Different shades of redbaiting

By admin | December 2, 2020

Published by Bulatlat

It is President Rodrigo Duterte who normalizes the nasty propaganda offensive against the Left. The redbaiting president sets the tone parroted by subordinates and apologists. This is echoed even by bureaucrats who interpret the president’s anti-Left rhetoric as a motivation for career promotion. This is how redbaiting as a nefarious manifestation of a dubious political ideology is transformed into an aspect of governance.

The occupant of Malacanang Palace is always the most rabid and notorious redbaiter-in-chief. Duterte has his own uncouth style but his ranting is no different from former presidents who used their privilege to attack critics and activists. Duterte may sound like a mad man when he talks gibberish but his predecessors also dished out incoherent inanities against the Left. Blame the communists and their sympathizers for what the government has failed to solve, accuse the opposition of conspiring with the ‘enemies of the state’, demonize activism, criminalize political organizing, and whip up Red Scare. But at the same time, make contradicting claims about the supposed obsoleteness of socialism and irrelevance of progressives in politics. The Left is absurdly both viciously monstrous and petty in the eyes of the ruling clique.

Redbaiting is a political act in aid of the conservative agenda. But it is preached by those in power as a righteous crusade against evildoers and godless activists. Those who embrace it are either victims of reactionary indoctrination which reflects the sorry state of political literacy today, or zealous guardians of a moribund state of affairs. They are both obscurantists and attack dogs serving the interest of the ruling ideology. They see red everywhere but not the other colors that dominate the political landscape. They provoke, cheer, and join state forces in unleashing violence against red dissenters.

Some are professional anti-communists; majority are amateurish in mimicking the worldview of their oppressors. Not all are paid mercenaries of the party in power. Some are even politically persecuted but harbor an irrational hatred (or fear) of communism. They are ready to collaborate and compromise with fascists and imperialists but abhor any links with ‘totalitarian’ leftists. Some are religious who use theology to bless state-sponsored violence targeting National Democratic formations. Some are scholars who trade critical thinking and political commitment with the perks of building a portfolio based on anti-Left nitpicking. Some are petty social climbers redtagging those they perceive to be a threat to their careers. Some are public opinion influencers who echo the views of their corporate patrons which translates into a comical behavior of pandering to those who wield power on one hand, and a condescending behavior to those who are organizing the marginalized on the other. Some are naïve friends misperceiving activism as the problem, relatives overcoming the humiliation they are experiencing as discriminated wage laborers by appropriating the views of the class enemy, and so-called apolitical acquaintances who are constantly warning against Leftist machinations.

They can all tolerate various political persuasions but aggressively dogmatic in naming the activist, the leftist, the communist as if failing to do so would harm the balance in the community or ruin their reputation. They may come from different backgrounds but they all share varying levels of resentment against the politics of the Left. They are also pitiful and pathetic for thinking that their seemingly innocent political gesture is not redbaiting but an act of good citizenship.

They are a reminder that in order to effectively counter redbaiting, it should not end with deposing the president alone. It needs bigger and bolder goals like the overhauling of the governance structure and cultivating a new political culture and literacy that truly empower ordinary citizens.

In the meantime, the redbaiters are acting as if their arrogance has no limits. They only appear strong as long as the party in power is there to give legitimacy to their irresponsible actions. They eventually reveal their insignificance when their political bosses lose clout or when the crisis of the social order has sparked a massive discontent.

Not all redbaiters are worthy of our precious attention and political outrage. When we push back against redbaiting, it is always in pursuit of our urgent tasks as activists: Organizing resistance against tyranny and mobilizing the masses to build a new future founded on the politics of change and hope.

Posted in reds | Tagged , | Leave a comment

January, February, March 2020 IFEX regional brief

By admin | November 21, 2020

January 2020 in Asia-Pacific: Landmark rulings on genocide and internet shutdowns. Read more

February 2020 in Asia-Pacific: Coronavirus, censorship, and threats against the media. Read more

March 2020: COVID-19 and censorship plague Asia-Pacific

What we saw spreading quickly across the region in March was not just the dreaded coronavirus, but the mainstreaming of laws, regulations, and other emergency measures deemed essential in fighting it. These measures are also – perhaps not coincidentally – very useful in suppressing critical voices. In short, the fear, disruption, and confusion caused by the pandemic are enabling various governments to attack freedom of expression in the name of addressing a public health crisis. Read more.

Posted in east asia, media | Tagged | Leave a comment

Duterte’s ‘tokhang’ approach in containing COVID-19 will worsen rights abuses

By admin | November 9, 2020

Published by Bayan Metro Manila

President Rodrigo Duterte’s late night spiel clarifying what he meant by the infamous ‘shoot them dead’ order confirmed our fears that he is applying ‘tokhang’ methods in addressing the COVID-19 health crisis. This is both alarming and infuriating since it could enable law enforces to commit rights abuses with impunity.

Duterte’s incoherent explanation about police procedures in making an arrest and the circumstances that make it necessary to shoot suspects were the exact arguments he used in justifying why the police should kill suspects resisting arrest (nanlaban) in 2016 and 2017.

Duterte was not defending the legality of his ‘shoot people dead’ directive, he was reviving a Tokhang rhetoric that led to bloody consequences.

The commander-in-chief was addressing not just the public but state troops who are manning checkpoints and communities under lockdown. Duterte appeared to be rambling but he was actually normalizing the use of guns and aggressive police actions in the name of protecting public safety. He was both instilling fear among the people (obey or risk punishment) while directing the police to establish full control through the use of extreme measures.

We have condemned the militarized approach in the fight against COVID-19. We condemn too the use of the Tokhang model in shaping narratives, mobilizing the bureaucracy with the police and the military in command, and the president’s narrow and intolerant view on dissent during an emergency situation.

Tokhang failed to solve the drug menace but it desensitized local communities as state forces went on a rampage committing various types of abuses. We fear that Duterte is using Tokhang methods not to contain the virus but to impose draconian social control measures. This is a looming threat as the government continues to be remiss in delivering aid to millions of households. Rather than fast track the implementation of social amelioration measures, Duterte is more focused in deterring people to protest or even complain about the lack of food and other services in their communities. Duterte’s late night outburst shows that his government is preparing to contain unrest and not how it will ensure that people’s needs are addressed if the lockdown is extended for another two weeks.

Duterte keeps on making televised speeches but remains silent on the issues of slow testing, inadequate protection for frontliners, and the delayed distribution of cash aid to poor households. Here is a government demonstrating its insensitivity to the plight of ordinary citizens and the inhumanity of talking about killing hungry protesters. The gall to continue asking for public support despite its callousness and unrestrained hostility to those who are demanding accountability.

We reiterate our urgent demands: free mass testing now, food and cash aid now, protection for frontliners now, and the lifting of unnecessary lockdown restrictions.

Posted in Bayan | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Fight to Preserve and Expand Metro Manila’s Green Spaces

By admin | October 31, 2020

Published by Manila Today

We are told that in order to appreciate nature and protect the environment, we have to go somewhere and participate in an outreach activity. It is there in the rural where we could restore forests, watersheds, and waterways. But here in the urban, we are merely incentivized to reduce carbon footprints, plant trees, and lead an eco-friendly lifestyle: buy eco-bags and manage waste efficiently.

The focus of the latter is the self since the collective burden of enhancing sustainability is outsourced to individuals. If the air is dirty or the water is polluted, then it is the responsibility of individuals to rethink and change their everyday habits. They can compensate their guilt by volunteering in a CSR-sponsored activity either in the suburbs or some popular tourism destination.

What is lost in this narrative is assigning accountability to policymakers who often conspire with big business in legitimizing the wanton plunder of our finite resources.

Indeed, citizens have a crucial role in cleaning our habitats; but it is the government which has the mandate and capability to mobilize an entire bureaucracy in order to ensure the rational usage of the commons. Government can regulate the activities of the extractive industry. State agencies can promote environment awareness through schools, media, and other opinion-making institutions.

Through innovative land use planning, policymakers can redraw the boundaries to promote social cohesion and ecological balance. Concretely, in the urban, it means making cities more livable, stimulating inclusive development, and building zones that uplift the living conditions of all.

But instead of fulfilling their duties, politicians betray their constituents by uncritically endorsing the worldview and business needs of their campaign donors. This includes dignifying the corporate spin about the supposed harm in society if public assets are not immediately handed over to the private sector.

Because of this, open spaces are targeted for commercial use, idled lands are converted into shopping enclaves, public properties are devalued and sold to private developers. Least priority is given to the building of parks and mass housing.

What narrow-minded and money-hungry politicians aspire to create is another pathetic replica of the First World. Then and now, the unquestioned indicator of progress in the urban is the skyscraper. A city is said to be booming if it has an expanding skyline dotted with towers, high-rise, and iconic buildings. Urban development is equated with malls, commercial centers, and flyovers.

Hence, the unlamented rapid privatization of public spaces; the corporatization of urban planning; and the distortion of the concept of ‘green city’. Thanks to corrupt and inept bureaucrats, urban planning is now largely assumed by corporate technocrats who buy, design, and build city blocks to maximize profit.

In recent years, real estate projects have adopted so-called green features which paid commentators exaggerate as an example of responsible and innovative investment. Suddenly, land developers who displaced farmers and urban poor residents have become ‘green’ heroes and visionaries. Labor exploiters are praised for integrating environment protection with commercial development.

Meanwhile, the coercive arm of the state is deployed to clear the land, evict residents, and persuade the public that these measures are needed for the benefit of the greater good, including the protection of the environment and strengthening the climate-readiness of communities.

Green Corridor

Believing that a democratic alternative is better compared to the business-driven greening initiative, Nilad environment network has launched the ‘green corridor’ campaign to promote the preservation and expansion of green spaces in the country’s premier urban hub.

It is touted as the people’s response to the ascendancy of the corporate sector in reshaping the cityscape with regard to enhancing the region’s green characteristics. This necessitates the formation of a broad movement composed of concerned citizens, environmentalists, activists, and civic groups which can counter the nefarious money-powered elite consensus.

Nilad’s campaign demands an inventory of green spaces, the expansion of the coastal green belt, and the enumeration of threatened wildlife habitats in Metro Manila. This can be used as reference in publishing a green map, the identification of small and large parks, and the tracing of bike lanes.

The political advocacy also involves local and national legislative lobbying. Laws need to be updated such as clarifying what it means to have an open space, green space, and green urban space.

Through local ordinances, we can determine the state of parks. Are parks expanding? Are they open to the general public? Policymakers have to understand that parks are more than just decorations or an optional feature of urban planning that can raise the land value of an open space. Green parks are actually essential to improving the overall health of individuals in a modernizing society. More importantly, parks boost democracy by facilitating the interaction of citizens from all walks of life. Today, as private developers gain tighter control over a rising number of parks and open spaces in the urban, the opportunity to exercise dissent and political action in public areas is getting more restricted.

Also needed is a comprehensive inventory of trees in Metro Manila. Some cities such as San Juan are mobilizing volunteers in order to count and specify the number of trees in every barangay. But the absence of a region-wide inventory of trees and a systematic accounting of tree planting programs make it easy for PPP contractors to cut trees and reduce the size of parks without generating public backlash.

On the part of Nilad, it will crowdsource the monitoring of parks and even the tagging of trees through social media. Decentralized greenwalks will be organized to evaluate the accessibility and maintenance of parks.

‘Green corridor’ is inevitably a political movement that will directly engage legislators, policymakers, and urban planners. It seeks to intervene in the ongoing conversation dominated by big business perspectives about the planning of the future of cities. It is an education campaign that aims to raise public consciousness and vigilance about some large-scale projects like the Manila Bay reclamation that threaten to destroy the biodiversity in the region. Finally, it upholds the principle that the people themselves are ready to decide and design the way we live and how we ought to live instead of simply delegating these issues to so-called experts and tycoons. Simply put, in greening the city, we envision a space where both rich and poor can inhabit in order to do business, create art, make love, enjoy nature, and practice politics.

Posted in greens, places | Tagged | Leave a comment

What will it take to combat digital authoritarianism in Southeast Asia?

By admin | October 23, 2020

This post is based on a keynote presentation delivered by the author at the first Global Voices Asia-Pacific Citizen Media Summit June 2, 2019 in Taipei, Taiwan.

The rise to power of someone like Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who gained global notoriety for launching a bloody campaign against illegal drugs, is linked to the manipulation of online information tools by populists who end up dominating elections.

Indeed, Duterte admitted to hiring a cyber army in 2016 and ran a campaign which prominently featured the use of social media to promote his candidacy. Later, his government was accused of deploying online trolls to distort public debates by spreading disinformation. He has also been also criticized for bullying the media while dangling before the public proposals to police the internet.

It is therefore no surprise to hear many people associating Duterte’s ascendancy with the alarming trend of ‘digital authoritarianism’.

But the internet cannot simply be blamed for enabling the victory of politicians like Duterte, who is in fact a newcomer in a region dominated by authoritarian regimes which came to power years before social media use became ubiquitous. For example, Cambodia’s Hun Sen was first elected prime minister in the 1980s. Thailand’s military has staged 12 coups in the past century. Singapore’s ruling party has been in power since the 1960s, and Malaysia’s ruling coalition held power from the 1950s until its defeat in 2018. Brunei has an absolute monarchy, while Vietnam and Laos are communist states.

Applied to the Philippines and the rest of Southeast Asia, digital authoritarianism refers to how the internet has been weaponized in aid of existing authoritarian regimes. It signifies the use of the online tools that many hoped would empower citizens for mass surveillance and the promotion of divisive hate speech. It reflects the actions of paranoid, repressive states seeking to prevent the rise of opposition forces by destroying connections and solidarities between communities, and online spaces of resistance.

Cybercrime legislation

Taming the ‘disruptive’ internet has been the focus of many states in the region. Internet legislation is often framed in aid of boosting national security objectives, protecting the public interest, and preserving law and order. In shaping public opinion, crusading governments have rationalized their actions by invoking the need to protect the public from online evils. They often invoke the need for social harmony, public tranquility, and defending the country’s morals and history. Indonesia, for example, seeks to censor pornography and other ‘obscene acts’, while Malaysia cites racial harmony when removing offensive internet content.

The first set of anti-cybercrime laws sought to update draconian media regulations and make them applicable in the era of social media and smartphones. Across the region, governments passed laws and orders on cyber libel and cyber defamation. What Vietnam’s decree no. 72, Myanmar’s article 66(d), Cambodia’s social media prakas (regulation), and Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act combined with the harsh lèse-majesté law have in common, is the intent to criminalize any online activity deemed a public threat or subversive in the eyes of authorities.

The current priority is the building of consensus to justify the passage of laws against so-called ‘fake news’. Last May, Singapore passed a law which defined false news this way: “A statement may be found to be false if it is false or misleading, whether wholly or in part, and whether on its own or in the context in which it appears.” Media groups were right to call the measure Orwellian. Laws like this are too broad and too vague—yet brutally precise in targeting free speech.

The author delivering his presentation at the Global Voices Asia-Pacific Summit in Taipei.

China model

The systematic approach to clamping down on free speech is often characterized in news reports as the adoption of the so-called ‘China model’. It points to the use of sophisticated technologies by security forces to control the local population—in particular, the weaponization of bureaucracy to silence dissent.

This is only partly correct, because China is not to blame for what’s happening in several Southeast Asian countries. Applied to the region, the ‘China model’ is even more sinister because of the way it is fused with built-in or local models of oppression to create a deadly mix of tools and processes that buttress the authoritarian features of governments.

What are these local instruments of oppression? Antiquated media laws, new cybercrime measures, security offices designed to gag the population, agencies toeing the line of the ruling party, and social institutions coerced to self-censor and kill critical thinking.

To speak of ‘digital authoritarianism with Chinese characteristics’ without explaining the region’s machineries of censorship would likely exaggerate China’s role in the overall equation of oppression—and make it more difficult to recognize the impunity perpetrated by evil regimes.

For it is not that governments in Southeast Asia suddenly became authoritarian because they were inspired by what China is doing. They already have repressive laws on defamation, sedition, and whistleblowing. What they got from China, primarily, was that nation’s precious political support, and the license to import surveillance hardware and totalitarian techniques to reinforce indigenous methods of controlling the local population. This has resulted in a frightening pattern of mixing digital and archaic tools of oppression to preserve the rule of despots and destroy hope of an alternative future, whose  political impact is not limited to suppressing free speech, since it has the potential to hack elections, undermine political processes, and destroy accountability.

From Asia to Silicon Valley

Is there a way out of this situation we are in? How can we break the rule of autocrats? How can we reclaim the promise and potential of the internet to strengthen our democratic vision? How can we assert our demands when voting results are digitally manipulated, public discourse is polluted by disinformation, and institutions are held hostage to archaic rulings?

I will dare to say we must go back to the basics of political organizing. At the grassroots level, we must fight not only fake news but cynicism, while planting the seeds of hope for a new political future. If we want new laws, the starting point is not lobbying, but political education in our communities. We want social movements backed by real political strength that can engage both corporate and bureaucratic powers. Our hope lies in a strong civil society that can make an impact from Asia to Silicon Valley.

Through political organizing, we can form new partnerships with various sectors who can contribute to the campaign. Students, writers, workers, farmers, software developers—each of these groupts have a role to play in this fight against what we call digital authoritarianism.

We must address the roots of conflict in society, attacking the deeper problems engendered by economic policies that are biased against the poor, and building power in the local sphere to challenge the nefarious impact of elite rule. In other words, we must work directly to combat the forces and change the social conditions that allowed authoritarians to claim power in the first place. Technology will be our friend in this long fight, but it is the people—and mainly the people—who will lead the struggle.

So it is neither a social media revolution nor a digital revolution that will save us from the clutches of digital authoritarianism, but no less than a people power revolution.

Posted in east asia, media | Tagged | Leave a comment

China’s COVID-19 Diplomacy Backfires in the Philippines

By admin | October 16, 2020

The Chinese embassy in Manila released a music video dedicated to COVID-19 frontline workers, but it quickly drew widespread anger among Filipino internet users because of the song’s indirect reference to the South China Sea, known locally as the West Philippine Sea.

The music video of the song “Iisang Dagat” (One Sea) was released on April 23. The lyrics were written by Chinese Ambassador H.E. Huang Xilian and the song was performed by Chinese diplomat Xia Wenxin from the embassy and several Filipino and Chinese celebrities.

The song mentions the friendship between the two countries and their mutual cooperation in dealing with the pandemic.

Read more

China’s Clandestine Gamble in the Philippines

The rapid expansion of Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators or POGOs is linked to rising Chinese influence on the government of Rodrigo Duterte. But this is a controversial, if not unmentionable, connection because the Chinese government has officially rejected POGOs, while the Philippines denies that it is giving preferential treatment to Chinese citizens for such businesses. For many Filipinos, however, POGOs have come to symbolize the dark side of state-backed Chinese investments in the country.

POGOs deal with online gambling. Since gambling is prohibited in many countries, POGOs allow bettors to play and transact through the internet.

Read more

Posted in nation | Tagged , | Leave a comment

IFEX Asia-Pacific brief: November and December 2019

By admin | October 11, 2020

November 2019: Blackout and landslide: 100 days without internet in Kashmir and election victory in Hong Kong

Read more

December 2019: India protests, internet shutdowns, Ampatuan verdict, and Hong Kong’s “White Christmas”

Read more

Posted in east asia | Leave a comment

Shooting people dead is the brutal legacy of the Duterte government

By admin | October 5, 2020

Published by Bayan Metro Manila

It’s not the first time that President Rodrigo Duterte has ordered law enforcers and state troops to shoot people dead but to hear him give the same directive during his press conference last night was extremely jarring, to say the least.

He was reacting to the protest of some residents in Quezon City who were merely asking for assistance yet he made it appear as if those who joined the action were conspiring to create destabilization.

His outburst was meant to make people forget that the hunger and deprivation affecting millions is caused by the government’s slow action and failure to properly prepare after the lockdown order was imposed in Luzon more than two weeks ago.

He warned against provoking social disturbance but his government is responsible for this. He was given emergency powers and more than 200 billion pesos to deal with the crisis but the government remained slow in distributing food and other relief to poor households.

Millions stayed at home, lost their jobs and livelihoods, and desperately waited for the promised assistance that was not only delayed but also inadequate.

Instead of addressing the bottleneck in the delivery of relief, Duterte directed his anger at those who were asking help from the government. It reflects an authoritarian mindset which projects a leader in control but is actually besieged by a nagging fear that he has already lost hegemony.

Duterte is haunted by the knowledge that his government is incapable of giving the basic needs of the population that is why he has chosen to rely on his trusted generals to be in charge of the COVID-19 task force.

The government is wrong to think that it can contain the virus by spreading fear. It has arrested curfew and quarantine ‘violators’, it filed charges against those who post ‘fake news’, it has summoned officials accused of undermining the efforts of the government, and it is now running after internet users who are criticizing the incompetence of the Duterte presidency.

The president’s order to shoot protesters who will endanger the lives of the police is a serious threat to civil liberties. This was the commander-in-chief giving specific instructions to police and soldiers manning the checkpoints and communities across the country. When the president issued a similar command in the past, it led to more than 5,000 drug-related deaths, displacement and bombing of Lumad communities, massacres in Negros, extrajudicial killings of activists, and other impunity attacks targeting critics of the state.

To prevent social unrest, Duterte must acknowledge the failure of his approach in confronting the country’s social problems. But his militarist thinking and anti-poor bias have polluted his judgment.

Duterte underestimates the people’s capacity to resist as it becomes more rabid in spreading terror. Our only option is to help ourselves by organizing our ranks and together we can beat COVID-19 and the virus in Malacanang.

Posted in Bayan | Tagged | Leave a comment

Activism and life-work balance

By admin | September 19, 2020

Published by Bulatlat

We are swamped with reminders about the need to slow down, refocus our priorities, and reflect on how we make good use of our time so that we live life to the fullest while improving our work productivity. We are told to aspire for a life-work balance to feel good about ourselves, enhance our opportunities, and contribute something back in our communities. Practice holistic living. Cultivate inner peace. Provide for self-care.

These are all ideal goals and sensible maxims that can empower individuals. We become more mature by constantly evaluating our choices. We make better decisions through introspection.

However, self-improvement can turn into a fetter when individuals become too enamored with how they look in the mirror and thereby weaken or even lose their sense of social solidarity. Its potential is eroded if framed to undermine collective bonds in society.

This type of individualism became popular not by accident. It got rebranded as a modern mantra during the methodical destruction of traditional ties in workplaces. The decline of unions and associations forced individuals to fend for themselves and treat everybody as competitors. This coincided with the massive reversal of social welfare programs which slashed subsidies for basic support services.

Instead of challenging the macro policies that condemned all aspects of living under the sway of free-market forces, individuals were told to be more resilient and responsible. Precarity became the reality for an increasing number of working families but the blame is pinned primarily on the failure of individuals to acquire new skills in the 21st century.

Despite the market crashes, bank bailouts, and bursting of property bubbles, what was still made imperative was the adjustment in the attitude of individuals instead of recalibrating the political economy.

Neoliberalism has been discredited several times yet it still reigns supreme as an economic doctrine. It got a friendly boost from the tech and automation sectors which disrupted local economies and rendered many jobs redundant.

Life became harder, especially for minimum wage earners. Jobs offered less protection and security. The role of welfare agencies was greatly diminished.

Despite the economy tipping on the verge of collapse, workers continue to survive on subsistence while desperately trying to become less expendable. They are expected to report for work and fulfill their duties as if the daily challenges they face can be easily ignored. Many are toiling under dire conditions and the solution offered to uplift the plight of laborers is not pay hikes or a comprehensive benefits package but a so-called life-work balance. It essentially transfers the responsibility of sustaining work productivity from capitalists to workers.

Because of this, a concept with real potential to empower individuals is again hijacked by the drive to earn more profits at the expense of labor. The very political act of probing the situation of the self in relation to the wider community is delinked from issues of power, equity, and justice.

Caring for the self should not be the end goal. What’s the purpose of doing this? Para kanino?

Activism can provide useful insight and practical guidance on how to better grasp the link between the personal and the broader set of social relationships. It can sharpen our understanding of the dynamics of changing the self in relation to social transformation.

It is more than just a matter of activism enriching our knowledge about how society works. Rather, it instills a liberating idea about how even ordinary individuals are capable of building a new world based on a more progressive set of values. And it is in the process of making the impossible possible, when individuals meet and work with other dreamers and changemakers, that they realize their full potential as human beings. The self breaking free from restrictions imposed by tradition; the individual immersed in the collective fight for good.

The personal-turned-political; the political learning to be personal. Smashing forced demarcations that sustain the oppressive structures of power. Activism as antidote to the seductive appeal of selfish individualism.

Improving the self is deliberately made part of the political struggle. Often, it is in thick of battle that an activist learns to find the proper balance in life and work. No time is wasted wallowing in prolonged self-doubt once the political priorities are identified. Personal difficulties are resolved with help from fellow activists. Perhaps some problems will continue to persist but the activist self does not allow them to limit what he or she can do in life, especially if the political goal is already set.

The self finds meaning through work with others. Work is made relevant if done for a greater cause. In other words, life-work balance is best achieved through activism.

Posted in youth | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Stop using the emergency law to silence criticism and stifle innovation

By admin | September 4, 2020

Published by Bayan Metro Manila

After filing charges against so-called ‘quarantine and curfew violators’ authorities are now summoning innovative leaders like Vico Sotto.

It confirms our suspicion that Republic Act 11469, which gives additional special powers to President Rodrigo Duterte in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, is drafted to undermine the independence of LGUs.

The Duterte government should stop using its emergency powers to engage in partisan politics and start doing something useful like the fast distribution of relief to millions of households.
Requiring the Pasig Mayor to leave the frontlines and appear before NBI investigators could hamper the delivery of vital social service programs to poor households in the city. It is needless distraction at a time when local leaders must be focused in performing their duties.

It is a selective application of the law to harass innovative leaders like Vico. The young mayor was praised for arguing the need to allow limited tricycle operations to transport health workers in the city.

Section 6 penalizes LGU officials “disobeying national government policies or directives in imposing quarantines.” It provides for an additional penalty of “perpetual, temporary absolute disqualification from office.”

While we understand the importance of a unified response in dealing with COVID-19, we also recognize that LGUs must be allowed to modify their plan of action to better address the needs of their constituents according to their evidence-based crisis assessment.

This principle is important to uphold especially if the national government standards are not applicable for implementation in some LGUs. This also becomes an imperative doctrine if the national government is delayed in conducting essential solutions like mass testing in communities and deployment of protective measures for frontliners.

Obeying the national government makes sense if it is implementing a comprehensive action plan to fight COVID-19. Disobeying it is a patriotic and humane act if based on a rational review that its purported measures are actually misguided and ineffective.

The Duterte government intends to create fear and deter people from protesting and disobeying its directives through mass arrests and intimidating a popular LGU leader like Vico. It has obviously underestimated the people’s growing outrage over the government’s incompetence in dealing with the public health crisis.

People first before petty politicking. Prioritize relief and not loyalty check for the government.

Posted in Bayan | Tagged , | Leave a comment