There is a supposed quote attributed to Edmund Burke that goes, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” And that’s what we have here. In a nation where the cancer of corruption has spread from the lowest level to the highest, in both the public and private spheres, it becomes a daunting challenge for anyone to triumph over it.
Yesterday, I found out about this call on facebook from Brian Ong, Fritz Tentativa and Benjamin Espina: Manolo Quezon for Senator.
Who is Manolo Quezon? Manuel Quezon III is the Explainer. He is that pundit on cable television, the op-ed writer, a Mac user, and more importantly he has geek cred enough to blog the Long View and be read. If you’re into the whole bloodline business, yes, he is descended from that President Manuel Quezon from the Commonwealth.
At the height of Ondoy, Quezon spearheaded and helped coordinate things both online and offline. He did not need to be a public official. He did not take credit for it. He led.
Manolo Quezon himself doesn’t like to run for public office. Who would want to, when politics is a dirty business? And yet here we are. Our country has corruption in every strata of society. Quezon understands this just as he understands the importance of defeating the Great Book Blockade.
Yes, it is a risk that drafting Manolo Quezon for Senator is a disservice to him, the person. That by doing so, we risk sending him to face the horde of the dark side. Quezon may be unwilling to do this, for obvious reasons and for many reasons, to face this battle, on his own, resources and inclination notwithstanding.
There are five million people from the Philippines on Facebook. Espina, Ong and Tentativa are asking for a million to join. Just maybe, if that number is reached can help sway Manolo Quezon to throw his hat in the ring.
The daunting challenges of tomorrow is great. Manolo Quezon, I believe, more than the likes of Lapid, Jamby and Jingoy, understands what this country needs and has the ability to help make it possible. In 1770, Burke wrote in Thoughts on the Cause of Present Discontents, “So when bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”
The good must associate. We need good men in the Senate. I urge you to join the group to draft Manolo Quezon for Senator, and ask others to do so as well.
Popularity: 1% [?]
cool. i wonder what he feels about it.
I’m beginning to agree with those saying that if bad men are combining in the Senate, then scrap it and replace it with parliament.
What about electing more women? Or more priests? Or more former mayors? Or former university lecturers? Or more Tsinoys?
Cocoy,
Sama ko d’yan sa panawagan na ‘yan. Kailangan ko na lang Facebook account. :-)
“I would rather have a Philippines run like hell by Filipinos than a Philippines run like heaven by the Americans” — Manuel L. Quezon
paalala lang po
Guess you got what he wished for.
Seems racist to me. But my father was a racist once, too, but changed. Hope abounds, amongst all the natural evil.
Joe
One of the promises that Erap made while he was in office is that by 2015, one in 5 Pinoys-in-Pinas will be surviving on less than a dollar a day. That is a campaign promise he will need the help of the next Malacanang-resident in order to accomplish, and maybe Chiz is the right person to help Erap.
——————–
Sidetopic: A view of USA politics. A fairly-reputable organization is keeping tabs on Barack Obama, e.g. that Barack Obama made about 510 promises during his campaign.
The report so far : 49 campaign promises met, 14 not met.
The Filipino Poor and marginalized are now surviving
less than $1 a day. Just go to the Garbage Dumps where
they earn their livelihoods. Erap Estrada is right.
Only Erap Estrada plundered millions of pesos. To make the Filipino people live that way. Truth is really stranger than fiction.
UP n,
Re sidetopic. Now THAT is the kind of objectivity that is helpful, rather than the easy potshots that others do. Do you have a reference name to the organization? I’d like to check out the scorecard.
My own tally is 13 accomplishments (mostly significant) against 6 mistakes (not nation-killers, the latest being the boneheaded proposed $250 payment to seniors because they don’t get a social security cost of living adjustment in 2010 weep weep).
Joe
Accomplished – Promise number No. 125: Direct military leaders to end war in Iraq
On “my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war”
————————————-
Failed : Promise number No. 24: End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000
————————————-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
UP n,
Thank you for the link. It is so refreshing to find something comprehensive and objective like this.
Joe
Dont hope for the end of the war in Iraq. It will continue like the Arab-Israeli conflict. Corporate
Sharks like Dick Cheney’s Haliburton Corporation needed
the contracts on the war effort to continue to make money.
Middle East will be always tinderbox. It is where
the Oil supply is. Plus the Religious Conflict of land
as an issue. It is almost a 50 years old conflict. No solution in sight. If Iran get the bomb. Then, supplies
it to terrorists. World War III cannot be avoided.
MLQ3:
“Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” And Vanity comes along and asks the question, “Is it popular?” But Conscience asks the question “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.”MLK
I have been following Monolo Quezon for quite sometime. His blogs are highly provocative, and informative.
Personally, this individual has a great admiration, not just for his column, but to deliver to the reader(s).
Also, a truely great mediator on Twitter. An act of humanism when called upon. I really do praise Manuel, for his great gesture of human kindness.
well, public office would prove or disprove what MQ3 writes. If he wins, we will see if he can perform or merely just a good writer. We will see.
One of the things going for MLQ3 is that he became an ardent supporter of GMA and the respect was mutual. MLQ3 worked for her directly.
One of the things going for MLQ3 is that he became a vocal critic of GMA — asking GMA to resign and asking folks to join him in talsik-diyan marches.
MLQ3 is known for his ability to work with people, one would suppose because MLQ3 is a great judge of people’s abilities to lead especially their honesty and integrity. MLQ3 is a very active leader in the Noynoy-for-President-2010 cabal.
You people are embarrassing. Sya lang kilala nyong galing sa pulitikal na pamilya eh. Tapos matagal na atang nag retire mga Quezon.
Frankly, daming ayaw kay Manolo. Minsan naligaw sila (mga acquaintances and kakilala ko) sa The Explainer. Pinagtatawanan. Hesu Kristo! He will need to work on his rhetorical skills (he seriously doesn’t have any), and before he runs he will need to crystallize his political beliefs. If some of you have been following him for years, you would know he’s easily re-molded by the opinions of people around him. He’ll get eaten alive in the Senate with only his name to shield him from the most fatal blows.
Then again, he could always fall back on basic morals. Maybe he’ll show Filipinos that some of us are able to live on simple and innocent reliance on truth and integrity.
bakit nila pinagtawan?
walang rhetorical skills. Explainer na walang inexplain, anti-thesis ng title, daw. Then the hair-style.
He will be eaten alive, by piranha bloggers of the Filipino Voices Blogsite. Like most of the political candidates. You can see most of the candidates are afraid to discuss with us bloggers. They send their paid minions as their advocates.
Hoy, Hyden, sinong piranha?
you guys are funny! lol
let’s not be defensive naman bert, hyden meant mlq3 will be eaten alive sa scrutiny dito sa mga taga-fv.
Nanonood ako ng the explainer – may natutunan naman ako and personally I like his hairstyle. Wala lang, there’s nothing wrong with his hairstyle eh, mabuti sana kung semi-bald siya diba?.
Manolo Quezon is adopted so ‘bloodline’ is to be taken figuratively. He has carried the name well. We badly need people like him in the Senate.
Here’s what he says about himself.
Oh, oh…here comes the dynasty advocates…
We needed someone like Yasay.
Seven votes from my own family, 40 votes from my 7 siblings, a total of 47 guaranted votes for Manolo as senator on election day from my family alone. I can also guarantee 50% of my barangay’s qualified voters to vote for Manolo.
Bert,
“I can also guarantee 50% of my barangay’s qualified voters to vote for Manolo.” – Bert
By the sound of it, you’re trying to encourage everyone to vote the same way you did. Is that having true knowledge, I say, no virtue at all. Utak ng Tilapya si Bert.
hehehe.
mario, here’s what you said at 5:16 pm above: “Also, a truely great mediator on Twitter. An act of humanism when called upon. I really do praise Manuel, for his great gesture of human kindness.”
After saying that, then this, at 3:22 am: “By the sound of it, you’re trying to encourage everyone to vote the same way you did. Is that having true knowledge, I say, no virtue at all. Utak ng Tilapya si Bert.”
Mario,
Are you really an electro/mechanical genius? Or, an actual alien?
Bert,
Galing din pala mag rebound.
Kala ko, puro tuyo ang utak mo.
Bert, guess your singing to the same choir.
Hehehehe!
No mario, I’m no choirboy of anyone. Just a simple guitarist.
Pero mario, hindi ka halatang genius, ayaw mo lang pahalata yata? Nagkukunwari ka lang yatang bobo, tama ba?
Bert,
Lets do away with nonsense remarks, and continue on with the direct subject that is written in the first place by cocoy. Obviously, there’s some loose end that you and I have take care of. Don’t be alarm, or this could be a frightful idea to you.
Those who are subject to vulgar infatuation may exclaim: “Montesquieu has said this! So it’s magnificent! It’s sublime!” As for me, I have the courage of my own opinion. I say: What! You have the nerve to call that fine? It is frightful! It is abominable! These random selections from the writings of Montesquieu show that he considers persons, liberties, property — mankind itself — to be nothing but materials for legislators to exercise their wisdom upon.
Bert,
[Or, you can study about him a little bit.] If you desire to do so!
Let us contemplate, and continue discussion to what MLQ3 has to offer in the Senate seat. Not no nonsense remarks. And also, I do opologize in the same token for being so blunt. You know, wisdom can expand our knowledge a long way.
Ok, mario.
There’s no need for the apology. I can be blunt myself, I love calling a spade a spade, make for a more interesting tete a-tete if we may call it that as long as we don’t make it too personal. These are stuffs that make FV a wee bit more exciting reading compared to other serious sites that make one snore of boredom.
Don’t worry about me, I’m not afraid discussing ideas, but grouchiness turns me off, and so oftentimes I have to make some sort of a balance by way of some light banterings that oft happen makes me laugh also. It irked some, but what the heck, they irked me, and so I guess that makes it quits, heheh.
Montasquieu? Oh, the guy’s not so bad, if only for one thing, he said, “One has to stand with people, not above them”. I agree, even if some bright guys here in FV might not.
Bert,
Ditto! All in good intention. Our pundit should be directed to the issues, or government official(s), rather than amongst ourselves. Hell, if someone stick me with a sharp object. Then it’s all fair play.
His grandfather had a famous line. You know, “I would rather have a Philippines run like hell by Filipinos…” What does Manolo say? If he disagrees with his grandpa, that’s great. Adopted pala… if he disagrees with foster granddaddy, no wonder. hehehe
So, Manolo Quezon’s grandfather is responsible for the Hell
we are all living in now…How could the grandchild do better?
I’m also for leaving MLQ3 alone, although if he decides to run, I’ll go for him. But the decision is his, not his admirers’ or the people’s.
Hhhhmmm. I would vote for MLQIII as Senator of the Republic to fiscalize BCAIII, in case the latter gets elected as PreXV.
Hey, BrianB, now that you’ve mentioned it, are you saying this would be a ‘Battle of the (non)Bangs’?
Media people uses the Media exposure for their political ambitions. Loren Legarda is a good example. They use their positions for the public to know them. At the same time, as a jumping board for a political career.
This is the reason we are now all paranoid to all do gooders. Did
she/he wants my vote? I believe that anybody who wants to inform
the public should do it, with a sincere heart. Tell the truth, to
help people without expecting anything in return…
Hyden: this “…without expecting anything in return” comment may be off base.
Utang na loob — the English may not quite get it right, but something in return is expected by Filipino society from someone who was helped by another. That is the Filipino way – Utang na loob.
An obligation of parents is to inculcate in their children the Filipino trait of “utang na loob”.
Utang na loob should be dispensed with when the guy you owe asks you to do something unethical in return. “I bailed you out of debt, you help me cheat in the election.”
This is for all the readers out there, not just you, UPn.
I think MLQ3 believes the same.
In this new century, money on the table (or drugs, or sex) is what Pinoys should already have learned to expect as compensation for illegal behavior.
It is poor taste to insinuate that Pinoys (even a very small few) will ask their friends to do something unethical. Pinoys just merely say “… o, ikaw na ang bahala, ha?!”
——————
An obligation of parents is to inculcate in their children the Filipino trait of “utang na loob”.
I agree that it is good to teach children the value of gratitude, in addition to many other courtesies. But we should not confine it within the utang na loob concept, since there are many other good ways to express gratitude. It’s best done the multinational way. After all, every nation and culture understands gratitude.
I agree with with Chino F.
utang na loob is now being abused for forcing a commitment to return a favor rather than being grateful for all the blessings you have received.
It depends , if a person is an altruistic person or an opportunistic person like most of the Filipino people and almost all of the Filipino politicians. I still believe the goodness of people. Those
who can give, expecting nothing in return. We are human beings, not
animals, who survive on “eat and be eaten”.
As cvj has suggested, after reading that blog of MLQ3, I am left with no thought than to say this – LEAVE MLQ ALONE.
Nothing in that definition or description of self convinces me that one Manuel L. Quezon will contribute to our contemporary intellectual culture what most may have failed to do – just nothing.
Admittedly, he writes for others – in defense of their thoughts, ideas, worldviews and advocacies.
He or she did write for GMA, too. That I sure hate.
He or she? Do you not know who this person is?
What do you hate, the fact that he resigned when everyone else stayed to defend their Queen?
Contemporary Intellectual Culture, and the contribution thereof, lies in those who are willing to grasp it and actually listen.
To the man that has explained a million different scenarios with the backdrop of history as support, I do not see how you are able to say this against him.
Granted, I have not always agreed with his views on some things, but in most things, I have to say, he is honest in his views, and that is the most we can ask of any man — Politician or not. He admits his mistakes, surely, that is more respectable than someone who masquerades as the perfect public figure.
Honesty counts for me, as much as intellect. He has both. Whether you back such a movement, to throw dirt at man who has done his fair share to inform is another thing that surely I will not stand for.
Don’t support the movement, because of principle, I can respect that. But don’t try to twist a man’s image to suit your own political idea of what constitutes a worthy Senator.
Granted that MLQ possesses the integrity, and ability to articulate.
What exactly does he stand for?
What is he specifically supposed to achieve while in the Senate?
What is his legislative agenda?
Is he in favor of amending the constitution to allow foreigners full ownership of real estate (subject to qualification that the property is for health or education purposes, not to exceed XYZ hectares)?
Is he in favor of genuine land reform – land distribution, no SDOs.?
What exactly is the agenda of MLQ’s backers? Policy proposals? Legislative proposals? Who are his backers?
Who is MLQ supporting for President?
BongV, you do sound like a bargain basement version of Benign0
cvj:
so what? does it make the question less relevant?
To BongV:
No, the questions are full of merit, but you have to acknowledge when people are poking in good nature and when you are becoming too uptight. It’s probably those reasons why we cannot promote discourse for there are too many constipated airs in our words, we cannot at all see that we are not defined just by what we say.
Hans,
A sober question merits a sober answer – not a drunken one.
“He or she did write for GMA, too. That I sure hate.”-Primer
That statement of yours surely is double-standard if I ever saw one, I’m sorry to say, Primer.
You hate mlq3 for being once a writer for President GMA but you love Bayani Fernando’s sticking to GMA like a leech.
Being among those advocating for this draft, let me raise a few points that makes me throw my lot for Mr. Quezon and what will work against him, and therefore explain my stand as to why he is among the best men for the job.
True, I have been following Mr. Quezon’s writings for a while already, and his grasp of the current issues shows an intricate understanding of the workings of the political systems of the country, or whatever dysfunctional systems we might have so far. An understanding of these systems is vital to an elementary framework which will allow for legislation. Keyword: legislation. Among the tripartite branches of government we profess to have in the 1987 constitution, it is the legislative branch which requires much research, crafting of arguments, cross-referencing and understanding of the pulse of the national sphere. In our current bicameral systems which will hopefully be led to a peaceful transition in the aftermath of the Arroyo regime’s removal, Mr. Quezon is in a way a part of the cosmopolitan elite most qualified enough for the job, seeing as he has an attuned-to-the-times personality not so different from that of President Quezon during the Commonwealth. That he is better suited for coordinated mobilizations is much better: he has the dynamism of the current generation with the traditional academic erudition (or whatever we have for it in this country) of the past generations so far.
The very fact that he does not seek it explains as well why he is all the more worthy of it: Plato has highlighted it in his “The Republic” that the philosopher-kings are the most ideal leaders because they do not seek office and yet are the ones who have trained all their life for the undertaking. His being an adopted member of the Quezon family quite highlights it all the more: antiquity has the Romans showing that the adopted proteges rule better than the natural children. See the rule of the Five Good Emperors and how it went downhill when Commodus assumed the post. (No, I am not talking of the Russell Crowe-Gladiator version which is bullshit; but you cannot deny Commodus has quirks unbecoming of the Roman Emperor.)
We do have to admit that he has problematic issues involved with his surname, however. The very “racist” proclamation of the elder Quezon and our general opinion of him as a power-hungry, two-timing negotiator has been well-documented in our history books; Manolo himself recognized this and has disassociated himself from it. It is precisely what Michel Foucault has already inaugurated: a constant critique of oneself’s involvement. It is what made him an ardent critic of the Arroyo administration after speaking for them; it might be what makes him a transformative force in a decrepit, intellectually-desolate and obscurantist Senate.
I, being a student of the Socialist framework, have long acknowledged the fact that the current systems are self-destructive and therefore should be removed. And yet their disciplinary construction, based from the American model (which the elder Quezon himself heralded), has decidedly recidivist tendencies at the same time, which explains why we cannot do anything to reform it or do away with it. That Manolo Quezon himself does not label himself such shows a following of the post-modern post-structural thought (if he does not do so willingly and knowingly; I may of course be over-reading his actions) reflects a work ethic which is necessary in the process of state rehabilitation without bloodshed if we choose to: an understanding of how to preserve our gains yet violently cut off those which impede the state from making itself relevant to everyday life. Our past administrations have relied on the old guards and they have alienated the youth, and our elders disown them. We now have coordinators; are we to shun what we have of the “mean” we need so far? We have to acknowledge historical progression being incremental.
Quezon is among what we have. Let him make the most out of his capabilities, and it is the demos who calls for it.
If MLQ were to run, what exactly is he supposed achieve?
What is his legislative agenda?
specifically, platform plez
On that:
There are many potential avenues that Mr. Quezon could work on. Harnessing the net in his moderative nature for the Philippine concerned netizens could be used as a case study for making political participation OUTSIDE THE ELECTORAL PROCESS MORE INTERACTIVE, MORE NET-BASED, AND THEREFORE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO CITIZENS WHO ARE WILLING TO BE EDUCATED IN IT. There are many legislative possibilities that would make the government more accessible to citizens through the internet, not just the stale gov.ph forums that are devoid of any intelligence.
Mr. Quezon, being a noted analyst of the electoral process and the workings of the government, can even serve as a proper fiscalizer (and therefore troubleshooter) as have been the hallmark of the late Benigno Aquino Jr. during Marcos I. His expertise on research and negotiation could bring up results that will put up proper legislation in place.
But of course, BongV, these are suggestions from an elementary student of public administration. Mr. Quezon, if he will be as dynamic in his research with regards to his projected performance in the Upper House, would be able to do more.
The challenge here now for us who are drafting him is to try to analyze the groundworks by which Mr. Quezon will be able also to facilitate the fabrication of a platform. A candidate of the people should maximize the use of the people’s support and his own virtues as well. To focus on one is disastrous, as witness the Gracchi of Rome and probably why Obama is experiencing setbacks despite his impressive harnessing of people’s initiatives.
Primer may prove to be a strong supporter of MLQ3.
http://filipinovoices.com/why-not-medical-marijuana-in-rp
HansJ:
MLQ3, like a scalpel, is a tool. In the hands of a surgeon, he can save lives. In the hands of a homicidal maniac, he can do lots of serious damage.
“Fiscalizer” is a word that denotes a “red flag” to me. It sends alarm bells ringing. As a “fiscalizer” he will be “against something”. What am more interested to know is not just what he is against – but what exactly does he stand for?
Knowing mlq3 for a long time already from his blogs, I’m sure, if he decided to make a run for senator, he will make known his platform, and what he stands for.
In the meantime, he has his writings to deserve our good opinions of him, and our votes.
And he is clean too. If he changes his attitude after the election and become unclean, that all means and efforts, fair and foul, to reform him are futile, then he deserves our “surge-the-gates” too.
What’s good for the gander is good for the goose, ahayhehehehehe.
BongV:
Scalpel analysis noted: we agree on that.
Now on the fiscalizing part. Is not taking a stand against something already a denotion of function? Sure, nothing is dichotomous, but that is where you start making your own stand. Amang Rodriguez said politics is addition, though I say it works better for public administration. As a legislator who could improve errors in the systems, as I said, a troubleshooter is essential in fixing what is already here if it can be fixed. Sure, there are many things to replace in our systems, but there are also things that only need fixing. If that is not yet clear: HE CAN STAND FOR IMPROVEMENT, FOR REVISION. Foucault has expounded on the irresponsibility of replacing when fixing is enough.
In a liberal system that we have, sure, fiscalizing will achieve little. But in the event that we are able to establish systems of direct democracy, fiscalizing will become all the more vital and an efficient means of public accountability. That can be another one: HE CAN STAND FOR SYSTEM REFORM AND OVERHAUL FOR PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY, WHATEVER THE SITUATION NECESSITATES.
But then that’s just my suggestion. I cannot honestly answer what he would stand for: I am not him! But I could sure give my cents on what he could stand for, what he could legislate, based on what I as a citizen knows and what he as a legislator could do. Fiscalizing is an important function in a legislature, and sadly also the most underappreciated.
Standing against something does not necessarily mean standing for something. For example, one can be against term extensions because:
Another example, one can be against allowing foreigners to own lands because:
you don’t want competition. competition will force you to invest in better equipment, better processes, and better people. you’d rather have your hefty margins despite a lousy inferior service/product – and by not allowing foreigners to own land – you keep competition out.
people don’t have to know that even without foreigners – they are still LANDLESS – have been LANDLESS for decades under the local economic elite. you scare them that they will be landless when foreigners come in, despite the fact that they ARE ALREADY LANDLESS under the local economic elite.
landless whether under the local economic elite or foreigners – is still the same landless. However, the chances of owning land due to a higher purchasing power due to better compensation from foreigners – are higher – but the people don’t have to know that. Just scare them with term extensions.
Amang forgot what happens when you add one rotten apple to the basket. You don’t just add – you add the right ones.
The Republic Act No. 6735, “The Initiative and Referendum Act” is the enabling law for Article XVII, Section 2 of the Constitution. This constitutional clause has yet to be leveraged by people in an exercise involving direct deomcracy. Currently (do correct me if am mistaken), members of Congress can only be removed by Congress voting to expel the erring rep, based on “disorderly behavior”. There is an opportunity to introduce a law, via people’s initiative, that can recall erring Congressmen. This could have been resorted to against Congressmen who blocked the impeachment proceedings against Arroyo.
Well, MLQ has to speak for himself, lest he be mistaken as a mouthpiece for vested interests.
For those who care about a complete MLQ quote; the entire sentence reads “I would rather have a country run like hell by Filipinos than a country run like heaven by the Americans, because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved”.
Well, that sure is hopeful:
If not MLQ3, there are other round’two’s, too : for a chance to serve and improve.
Aquino bloodline, round2.
Erap para sa mahirap, round2.
GMA for congress ( kind of round2).
sarcasm.
true.
Filo,
Do you want to continue where UP n Grad and I left off?
http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-109966
Continue with what exactly? Care to elaborate jl?
Filo,
Yes I do.
What effect on government was UP n Grad actually hoping for when he/she recommended his/her Constitutional amendment?
Would it be for the status quo of government, for regression of government, for improvement of government, etc… ?
What he was actually hoping for, only he can say. (Interestingly your question relates to this particular reply to your other question a few clicks below.)
The above answer is still in effect.
But for discussion’s sake, I read his idea as driven with the intention of being a deterrent to ineffective leadership, where failing at round one actually has undesirable consequences on anyone elected to lead. So the aim probably wasn’t to reinforce the status quo or for regression of government. I’ll leave it to UP n grad to agree or disagree.
Filo,
So you read all of that but you agreed in the sarcasm in UP N Grad’s remark in “Well that sure is hopeful: …”.
UP N grad was given every chance to clarify his remark on “Well that sure is hopeful: …” but he/she never did.
So are you going to clarify now up to what part of his/her sarcastic remark you agreed with?
jl,
I may have overestimated you.
Helpful hints: deterrent, failure, round two, hopeful, sarcarm. Put those together if you can, and you’ll find this statement borderline ignorant:
No surprise why UP n grad didn’t bother to clarify that.
Maybe this will help: Read our comments again, and mean it.
Filo,
Yes I did.
And I still see that 4 of the 5 items in your “Helpful hints” don’t come from his sarcastic post, do they?
If he was hopeful on the government on one post, why the sarcasm on this one?
jl,
That 4 of 5 of the helpful hints aren’t in UP n grad’s comment is irrelevant.
That you don’t get the word sarcasm and how the word “hopeful” comes into play is a pity.
Keep up the nitpicking; it’s the quickest way to nowhere.
sabihin niyo po kay justice league na talk to the hand na lang.e sa totoo lang po sobrang immature ng kadibate niyo.binabaluktot pa sinasabi niyo at kay chinof,e ako getz ko mga pahayag nyo.good luck po!
Filo,
Maybe you should reserve that pity for yourself.
Dong,
That should not surprise anyone.
That’s the complete quote, but it doesn’t save Quezon. And the latter part hasn’t come true. It was probably Quezon’s hope that the bad government would improve, but even he can’t see what would happen to his country in the future. Improve in probably, say, 500 years? Too slow for me. Still, his opinion of wanting the country run like hell remains the damning factor.
I guess this is why MLQ3 would stay out of politics. It’s still bad government and hasn’t improved.
For much of its history, China and Vietnam were even more of “hell” than the Philippines ever was. Nationhood is not for people like you. Why don’t you just immigrate to some prosperous country so you can bask in their reflected glory?
cvj:
Actually, Vietnam a couple of years ago was still seen as “hell” and Philippines was heaven.
As of 2009, Vietnam has overtaken the Philippines. Same as South Korea. Same as Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia.
So what excuse does the Philippines have? wholesale mental retardation?
now that really isn’t fair cvj. you can’t blame chino f for wishing that the government DID improve if the government COULD BE improved.
Parallax,
Once Chino F comes back and reiterates his thoughts on “dictatorship”; you might find out what happened to that wish.
I know where your coming from CVJ. Quezon had his good points… but his infamous saying caught him flatfooted on his actual attitude towards the country. I don’t think it’s really nationalism if you want your country to be run like hell at all. Or he probably fell victim to the stupid fault our countrymen bear today – emotionalism.
China is still “hell” in the countrysides, I hear, and Vietnam was hell in the War, but is heaven now. And both are more economically progressive than the Philippines. Besides, how they were run seems irrelevant to how our country is to be run. Maybe you’d like to try out their government system (communism)?
I’m being pestered to migrate all right. But I’m still checking my options.
to Chino F: You can do a cvj — board a plane to move overseas. Move overseas, work overseas and contribute.
Chino F, we do have something to learn from Vietnam and China in that they addressed the problem of inequality first. It’s a prerequisite to economic takeoff.
Hmmm… Inequality is an issue, I agree… but are you sure Vietnam and China have actually solved it? A friend who’s a missionary in a far-off northern Chinese province tells a different story. And from what China has been doing in Tibet… do they really practice equality? But yes, we have our own problems.
Yes Chino F, China and Vietnam have addressed inequality during their respective revolutions, particularly land inequality. That’s why when they finally allowed market-based exchanges, the benefits did not just go to a few families and as a result, there was enough broad-based domestic demand to reinforce the process and triggered an acceleration of economic growth.
One of the side effects of fast growth, however, is that inequality increases such that now, after 30 years of such growth, China is now more unequal than the Philippines (as measured by the Gini coefficient). If it hasn’t already, this will become an issue for them moving forward. That’s why you have to start with a low level of inequality to have some runway for growth. They then have to deal with inequality again.
As for us, we haven’t even started dealing with our own problem of inequality.
The experience of addresing inequality as a prerequisite to high economic growth can be seen even in Capitalist countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan. Same is true here in Southeast Asia with Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia.
The antipinoy crowd looks to defects in our culture or the defects of democracy as the reason for our falling behind when it is clear that inequality is the one constant throughout our short history as a nation.
Inequality still owes itself in a large part to defects in culture and government systems, so we can’t leave those out. You can’t blame the elite only or seek to eliminate them. Same for the lower classes. People on every level share responsibility for sadly making the first part of MLQ’s statement – “see the Philippines run like hell” – true, but they can also be responsible for making our country better. Yes, let’s make the second part of MLQ’s infamous quote true (improve it), but with the mindset that the “run like hell” thing never needed to happen.
In what way does inequality owe itself in large part to ‘defects in culture’?
In what way does inequality owe itself to defects in government systems?
I want to know your take on this since my view is that (feedback loops aside) it’s more the other way around*, i.e. underlying inequality is the reason why our government is dysfunctional and the driver behind the perception that our ‘culture is dysfunctional’.
It just makes more sense that inequality is more an effect than a cause. We have a culture that believes there should be rich and poor, some are better than others, we must not change certain things because of tradition, etc. Blacks remained under inequality in the US because there was a culture that believed they were inferior. The Yellow Peril sentiment which was more culturally based caused laws banning Chinese from immigrating into the US in the 1800s. Nazis went on to kill Jews because their (Nazi) culture believed that they were superior, and German culture had a disdain for Jews. Inequality in the Philippines is supported by cultural beliefs that lead to it, like “hanggang dito lang tayo,” “wag mo nang baguhin ang mahirap baguhin,” and all that. Even if you address the inequality, the underlying factors will bring it back. So we need cultural reform too.
Ok, at least we know where we disagree. From the experience of our neighbors, it was policy change that drove the change in mindset so i find the cultural angle a hard sell.
Having said that, I see a lot of that we are better than others when i here the words ‘vacuous’ and ‘retarded’ coming from the antipinoy crowd of Benign0, BongV and Ben Kritz. In that respect, i think you are right, inequality is partly cultural but more from the point of view of an elitist middle class siding with the well-off.
I even read that someone in the Get Real Philippines crowd even wants to legislate forced sterilization of fathers of street children so the Nazi comparison is not an exaggeration.
Probably forced sterilization when the fathers are landing themselves on three women and making fifteen children out of it, and not supporting all of them (just supporting a few is not enough). Must have been meant as a jest, but I know where this comes from. I heard of forced sterilization in many countries, like the U.S. and Europe, though these are for sexual offenders. Here, it’s being recommended for careless procreators. In a sense, the “overfathering” as I explained above can be seen as an offense to society by generating so much load that society’s affected. Those guys should stop contributing to the population explosion already.
Well, where we disagree I know too. Let’s leave it at that, then.
The recommendation was not made *in jest*. Read for yourself…
http://www.getrealphilippines.com/solution/zpg.html
…particularly the part that says “Compulsory sterilization and elimination of voting rights of parents of street children“
Dude, forced sterilization is being done in the U.S. and Europe, and it’s far from uncivilized in my view. Of course the leftists and human rights advocates will be against it. I don’t necessary believe in it, but I understand the premise for the proposal. Ang tigas ng ulo ng lalaking Pinoy eh. Both heads. Hmm, that’s part of culture too, and it contributes to uncontrolled population increase, and that in turn contributes to increased inequality… there, I guess the point’s made.
Chino F,
“We have a culture that believes there should be rich and poor, some are better than others . . .”
As long as there is a robust market for products that make Filipino’s naturally beautiful brown skin “whiter”, we know that there are superficial and racist undertones to the inequality that is practiced here. I almost gagged when I saw a local festival parade a couple of years ago, and all the distinguished women of the community were paraded down the street on floats, all pasty white, all under umbrellas . . . And the adoring brown-skinned crowd looked on . . .
I get so pissed at how my own pasty white skin refuses to brown up properly under the tropical sun, turning instead to splotches of red that I imagine will be cancer eating my body away in a few years.
And Filipinos don’t like their own skin; they prefer mine.
We are really hilarious excuses for civilized, mentally healthy people . . .
Joe
Joe, how is it that the women wishing to be whiter has racial undertones while your wishing your skin to ‘brown up’ is not?
cvj,
One is for social stature that denies who they really are, as if it were not good enough,
the other, me, is trying to avoid cancer in the tropics.
Joe
Ah, ok then.
UP n Grad,
http://filipinovoices.com/arroyos-chicken-ranch-economy/comment-page-1#comment-108008
Disregarding the idea of sending a corpse to jail for at least a 1 year term in Bilibid instead of burying it; what effect on government were you actually hoping for when you recommended your Constitutional amendment?
Chino F,
I took a peek at your site.
Would you care to reiterate your thoughts on “dictatorship” on this thread?
Thanks for reading my blog and giving a reaction. What exactly do you mean, my intro on the thread and the article on dictatorship?
If you mean the article, maybe I can take a few snippets:
Here’s the link to the article so you can have a peek:
http://chinocracy.blogspot.com/2008/08/best-and-worst-government.html
My blog posts are tongue-in-cheek pieces (well, many of yours are too). I wrote this after pondering on others saying that dictatorship is needed to control the Filipino people. For me, dictatorship has been tried on our country with no success… but for many reasons aside from the dictatorship too. And yes, I still believe the latter part of Quezon’s statement, “it will improve,” hasn’t come true.
BTW, some would call Lee Kuan Yew a dictator. I wouldn’t. He just made strict rules and enforced them well. I think Singaporean culture encourages discipline too. A far cry from our own rules that are also strict, but barely enforced, along with a culture that says it’s manly to get away with it. Culture or the majority can become a dictator too.
Chino F,
I thought you would have guessed by now where I would have been pointing to.
I think that is clear enough to indicate that you acknowledge that the country has gone through a dictatorship.
You yourself restated that a dictatorship is the worst government and as per your blog, you stated the best human government is a democracy.
MLQ didn’t qualify in that quote how much of an improvement we can have; only that a bad Filipino government can always be improved.
So, given your thoughts on “dictatorship”; is a non-dictatorship government already an improvement from a dictatorship that you already admit has been tried on the country?
If you answer yes; then you have already validated MLQ and we can both move on.
The dictatorship is gone, yes, but little has improved. The country is still run like hell. And remember I said even democracy isn’t perfect. The switch from dictatorship to democracy doesn’t automatically mean improvement. And MLQ isn’t the only one to blame. The people share as much responsibility. And did MLQ mean that even if there’s still improvement, it can still be run like hell? I didn’t validate him. There’s still a long way to go.
As i mentioned above, one thing that has remained constant in our society is its inequality. Whether it be the post-WW2 republic, the Martial Law years, or the Post-EDSA administrations, the level of inequality has remained consistently high. That’s why our economy cannot take off as fast as our neighbors, whether they be communist (like China & Vietnam), capitalist (like Taiwan & Korea), authoritarian (like Singapore) or democratic (like India).
It cannot take off because it did not pass measures that address inequality. Specifically:
Shape or ship out. Thus, far it’s sinking boat and you wonder why :)
BongV, i agree with you on genuine land reform. Regarding foreign investments, the hoped for large influx will have to wait until our domestic investment activitiy takes off. That’s been the pattern in our neighbors i.e. foreign investments came in after the local economy started growing fast, not the other way around. )
If what you’re advocating is to loosen constitutional restrictions on land ownership to foreigners, then that may conflict with your first advocacy of promoting genuine land reform as locals will be crowded out by big the foreign concessions working with their local partners (i.e. SMC-Kuok type plantations, mining concessions etc.)
Cvj, BongV,
Land reform means, what, government mandated acquisition of private lands and redistribution to less well-off private landholders, with the government making up the shortfall in value between what current landholders believe is the long term value of the land and the near-term market value, which is pegged at what a hectare of rice can generate, which is near zilch-negative? Somewhere in there are time-adjusted values and the fact that the government is debt-laden and can’t afford this, and lack of farming skills that preclude the value of the land from being realized, and all kinds of problems. Rat’s nest to the 26th power.
I say scrap land reform if that is what it means. Zone land professionally and thoughtfully. Assess taxes rationally. Open ownership up to foreign investors. Regulate mining and land usage with care. Let the market sort out the landholding.
Joe
Joe, is your argument that while it is *desirable*, it is not *affordable*?
Re: affordability, it’s not like we’re the first country implementing this. We should then look into how Vietnam, China, Taiwan and Korea did their land reforms. Here in Singapore, i have a friend who’s family’s farmer was also taken for public housing and road works. At the time these countries executed their respective land reforms in the 50′s and 60′s, they were poorer than us. As far as affordability is concerned, it’s not like we are buying land or commodity from abroad. It’s Philippine land so it’s more a matter of political will.
We must remember that Land Reform is also about getting the rich away from the land. Our rich people have been focused for too long on the low hanging fruits of land and real estate ventures (not to mention malls and government awarded monopolies.) Their investments go to more productive areas like manufacturing. If we want to have our own Toyota’s, LG’s, Hua Wei’s, we have to make large scale land ownership a losing proposition as an investment opportunity. Then their capital would flow to the other sectors which would generate more return.
Once that’s done, then your “Let the market sort it out” approach would have more of a chance. First thing’s first.
sorry, the above should’ve read “who’s family’s farmland“.
I’ll take my this as my cue to nitpick as well.
(When in Rome … you know the rest.)
If the improvement is significant, then great! Let’s keep that up. We’re all for it.
But when improvement (like, say, in the last 2 decades plus plus) is marginal, minimal, negligible, imaginary, or just far off-target, then the latter part of “because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved” means just as much.
If you were 400lbs overweight and lost 1lb many pathetic years of trying, will you be able to contain yourself after seeing this “improvement?” Didn’t think so.
Cvj,
Thanks for the perspective. I’m like a novice swimmer thrown into the the high seas on this. I suppose what you say also explains why land along the National Highway sells for P2,000 sq m while inland farmland sells for P200. Highest value is commercial, and the greedy rascals want highest value. But I rather think that if the Philippines taught farmers to be agribusiness professionals, and gave them a boost by setting quality standards and building export pipelines, the value of the inland land would increase and market pricing and allocation would shift to favor a “middle class” of producers. South America (e.g., Chile) thrives on ag exports. Here, the most fertile land in Asia largely languishes with struggling coconut, sugar cane and banana farms and inefficient, hand-farmed rice production that cannot meet demand. Meanwhile Nestles is crying for more coffee and Mars is begging for more cocoa and Luzon vegetables are in short supply because Baguio (sp?), veggie capital of the nation, was plastered by four typhoons.
The system seems to lack integrity to me, and I fail to see how re-distributing land will create any more economic value. However, creating markets and market competitiveness will create value.
Joe
Joe, let me be clear, i did not say leave the farmers alone to their own devices. Surely, promoting good farming practices is part of the mix. And on this matter, it is important to emphasize that the methods that we need to teach marginal farmers are not those of large agribusiness because the scale is different. An American entrepreneur, Paul Polak wrote a book “Out Of Poverty” which describes his successful experiences in making small (as in a fraction of a hectare) farmer become self sufficient and self-sustaining. He lamented the fact that most R&D is geared towards large scale farming.
South American style corporate farming is just another form of collectivization. The only difference is that the former is under the supervision of large corporations and not the State. Redistribution of land is important because the goal is to make farmers self-sustaining entrepreneurs, not employees of large plantations (even if disguised as ‘stockholders’). Deng’s reforms and Vietnam’s reforms in the 70′s veered away from their previous attempts at large scale collectivization towards allowing small farmers to keep a larger share of the profits.
cvj,
Got it. We are properly aligned. Thanks.
Joe
Chino F,
MLQ meant that even if there’s improvement but still run like hell; it can still/always be improved.
The government may regress from such improvement but that can still/always be improved.
I contend that there was some improvement; you contend that there was no improvement whatsoever.
I would contend that a shift from a government that “takes away freedoms to get the power and oppress to stay in it” to a government that “allows people to practice the God-given freedoms they have, while allowing them to bargain among themselves for how to exercise power” is already an improvement whether that be marginal, minimal, … .
How the people exercise those God given freedoms is already irrelevant to the issue of whether the people have the power or not have the power to exercise said God given freedoms.
You want to dictate how the people exercise those? What happens to the bargaining part?
Since you are contending that there was in fact no improvement on shifting from one to the other; it therefore follows that having a government that “takes away freedoms to get the power and oppress to stay in it” is no different from having a government that “allows people to practice the God-given freedoms they have, while allowing them to bargain among themselves for how to exercise power”.
Since such is your case; why are you choosing one over the other when there is supposed to be no improvement between the two?
Filo,
And what would your recommendation be? Stop trying to lose weight?
And since you brought this up in the context of government; when improvement (like, say, in the last 2 decades plus plus) is marginal, minimal, negligible, imaginary, or just far off-target; are you proposing that people should stop trying to improve government?
To stop trying was your idea jl, not mine. Nowhere in what I wrote did I even remotely suggest to stop trying, so don’t make hasty assumptions.
Which part of “marginal, minimal, negligible, imaginary, or just far off-target” did you not understand when you used these descriptive terms side-by-side with the shift from martial law to democracy? That shift was a major improvement and has nothing to do with the terms minimal, negligible, marginal, imaginary, or far off-target. Someone as clever as yourself has no business getting that one wrong, even if I did quote you on a non-dictatorship being an improvement from a dictatorship; to be clear, I didn’t disagree with that.
What I do disagree with are: [1] how “it could always be improved” is applied to a fault – which relates to my agreeing with UP n grad’s sarcastic remark; and [2] how some people couldn’t grasp other people’s dissatisfaction with improvement that is marginal/minimal/negligible/imaginary/just far off-target.
Justice League,
Let’s just say that there were some improvements… but they’re not enough. The country needs to do better. Yes, we can still improve the Philippines, but there are a lot of factors that stunt this improvement, or at least slow it down. If there’s anything that has no improvement, it’s in the way Filipinos address these factors: amor propio, insistence on keeping things the same, greed, bahala na, etc. To use Filo’s analogy, let’s stop from thinking of a 1 pound reduction as a raging success, and instead gun for losing more pounds. Nice analogy, losing pounds… aside from gaining or adding something, we have to lose a few things too. Lose some attitude, some cultural aspects, etc.
Chino F,
So in the end you do validate MLQ.
Well then.
super friends!
all this quibbling for an inconsequential point sir?ano po punto niyo,na okey lang ang lahat?na walang kelangang baguhin?
anything po that a pinoy can worsen “can be improved” afterwards,kaya ayun nagworsen year after year kahit wala ng martial law.50 years from now,”can be improved” pa rin motto ng pinoy.pahiya tayo kay pres.quezon dahil magaling tayong magpalala.
I prefer to scrap the pork barrel and reallocate it to land acquisition.
Each of the 214 congressmen is allocated 60 million pesos (roughly USD1.5 million) for spending at his discretion, and each of the 24 senators receives twice that amount – with no real oversight or accountability
(source: http://philippines.suite101.com/article.cfm/institutionalized_corruption)
If congressmen can afford to pay $20,000 for state dinners – specially when it is pulled from their pork barrel – I say the government can afford land reform.
Filo,
So you admit that you quoted me.
Are you going to admit now that the quote was a reply to someone whose initial idea was “And the latter part hasn’t come true. It was probably Quezon’s hope that the bad government would improve, but even he can’t see what would happen to his country in the future. Improve in probably, say, 500 years?” and “It’s still bad government and hasn’t improved.”?
Maybe you should read now the 1st sentence of his paragraph. http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-111149
Dong,
My point is to complete the insufficiency of what you sought to remind us with.
Maybe you should re-read all of my posts in this thread again.
jl,
On the matter of the Philippines coming out of a dictatorship and becoming democratic as (a significant) improvement, we agree.
On your pressing that any wee bit of improvement “whether that be marginal, minimal, [DOT DOT DOT]” (ellipses are very convenient when one doesn’t want to include “imaginary” and “off-target” in quoting other people but want to push on with the same argument, aren’t they?) is IMPROVEMENT all the same, we disagree. As far as being okay with that sort of magnitude of improvement, speak for yourself. You do admit having said these gems, right?
Heck, you could drive anything rock bottom AND THEN say “it could still be improved.” Maybe you should read the last paragraph of this comment
http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-110793
and ponder the concept.
Oh boy, lost one pound. Yahu.
If you want to celebrate, that’s your business.
399 pounds to go, dude. Go figure.
(You do realize that now we’re not talking about gov’t improvements in 1986, right?)
Just an aside, but why is it that your first instinct when faced with negligible, imaginary, far off-target, marginal, or minimal improvements, is to stop trying? Ever heard of trying harder or working smarter to hit the goal?
Filo,
Very well then.
Yes I did and they are aligned to what MLQ meant that a bad Filipino government can always be improved.
I don’t want to celebrate but I figured that the boy would be gaining weight if he didn’t try to lose it. So how much weight would the boy be gaining if he didn’t try to lose weight? Go figure that one out.
Yes I do but I don’t see any of that in your “But when improvement (like, say, in the last 2 decades plus plus) is marginal, minimal, negligible, imaginary, or just far off-target, then the latter part of “because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved” means just as much.”.
I got that from you.
What idea were you imparting when you stated ” … then the latter part of “because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved” means just as much. “?
Dong has a point. If one really respects MLQ1 (and MLQ3), I agree, shouldn’t we make his second part of the quote true? But we haven’t done it. Onga, nakakahiya nga, the Phils. has failed MLQ1. Time to strive for something better.
Chino F,
Maybe it would have been better if you had stated “If one really respects MLQ1 (and MLQ3), I agree, shouldn’t we continue making the second part of the quote true?”.
But you didn’t.
So you’re back again to “If one really respects MLQ1 (and MLQ3), I agree, shouldn’t we make his second part of the quote true? But we haven’t done it.” when previously you already stated “Let’s just say that there were some improvements… but they’re not enough.”
Make up your mind already!
My mind’s made up anyway. Guess I minced my words… I mean “we haven’t done it” as “haven’t done enough improvement.” And I follow the standard that says, if it isn’t enough, then it’s as good as nothing. Still, the Phils. needn’t have been run like hell in the beginning. But since it was, guess we have no choice then. Improve or fall.
Maybe here’s another point where we disagree: what Pinoys have been doing to make those small improvements you consider good enough, I consider not enough and we need to do something different. Like elect someone not because he’s popular but because he’s got the real qualifications and intellect. Well, that’s just one out of many things.
I see you’re lost in the analogy already. True to form, you nitpick even the irrelevant, jl. Stick with the subject so you’ll be able to follow please.
Your having NOT seen that option isn’t my problem or homework. When you crash into a parked car because you didn’t see it, you can’t blame that car can you? Tsk tsk, one more and it’s game over for you.
Oooh, blaming somebody else now for your embarrassing affinity for mediocrity, jl? Puh-leeze. You can’t even quote any part of what I’ve said that suggests giving up was my logical next move. Presumptive and flatfooted suits you quite well though.
So you do admit that you missed it yourself. The thought of trying harder or working smarter did not occur to you so immediately you thought it best to stop trying. Why, that’s exactly what the problem is! It’s the opposite of what Quezon would have wanted, but the sad reality very easily came out of you, jl. It’s a bit of a revelation, but no surprise. Even dong had you figured out.
Let me get you off the hook so you could celebrate your 1lb weight loss: (Pay attention mmmkay? Be vewy vewy quiet- )
Another hint in case of shortage in comprehension: Degree of improvement is proportional to how meaningful said improvement is.
No indication of “hey stop trying” there.
sir justice league,
binasa ko po lahat ng posts ninyo.tama pa rin ako sa pagkakabasa ko sa inyo.na ipinaglalaban niyo ang sobrang nakakabilib na improvements sa gobyerno ng pinas kaya ma-nitpick daw po kayo.totoo nga po sabi nila,medyo lame mga ikinukulit niyo po kasi simpleng simpleng bigo ang demokratikong gobyernong pinoy sa maraming bagay at maraming kelangan ayusin.bago po kayo mamilosopo,hindi ko nirerekominda kumunistang regime.
kung kukumpletuhin niyo quote ni quezon,sana po intindihin niyo rin yung quote.
ok naman intentions ni quezon sa sinabi niya,pero pinoys waste every opportunity to improve government ngayong meron tayong demokrasya.we pinoys are irresponsible w/ democracy.nakakalungkot.
Filo,
That is actually applicable to you.
Oh you want me to quote you where that was suggested. Very well, read below.
Nope. Like I said, I got that from you.
Sheeesh. And you had to repeat that.
Since you want me to show you; I’ll do that to your original statement.
Look at the bold part.
But when improvement (like, say, in the last 2 decades plus plus) is marginal, minimal, negligible, imaginary , or just far off-target, then the latter part of “because however bad a Filipino government might be, it can always be improved” means just as much.
I’ll do that now to your repetition (which actually makes it easier for me since you added the meaning)
When improvement is
marginal
or minimal
or negligible
or imaginary
or far off-target, then
“it can always be improved” means
just as much
(meaning marginal
or minimal
or negligible
or imaginary
or far off-target, whichever corresponds).
So go ahead. Show everyone how trying harder or working smarter is going to make a difference when “it can always be improved” is IMAGINARY.
How can you improve it when that it can be improved is IMAGINARY?
So what’s the logical next step?
I told you I got that from you.
Nope he didn’t.
Dong,
Yes I do on both counts.
It’s now your turn to quote any part of what I’ve said that “sobrang nakakabilib na improvements sa gobyerno ng pinas.”
Chino F,
You wrote so much about Democracy.
I would agree that the shift to Democracy isn’t enough and we need to improve more but I wouldn’t discount that as “as good as nothing”. Even Filo wouldn’t agree with you.
What was that, jl?
(sound of crickets)
Miss something again?
Keep ‘em coming. Haha
———
dong,
He’ll be talking to the hand real soon, don’t you worry.
———
Chino F.,
No need to further expound on what you were trying to say. Your dissatisfaction with the magnitude of improvement in governance is understandable and corresponds to what I described earlier. Somebody we both know was absent when figure of speech was taken up in school. Cheers man!
Looks like the mod has spoken.
Filo,
That’s not a part of your earlier post so it doesn’t affect what was highlighted there.
But if you want to show if it has an effect on your “repetition”, do answer this: When improvement is imaginary; “it can always be improved” correspondingly means just as much as what?
Choose your answer from marginal or minimal or negligible or imaginary
or far off-target.
Then you might want to come back to answer “How can you improve it when that it can be improved is IMAGINARY?”
You want to be quoted, well you got quoted.
And you are likely to see this linked in the future http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-111482
Dong,
I actually got to read your post before it got deleted.
Anyway, I saw that you stated “ok naman intentions ni quezon sa sinabi niya … ” in http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-111471
Since MLQ’s intentions were ok to you anyway; can you kindly tell everybody why you posted an incomplete version of MLQ’s statement?
key points learned:
(agreeing with apanfilo’s brief comment) mlq’s quote was a rhetorical device, that which filipinos have failed to comply with properly, save for the shift from martial rule to democratic government
because we always have this second chance to improve, we take it for granted year after year (which would explain upngrad’s crafty comments)
the unacceptably small improvements in government since 1986 edsa revolution have resulted in voices of dissent similar to chino’s, filo’s, dong’s, and apparently upngrad’s as well
mlq isn’t being blamed here; it’s just that the leadership we have is so far from ideal (i got the weight loss analogy)
degree of improvement does matter a lot, so marginal improvement translates to marginally meaningful changes that benefit the common filipino, minimal translates to minimal, and so on
there may be more people out there who feel the same way as chino about how little has changed for the better (no worries bro, i know the word “nothing” was a figure of speech)
we struggle to call “improvement” the unacceptable things we live with like institutionalized corruption (thanks for the link bong!) and media-driven personality politics because it’s an obvious contradiction
the tendency of pinoys to give up almost immediately and pin the blame on somebody else is virtually irresistible, which highlights a society-wide problem
“talk to the hand” is really funny when it actually applies to the situation =vP
cheers!
whoops! the bullet points are missing.
it’s supposed to look something like this:
Cheers too, Filo, and others. It has been an interesting discussion after all.
Parallax,
Very interesting.
There was this guy who stated “You do admit having said these gems, right?”.
And then quoted my statements:
“MLQ meant that even if there’s improvement but still run like hell; it can still/always be improved.
The government may regress from such improvement but that can still/always be improved.”
And then he added “Heck, you could drive anything rock bottom AND THEN say “it could still be improved.””
So clearly the guy knew that I was pro-improvement through and through.
(We were a democracy, then the dictatorship came, and now we are a democracy again. So clearly we had a regression but improved back.)
Yet on the same post he charges that I’m okay with marginal, minimal, … magnitude of improvement even though he’s going to quote the part where I say ” … it can still/always be improved.”
If someone was actually okay with such magnitude of improvement, why would that someone imply that such magnitude can still/always be improved? Why not go for status quo instead if such magnitude of improvement was actually okay?
Then lo and behold in the same post ; the guy insinuates that my first instinct when faced with negligible, imaginary, far off-target, marginal, or minimal improvements, is to stop trying. The nerve of the guy.
Go check it out. http://filipinovoices.com/quezon-for-senator/comment-page-1#comment-111290
Well he got shown where that “stop trying” thing actually came from. It came from him.
Very interesting.
Cheers.
Hey Chino, dong, Parallax, glad to see the important lessons weren’t lost on you guys even though dong’s sock puppet idea was not very helpful but definitely funny. If anything, Filipinos would benefit in adopting a Get It Right The First Time mentality to progress faster in everything. A mentality of no giving up, no round 2, just a full commitment to making the best choices in the shortest possible time. That mindset couldn’t be any simpler. Maybe if pinoys could take on challenges like that then President Quezon wouldn’t be shaking his head up in the clouds and we wouldn’t be so frustrated with our leaders or life in general. Cheers!
I hope “pride” this time will not be misunderstood. When the Philippines borrowed money to go to heaven, the borrower in charge put the filipino in hell. The creditor however expected that the money will grow like a real tree. It did not because it was spent somewhere else. When did the debt started to grow and when did we defaulted? It was after the famous quote..
I do like Manolo personally. Yes… let him replace one of the old senator.. I am tired of those people. I’d rather give Manolo a chance to prove himself rather than giving the old ones another chance to prove nothing.
leytenian,
I am with you girl.
But for now, I refrain from being pertinacious.
Jesus, I can’t believe everybody’s arguing over that old Quezon quote. Can’t you guys recognize a piece of rhetorical device even if it hits you in the head?
Peace.
I’ll try to be clear, boys and girls. Quezon made that famous quote during the Independence movement. Without looking in the history books, I can guess that Quezon was speaking to critics who were saying that we’re not ready yet for independence. His famous line was not racist at all. It just meant that independence–sovereignty–is the highest virtue of a nation, of a people.
Nominal independece was granted several years later after the famous quote. The Americans, however, made sure that we continued to be a colony via the parity rights and the Bell Trade Act.
True, true, these are valid historical facts. But you know the context of most analysts (and some of our presumptuous bloggers here) today: they are prone to analyzing the things of the past without considering the past situations. Even Rizal was rebuked for this by Ferdinand Blumentritt when the latter wrote the foreword to the former’s edition of Morga.
But you also have to see the context of that quote in contemporary history. Marcos, being the Commonwealth baby he is and his desire to fabricate a national myth on his image, also used the spirit of that quote and tried to twist it against Malaysia in his attempt to wrest Sabah. Sure, we have historical value to claim Sabah but the methods Marcos employed (particularly Operation Jabidah) was so national fundamentalist it robbed the statement of its nobility.
The Bangsa Moro have more valid claims to Sabah than the artifical state created in 1947 by colonial edict – the Philippines. Operation Jabidah was paid for by the blood of the moro not the indio.
Ok, now you are touching on a larger question. We can proceed from that.
You are probably not aware that our Moro connections during the Commonwealth period were tacitly, though underhandedly, preserved despite the problematic relationship at the public eye. Patricio Abinales has documented that Moro leaders have been always willing to cooperate with the “indios” in establishing an independent Philippine state – if you would like to make the distinction. For all our talk on calling the Commonwealth a bullshit colonialist projet by the US, the emancipators and negotiators who chose the liberal means of securing a functioning state had no other option. See Japan’s cooperation with the US and how they eventually worked on it. It’s probably our problem on overuse of hindsight perhaps?
And I would give it to you that the Moros were the ones involved: but have not the emancipation movements clarified from Bonifacio onwards that all indigenous inhabitants of these 7,107 islands are Filipinos? Why revive the colonial labels we have disposed? Sen. Aquino Jr. have said it when he was fiscalizing on Jabidah, as you would say above: politically they have no favors to pay to the Moros for their supporting the Nacionalista party, but they are nevertheless part of the Philippine demos?
Fundamentalists robbing a statement of its nobility. When they the Jabidah people get angry , the sound effects include Allahu akhbar!!! Blammm, blammm, blammm, kabloooieee!!!! And people die.
Fundamentalists robbing the statement “Allahu akhbar” of its nobility.
apanfilo,
Not racist at all.
Funny though, and it’s ironic how my friends react, when I tell them I am bringing some cogñac and the very finest tequilas that jose can muster. Their reply, “Hell Yeah.”
Is that, “Hell Yeah,” mario’s bringing home free booze…!
Or, is it, “Hell Yeah,” we’re getting rip tonight…!
Really, it could go on and on…!
So, Hell Yeah…!
mario,
speak english ples! will somebody interpret what this alien was saying so i can respond to what he’s blabbering about?
Bert,
“Quezon made that famous quote during the Independence movement.”- comment from apanfilo.
Let me educate you a wee bit Bert.
What is “Hell” translated to you.
“Hell” comes in many forms of figuritive speech.
Was Manuel Quezon saying, to run our country down by Filipinos. When he stated “hell”.
Or did he meant, “hell” we got our country back from the Americans.
And this is not a racist statement.
True i was off tangent, but “Hell Yeah”.
Lets find out if Bert has any brains at all. If you can’t figure this out for yourself, and have to ask everyone for an opinion. You must be a MORON.
That’s better, mario. akala ko kasi bulol ka.
People are not contributing to the discussion…
masanay na po kayo.ganito talaga kahit saan na may debate.paborito ko:
http://filipinovoices.com/beavis-and-butthead
marami pong passionate makipagebate dito pero madami ding mapapel.madaming emosyonal,madaming cerebral,lahat kapamilya
Hansley Juliano,
So True, and I do apologize.
I had to defend myself, from an unpleasant remark.
Let’s all get back to the main subject.
Well, better than Piolo Pascual running for the senate.
MLQ3 and BF are not individuals we can put in the same weighing scale, hence the seeming perception of double standard of morality.
BF has been abandoned by the Party in power which means precisely that him and MLQ3 are apple and orange, respectively – not the same fruits.
I hate historians who may have made distortions of history on account of their role as historian for someone else’ subjectivity.
Engineers are pretty not like historians.
My casual perception of MLQ3 is one that should be taken in the context of the link or blog that cvj has suggested and it is of no moment how much better I ought to know MLQ3. Sure I remember that he participates in this blogsite from time to time but as to whether I like or love reading his columns is out of the question.
MLQ3 will not even run for Senate, before we know it all and yet here we are in an orgy of drafting someone without his full acknowledgment. We might end up wasting our time discussing about the commonplace life of a writer in a universe of writers.
Speaking of DOUBLE STANDARD OF MORALITY, we need only revisit the past right here at FV when this author was accused of reducing FV as a carrier and of having been co-opted.
Everyone, one way or other, has been, witting or unwitting carrier if not totally co-opted. To validate this supposition, again, we need only to travel back in time – who did some bloggers endorse openly, with zeal, with rotten bias, whatever.
So, if at any moment, one issues his ‘imprimatur’, couldn’t it be then said that whoever that person is might be said not to have practiced what he preached?
This doesn’t at all refer to Nick, some others.
Well, I tweeted about this and asked him for his reaction. His reply was a short “eek.” I guess that means he has no plans of running =D
To be fair to MLQ3, I personally believe he is far better qualified to comment on and make recommendations with regard to many of the critical issues and challenges that Filipinos face than most popularly-elected politicians (most of whom, well, merely reflect and parrot popular sentiment).
Trouble is, the reason he has free rein to do so is because of his current situation as an outsider in the Politico-Industrial boys club that imprisons the Philippines’ future fortunes.
Nowadays, specially, the position of the Philippines as a chronic regional laggard is becoming a bigger in-your-face reality than ever as this report shows:
A composite scorecard for the Philippines
2009 Edition
[Download report in PDF format]
This report is extracted from a larger, global study which combines survey and statistical data from a number of country assessment rankings, with the objective to develop a single assessment metric. The study finds that the Philippines remains below-average in overall performance on a global scale, and is significantly behind most of its competitors and trading partners in the Asia-Pacific region.
Recommendations for how this study can be used by policy-makers and business stakeholders as well as suggestions for further research are offered as a conclusion.
More importantly, the timing of the release of this report coincides makes it relevant in the on-going national political “debate”; specifically along the lines of:
(1) A Guide for Candidates: With few exceptions, the candidates and the political parties that support them have not developed specific, substantive, issue-based platforms. The issues are clearly defined by this study, those in which the Philippines is lagging behind the rest of the region and the world as well as those which are showing some positive signs. Regardless if the candidates attempt to address the issues or are simply content to offer meaningless rhetoric and buzzwords, the scores in this study define the job the winning candidate will have to do.
(2) A Guide for Voters: Likewise, the indicators in this study can serve as a standard against which the voters can judge the candidates and demand clear plans. Voters can determine for themselves whether candidates who describe themselves as having “political will” or being a “fiscalizer” are actually offering solutions to problems such as the high incidence of tuberculosis in the country, or the poor representation of women in the workforce.
(3) A Guide for Investors and Business Interests: Those considering doing business in the Philippines or expanding an existing business can use the results of the study to accurately access the overall climate in which they would be operating, and compare it to other areas of opportunity within the region. Similarly, government can use the results to promote investment in areas that would be mutually beneficial to both the country and businesses, such as making improvements in the transportation infrastructure, or developing the moribund ICT sector.
Check it out here and make the true situation of the Philippines REAL for you.
The above report makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR what our political candidates needs to be discussing TODAY and OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS leading up to the 2010 Elections. Any other form or nature of “engagement” with the electorate other than what is highlighted in the above report is utterly IRRELEVANT and a waste of everyone’s time.
yeah, coz he’s one (of 2?) guys who’s provided a blurb for your book :) [this is good natured ribbing, btw]
You want to read some amusing entries and not-so-amusing entries, go check NoyNoy interview (his land-reform/ agriculture policies, Mindanao peace, pursuing legal cases against GMA and Miguel Arroyo and BongBong, his approach to better governance):
http://www.verafiles.org/index.php/first-person/373-noynoy-no-point-in-competing-with-my-parents?start=2
My officemates in a BPO office are in unison as to who the next president should be. We need erap back in office. If Erap wins, we are almost assured of a P65-70 to a dollar exchange rate. The higher, the better for us in the BPO businesses. Pls make it happen. Erap for pres. If not, we’ll settle for villar though as this sonomagun surely knows how to steal also. go philippines.
Yes, thank you for being so desperate you will allow this aborted nation any chance of getting to an incubator. How selfish can you get, seriously?
This stupid, un-thought-of statement above shows exactly why politics should not be used to solve social questions. Nazi Germany got its legitmacy because of it. Stalinist Russia lasted so far because of it. The US has been its champion since forever. Extremist nationalism and social desperation are very good ingredients to allow totalitarian states taking over.
With your thinking in the BPO sector, I don’t wonder why this administration is deluded into prostituting this nation.