Mong Palatino

Blogging about the Philippines and the Asia-Pacific since 2004

About

@mongster is a Manila-based activist, former Philippine legislator, and blogger/analyst of Asia-Pacific affairs.

Published by The Diplomat

Ferdinand Marcos Jr. will mark his first month as president of the Philippines on July 30. If his performance in the past month has been a glimpse of his leadership for the next six years, we can assume that his presidency will be substantially similar to that of his predecessor. Marcos is poised to continue the legacy of Rodrigo Duterte, minus the cursing and ranting when talking in public.

Among the first cabinet appointments made by Marcos were economists who also worked under the Duterte government. It is no surprise, therefore, that his economic platform, which he finally unveiled during his state of the nation address last week, made numerous references to the development plan of the previous government. He may be trying to assure local and foreign investors that he will not impose drastic changes when it comes to policies dealing with the business sector.

Read more

Arrests and Censorship Mark Rodrigo Duterte’s Final Month in Power

Published by The Diplomat

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has been actively meeting supporters and unveiling infrastructure projects ahead of the end of his term on June 30. But his government also continued to clamp down on critics and activists, reflecting the strongman tactics of his controversial six-year presidency.

While Cabinet members have been reminding the people of Duterte’s legacy, the police and other members of the government’s security cluster seemed intent on further shrinking the country’s civic space.

Read more

Published by Bulatlat

The panelist at the SMNI forum with presidentiables echoed the rhetoric of the government’s anti-communist task force by asking the candidates if they consider the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)-New People’s Army (NPA) a friend or enemy of the Filipino nation. It reflects the kind of thinking that dominated the long ‘Cold War’ era and the recent ‘War on Terror’ which sought to divide the population between those who support and oppose the security doctrine of the state. It’s either you salute the military and police or risk being suspected of belonging to the ‘other side’. In the case of the Philippines, an activist is presumed guilty of treason unless he or she categorically denounces the CPP-NPA. Any hint of progressive leaning could trigger toxic red-tagging and demonization which often lead to violent consequences.
Since the CPP-NPA operates outside the ambit of the state, it is instantly branded as an antagonistic force that threatens the existence of the Republic. In the past, the specter of a communist takeover was used to whip up anti-Red hysteria. In recent years, the narrative was tweaked by blaming the local communist movement for the country’s underdevelopment. In the eyes of its class enemies, the CPP-NPA is both a conspiratorial behemoth that seeks to supplant the government and a pestering malignant cancer in society. Holistic political analysis is replaced by a sweeping generalization that conveniently scapegoats the CPP-NPA for the major ills that afflict the nation. A long view of history is discarded so that reactionary propagandists can distort the past by falsely attributing the deterioration in the country’s quality of life and governance with the rise and supposed machinations of the Left.

A partisan reading of history and politics is not uncommon but there should be an acknowledgement that one is a willing subscriber of a particular lens. The paradox in taking the mainstream side of learning our modern history is to come into terms with the knowledge that the outlawed CPP-NPA attained nationwide recognition by becoming a pillar in the anti-dictatorship movement in the 1970s and 1980s. We cannot study the resistance against Martial Law without encountering the crucial role of CPP-NPA cadres and their network of grassroots campaigners in laying the groundwork for the emergence of a broad opposition against Marcos. We cannot praise the civil disobedience of the Yellows without mentioning the collective organizing and sacrifice of the Reds, many of whom were CPP-NPA members. This historical fact, however, is often ignored in order to blur the contribution of the armed Left in ousting the dictator in 1986.

Maligning the CPP-NPA soon became a prominent theme in opinion-making institutions. Indeed, tagging the CPP-NPA as a terrorist has already been normalized in news reports through the aggressive disinformation work of government operatives. This is done not just to justify the scuttling of the peace process and the unleashing of a brutal crackdown in rural communities, but also to undermine the revolutionary legacy of the CPP-NPA. Its ideological rivals can only see malice and evil in the politics of the CPP-NPA which they claim is already a lost cause. They refuse to accept that a major reason why it has endured for more than half a century is that it has consistently advocated the rights and welfare of the marginalized. It could not have survived the nonstop offensives of the military if it were merely a criminal gang spreading senseless violence. Its radical work was embraced by many and became the unofficial standard in evaluating the country’s progress in achieving true emancipation and justice. Only the rabid conservative will dismiss the social agenda of the CPP-NPA as anti-Filipino and anti-democracy. For the landless poor and exploited population, it represents an alternative worth fighting for. The CPP-NPA continues to thrive especially in the remote areas of the country because its politics of empowerment resonates not just with the oppressed but all those who wanted to build a new future founded on justice and equality.

The government and its paid apologists are fanatically insisting that loyal citizens should support the all-out war against the CPP-NPA. But as responsible citizens who stand for democracy, we dare say that our enemies are not fellow Filipinos who have persevered in the struggle to end poverty, feudal bondage, foreign meddling, and bureaucratic plunder. Our real enemies are those who perpetuate an unjust social order. History will ultimately reveal these friends and enemies; but in the meantime, we aim to be friends and allies of many so that we can be stronger until we defeat the political monsters and dynasties that have plagued our country for so long.

Published by Bayan Metro Manila

It is sickening to watch politicians playing a petty ‘game of thrones’ over Congress speakership, pork barrel allocations, and partisan politicking ahead of the 2022 elections.

This revolting spectacle is taking place amid worsening hunger, unemployment, and poverty levels in the country caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Millions are scrambling for jobs and food while Duterte allies are squabbling over pork barrel projects. Politicians are oblivious to the harsh social impact of the pandemic as they continue to fight over the speakership post in the House of Representatives.

Legislators should focus on scrutinizing the 2021 budget to ensure that public funds will be efficiently used to improve the country’s COVID-19 response and revive the local economy. Instead, they are obsessed with plotting nasty schemes over the potential spoils of the speakership row.

Congress should have used its mandate to question the anti-people policies, programs, and projects of the Duterte government. But they seem inclined to resolve the leadership crisis by seeking the intervention (again) of the president. So much for Congress as an independent branch of the government.

The tragic losers here are the Filipino people. Betrayed by the incompetence of the Duterte government, abandoned by power and money-hungry legislators, and terrorized by state forces which are brutally imposing draconian measures to stifle dissent ahead of the coming election season.

To survive the pandemic, our people have no choice but to fight for better governance. Voters too will remember the politicians who promoted their self-interest instead of the public welfare.

Written for The Diplomat

The year 2021 ended tragically for the Philippines as Typhoon Rai (known locally as Odette) battered the southern part of the country, including prime tourism destinations. Recovery had barely begun when the Omicron variant once again plunged the country into panic, in addition to triggering a new set of mobility restrictions. The year 2022 is shaping up to be a tougher year, but many Filipinos are pinning their hopes on the changes that the upcoming presidential election will bring.

Read more

The Options for Duterte’s Post-Presidency

Written for The Diplomat

Rodrigo Duterte’s presidency will come to an end on June 30, but he has been packing up his things at the Malacañang presidential palace since February. The country’s first president from Mindanao island will return to his home in Davao City where he served as mayor for nearly three decades.

Duterte was invited to be the anti-drug czar of the incoming Marcos government but his spokesperson said he is not keen on accepting the role. His executive secretary subsequently divulged that he is preparing to teach at a police academy in Davao. Duterte was a former prosecutor before his appointment as vice mayor in 1986

Read more

October 2021: A Nobel for journalism, a mass release of prisoners, and a raft of repressive new laws. Maria Ressa became the first Filipino Nobel laureate for her work as a journalist and truth crusader. Journalists were among the prisoners released in Myanmar, but 20 are still in detention. Several laws that could undermine freedom of expression were passed in October including the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill in Singapore. Read more

November 2021. #MeToo in China, prisoner release in Cambodia, and landmark legislation in Pakistan. A Chinese tennis star has accused a former high-ranking member of China’s Politburo of sexual assault. Cambodia has released 27 prisoners, but this is probationary and they could be rearrested. Pakistan’s National Assembly has passed landmark legislation intended to protect journalists, but an amendment has rights groups concerned. Read more

December 2021. Hong Kong’s bleak scenario, court convictions, and a Nobel call to action. Publisher Jimmy Lai received another prison sentence in Hong Kong, pro-democracy news websites were forced to shut down in the aftermath of police raids, alarming court convictions in Myanmar and Vietnam, and a powerful Nobel lecture by Maria Ressa. Read more

Published by Bulatlat

Joma Sison said he became a Marxist after reading anti-communist books in schools. I wonder how many activists became more radicalized after reading analysts and columnists who specialize in denigrating the national democratic struggle. I remember a scholar who wrote that NatDem activists are supposedly only good at name-calling before accusing his campus critics of being ‘baby Stalinists’. I don’t think he noticed the irony in his argument. I would often encounter writers like him not just in the academe but also in mainstream media publications, most notably opinion columns. Reading them is no fun but helpful in improving our praxis. We become more effective organizers if we know how to counter the anti-Left narrative being peddled in opinion-making institutions.

Writers who do not deny their anti-Left bias and Rightist political orientation are easier to dismiss. I can point out the twisting of facts and malicious interpretation of events as fanatic defense of their politician backers and irrational hatred of radical politics. But there are also writers who claim to be analyzing and explaining the political situation without the baggage of the anti-Left lens, even if they wielded state power by being cozy with the ruling bourgeois party. There are even those who equate their unabashedly anti-Left scholarship with the progressive objective of making politics more democratic.

These writings often get a boost through direct and indirect patronage from state-sponsored agencies. The anti-Left analysis is amplified until it becomes the standard reference and frame in news reports and academic papers. Worse, it is weaponized too by Right-wing trolls in justifying the demonization and even violence targeting Leftist activists.

Of course, the Left is given the opportunity to issue a rejoinder and assert its politics in the civic space. However, it rests on the assumption that the Left can push back without triggering a brutal backlash from well-entrenched reactionary forces. Or that in the so-called free market of ideas, the State plays the role of a disinterested spectator when anti-Left perspectives are circulated. Unless there is an upsurge in revolutionary movements, the ruling class is able to restrict what kind of information may proliferate in society to preserve the status quo. We thrive from exchanging Leftist viewpoints but it is always drowned out by massive anti-Left propaganda.

As an ascendant political movement, the Left has to be accountable for its actions. It should welcome criticism and engage those who question its politics. So far, no one has been prevented from doing this. There is no dearth of materials criticizing and even condemning the history and politics of the NatDem Left. These are used to extend the expired validity of Red scare tactics and ridicule the long-running communist movement in the country.

Deliberate or not, the glaring error of some partisan critics of the Left is to polemicize with a distorted sense of history and improper reading of the local political landscape. In their attempt to be seen as impartial observers, they criticize the Left and the Right as if both are equally liable for what has happened to our country. There is no mention of the important fact that the Left, despite its superior moral clout, has no control of the bureaucracy and national treasury. When they highlight the excesses and failures of the Left, they uncritically compare it with the crimes of the Right. It is the Right that has had an uninterrupted dominance in government but some critics have been depicting the Left’s struggle for justice and democracy as the principal cause of the tragic state of our nation.

Even the Left’s participation in elections is subjected to constant derision. The main flaw in the seemingly fair evaluation of the Left’s performance in the polls is the naïve thinking that the electoral playing field is equitable. The Left’s electoral numbers are dissected and flaunted without being placed in the context of a fraud-prone voting system manipulated by money, patronage, and foreign meddling. How should we interpret the votes garnered by Leftist candidates? That they are too low to qualify for a Senate seat? Or enough to maintain a growing electoral base while deflecting the nonstop violent attacks of state-backed forces? Other political parties can focus on vote-getting activities but Makabayan and its candidates are forced to contend with and defeat the insidious black propaganda operations of groups linked to government machinery. That Makabayan parties continue to be reelected despite facing numerous obstacles is proof of their enduring appeal and influence in the grassroots.

But I want to probe too if Makabayan’s modest success in the parliamentary arena is also misconstrued as an indication of the Left attaining a significant presence in mainstream politics. Because even if the Left has representation in Congress (for now) and some local government units, it remains to be a minority voice and marginalized political force. Its electoral work is just part of a broader struggle for social transformation. Hence, its tactics and strategies are seen to be out of place in traditional politics. This will naturally elicit various reactions from all sides of the political spectrum including reactionary pundits who are inevitably hostile and paranoid to Leftist campaigning. The same experts who nitpick on every move of the Left but refuse to use the same standards in writing about corrupt politicians and elite parties. Some are well-meaning even if they only manage to embarrass themselves for spreading misanalysis.

Published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer

The Duterte administration’s so-called “whole-of-nation” approach in dealing with the communist movement has been exposed as nothing more than a costly “coordinated inauthentic behavior.”

It is infuriating that public funds were utilized to spread disinformation targeting activists, leftists, and other critics of the government.

The military said it supports the advocacy of the social media pages removed by Facebook. This is an incriminating admission, since the banned accounts are known for red-tagging, demonization of activism, vilification of people’s resistance, and promoting hate and even violence against leaders of activist groups.

It would have made a lot of sense if the military cyberunits used the resources generously provided by the state to challenge Chinese trolls and counter the illegal claims of the Chinese government that violate our sovereignty. This is an advocacy worth supporting without the need to resort to disinformation.

We call on legislators to defund the disinformation machinery of the Duterte administration. Congress should rigorously study the military budget and impose stringent requirements to ensure that public funds are not used to commit human rights abuses.

There should be an official investigation and audit regarding the funds used for the military’s disinformation campaign. The Facebook findings should be made a reference to probe the liability of army officers involved in the illegal cyberoperation. Those found guilty must be penalized and be made to account for their crimes.

This is not a victimless crime. Duterte and the military weaponized social media to harass, intimidate, and terror-tag numerous activists. This insidious propaganda operation is often followed by actual acts of violence directed against activists, which include instances of enforced disappearances, frustrated murder, and extrajudicial killings.

We continue to ask all tech companies not to be complicit in Duterte’s reign of terror.

We reiterate our demand for the junking of the “whole-of-nation” approach and, instead, pursue a policy that will genuinely address the roots of the armed conflict.

Written for The Diplomat

The election victory of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in this month’s Philippine presidential election reflected the continuing dominance of political dynasties in the country’s political life.

The return of the Marcoses has reminded many about the dangers of a single family monopolizing political power. The social problems engendered by the dominance of political dynasties certainly did not begin with the rise of the Marcoses nor did they disappear after the family was deposed in 1986. Politics over the past three decades has continued to be infected with cronyism, patronage, violence, corruption, and elitism, which have led to mass cynicism and dissatisfaction. That the next president is another Marcos highlights the tragedy and paradox of modern Philippine politics. It is tragic because no substantial accountability has been pursued against those who benefited from placing the country under dictatorship; and unreal because we are so outraged by what’s happening in the country yet we feel the political system is designed in a way that would only allow dynasties to remain in power

Read more

No Honeymoon for the Marcos Presidency?

Written for The Diplomat

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has junked several cases seeking the disqualification of former Senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr., which could pave the way for his proclamation as the next president of the Philippines after garnering a sizeable lead in this week’s presidential election.

Marcos ran on a platform of building unity in the country. Can he convince those who suffered during the Martial Law years to unite with him even if he continues to deny that atrocities were committed in the past? Is unity possible between Marcoses and other political forces which wanted to reclaim the ill-gotten wealth of the family? What kind of unity will Marcos promote if the demands for truth, justice, and accountability are addressed to his own family?

It is too early for Marcos to celebrate because even if the voting has ended, the political opposition is not eager to surrender the fight for what they think is right and just for the nation’s future.

Read more

Duterte’s deadly legacy

July 30th, 2022

Published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer

The specter of unabated killings is the brutal legacy of the Duterte administration.

President Duterte waged a bloody war on drugs that led to thousands of killings. Most of the victims are suspected petty drug users, peddlers, and barangay bystanders. The police went on a deadly “tokhang” rampage but failed to end the drug menace.

Mr. Duterte relentlessly attacked activists, leftists, opposition leaders, and critics. Many of them became victims of extrajudicial killings. These include lawyers, environmentalists, indigenous peoples, farmers, reporters, local officials, peace consultants, and human rights defenders.

We believe these are state-sponsored killings that Mr. Duterte enabled through official and unofficial policies and declarations. From “tokhang” directives to martial law in Mindanao and the imposition of a state of lawlessness in Negros and Samar islands, the Duterte administration weaponized the bureaucracy, which led to fatal consequences. It has to be made accountable for legitimizing the attacks against urban poor residents, activists, and rural communities.

Mr. Duterte’s anticommunist rhetoric demonized the work of activists. He criminalized activism by linking the advocacies of people’s organizations with armed struggle. Suspected communist sympathizers are harassed, red-tagged, charged with trumped-up cases, and targeted by death squads.

In 2020, Mr. Duterte’s bungled COVID-19 response led to several unnecessary deaths. His criminal neglect has worsened the suffering of the people. His militarist and harsh lockdown restrictions have curtailed the rights of workers. Official COVID-19 monitoring does not count the number of people who died because of lockdown impositions, the overkill deployment of troops in communities, and those who were deprived of hospital health care.

We remember the victims of “tokhang.” We honor the lives of activists who were killed for bringing light to this world. We mourn those who died this year because of government incompetence and repression. The struggle continues until we achieve justice.

Published by Bulatlat

The Philippine revolution has long baffled political scientists. It emerged in an archipelago dominated by an imperialist power and thrived even after the disintegration of the communist bloc. There’s no socialist rear offering refuge to armed revolutionaries. There’s no industrial base where Soviet-style insurrections can immediately take place. There are only islands in this part of the Pacific Ring of Fire dotted with active volcanoes and faultlines. Yet, a Maoist-inspired revolution is being waged here in the past half-century. A fluke of history? Not if we link it to the country’s anti-colonial struggle. From local revolts spanning 80 years to establishing Asia’s first republic, Filipino islanders have persisted in resisting colonial bondage. They proved how political revolution would prevail over the divide-and-rule strategy of the colonizers which gave birth to the Philippine nation. It was an epic struggle that united the islands amid fierce and bitter divisions among Christians, Muslims, and ethnic communities. But imperialism became the new plague after the demise of colonialism, and the nation was relegated into a neocolony. It meant the pursuit of nation-building under the tutelage of a foreign power. The islands were targeted (read: plundered) for their precious resources but wealth was hoarded somewhere else. This legitimized dispossession was challenged by the resurgence of the national liberation movement. Those who profit from the exploitation of our lands are the most rabid in demonizing the people’s resistance. They spread the self-serving lie that revolutions would only doom our future. But against the expectations of the conservative establishment, the struggle has lasted up to this day. It was supposed to be dead or dying yet it kept on appearing as a specter haunting the elite.

The song ‘Muog na Buo’ alludes to the specific character of the struggle for national democracy in the Philippines. It highlights the aim of revolutionaries to turn the scattered isles (kalat-kalat na pulo) into a solid fortress (muog na buo). It is a reminder that the Maoist doctrine of protracted war from the countryside to the cities cannot be dogmatically applied to the Philippines which has a different history, political landscape, and geographical terrain. It is a celebration of the creativity and tenacity of Filipino revolutionaries who have enriched the Marxist theory of struggle in an archipelagic setting. It validates the enduring legacy of our anti-colonial heroes who sought to unite the nation by waging a war for independence. This is how the unfinished revolution will hasten the arrival of a new political future:

Narito tayo para sa pagkakaisa, pagsulong
Narito tayo para sa masang aping Pilipino
Narito tayo para ang kalat-kalat na pulo
Magiging muog na buo

We are here for unity, forward advance
We are here for the oppressed Filipino masses
We are here to turn our scattered isles
Into a solid fortress

Then and now, it is through political struggle that our people were able to overcome our isolation from each other in order to build a common stand against local and foreign oppressors. Solidarity countered the destructive effect of divisive politics. Centuries of promoting a type of island mentality that pits natives against each other made it more difficult for progressive forces to introduce a new type of politics. Hence, the need for a continuing cultural revolution to fight old values and habits with an empowering outlook in life and politics.

Again, the song ‘Muog na Buo’ speaks about the experience of many activists grappling with the contradictions brought about by their world-building praxis. At first, it mentions the individual engaged in political struggle guided by revolutionary theory. Later, the individual who believes he or she is changing the world (Narito ako / I am here) proclaims the necessity of collective struggle (Narito tayo / We are here). This is not an abrupt transformation but an arduous struggle which only confirms that genuinely embracing revolutionary politics will significantly change the self. It is not an aimless journey of an enlightened individual to some utopian destination but a basic political undertaking that features painstaking grassroots organizing, creative application of theory and tactics, building community power, and reframing everyday politics into a platform that can allow ordinary citizens to link arms with both kasamas and strangers to seize the day and win a new future.

Like the foolish old man who wanted to remove a mountain in the Chinese fable, there are also stubborn Filipino islanders who believe they can turn the 7,600 islands into a solid rock.

*The lyrics of the song Muog na Buo was penned by Silvia Madiaga