I know Randy David to be an excellent writer and scholar and I have memories of him from his talk show, Public Forum, when I was much younger. While I ‘know’ him from what he has written and said on TV, I have only met him once. Shortly after the Hello Garci scandal broke, I heard him speak in a little powwow along with some people from Akbayan. He did an excellent summation of how the Marcos era destroyed many of our institutions and why we seem to have been in a permanent state of crisis since. Given his audience, he outlined the role of the civil society and of the middle class. For this he admitted he remained a singularly bourgeois scholar. He spoke for well over an hour without notes, without pause. I was impressed. It may well have been any one of his lectures of the past few decades but he delivered it with the surety of one who professes only truth as he saw it.
People who produce knowledge, scholars such as Professor David, are tasked by their vocation to be critical of the status quo. It is the culture of the academe, especially in the social sciences, where all concepts are in a constant state of contestation. This culture of critique, by nature, is questioning. Ideas are an academic’s currency. And ideas are only upheld for as along as they can be convincingly defended. These debates are done in a collegial atmosphere, where truth and malice would be bed partners aberrant.
Today the good professor proclaims his intention to run for public office – an arena where malice is a constant. In politics there are no truths, no ideals. There is only what is pragmatic. And while Professor David is no tyro in the public eye, I worry that he has not the skills to fight the dirty fight in a battle with the most powerful person in the land. He would contest a most skilled politician with an incumbent’s financial and political resources. Asked where he would get the resources to campaign, he blithely replied if he runs maybe it would come.
My admiration for Professor David is not new, and I am ecstatic he has strongly expressed interest in running for Congress in 2010. It is perhaps the natural evolution of one who has over the decades tirelessly described this patch of the world. Frustration after frustration, inutile at the sidelines, he has probably realized the time is ripe to change it.
I would donate P500 pesos to support Professor David as he embarks on an impossible quest to slay a monster. Imagine if there were thousands more of you who would do the same.
Popularity: 1% [?]
where can I send a thousand pesos?
he is not running for office in my city and district, but I would like to support him too, let us know where we can send money for his campaign. if he has a website which can take donations – I will be glad to put in some hard-earned mullah – and encourage my friends to support Randy David, too.
Make that 2,000.
To Ding: Is Primer espousing B-Fernando2010 the exception (you know… you telling Primer not to do electioneering on FilipinoVoice). Or is sparks’ support for Prof David the exception?
West-coast group (Seattle, LA, Vancouver) — UP grads (various campuses), many are now entrepreneurs, some connected to European money — are organizing for Randy David. These are same guys who sent $$$ to Walden Bello.
Mimicking the epic saga of David v. Goliath. He has one upside. His surname is David. David the servant son did win against the proud Philistine warrior Goliath. But he was a believer and Randy is not. From the looks of it, the Kapampangans have long been deserted by their Gods. Lahar has devastated the province, and one proud “kabalen” has failed to become the pride of the entire archipelago. Many have called her names from the most elegant, the “Queen” to the most sobering sobriquet, “labanderang pandak”.
What has Randy got to offer other than standing before the grandeous but diminutive Queen hoping that by simply stepping up to the plate he could already define himself as the anti-thesis of the Queen? The Queen has a considerable following in her district and the perception of her in that place could be the opposite of what some of us would have perceived the Queen. In which case, the perception of who is the villain and the heroine is completely switchable, and truth to tell, the Metro Manila villain could be the generous and adorable Queen of that district in Pampanga.
Pampanga could very well be the microcosm of the nationwide electorate psyche of having elected Erap over some cerebrals like Roco, Miriam Defensor, or Emilio Osmena. But the analogy is a little bit off because though Mr. David is a professor of note, the Queen holds a degree in economics from a U.S. university. It is an uphill battle for Mr. David, but will pledge P1,000 just to see him on the ring.
One correction JCC, the queen has no degree from any US university. She got her degree from the Assumption, She didn’t complete her course in Georgetown.
buencamino,
you were right but her economics degree were from Ateneo and UP.
In August of that year, she married José Miguel (“Mike”) Tuason Arroyo. She received a master’s degree in economics from Ateneo de Manila University in 1978. She completed a doctorate in economics at the University of the Philippines (UP) in 1985.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2008. © 1993-2007 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
jcc,
i think randy offers more than just his hatred of gloria. i think what we need most are visionary leaders, people who have the vision and the wherewithal and the skills to use our resources for the benefit of all.
the analogy that i like to use in this scenario is this—of a David fighting a demon enfant, a pigmy but with a monster (as what caffeine_sparks said) behind her.
name-calling will get you nowhere, mangubat. it will only turn-off would-be supporters of randy david. you are not helping him, i think, with your hateful rantings.
thats good for the people of pampangga!
patricio,
no one is saying that David’s plan to run against GMA is fueled purely by personal hatred.
i’m sorry i don’t / can’t share your high regard for prof. david, not since i learned that his department of sociology continues to refuse prof. sarah raymundo tenure, despite her having fulfilled ALL requirments, and WITHOUT explaining why, and WITHOUT giving her a chance to defend herself.
“I worry that he has not the skills to fight the dirty fight in a battle with the most powerful person in the land.”
well he certainly has the skills to fight the dirty fight in a battle against powerless leftists in the academe. no wonder partylist congressman mong palatino tags him a fashionable ex-radical like bobi tiglao, mike defensor, and alex magno.
http://www.mongpalatino.us.splinder.com/post/612322/The+Other+Radicals
This — digging up as much as you can from the past about a congressman/senator/malacanang-resident wannabee — is how it is supposed to be.
the “Pinoy”-attitude of being forgiving of indiscretions –”Maliit na bagay lang iyan, pabayaan mo na.” — is deadly-stupid when it comes to candidates for political office.
was david dead set against her? do u know why?
I don’t know that politicking in the university can be comparable to politicking in government.
Compromising on principles, for example, will see leftists colluding with landlords to derail CARP-ER.
but maybe sparks, the goal must be to acquire more knowledge about the “leftists” you speak of. because they do come in many hues of red in this country. realizing this will allow us all to see where prof. david stands in the greater scheme of things, and in the tenure case of prof. sarah raymundo.
can you be more specific, who are these “leftists” colluding with landlords to derail CARP-ER?
from legal standpoint, the tenure of professors are decided by their peers in the academic community. technically, they can be dismissed at will. i followed the post of mr. danny arao and what i have gathered from his post was that the woman professor at the sociology department or which prof. david is the head, was terminated based on the majority vote of the professors in the department.
but mr. arao’s query is legit though, for Prof. David to explain why despite the qualification of this particular professor she was let go by the department… but intellectual fitness is not the only gauge in assuring one’s tenure in the academic community … there are other factors which maybe prof. david can care to explain.
From what I gather, Prof. Raymundo had the majority when the faculty of the Department voted on her tenure. Now, one professor (Prof. Walden Bello who voted for Prof. Raymundo’s tenure) resigned to be a member of the House of Representatives and another retired.
Now, Prof. David is saying that Prof. Raymundo does not have the majority. She did when the vote was taken. Where’s due process in that?
The members of the faculty of the Department, of which Prof. David is now chairperson, never presented their allegations to Prof. Raymundo. She never had the chance to explain her side. Where’s due process in that?
The implications boggle the mind:
http://kapirasongkritika.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/dalawang-taon-na/
Prof. David, for all his talk about due process (derived from Weber) and communicative rationality (derived from Habermas) does not seem to practice these in his Department.
“People who produce knowledge, scholars such as Professor David, are tasked by their vocation to be critical of the status quo. It is the culture of the academe, especially in the social sciences, where all concepts are in a constant state of contestation… These debates are done in a collegial atmosphere, where truth and malice would be bed partners aberrant.”
This is a gross simplification, a romanticization of the academe that is not at all supported by facts. Do we have to be reminded of how academics supported the Marcos dictatorship, for example? Of how they are not at all critical of the status quo?
Sa tingin ko, dapat sumuporta tayo sa taong lalaban kay Gloria sa pagka-kongresista ng isang distrito sa Pampanga. Kung si Prop. David iyun, wala akong problemang suportahan siya.
Pero hindi sa batayang napakahusay niyang intelektwal at ang mga akademiko ay may kulturang taliwas sa dominanteng kultura ng pulitika sa bansa. Please lang.
saan nakasulat ang involvement ni prof david sa raymundo tenure case?
Majority is itself an explanation.
Those who shouted ayes in 1109 did not have to explain.
UPN,
I posted a comment on the thread. I have not post a piece on the David candidacy. Kuha mo kaibahan?
You are my self-appointed ‘minder’?
You feel i should castigate Sparks? Go figure.
Was her post a ‘praise release’ in the Primer ‘genre’?
Mag-isip ka naman.
Better yet, sa husay mong yan, bakit nga ba ayaw mong maging contributor?
‘Magaling’ ka naman, o mahusay kang mag-magaling?
Hindi naman siguro.
Sige na, mag contribute ka naman ng sarili mong piyesa.
Para matuto kami.
Ding: you kept mentioning to Primer this rule that Primer should cease/desist from endorsing candidates (and to imitate you — that you will take sabbatical once you endorse a candidate).
Is that policy a FilipinoVoices policy like you kept mentioning to Primer, or your personal preference?
..or your personal preference and nothing more.
Ang tagal mo mag-isip eh….. I’ll take you back to the context of my exchange with Prime.
We were talking about endorsing presidential aspirants in next years elections.
My position here holds.
Kung kaya mong isipin, in like manner if David were running for President, my view about endorsing him would be different.
Sige na. magsulat ka na.
The English reads to me like FilipinoVoices requests Filipinos not to post their (reasons for their) endorsements for President-2010 (but FilipinoVoices approves Filipinos to post their choices for congressional-2010).
Am I reading Ding’s preference, or is the above (which sounds whimsy than policy to me) the FilipinoVoices policy as A-okayed by the owner and his advisers?
My expectations is the policy will be violated up and down the food chain.
But hey… Ding-experience over Pinas pulse of nation and how to run journalism and opinion sites has greater weight than my management science and technology stuff.
I’m cool — I observe to learn.
Hi Mike,
Be well and please do stay with FV.
Pinoy naman tayo lahat.
Di man pare-pareho ang pananaw lagi, isa lang ang bansa natin.
Mangibang bansa man tayo, di mababago ang damdamin natin para sa Inang Bayan.
Maybe we should all preface blogposts mentioning any politician running for office with a caveat – “I am not working for politician so and so.”
So let me just say, I am not in PR and I am not working for Prof. David.
I’m fine with Randy David…he’s a professor and they play an important role in society regardless of their views.
I don’t know if he is ready for the down and dirty world of politics, but who knows? I remember how appalled he was at the conditions at the police station and the holding cells. I had the impression that he is pretty soft.
Anyway, why run for this specific seat? It must be purely anti-GMA and nothing else, eh? But why not get behind someone who has a better chance of winning AND a better chance of handling the job? (Though I see the argument that ANYBODY can handle this job)
But really…why not back someone “stronger”?
RC:
I think David’s position is more than just anti-GMA. Personally, imho, David is a pragmatic ideologue who is left-of-center.
The job involves legislation and yet, by the graces of democracy, we have people like Jalosjos, Triallanes, and Pichay in the legislative body. I will go out on a limb and say Randy David can handle the job better than Jalosjos, Trillanes or Pichay .David’s sociology background is also an asset that he brings to the table.
As to better chance of winning, my take is aren’t we falling into the winnability trap if we take that route?
Shouldn’t we be identifying the candidate who can do the job best and support him to the best of our abilities so that his chances of winning are increased? Isn’t that what passion and commitment to principles entails?
Good points. What’s his platform?
RC:
This is a new development and it would be best to defer to candidate David.
However, here are some indicators – http://books.google.com/books?id=lnyynEeornkC&lpg=PA37&ots=xLPIGtNVCY&dq=randy%20david%20platform&pg=PA37
and he was a speaker at Akbayan recently, I suppose, as an ideologue, he is perceived to share those views and platforms – http://www.akbayan.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=62
I just saw him for an hour on ANC with Ricky C.
Basically, he will only run head-to-head vs GMA on a “No GMA!” basis. He talked about making every contested seat a national — rather than local — contest by bonding against the 170 signatories of 1109. Unfortunately, “all politics are local”.
I still don’t think that message will fly high and far. It would have been great if he had rattled off some new policies or touched on something new and exciting.
Anyway, at least he is not the same old, same old trapo.
Wait! There’s an idea: All the non-trapo types, mostly local guys, should make a new party and come out with a captivating platform. No existing politician can join…nor donate cash. Funding can come from friends and supporters…via the internet, even.
Why doesn’t anyone do that?