not causes.
Why are Chinese-Filipinos prosperous? Because they are an entrepreneurial people, perhaps part of the legacy of the very old Chinese civilization. So how do we make Filipinos more entrepreneurial? Through education, definitely, and availability of more small business loans, perhaps. And we have to do this in the context of a democracy–imperfect though that democracy may be at the present–because, like it or not, that’s how Filipinos want it done (unlike the Chinese). This brings us back again to the question of who really wield the levers of power (i.e., agents of change) in this imperfect democracy.
No democracy is perfect, neither is any other form of government on this earth. If we focus more on the economy which is tangible and measurable, instead of democracy which is neither, then we have a better chance of gaining both. This clamor for democracy works when people do not only demand for their democratic rights but also perform their democratic duties. Before one complains, it is ‘just’ to ask ourselves, “are we contributing solutions to our leaders or are we merely expecting to be served?”–otherwise, it is not really democracy that we want, but mendicancy where things are just handed down to us without merit.
Regarding the elite: Key to Social Change
“Neither does complaining excuse voters to vote without first doing their homework and demanding to exhaust all information (such as the platform or concrete plans-of-action) from their candidates to evaluate them intelligently before voting.”
AsiaWest,
Oh, we did, the voters always did. The people scrutinized GMA and found her clean before she became president. She changed after the election. The people scrutinized Erap too, and found him a chickboy and quite slow, but, what the heck, Marcos and Tabako were too fast, and chickboys too. And Cory was slow too. What happened to the country after their rule? Down the drain.
And so the people tried Erap. But the evil, ehe, este, civil society has too much ego and could not wait for Erap to prove his worth, and so the evil, ehe, este, civil society put up their disco party at Edsa where Angie the dancer brought his soldiers to dance the Fandango, forcing Erap to cross the Pasig River after barely a year of sitting on the throne.
So, AsiaWest, as you see, the people did always do their homework.
And, AsiaWest, if by elite you mean the oligarchs, oh, indeed they are the key to social change. They made the poor poorer and poorer and poorer, and themselves richer and richer and richer. But, just you wait, AsiaWest. All throughout history is replete with stories of the turning of the wheel..the arrival in time of the great equalizer. The elite the poor, and vice-versa.
correction: ‘barely a year’ to ‘barely 3 years’.
That only proves that the people contributed a lot to the mess. The people voted GMA and then want her out just because she changed after being elected? You mean people are clean before entering politics, then when they get elected, they change? Wow, that’s a really poor analysis. It’s more an excuse than an analysis. That’s like Miriam saying, “I lied, hahaha!”
It makes more sense that politicians were already corrupt as ordinary people even before getting elected, and they just carry on being their true selves or increase it while in the position. Proof, as BongV said, is that she promised not to run for president while still a VP, then broke that promise later on. No dude, the people rarely do their homework. That’s why they bear as much responsibility as the government in making a mess of the country. Dude, government is not a genie for the people.
What? You think the people didn’t know he was a chickboy before he was elected? Well, you certainly prove that the people are dumb and you can’t trust ‘em! Nyahahaha!
Dude you can’t exonerate the people forever. They’re responsible too, and it’s in plain view why. But what to do is not to blame them, but make them more aware that their choices affect the country more than they think.
Asia West,
If a company hired a manager which had presented a perfect resume and who had done well in the interview but whose performance has turned out to be lackluster and in fact he has betrayed and swindled the company, who’s culpable?
Again, the following assertions of yours are equally bigoted as the negativity is directed against Filipinos as a race: “Filipinos tend to immerse themselves in ideals and rhapsodic sentiments without balancing them out with hard-nosed good-sense pragmatism which the Chinese have a lot of.”
trying Erap is not homework, that’s STUPIDITY
In the US, a resume is not enough, the companies check your credit score, and they conduct background checks see if you have any criminal convictions, and they talk to your previous employers. If the company just took the resume at face value and did not conduct due diligence – the company is culpable for flawed hiring practices.
Moreover, the company’s stockholders through the actionas of the members of the board of directors can resolve to have the manager fired.
In the case of the Philippines, the Filipinos hired a lousy manager, and had a lousy board – when it was time to kick out the manager, the stockholders can’t get the board to fire the manager – so the stockholders “surge the gates” when they should have replaced the board of directors – use the kukote ng hindi nangangamote!
BongV, in a presidential system, there’s no such process as the “stockholders” replacing the “board” if the latter can’t kick out “the manager.”
Your own analogy may apply in a parliamentary system because of the “no confidence vote” process which may result in the dissolution of the parliament and a general election to form a new government that will in turn elect a new PM. In a presidential system like one that obtains in US and RP, resort to impeachment may be the only process available to un-elect a sitting president. And if congress fails to impeach the president against the will of the people, direct democracy (i.e., People Power democracy) may be the only inter-election recourse as what has taken place during EDSA II.
It pays to use your big K.
On the contrary, your legislative body is the board, elected by the stakeholders – “the people”. The people had the option to recall even impeach – but, the representatives who the people selected based on gut – left the people on the gutter to dance with the incumbent. How could you miss that?
Jeeze Bert, that’s why the elite is the one that needs to lead change. You cannot change the people themselves, but you can work on the way they arrive at their decisions.
If you believe you are indeed doing your homework, Bert, and in spite of that, you still end up with lousy leadership, then you are entailing that Filipinos can’t be relied upon to be very good judge of character, especially in light of the fact that “doing homework” chronically fails as we still continue to elect the same kind of leadership–i.e. “not just once, not even twice, but more often than we are willing to admit” Moreover, this failure continues to be widespread–not only an occurrence on the national or Presidental/Vice-Presidential level but also locally. The President could not maintain power without the support of politicians from the lower and other areas of the government.
On the contrary, your legislative body is the board, elected by the stakeholders – “the people”. The people had the option to recall even impeach – . . . the representatives – BongV
BongV,
Are you sure the constitution you are reading is not the Russian constitution?
Abe:
I think you should be asking the question to yourself. Obviously it is flying above your head. :)
Abe:
At the local level, in case you are not aware of the Local Government Code on Recall:
Also, the 1987 Constitution, Article 7, the Legislative Department,provides:
Article 7, Section 32 also provides:
Also,
Under Article XVII, Sec.2 of the Constitution,
The laws are there, it is up to the people to exercise their creativity to make it happen.
BongV,
You have compared the Philippine Congress to a “board of directors,” through which the people (which you in turn compared to “stockholders”) can fire (“impeach”) the president. This seems fine to me.
But you argue moreover that the people is ultimately accountable for their decision because it is apparently your claim that the people can in turn recall or impeach members of congress if they fail in their duty, acting as a collective body (or as a “board of directors”), to fire the president (the hired “manager” in my example). What is your constitutional or legal basis for this argument?
Good, finally, we are on the same page.
Perhaps you can open the 1987 Philippine Constitution and read the sections pertaining to People’s Initiative. While Article 17, Section 2 provides for people’s initiative – it has yet to have an enabling law. Clearly, Congress has been remiss in providing for the enabling law.
If they elect bozos who do not pass the enabling law, surely you hold the bozo accountable by not voting for the bozo – but such action isn’t for the bozo to exercise – but the people. Voting for the representatives who are competent, have integrity, have vision, have track record of performance, have substance – is an act of the people. Therefore, it now boils down to the people ( who are the ultimate source of political power – remember government of the people, by the people, for the people – NOT government of Congress, by the Congress, for the Congress) to select representatives who can actually provide the enabling law.
BongV,
It will probably help if you try learning first the meaning of initiative and referendum as contemplated by Article VI, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution in relation to Section 32 of the same article as distinguished from recall as employed by the Local Government Code pursuant to Article X, Section 3 of the Constitution.
Once you have a better grasp of those terms, come back and debate again.
Abe:
Obviously it is beyond your grasp to consider the possibility of initiative as a mechanism for refining the laws on recall, provided further that there is an enabling law.
Amendments proposed via people’s initiative can include a section on recall of legislators – Senators and Congressmen.
Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution and congressional practice, Members of Congress may have their services ended prior to the normal expiration of their constitutionally established terms of office by their resignation or death, or by action of the House of Congress in which they are a Member by way of an “expulsion,” or by a finding that in accepting a subsequent public office deemed to be “incompatible” with congressional office, the Member has vacated his congressional seat.
Article 9, Section 2, 1987 Constitution states
Note that the a legislator can be removed from the Senate or Congress only through the motion of the Senate or Congress as stated in Article 6, Section 3:
Legislators ratting on their colleagues? You have a snowflake’s chance in hell for that to happen.
Thus, you take the alternative path – the answer of which lies in Under Article XVII, Sec.2 of the Constitution.
BongV,
Almost anything is legally possible if the charter is changed, e.g., make the presidential spouse (Mike Arroyo, for instance) as the person to succeed the president in case of her disability. But before that change or amendment takes effect, you have to resolve a legal or constitutional issue within the letter and spirit of the existing constitution.
The present constitution does not allow the mechanism of recall with respect to members of congress. A member of congress may be “expelled” by the action of his peers but not by the direct act of the people by way of recall. Your analogy does not therefore apply to the present form of our government.
BongV,
That’s exactly why you are amending the constitution by way of people’s initiative to allow for a mechanism of recall with respect to members of Congress. :)
BongV,
I would be very happy if that amendment takes place because recall is a critical aspect of a “people powered” democracy. But until then, we will need to shelve your “board of directors/stockholders” analogy.
Abe:
This will be a good time to bring up the Oblation – Kung hindi tayo ang kikilos, sino. Kung hindi ngayon, kailan? :)
On the contrary, the exercise of passing the amendment is part of the analogy. Can’t have the cake and eat it too Abe.
I love your fighting spirit, BongV.
The proper point of comparison is not between the Chinese businessmen and the rest of the Filipinos. Rather it should be between the successful Chinese businessmen here and their counterparts in the other countries. From that standpoint, our local Chinese Taipans are lackluster as they have failed to establish a manufacturing and industrial base.
The taipan’s responsibility is not to develop a manufacturing and industrial base. The taipan’s focus is to generate revenue.
One trillion USD in net assets – is 1 trillion USD – Lucio Tan’s net assets nearly equals the annual budget of the Philippine government. As far as Lucio Tan is concerned, he is already made.
It’s up to the Philippine government to create the policy environment conducive to manufacturing and industry – reduce cost of doing business; streamlined processes; full ownership of real estate – cant’ have the cake and eat it too. Or, keep on eating FDI crumbs from ASEAN.