The Spirit of ’86 remains an unfinished project.
Take note for example the parallel in how easily the Nazis were de-Nazified and returned to business as usual in Germany and in how discretely the Marcos loyalists were de-Marcosified and allowed to restore themselves to their pre-EDSA statuses (think of Danding who fled with the dictator to exile and Marcos crony Lucio Tan who today are both kingmakers again).
There are others, Manolo Quezon reminds us, who have as quietly reinvented (or recycled) themselves: the Aguilars (and Villars), the Estradas, the Teodoros, the Gordons, and the Escuderos, the Angaras, the Punos, the Cayetanos, to name a few more.
By some stretch, the Yellow Revolution was a sequel to the revolutionary narrative of the Filipinos’ long struggle against oppression by foreign tormentors (or its many current forms) except that the focus then was the fight against the abuses of a locally grown tyrant.
On the other hand, it is painful to imagine how by another twist of fortune some heroes of the EDSA uprising (my mentors, Jojo Binay and Rene Saguisag, come to mind) have seemed to have forgotten about (or abandoned?) the project of ’86.
How could we ever gainsay or minimize the evil of the Marcos regime?
Yet, we have seen how an unlikely copycat, at least at her inauguration to power, has sought to revive the specter of the ignominious era in a variety of sinister plots or designs: making a travesty of the check and balance mechanism such as the impeachment process and legislative oversight, militarizing the executive agency, “packing” the Supreme Court and the COMELEC, and, of course, the constant fiddling with the Cha-cha nuclear option. Of late, even without martial law being declared, we have witnessed the case of 43 “health workers” arrested en masse, held incommunicado and possibly tortured.
Thus, trust in the legitimacy of our fundamental institutions is at a dangerously low point. Our society is in a crisis of trust.
How can the people’s faith be regained? How can we reclaim our basic decency? How can Filipinos be motivated to comply with the minimum prerequisites of a good society?
We have seen repeated accounts of how money and votes are interwoven into the numbers game and technical legalisms; whoever has the most of them is set to gain power. But how can the winner command fealty from the governed based on principles if he or she embodies the absence of moral compass by which to lead? Without value-commitments, such a leader will only recreate the vicious cycle of a dysfunctional society. Yet, the inviolate principles are too universal, too commonsensical, too motherhood to be overlooked: integrity, honesty, fairness and, again, trust.
Truly, we can surmise that one possible route out of this rot is by way of example of authentic leaders, not the exceedingly clever, the most photogenic or the greatest in forensics.
On the other hand, there are various democratic avenues that may be taken to address our dilemma. The formal exercise of sovereign will is one. But if this too turns awry as when the steering media debauches it and deepens the crisis of trust, going back to old-fashioned democracy is a coterminous option. Geography is not even a valid excuse for those who have access to the magic of modern technology. Yes, reasoned discourse among the various sectors of our community with a view to reaching a common understanding offers one of the best hopes for our democracy – at least for now.
In such regard, disagreements and differing views even on core issues are to be expected in the dialogue but we must guard the process against sheer pettiness and corruption at all cost.
As part of this discourse, we ask one question of relevance: Is there an earnest effort from those in position of power to grow the economy so that ordinary people are afforded the opportunity for self-fulfillment or make the state respond to the people’s interests rather than the usual suspect, the special and vested interests?
Concerning now the presidential elections scheduled for the May 2010, we likewise ask these questions: Who among the candidates is the fair personification of the vision being suggested: inclusion, consultation, transparency, participation? Who is promising to exact accountability instead of impunity? Who demands almost innocently that we follow the True North of the moral compass – kung ano ang tama?
Lest we forget, it’s well to note that the political exercise is not just about those who aspire to lead. It is also about the community writ large, us.
Are we up to the challenge of self-empowerment? Or are we ready to re-live the spirit of ’86 and say: Never again?
Popularity: 1% [?]
Sadly Prof. Abe even the battle cries ‘ Panatiliing buhay ang diwa ng EDSA’ and ‘Isa puso ang EDSA’ have seemingly become tired and hollow with each passing year.
One even wonders how the generation of today has a true understanding of what it took to bring down the dictatorship in a bloodless people power uprising.
That such a seminal event has been devalued is a tragic testament to the failure to follow through on strengthening the democratic institutions that EDSA restored.
“Truly, we can surmise that one possible route out of this rot is by way of example of authentic leaders, not the exceedingly clever, the most photogenic or the greatest in forensics.”-Abe
Who’re being alluded to here? Let me guess:
-the exceedingly clever…..hmmmn, Villar?
-the most photogenic…..hmmn, hmmn, Gibo?
-the greatest in forensics…..hmmn, hmmn, hmmn????
I gave up.
“By some stretch, the Yellow Revolution was a sequel to the revolutionary narrative of the Filipinos’ long struggle against oppression by foreign tormentors…”
Interesting, Mr. Abe. Yes, indeed from a bit of overstretch, Ferdinand Marcos might have been the fourth foreign tormentor after the Spanish, Americans, Japanese, and FM who considered himself Chinese-Japanese-Ilocano and who allegedly said:
“I have Chinese blood in me…I am not ashamed to admit that perhaps the great leaders of our country all have Chinese blood.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Filipino
Hey, aren’t the Cojuangcos’ ancestors also from China’s Fujian province?
Tsk tsk for Manny Villar. Thank God for small blessings?
Email-brigade keeps doing their stuff.
——————-
From: Leader0323
Subject: Fw: [Filipinos for Democracy] REMINDER
Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 9:54 AM
The Walden Bello/deQuiros FAN CLUB wants to send the reminder.
GMA Talsik diyan! The force is with you, Noy! Use the Force!
Gibo – GMA’s declared choice [ go Gibo go!] [ is that green enough???]
Villar — secret GMA choice. // Pulsing statistical tie
Gordon – cry-baby he cried when they closed Subic
Erap – convicted not allowed.
Jamby — P60 a kilo wrong answer
Perlas – who him???
Ac – alphabetically lists before Aq yellow
JC – Onward Christian Soldier!
Abe,
To answer your question, I believe there is a next step, and it will be anchored on the internet by a gathering of people who recognize they are the opinion leaders, a force if they can get organized, and much more powerful than a march. The tendency among Filipinos is to break apart, to act as small clans, to never bend personal interest to the good of the group. When that is overcome and there is a genuine interest in the “community”, it is possible to make progress.
Joe
The Myth of the American propagandist in 1986. We have too much of it.
It did not give anything good for the country. Poverty still rampant.
Corruption is a way of life. Land Reform Program is put on the backburner. The NPA problem and the Mindanao problem are like sore
thumbs sticking out.
I am tired to the 1986 EDSA Romanticism Revolution. Its time to build
and unite the country. Instead of dividing the country. The Marcos
Loyalists are Filipinos also. If they admire Marcos. Then, so be it.
The same way that those people are ON HIGH with the EDSA Revolution.
Abe,
Additional thought . . .
I have spent the better part of a year gathering perspectives on Philippine society. It is broken by most standards of civil rectitude, in part because of poverty (ask why poverty and find the Catholic Church doctrine on babies) and in part because the entrenched powerful are taking care of themselves whilst selling their country down the river, figuratively and literally.
Everyone talks about corruption but no one knows how to tame the beast. It is so far-reaching as to have become an ethic. It is the way businessmen, government workers and individuals operate. Cheating at the edges is a way of life here. Why? Because it is the only way to get ahead in a society that puts up horrid roadblocks to good health, security, advancement and wealth.
Well, to tame the beast you need to fix the societal infrastructure, not build concrete infrastructure. This can be done with a handful of initiatives aimed at unleashing people’s natural drive to succeed. Basically, unwrap the bindings that constrain individual ambition. Social engineering is possible, if there is a vision and practical things to be done . . . refer to US achievements to end the barriers to opportunity imposed by discrimination by age, sex and race.
I would add that skepticism, petty bickering and “the apathy of subsistence” are very real barriers to progress. But those can be overcome by a unified voice, when those of differing opinions come together to advance social justice.
Joe
Joe,
Indeed, there’s more to poverty than merely scraping up less than two dollars a day. That’s what the WB statistics tells us though, minus the degradation, the powerlessness and the cruel subsistence attached to being Filipino poor.
Poverty cheapens values, morals, even life itself. Yet, toothless and shirtless, the Filipino poor will manage to flash a smile, sometimes sincere.
Election with all the freebies the poor get by virtue of it – trinkets, songs and dances and doles for real – is both an entitlement and an entertainment time for them. It actually excites them. But that’s when and where our taxes are spent too, more often than not.
On a philosophical note, it is the duty of society to provide opportunities for everyone. But which specific element of the society: the fictional state, the so-called government, big business, communities, goodhearted neighbors, rich nations or the individuals by themselves?
Perhaps the answer is: well, it depends on our belief system. For example, what is our belief or ideology as to whose primary duty it is to provide income for the poor so that there will be enough for nutritious food on the table, education for the young to prepare them meet the responsibilities of adulthood, and something set aside as safety net in case of crisis?
Some maintain the responsibility falls on the individual, others insist on the government and I personally believe it is upon the people in a given society who have the wherewithal (power, wealth, influence) to do it.
Poverty is not an excuse for being miscreant. But often the poor begin to rise from “the apathy of subsistence” only after the basic necessities of life have been met. Do you believe that it may be hard to fine-tune the rules of good manners and right conduct when the stomach is empty? And don’t you think that those who have extra leisure time have fewer excuses for not being upright?
I do like the idea of a “unified voice, when those of differing opinions come together to advance social justice.” Do you think that on a rather smaller scale it is something doable here in FV?
I’m obviously rambling at the moment as I’m past my sleeping time again but what comes to mind because of your provocation is this: Instead of demanding platforms from aspiring leaders who are courting our votes, won’t it be a better idea if we start creating the platform ourselves and by coming together with a “unified voice” for our common design, we tell the candidates: sirs, you have our votes if you promise to do what we say in here.
How is that for a start?
Abe,
I hope you got some sleep. I don’t know if FV is the correct place to seed a “unified voice”; possibly it should be a fully dedicated web site to that cause. Rather like the Tea Party initiative that is emerging in the US, but with a specific Philippine set of objectives.
But I am convinced that building “social infrastructure” is the highest priority. Until that is done, all the investments in education or roads is largely wasted.
I caught a BBC report on Saudi Arabia’s educational initiatives this morning. The Saudis are committed to being an international player in education and science. The formula: more and better books, more and better teachers, and a commitment to knowledge. Aspire to be a global competitor. Welcome foreigners to the educational institutions. But move at a pace that preserves Saudi culture.
Well, the Saudi’s have an advantage, being rich from oil, and able to build a huge, modern post-graduate university – Kaust University – with the stature to stand side -by-side to Cambridge or MIT.
The Philippines has a more daunting challenge for sure. It starts with hordes of people, most poor, and the overwhelming numbers of kids that must be taught. There simply aren’t enough good schools, good teachers, good books. Kids are taught by “rote’ learning that has them obey the rules, not aspire to achieve. That’s the way the teachers learned and that’s the way they teach.
But that is not the major problem.
The real difficulty is that, once students graduate, they are thrown into a society that does not operate rationally, that does not provide opportunities for the ambitious or skilled. It throws them into a society that runs on favors, where the good jobs are given to friends and family and favorites, not to the most capable. The result is a deadening of ambition, and, worse, mediocrity in performance.
So it is futile for the Philippines to work on upgrading education if it is going to continue to throw its graduates to the wolves.
It is better to focus on social infrastructure – getting rid of an environment that encourages wolves to prowl – than to build schools that merely grow food for the ravenous scavengers that inhabit the positions of power and riches.
Joe
Abe,
“won’t it be a better idea if we start creating the platform ourselves and by coming together with a “unified voice” for our common design, we tell the candidates: sirs, you have our votes if you promise to do what we say in here.”
I am actually thinking past the elections, how to influence whatever president or governor takes over. Building a permanent force for development of a “positive social infrastructure”.
Cheating in the Philippines is an accepted ethic. Why? Because so many barriers are in the way of personal achievement and prosperity. Nepotistic hiring blocks careers. Lack of competition blocks robust markets from developing. Closed, biased and inefficient courts allow unfair business practices to persist. Money is wasted on the national debt and babies who grow up to become people without jobs. The heart of the nation, Manila, is frozen by congestion and a dilapidated, dangerous infrastructure.
People cheat because it is one of the few ways to get past the barriers and move ahead financially.
The Philippines needs infrastructure, but not entirely of concrete. It needs new laws to change the way the system works, to get ambitious, talented, hard-working Filipinos past the barriers to prosperity.
Address each of the points made in Paragraph 1 and you will create a vibrant nation that does not need to cheat.
Hmmm . . . How to unleash the natural drive to compete, to win, to become secure and prosperous. How to build a social infrastructure that distinguishes right from wrong, and comes down on the side of right. How to build a social infrastructure free of self-imposed restraints. How to build a social infrastructure in which people can aspire, work hard and smart, be secure, and prosper.
A mission of opportunity . . .
Joe
erratum: paragraph 3
“..unified voice, when those of differing opinions come together to advance social justice
Something about “… the ‘something’ in the details”, in particular, the cost of “advance”. I can see dissonance between cocy and Abe similar to Noynoy and Villar already differing on approach to programs that benefit classes C/D/E that will require more taxes on A/B.
UP n,
Yes, the details are the problem, but I think if the issues are simplified into initiatives that most people would agree with, then people of different origins, conceptually, can come together.
For example, if it is agreed that a nation of laws needs open, fair, efficient courts to work properly, then it doesn’t matter if you are for Villar or Aquino, you know that something needs to be done. So you work on the solution, together.
Obama is experimenting with this. Doing a bad job at his consensus-building, but, hey, he is a newbie .. .
Joe
Oh, all the movies in our minds.
Why can’t our heroes be the perfect people that they should be in our own mental scripts and our villains dark, beastly rotten ogres as always?
Joker Arroyo would be the ever-valiant, indefatigable crusader against graft and corruption as before. Rene Saguisag and Jojo Binay would be in Noynoy’s camp as candidates or campaign stalwarts. Ben Abalos would be known the best Comelec chairman ever, Raul Gonzales the best Justice Secretary. Danding Cojuangco and Lucio Tan would be manning sari-sari stores. Estrada, Imelda Marcos and family in jail. The Teodoros, the Gordons, the Escuderos , the Angaras, and company virtual unknowns. Cory Aquino would be in her library reading books after a day’s work and Marcos playing mahjong and not the other way around. Noynoy would be banging tables and slamming doors on uncles and aunts for paying slave wage to poor farmer tenants. Kris Aquino would be a nun.
What’s wrong with God?!
Ahahahahahah,
. . . a Nun.
I think Noynoy should be a priest, truly . . . save the country a lot of muddling around, especially if Ms. Arroyo is House leader or PM. Lots of harmony there, eh?
Joe
He’s watching, smiling and amused. Or maybe he’s sleeping on his job.
Bert,
Ronald Regan was America’s “sleeping president”. He would nod off at cabinet meetings. Yet he got the Berlin Wall down, and effectively ended the cold war.
He knew what to say when he woke up.
Joe
Joe,
My favorite Reagan line came after he admitted that he indeed traded arms for hostages. It was one hell of a way to explain a lie.
“A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not.” – Ronald Reagan 1987
One of the biggest differences between Politicians and individual Filipinos is that the politicians have more persistence and endurance.
Translation — Politicians know that Filipinos believe that politicians will prevail. [Except for the CBCP -- CBCP tenacity and endurance match the politicians'.]
the project of 1986 was not distributed nor founded thru the concept of equality. That generations may now be the wowowee subscribers who cannot understand the intrinsic value of their votes. The successors after Marcos had put the country into huge debt and unstable military police force. The members of the senate were also very centralized even until now. There was no interesting mix of professional backgrounds such as lawyers, career diplomats, engineers, bankers, educators, experts of fishery-related agencies, and farming.
1986 spirit was only applicable at that time when the country was ruled by a tyrant. At this time, we must push for high ideals. Instead of focusing on the spirit of the dead, why not focus on the rule of law and combining high quality talents for the national government. To do this, we cannot have a weakling and lame duck president.
“Social engineering is possible, if there is a vision and practical things to be done . . . refer to US achievements to end the barriers to opportunity.” – Joe
In a way The Cusp has touched on this in the other thread. He posted: “The irony here is that most Western countries have done away with corruption by legalising and regulating what used to be illegal transactions between big business and their political parties.”
You see, Joe, when you corrupt you “distort” but the distortion can be made the norm by legitimation.
For instance the US supreme court legitimated corporate greed in an 1886 landmark decision, ruling that corporations are “persons” and their money are property within the meaning of a constitutional amendment meant to protect Negro rights.
Since then corporate power has gained enormous ascendance in US society and I think eventually ended American democracy as known by townspeople in New England.
Only recently a conservative majority SC, opting for another “social engineering,” decided that a corporation has free speech right just like any flesh and blood American, free to use its vast resources to sway electoral choices in the market of ideas. Because of it, the legalized imbalance of resources (the corruption or distortion) is not officially “cheating” anymore. It’s bound to become as “accepted ethics.”
Corporate empires, whose “civil rectitude” has often been suspect, may now “sell their country down the river, figuratively and literally.”
Americans too have “more daunting challenge for sure” ahead of them. Think of the insatiable greed of those top people in AIG in the face of ordinary Americans loosing their homes and livelihoods.
Today, it’s estimated 122 Americans die each day, or 45,000 yearly, for lack of health insurance because corporate lobbying has been re-engineered by being legitimated into becoming a constitutional right.
Abe,
Yes, I agree with your perspective on the corporate takeover of American democracy and the legitimization of greed. But I am not working on correcting America’s structural failings. She can take care of herself, as there are functioning bodies such as the Civil Liberties Union, and today the arising Tea Party that keep things reasonably in balance. Certainly most Americans eat well and have a good life.
My focus is the Philippines, where I live, and where my son’s opportunities are defined by civic behaviors here.
Joe
added thought.
Abe,
You remind me a little of Bert. Because I am American, when I criticize the Philippines, he points out the failings of my home country, as if that had any relevance at all to the Philippine condition.
Just so you are squared away on my intention, it is not to correct America’s flaws, of which there are many, but to advocate for a more productive Philippines.
Joe
I guess it goes both ways, Joe. You could also call it as our primal instinct for patriotism.
But I was serious to suggest not to get too attached to Americanism. In places where I used to work (the rather underprivileged sector, that is) I had this gut feel that America whose “civic behavior” had so impressed Tocqueville could be losing it. Sometimes I’d tell people: this is how it’s done in the Philippines, I think it works, try it.
It’s probably better to raise kids in Biliran than in Camden City, if you know what I mean. The creeping decadence is happening not only in Wall Street. Sometimes I ponder whether it would have been more opportune for the Philippines to have been Japanized first (as the Taiwan and So. Korea were) than Americanized.
Abe,
Yes, with enough bantering about, we can find agreement. I wholly agree with your last statements.
Joe
u d man, Joe.
Shouldn’t we rather say that EDSA 86 has been a grand historical anomaly?
If the author is wont to say that this event de-Marcosified the Marcoses, after Cory, who should have been de-Corified? The Aquinos? I doubt if they are, maybe yes, or maybe no.
There is no unfinished business of any EDSA, be that the 1 or the 2. And ironically, we seem to want to repeat history. One Gringo is not enough. Come Trillanes. One Trillanes is not enough. Come General Lim. Oh my god, what kind of orgy is this?
Where have you been Primer?
The Spirit of ’86 is not a “grand historical anomaly” although it was born out of anomalies: 1) only about 60 families out of more than 90 million Filipinos dominate the Philippine economy, 2) the system in place for the last 110 years has benefited only the very, very few and ignored the plight of the vast, vast many.
I do maintain the Yellow Revolution was not all just ending the dictatorship but exactly as described above, “a sequel to the revolutionary narrative of the Filipinos’ long struggle against oppression by foreign tormentors (or its many current forms).”
The project is a continuing one and its trajectory could be seen as covering the liberatory aspirations of Andres Bonifacio, Salud Algabre and Edgar Jopson (although it’s not just the progressives now who are articulating the broad dimension of the problem but even rightist reformers like Lim and Trillanes).
The hesitation of the Great Beast to take the streets during the scandals that rocked the Arroyo government or simply lend warm bodies to form the “hooting throng” is due to better wisdom.
This I wrote five years ago:
@abe margallo:
and how many families DOMINATE the political power of the filipino nation since time immemorial – and i mean national, rather than local dominance? more often than not, it seems one has to be a “blue blood” (regardless of how the wealth was acquired by the progenitors from whom the “good name” was inherited). the only possible exception was diosdado macapagal, “the poor boy from lubao”. villar is right. it looks like the “aristocracy” would not allow a rags-to-riches masa, a noveau riche, to attain the highest post that the nation can give. this time, i’m certain they will fail. villar will be the next president.
Bencard,
Let’s follow the lineage. Cong Dadong was the exception and the exception to the exception is . . .(clue: she wanted to look like another rags-to-riches-to- ______ girl from Bikol).
And also, didn’t you make similar prediction before: Obama would fail and McCain was certain to win? What’s your margin of error now?
abe:
on the contrary, i predicted obama would win over mccain but i warned those independent, unaffiliated voters (who desperately but erroneously cast their votes for obama), about the kind of government they would be getting under him. most of those same misguided voters now are part of the “tea party” movement and have realized the magnitude of their mistake. virginia, new jersey, massachusets, among others, have repudiated “obamania” and are fired-up to correct the dire situation.
obama is miserably failing in practically all areas of governance – economy, national security, environment, foreign relations, and matters of personal credibility.
And Sarah Palin is the great American hope for salvation . . .
Joe
you’re not kidding, joe-am.
Bencard,
You boldly predicted that a Marxist (from your wordlist) would be your next Commander in Chief (but he has to get past Hillary first)?
You have to let up somehow slabbering over those talking heads at Fox and those slash and burn political extremists. It could be intellectually unhealthy for a smart guy like you.
thanks for the left-handed compliment, abe, but i’d rather be CORRECT than smart. after only one year, your champion’s popularity has plummeted from over 60% when he assumed power to about 40% now. polls show consistently that many conservative republicans will win in the mid-term elections (congress & senate) to wrest control of both houses. massachusets, new jersey and virginia are only the tip of the iceberg. many incumbent democrats are dropping out like flies, not seeking re-election to stave off certain defeat. those are FACTS and not necessarily fox’s. but as long as you watch nothing but the leftist media, you will never know that because you’ll be kept in the dark like a mushroom.
The significant poll I think is that more voters believe the Democrats have a plan for where it wants to take the nation than do Republicans.
But let’s put on record here your prediction that after the mid-term elections there will be 60 Republican senators (minus Joe Lieberman) and Nancy Pelosi will loss the speakership. Cool?
Btw, do you still have her approval rating, I mean that of one of RP’s “greatest” (again your choice of word) presidents?
The Malacanang presidency is Noynoy’s by right of inheritance, Conrado deQuiros eloquently wrote in August 2009.
…Noynoy … worthy of his mother…. worthy of his father. .. put in the most elemental way,… it is a matter of necessity… it is a matter of trust…. The name of his parents …The burden of his inheritance is huge…
Noynoy inherited the mantle when his mother died. History summons him to do it . . . It is his destiny.
Noynoy’s running for president completes the cycle that began when his mother ran for president …
Noynoy running for president will deliver us back to the beginning of things … thrust us back to the time where myth and history meet . . . between the Fellowship of the Ring and the Eye of Mordor, between Luke Skywalker and the Evil Empire.