Laos’ Economic Agenda

By admin | June 10, 2015

Written for The Diplomat

This year marks the 60th anniversary of the Lao People’s Revolutionary Party (formerly known as Lao People’s Party), which was founded together with the Indochina Communist Party to expel foreign invaders from Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. The struggle for independence finally succeeded in 1975, which led to the establishment of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.

To celebrate the party’s achievements in the past 60 years, a large gathering of senior party leaders and high-ranking party officials was held at which party secretary-general and president of the Lao PDR Choummaly Sayasone delivered the keynote address.

Choummaly praised the “people’s fighting movement” in leading the Lao multiethnic people during the two-decade campaign for national liberation. He also defined the major victories of the party after 1975: “We were able to heal the wounds of war, restore production, promote culture, and normalize the living conditions” in the country.

He asserted that the party has remained relevant because it adopted the policy of “self-construction and self-improvement to enhance its strength with endless flexibility.” He cited the so-called renovation policy of 1986 which “replaced the bureaucratically centralized economic mechanism and subsidy-based administration with a state-managed market-orientated economy.”

A “state-managed market-orientated economy” sounds like an oxymoron but Choummaly repeated it several times in his speech to emphasize that the party has “liberalized old ways of thinking towards a realistic analysis of the [global] situation” while pursuing socialist directives.

But despite Choummaly’s claim that Lao socialism has led to the empowerment of the people, his speech provided several confirmations about the high poverty rate in the country. For example, he pushed for higher productivity to end poverty in all sectors. “We have to concentrate on alleviating the poverty of local people and graduating from least developed country status and creating a fundamental foundation for our country to move towards socialism,” he said.

He added: “We have to continue to reduce the number of impoverished families to a minimum level and create the necessary infrastructure and facilities for economic development.”

Choummaly rallied his party mates to work for the continued growth of the domestic economy, calling for an average rate of at least 7-8 percent annually until 2020. And the focus of this ambitious economic plan? Choummaly enumerated the country’s expanding sectors with high growth potential such as agriculture and forestry, processing, electricity (hydropower), and transnational tourism. He also mentioned the use of new technology in agriculture and rural development to realize the twin objectives of industrialization and modernization.

Interestingly, Choummaly also spoke of integrating political ideology with the new economic initiatives. “We must view poverty alleviation in association with strengthening political ideology at the grassroots level and comprehensive rural development.”

Perhaps this statement sums up the unique “development destination” that Laos officials are envisioning in the next few years: “The move aims to realize the objective of building up large villages to become small towns in rural areas.”

Choummaly linked the ongoing integration of the diverse economies of Southeast Asian nations with the forces of change that influence the nation’s development. He warned of “new disputes,” which he said should be decisively addressed by the new generation of party leaders.

This is probably why he diligently discussed organizational concepts such as “centrally based democratic principle” and “team-based leadership principle” after advocating for greater competitiveness and market reforms in the economy.

It may not have been the intention, but Choummaly’s speech offered a succinct overview of socialism, Laos style.

Cambodia’s ‘Cyber War’ Legislation Targets Online Critics

Written for The Diplomat

Media freedom is guaranteed in the Cambodian constitution but it is undermined since the mainstream media is largely controlled by families close to the ruling party. This is not the case for online media where censorship is almost non-existent. The government, however, is already targeting regulation of the Internet, which could further restrict free speech in the country.

In 2010, only 300,000 Cambodians had access to the Internet. By 2013, however, that number had surged to almost four million, or about a quarter of the country’s population. There are now 1.7 million registered Facebook users. Suddenly, ordinary Cambodians, including those living in rural areas, have the opportunity to receive news and information provided by the political opposition and other critical voices.

The political impact of the Internet was felt in the 2013 general elections, when the opposition attributed its victory in many areas to aggressive online campaigning. In addition, community activists and dissident monks were able to maximize the online space to highlight social issues that expose government abuse, such as landgrabbing, police brutality, corruption, and deforestation.

Perhaps feeling threatened by the social media phenomenon, the government proposed two laws in 2014 that would create several layers in the bureaucracy to directly supervise the growth and management of the Internet infrastructure. The draft laws have been assailed by some critics as serious threats to media freedom, but the government insisted that the passage of these measures is necessary to protect national security and the dignity of individuals.

The draft anti-cybercrime law intends to penalize Internet content that “generates insecurity, instability, and political cohesiveness.”

Meanwhile, the draft law on telecommunications would give the government a broader mandate as industry regulator. There are fears that authorities will use this law to install surveillance equipment that would monitor the Internet activities of Cambodian citizens.

Aside from introducing these draft laws, the government has already implemented some measures designed to discourage online dissent. In October 2014, the Press and Quick Reaction Unit at the Council of Ministers established the so-called “Cyber War Team” to monitor and collect information from Facebook and other websites in order to “protect the government’s stance and prestige.” Some officials also visited telecoms firms to inspect the data logs and billing records of some subscribers.

In a report published last week, the Cambodian human rights group Licadho warned against the “capricious controls” that the government is enforcing to weaken Internet freedom.

“Freedom of expression is a right that many Cambodians have never truly experienced. It comes as no surprise that as soon as Cambodians found a way to have their voices heard, the government has begun a comprehensive effort to once again silence them,” said Am Sam Ath, technical coordinator for Licadho.

But the government is undeterred by criticisms. A few days ago, Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan proposed “to take legal action against the ill-intentioned and unethical persons for using social media to attack, insult and defame civil servants and government leaders.”

“Insults and defamation are not part of freedom of expression, but instead violate the rights and dignity of individuals,” he added.

Cambodia has the right to pass laws that would enhance the rights and civil liberties of its citizens. Cybercrime legislation is necessary for the overall protection of the Internet sector and its subscribers. But human rights activists are right to argue about the inclusion of provisions in the draft laws that would erode the freedom that Cambodians enjoy while using the Internet. At a minimum, the government should genuinely consult civil society and other stakeholders before developing Internet-related laws.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Mahathir Versus Najib

By admin | June 4, 2015

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak’s fiercest critic today is not found in the ranks of the opposition. Rather, it is a former ally: Mahathir Mohamad.

Mahathir is Malaysia’s longest-serving prime minister, and served as mentor to Najib. Despite his retirement from government service, Mahathir has remained an influential political figure. At 89, Mahathir continues to be a newsmaker, especially when he candidly shares his views on domestic and even global affairs through his widely read blog.

Since last year, Mahathir has been criticizing the administration of Najib. But it was early this month when he launched a more comprehensive tirade against what he thinks were the fundamental blunders committed by Najib.

Writing on his blog, Mahathir pressed for clarifications on the following issues: 1) the 2006 murder of a Mongolian translator who purportedly had personal knowledge of a corruption scandal involving the defense department; 2) the reported mismanagement of the country’s investment fund (1MDB); and the 3) implementation of a cash distribution scheme to marginalized groups (BR1M).

Najib is linked to these issues through some of his former subordinates and relatives. Mahathir called on Najib to come clean on his role in investigating these issues.

Najib eventually made public a recorded video interview in response to some of Mahathir’s allegations. But Mahathir was disappointed with what he heard. Writing again on his blog, he admonished Najib for being evasive, especially on the issue of the investment fund mess.

“I asked Najib simple questions but instead of answering the questions he asked people to support him. I would like to ask the supporters whether their support means the disappearance of 42 billion Ringgit is okay, that there is no necessity to at least explain where the money is,” Mahathir wrote.

Najib hinted that his relationship with Mahathir soured when the government was not able to build a new bridge between Malaysia and Singapore. Mahathir denied this, and insisted that his real concern is the unexplained loss of taxpayers’ money in the 1MDB.

“I don’t advocate the removal of a prime minister because he is too afraid of Singapore to build a crooked bridge. But when you lose money and cannot explain where the money is, I think you are not competent to become prime minister,” Mahathir said in a press conference.

Mahathir warned the ruling coalition that it will lose in the next general election if Najib does not step down immediately.

For his part, Najib claimed he still respected Mahathir but he also emphasized that his duty is not just to listen to an individual opinion.

“Whatever the individual opinion, in the end, I will be responsible to the people and the party. It is quite healthy if there is a difference of opinion but, regardless, in the end I have to be responsible to the people and party. And most of these matters, I bring to the Cabinet and the Cabinet decides,” he said in a TV interview.

Najib added that criticisms are welcome, especially those made with “prudence and responsibility.”

“The criticisms this time are more than usual, more intense than usual. But I have to accept the political ups and downs which, under all circumstances, will not be peaceful and comfortable all the time. I take the criticisms, no matter how painful. As long as the people and the party give me the mandate, the trust, I will continue to lead the country and party,” he said during the interview.

Najib also defended the programs of his government like the BR1M and reminded the public that there were also economic problems during the term of Mahathir.

“We should not allow certain issues to be highlighted as though our economy is collapsing, or that we are having problems to the point that they cannot be resolved. This is not true at all. Tun Dr Mahathir’s era was not perfect either, nor is my era. But we must know that we are open, we improve the situation, so that tomorrow will be better than today,” Najib said.

Finally, Najib urged the public not to believe everything that is published online. “A lot of information is blown out of proportion and twisted until it is misunderstood. The majority of accusations and ‘spins’ do not reflect the reality of the situation of a particular issue or the statements made by leaders, be it the opposition or government.”

We should expect Mahathir to issue a more biting rejoinder. But Najib’s allies are also starting to hit back at Mahathir. Whatever the case, Malaysian politics has become more interesting. Will the opposition benefit from the bickering within the ruling coalition?

Najib Blogs His Response to Mahathir and Critics

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysia’s former leader Mahathir Mohamad has often criticized the incumbent Prime Minister Najib Razak through his popular blog. This time it is Najib who has used a blog to hit back at his former mentor and other critics of his administration.

Najib blogged his detailed response to 13 frequent allegations of his critics, which included some of the issues raised earlier by Mahathir such as the 2006 murder of a Mongolian translator, corruption in the bureaucracy, rising criminality, and mismanagement of the country’s finances.

Najib didn’t name Mahathir but he was clearly alluding to Malaysia’s longest-serving prime minister. For example, he questioned the irony of a critic of the West using a Western media report which cited Malaysia as among the most corrupt nations in the world. “I find it troubling that someone who used to continually criticise the international media as being biased now suddenly believes and takes their arguments as the truth,” he wrote in obvious reference to Mahathir.

Responding to his alleged involvement in the murder of a Mongolian translator, Najib said this is an old issue that has been resurrected by “veteran leaders.” He described his accusers as “influential individuals (with) many resources.” He added that his accusers could have presented more evidence against him in the past: “When the issue erupted, I believe they would still have been able to verify the validity of the allegations. If they believed this to be true, why did they not raise it when the issue erupted 8 years ago? Why now?”

Najib reiterated his innocence and reminded the public that he swore an oath on the Quran in a Mosque to prove his claim. He also emphasized that the court has already determined the guilty person in the murder case.

Addressing the charge that his government has squandered the taxpayers’ money in an investment fund mess (1MDB), Najib lashed back at some politicians for sowing intrigue. “It is unfair for certain politicians to convict the government in the court of public opinion way before the actual facts are laid down by lawful authorities.”

Again, there’s no mention of Mahathir’s name but Najib cautioned the public about unreliable online sources like blogs with malicious motives. “If we are sincere in finding out the truth behind those allegations, we need to get the information from legitimate sources and not third-party news portals or online blogs that might have hidden agendas.” Reporters should ask him if Mahathir’s blog is among those with a “hidden agenda.”

In defending the cash subsidy for the poor (BR1M), Najib hit back at politicians who refuse to appreciate the economic soundness of the program: “Some politicians say that in spite of BR1M, the people are ‘not grateful.’ This is exactly why they believe it is bribery and are not on the same page as the fiscal committee. We see it as an economic measure, but these politicians see it purely in the context of politics.”

And finally, Najib confidently asserted that the ruling coalition will continue to prevail in the next elections despite Mahathir’s warning that the blunders of the incumbent leader will bring the party down.

“If we are united, and stop the infighting, we will succeed. If we focus on constructive rather than destructive politics, we will succeed. If we focus on work instead of believing and spreading rumours, spins and half-truths, we will succeed,” Najib wrote.

Many are now eagerly awaiting Mahathir’s rejoinder in his blog. Or he could pursue his challenge of conducting a public debate with Najib. Who will emerge victorious in this showdown between two heavyweights of Malaysian politics?

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

Why I am not offended when somebody calls me a communist

By admin | June 1, 2015

Written for Bulatlat

I keep silent every time I am tagged a communist. It’s not embarrassment but more of disbelief that in this day and age, a red baiter still thinks that this kind of witch hunt is politically legitimate or even persuasive. How dangerous it is to live in a society where people are condemned simply for thinking and acting differently. It seems not enough to criticize a radical cause, one must also learn to hate the advocates of the cause. Calling an activist a commie in the Philippines is meant to be an insult. It is intended to harm the reputation of a progressive thinker. It is a demonization technique in the propaganda playbook of the anti-Left.

But the communist tag could easily lead to fatal consequences. Hundreds of activists have been disappeared or killed already after being branded by state forces as communist members or sympathizers. Despite their legal credentials, these activists were listed in the notorious Order of Battle of the Armed Forces of the Philippines for their alleged involvement with “communist-terrorist” activities. This is the principal reason why some activists refuse to be called communists.

Let us agree, however, that the term communist has more than one connotation. A communist can be a member of a Communist Party, she can be an activist passionately upholding the teachings of Marx and Lenin, or she can be a Marxist intellectual involved in some radical initiatives; and finally, she can be a dedicated and selfless revolutionary in an underground cell.

Today it is no longer a crime to profess membership in a Communist Party but only a fool or an apostate will do that in the Philippines. Because in the eyes of the state, a communist is a psychotic subversive who fanatically targets the overthrow of the established order. A communist is an NPA combatant.

A government blindly protecting the interests of the cacique class becomes a paranoid state which sees communists lurking everywhere. The specter of communism is exaggerated as a threat that must be vanquished; an abnormal presence that has no right to exist in our civilized society. Mainstream Philippine politics suffers from this pathological refusal to integrate communist philosophy in everyday discourse.

The political field has built-in mechanisms that ruthlessly expel communists or communist-leaning politicians. It welcomes politicians who steal, cheat, and lie with impunity or dynasts who equate their family history with the national interest; but it abhors politicians who articulate Leftist issues. More so, a Leftist is forced to explain first to everybody as to why it is necessary to express a political standpoint. In other words, politicians are judged approvingly not because of their commitment to defend their principles but their willingness to compromise.

Rightists or Centrists are labels which do not figure prominently in the local political vocabulary. Traditional politicians are not called for who or what they really are. As for Leftists, they are presented to the public as malicious rabble-rousers who should act more sincerely, speak more convincingly, and provide more goodwill gestures as if they are criminals who should be grateful for being allowed to exercise their rights in the political arena.

In other countries, citizens are informed about their leaders who belong to the Right, Center, and Left. In the Philippines, it is only the Leftists who are branded for espousing an ideological version of politics. This politics is no other than communist politics. Contrast this to the purportedly dogma-free politics offered by bourgeois parties. No wonder even the so-called freethinkers and mavericks of Philippine politics are hesitant to be known as ideological allies of the Left.

The tragedy is not the failure of the Left to reinvent itself but our adherence to a narrow definition of what it means to be a communist. The greater tragedy is our uncritical rejection of everything that communism stands for. Because even if we adopt the distorted perspective of the state, the idea of communism continues to be a powerful ideological weapon of the working classes. The vicious tirades against communism didn’t erode its spectral power. Then and now, a communist shows class bias in favor of the weak and downtrodden. He is a destroyer of the old world, an enemy of oppressors, a builder of a new world order, someone who has demonstrated “fidelity to the Event.” A communist intervenes in the “history of Eternity” to realize the early arrival of the future.

In the Philippines, the communists were among those who fought foreign aggressors during World War II. They were the most formidable opposition during the Martial Law regime. They have consistently advocated and fought for the upliftment of the lives of workers and farmers. Some of their demands were initially unpopular (because these were new) but they persevered until their agenda for social transformation became the most comprehensive blueprint in completing the unfinished revolution of the Katipunan.

Will the anti-Left ranting stop if we emphasize that the most abominable acts of inhumanity that caused wanton suffering in the country were not done by communists? Who steals the people’s money? Who profits from logging and mining concessions? Who refuses to distribute hacienda lands to small farmers? Who perpetuates impunity in killings, enforced disappearances and human rights violations? Who begs for American patronage? The Left, the bad communists, didn’t commit these horrible crimes of the century.

Yet we treat the Left as if it is a diabolical force that must be stopped before it wreaks havoc on our lives. At the same time, we poke fun at its inability to overthrow the repressive state. We ridicule the protracted character of the revolution.

But communists, they say, are stubborn as they continue to block the so-called ‘progress’ in the country. Who are they to stop the entry of mining companies in our watersheds? Why are they campaigning against foreign-funded development aggression projects in the ancestral domains of indigenous peoples? What is their motive in resisting the government’s corporate privatization schemes?

Communists are not always right, but when it comes to upholding human rights, they are our most reliable allies. Rightists uphold property rights while communists are more interested in equitable distribution and social justice. The bourgeois class prefers peace of the graveyard while communists are fighting for peace based on justice and real democracy.

There is another reason why I keep silent every time I am called a communist. I am quietly rejoicing because despite my petty bourgeois background and my decision to remain in the urban while the people’s war is raging the countryside, I am still seen by an adversary as a political subject worthy to be called a communist. The silence hides a proud smile and a longing to proclaim that yes, I am a communist, I am not alone, we are many and we have a world to win.

Posted in reds | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Maoism is the reason why the hills are alive in the Philippines

By admin | May 27, 2015

Written for Bulatlat

How do you explain the presence of communist rebels in the country’s forest frontiers? Interestingly, the last remaining green spaces in the boondocks are strongholds of the New People’s Army. So who really should rejoice every time a province is declared NPA-free? The masses or the extractive industry? To preserve the richness of the country’s biodiversity, it seems we need to deploy more green warriors like the NPA. The reds are probably the greens’ most reliable, albeit unmentionable ally. It is the people and their resistance which keep the hills alive, and their collaborator is the NPA.

But the narrative of the struggle is incomplete without mentioning the reason why the NPA troops are basing in the countryside. Aren’t they supposed to be grabbing power in the city center? Perhaps they will in the future, but in the meantime they are building organs of political power in the countryside. This is the Maoist legacy in the Philippines.

Since the 1960s, Maoism has become a ‘material force’ in Philippine society. Politics became more fun after a Maoist-inspired Communist Party was re-established in 1968, a Maoist guerrilla army was founded in 1969, and Maoist student activists celebrated the coming revolution in 1970. Soon after, Maoist categories became popular such as semi-feudalism, mass line, serve the people, and protracted people’s war. These terms gained nationwide relevance during the anti-dictatorship struggle in the 1970s.

However, Mao and Maoism are often lampooned in the mainstream press today. There are Marxist academics, but Maoists? There are Leftists who will proudly identify themselves as anti-Stalin and anti-Mao. It doesn’t help that the Chinese government today is behaving like a superbad of the globe. Will it help if we clarify that China’s politburo has already renounced the core teachings of Mao when Deng Xiaoping gained power in 1978?

Succeeding generations grew up without properly understanding Mao’s colossal impact on the modern history of the world when he led the Chinese people in the struggle against foreign domination during the Second World War; and subsequently, during the national liberation in 1949. One fourth of humanity “have stood up” to end feudal oppression and imperialist plunder. Even if we use today’s cynical standards, Mao deserves to be called a true patriot and hero for leading the Chinese revolution.

But alas, thanks to Cold War propaganda, Mao is quickly dismissed by many as a fat dictator obsessed only with power, ideology, and opium.

This is really unfortunate since Mao had many useful teachings that can benefit the global 99 percent. Let the well-funded researchers bombard the cyberspace with real or manufactured proofs of Mao’s personal demons; but for students of history like us and those who wanted to learn from the victorious Chinese revolution, our task is to read beyond the anti-communist rhetoric and systematically study the meaning of Mao and Maoism even if it will neither lead to academic promotion nor profitable writing career.

So what can Mao and Maoism offer us? What endeared him to young activists and revolutionaries in the 1950s and 1960s? How did he inspire the anti-colonial struggle during the early years of the Cold War era? Did Maoism distort or enrich Marxism?

Cultural Revolution

Maoism, according to its detractors, entails a defense of Stalinism. Indeed, Mao upheld the legacy of Stalin; but he was also critical of Stalin’s viewpoints. For example, he rejected Stalin’s statement that there were no more classes and class struggle in the Soviet Union. Mao warned that the remnants of the old elite and the poisonous ideology of the old order are still influential even if a proletarian party is in power. Mao added that the contradictions between the old and new ideas exist within the leadership of the Communist Party.

Studying the experience of the Soviet Union, Mao concluded in the 1950s that it isn’t enough to confiscate and develop the mode of production, there must be a corresponding change too in the superstructure. In other words, the revolution is only half-complete if ownership of the economy is socialized. This must be sustained by radicalizing the beliefs, institutions, and attitudes of the people. Stalin, according to Mao, focused too much on the economic base and ignored the other equally-important aspect of the revolution, which meant struggle in the realm of ideas and culture. Hence, the need for a ‘cultural revolution.’

Mao acknowledged Stalin’s errors but he castigated the new leaders of the Soviet Union for dismissing the positive legacies of Stalin. This sparked a schism in the Communist bloc which we came to know as the ‘great debate’. The ideological struggle became more serious when Mao warned that modern revisionists have grabbed the leadership of the Soviet Union. He said that capitalist restoration is a real possibility if the initial victory of the revolution is not consolidated. He proved he was serious when he mobilized the Chinese masses to support the ‘Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution’ in 1966.

Here was a leader who wanted his constituents to seize control of the bureaucracy. Naturally, Mao would be seen by the Western world as a madman attempting a self-coup.

But Mao proved to be correct when capitalism was eventually restored in Russia and China courtesy of the ‘modern revisionists’ in the politburo of the two countries.

Mao provided us with the essential Marxist lesson of the last half of the 20th century: The dictatorship of the proletariat can always relapse into the former rule of the bourgeoisie. Therefore, in order to decisively defeat modern revisionism, the masses must continuously mobilize and defend the revolution.

People’s War

But Mao’s strategy to win the revolution is more interesting and applicable for the Philippines. His analysis that Russia’s Bolshevik model is unsuited to the prevailing conditions of semi-feudal and semi-colonial China was adopted too by Filipino revolutionaries in the 1960s. Instead of an urban insurrection led by workers, Mao theorized that the Chinese revolution can first succeed via a people’s war. The forces of reaction are strong and seemingly invincible in the cities but they are weak in the countryside. Mao argued that a people’s army can build strength in these remote regions, establish and consolidate the political rural base of the Party, and capture the cities when the mass movement is able to accumulate enough strength. Mao emphasized that the people’s army will enjoy mass support if it fights feudalism in the provinces. To win over the peasant masses, the people’s army must therefore make land reform its principal agenda. This revolution will fight for genuine independence and democracy but it will be sustained by the socialist construction of society. This is the essence of the national democratic revolution with a socialist perspective.

If this is familiar, it is because the NPA subscribes to this model. The NPA was patterned after China’s liberation army. The major difference is that the NPA is waging war in an archipelago. But the end goal is the same: Surround the cities from the countryside where red political power can exist.

Teacher Mao

Mao’s legacy in the Philippines is not limited to the NPA. Activists translated several articles of Mao which enriched the country’s political discourse. When we say ‘learn from the masses’, it reflects the enduring power of Maoist quotations. China’s Red Book summarized Mao’s teachings but its essential contents were amplified through the Struggle for National Democracy and Philippine Society and Revolution, the country’s most popular textbooks on Communism.

Mao’s ‘Talks at the Yenan Forum’ which discussed proletarian art and literature, proved highly significant in radicalizing numerous artists and writers in the 1970s. It also set the framework on how to merge aesthetics and politics which challenged the dominant conservative perspectives in the academe.

Philosophy students can enhance their knowledge on Hegelian dialectics by reading Mao’s ‘On Practice, On Contradiction.’ Another essay by Mao, ‘On the Correct Handling of Contradictions among the People’, is an impressive example of using his philosophy to study the political situation.

Mao had consistently fought to bridge the gap between the rural and urban. He sought to erase the division between manual and mental labor. He ridiculed abstract knowledge divorced from practice. He discouraged excessive theorizing. He called on young people and the intellectuals to live with peasants and workers.

China’s spectacular economic growth is often credited to the market reforms initiated by Deng after 1978. But the fundamentals of the strong Chinese economy were established during the phase of socialist construction under the leadership of Mao.

Mao in the 21st Century

How long will China’s leadership keep up the false claim that it continues to honor the radical legacy of Mao? Will the Chinese people rise up again to fight a new revolution?

Mao is dead but Maoism has survived in the 21st century. What kept it alive all these years despite the betrayal at the China front? A new generation of activists is rediscovering the original and daring ideas of Mao. Revolutionaries all over the world are embracing and affirming the validity of Maoism. The remote corners of the so-called Third World are alive with the people’s struggles. And here in the Philippines, Mao’s teachings on the united front, his leadership during the long march, his theories on guerrilla warfare, his polemics against pseudo-revolutionaries, and even his foreign policies are enthusiastically being discussed in various study sessions from the countryside to the cities.

Posted in reds | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Cambodia Defends Its Human Rights Record

By admin | May 17, 2015

Written for The Diplomat

Cambodia presented its human rights report before the United Nations Office in Geneva amid growing allegations that abuses are being systematically committed by state forces. The UN committee acknowledged that Cambodia has introduced some reforms in recent years, in particular land reform and registration of indigenous communal lands. But it also expressed dissatisfaction with the answers given by the Cambodian representatives, especially over the issue of impunity and extrajudicial killings.

The Cambodian government was represented by Ney Samol, Permanent Representative of Cambodia to the UN Office at Geneva, and Mak Sambath, president of the National Human Rights Committee of Cambodia.

The committee tackled several issues that seek to probe the role of the Cambodian government in addressing the rising number of human rights violations across the country in the past two decades.

One panel member asked why the police seemed hesitant to aggressively pursue investigations involving trafficking cases. Related to women’s issues, another panel expert expressed concern about the plight of women workers in the garment sector. The panel also cited a report published by Cambodia’s Minister of Women’s Affairs in 2012 and 2013 which mentioned that 35 percent of men had used some form of physical violence against women. It confirmed news reports of increasing incidences of domestic violence, rape, and acid attacks.

Cambodia was praised for abolishing death penalty but an expert observed that “there was still a gap between law and practice with regard to the right to life.” Proof of this is the unsolved murder cases of 12 journalists.

Cambodia was pressed to improve its policies concerning civil and political rights. The committee enumerated several laws and programs that limit free speech and assembly on the grounds of defamation, disinformation and incitement. Journalists were in fact threatened with detention and prosecution for purportedly spreading disinformation. Two other draft laws, cybercrime and civil society regulation, could also undermine citizen rights. An expert urged Cambodia to involve the public in finalizing these measures.

The committee also demanded more information about Cambodia’s prison system. Finally, it encouraged the government to respect the integrity and independence of the judiciary.

Cambodia firmly denied that activists are persecuted in the country. According to the government side, everyone in Cambodia is free to conduct political work as exemplified by the more than 1,000 NGOs that focus on human rights. Overall, there are more than 4,000 NGOs allowed to operate in the country, and these groups are not forbidden to criticize government policies.

The government also informed the committee that prison visits are regularly made to prevent torture. It claimed that it has been “working tirelessly” to solve the cases of disappeared and murdered journalists. It insisted that there’s no impunity in Cambodia.

It reminded the committee that Cambodia has been cooperating with international bodies to monitor the country’s compliance with human rights agreements. So far, Cambodia has already welcomed five special rapporteurs.

At one point of the proceedings, the Cambodian panel was combative. Asked about the gender imbalance in the government delegation, the Cambodian representative retorted that all five special rapporteurs to Cambodia had also been male, just like all secretary-generals of the UN.

The representative went on to defend the country’s record in upholding women’s rights by mentioning that some 20 percent of women were in leading positions in Cambodia’s public institutions.

Finally, the Cambodian government stressed that protests or public gatherings that threaten “security and stability” are temporarily prohibited.

Cambodia’s report to the UN was criticized by Licadho, a local human rights group. It noted that the report “lacks any connection to the present situation on the ground and reflects the authorities’ unwillingness to seriously acknowledge and address serious and systematic human rights violations.”

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch, an international watchdog, submitted several recommendations to the UN pertaining to the human rights situation in Cambodia. Some of these included the establishment of an independent commission to investigate irregularities in the 2013 elections, the opening of the media sector to independent and opposition voices, and a lifting of all arbitrary bans on freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

Thailand’s New Law Could Be Worse than Martial Law

Written for The Diplomat

The decision of the Thailand government to lift martial law on April 1 has failed to appease critics after General Prayuth Chan-ocha signed a new law that imposed harsher security measures across the country.

Martial law was declared on May 20, 2014 to restore order in the nation’s capital, which was besieged at the time by street clashes between pro-government and opposition forces. Two days later, a coup was launched by Prayuth, who established a government called the National Council of Peace and Order. The NCPO drafted an interim Constitution that was used to appoint government bodies including the legislature. Prayuth’s appointees subsequently named him as the country’s prime minister. But despite the existence of civilian agencies, martial law was retained.

The government was probably hoping to deflect international criticism when it revoked martial law this week. Yet it is hoping to restore confidence by replacing martial law with Order Number 3/2558 (3/2015), which invoked article 44 of the interim constitution to justify the enactment of extraordinary security-related measures. For some critics, the new order is akin to the draconian provisions of Thailand’s 1959 charter, which gave the military leader vast powers to persecute and prosecute the opposition.

The new order provides the appointment of “peace and order maintenance officers” from the ranks of the military who are given broad powers to defend the security of the state. These army personnel can search homes, summon and arrest troublemakers, confiscate property, and detain suspected individuals in special premises for up to seven days even without judicial authority.

Article 5 of the order could further undermine free speech in the country. The provision reads: “Peacekeeping Officers are empowered to issue orders prohibiting the propagation of any item of news or the sale or distribution of any book or publication or material likely to cause public alarm or which contains false information likely to cause public misunderstanding to the detriment of national security or public order.” (Unofficial translation by iLaw, the Freedom of Expression Documentation Center)

Thailand media groups described the article as a “greater threat to press freedom and freedom of expression than the lifted Martial Law.”

“Civilians are also at risk, as people who communicates and discusses topics through online social media that contain information viewed by the authorities as threat to national security, cause of public alarm, spreading of false information or public misunderstanding will be punished on the same condition,” the media groups warned in a joint statement signed by the Thai Journalists Association, National Press Council of Thailand, Thai Broadcasting Journalists Association, and News Broadcasting Council of Thailand.

They urged the NCPO to clarify the intent of the article and provide a more specific definition of “national security threat” and “dissemination of false information.”

Freedom of assembly is still curtailed, as stated in article 12 of the order which bans “political gatherings of five or more persons.” Referring to this provision, the Southeast Asian Press Alliance asked: “If the aim of the order is to lift martial law, why are such activities still banned and what are the criteria for giving permissions to such gatherings?”

Meanwhile, the Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reminded the public that the order didn’t remove martial law in the southern border provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, and the four districts in Songkhla. A Muslim separatist movement is currently active in the southern region.

Anusorn Iamsa-ard, spokesperson for the former ruling Pheu Thai Party, likened the lifting of martial law and the enactment of the new order as “running away from a tiger into a crocodile.” Sathit Pitutecha, deputy chairman of the Democrat Party, warned NCPO that the order “will destroy the confidence of both domestic and foreign communities, especially the international communities, who will only see Thailand as more of a dictatorship.”

Even the National Human Rights Commission, which rarely criticizes the NCPO, issued a statement about the detrimental impact of the measure. “The PM has to be cautious about falling into the trap of having so much authority, which could lead to criticism later on. During a time that the country is trying to promote national reform and solve inequality issues, I doubt that it’s suitable to use Article 44 or martial law,” said NHRC Commissioner Niran Pitakwatchara.

Instead of assuring the international community about its commitment to democratic transition, Thailand further damaged its reputation by choosing to affirm its restrictive policies.

“Normally I would warmly welcome the lifting of martial law, but I am alarmed at the decision to replace martial law with something even more draconian, which bestows unlimited powers on the current Prime Minister without any judicial oversight at all,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein.

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

Bakit Aktibista Ang Crush Ng Crush Mo?

By admin | May 14, 2015

Sinulat para sa Manila Today

Dahil nagtitiwala siya sa masa; dahil kinakalinga siya ng masa

Kaibigan ng mga inaapi, kaaway ng mga ilustradong kontrabida sa lipunan. Hindi umaastang bayani, sa halip ay nakasandig sa lakas ng mamamayang pumipiglas. Mayroon siyang barkada na ang tawag niya ay kolektib, mayroon siyang ugnay mula siyudad hanggang probinsiya na tinukoy niyang mass base, at ang motto niya sa buhay ay sundin ang linyang masa. Sabi niya, hindi habag (at hashtag) ang kailangan ng mahirap kundi ang pagsulong ng kanilang pakikibaka. Tinanong siya minsan ng crush mo, pwede ba akong lumahok sa pakikibakang ito? At ang kanyang sagot, palayain mo muna ang puso kong binihag mo.

Dahil siya ay palaban; dahil siya ay lumalaban

Hindi naman siya basag-ulo at bodybuilder pero lagi siyang nang-aaway. Wala siyang pasensiya sa mga kurakot, sa mga pulitikong abusado sa kapangyarihan, sa mga nangangamkam ng lupa, sa mga nanghahamak sa karapatan ng manggagawa, sa mga sunud-sunuran sa dikta ng dayuhan. Tila hindi sapat para sa kanya ang magpahayag ng galit; sa tuwina ay may kasunod itong pagkilos, pag-oorganisa, pagbaklas. May nagliliyab na poot sa kanyang dibdib. At ang hangad niya ay pasiklabin ang apoy na ito at paramihin ang mga pusong umaalab hanggang magluwal ng bagong liwanag sa lipunan.

Dahil prinsipyo ang kanyang ginto

Halos walang bisyo at hindi sabit sa mga uso dahil kadalasan kulang o walang pambili ng luho. Dahil wala naman siyang romantikong pagtingin sa buhay mahirap; sadyang natutunan na lamang niyang huwag sambahin ang mga materyal na bagay. Kung gayon, ano ang kanyang pinagmamalaking yaman? Dunong-paaralan, diploma? Kahit trapong pulpol mayroon niyan. Pero ang prinsipyong di-nabibili, yan ang kanyang sinisikap isabuhay at higit na pinagyayaman. Natatangi dahil may paninindigang marupok at mapagkunwari. Pero ang kanyang pamantayan ay maging tunay na lingkod bayan at rebolusyonaryo. Lagi niyang sambit, simpleng pamumuhay at puspusang pakikibaka. Paano yan, romantiko na’y mandirigma pa.

Dahil marunong siyang umako ng kanyang kahinaan at pagkakamali

Kaugnay ng sinundang talata, maaaring isiping nagpapanggap na perpektong karakter ang aktibista. Subalit hindi. Tao rin na may kapintasan. At maraming masusumbat sa kanya: sa kanyang pakikitungo sa kapwa, sa kanyang aktitud sa mga praktikal na usapin, sa kanyang tila malagim na tanaw sa buhay. Pero may silbi ang husga dahil pinagmuni-munian niya ito at umakma sa mga punang natanggap. Ang tawag niya dun ay pagpapanibagong-hubog. Minsan may dinaluhan siyang group therapy na kung saan ang mga sumali ay nagpuna sa aktitud ng iba habang nagpuna rin sila sa kanilang sarili. At pagkatapos nito’y tila higit na tumibay ang motibasyong makibaka, lumaban, at umibig.

Dahil binabaka niya ang pyudal na kultura at pagsasamantala

Pwede bang maging “maginoo pero medyo bastos”? Magalang pero lihim na arogante sa relasyon? Bukas ang isip sa mga bagong ideya pero hindi sa kasarian? Inaangat sa pedestal ang kababaihan subalit ayaw silang pakawalan sa kulungan ng kusina’t kama? Ang palusot ng marami ay pamana diumano ng depektibong kultura; hindi pa daw tayo handa sa makabagong sensibilidad. Subalit umaalma ang aktibistang tutol sa diskriminasyon. Kung pyudal ang kaisipan, bakit hindi ito baguhin? Kung ang kultura ay mapang-api’t dekadente, bakit hindi ugatin ang sanhi nito at pangibabawan? 2015 na, kahit ang burgis na pananaw sa pakikipagrelasyon ay dapat ng ibasura.

Dahil habang pinaglilingkuran niya ang sambayanan, inaalay niya ang natitirang lahat-lahat sa kanyang iniirog

Hindi kaya siya napapahandsgod magmahal? Mahal niya ang manggagawa, ang magsasaka, ang masang lumalaban, at iba pang mga taong hindi niya kakilala subalit kakapit-bisig niya sa parlyamento ng kalye. Namamangha ka’t di makapinawala na pagkatapos magpamalas ng pag-ibig sa bayan, siya ay nakapaglalaan pa ng pambihirang pag-ibig sa isang indibidwal, sa kanyang sinisinta. May puwang sa kanyang puso na hindi pwedeng angkinin ninuman, kahit ni Inang Bayan. Ang puso ng tibak ay alay sa bayan subalit ang tibok nito ay para lamang sa kanyang pinakaiisang minamahal.

Dahil pangmatagalan ang kanyang perspektiba kaya’t handa siyang maghintay hanggang magtagumpay

Mahaba raw ang pakikibaka, matagalan daw ang digmang bayan, at siya ay buong loob na magpapakatatag. Handa raw niya ialay ang lahat-lahat sa kilusang masa habang bitbit ang pangako ng pag-ibig. Kung hindi pa ukol ngayon, bakit manlulumo samantalang hindi pa nasusulat ang kuwento ng hinaharap. At bakit hihintayin ang wakas samantalang pwedeng umusbong ang pagmamahalan sa panahon ng digma. Maraming sangandaan sa mahabang byahe, at ang daan ay tigib ng panganib, subalit sa kahuli-hulihan ang kanyang katapatan sa ideya ng rebolusyon at pag-ibig ang huhubog ng kanyang bukas.

Dahil dalisay at dakila ang kanyang pag-ibig

Paalala ni Bonifacio: “Aling pag-ibig pa ang hihigit kaya sa pagkadalisay at pagkadakila gaya ng pag-ibig sa tinubuang lupa?” Wagas dahil bakit mo mamahalin ang isang daang milyong nilalang na hindi mo pa naman nakikita. Dagdag pa’y walang katiyakan na makakatanggap ka ng gantimpalang mangingibig. Subalit patuloy ang pag-alay ng buhay para sa bayan. Mga bayani at karaniwang tao – lahat sila, lahat tayo nagmamahal kahit pilit dinudungisan ng mga mapang-api ang pagsangkot sa pakikibaka ng masa. Ang gusto ng ilan, pag-ibig na mababaw, pakitang-tao na gumagampan diumano ng tungkulin para sa bayan. Subalit para sa aktibistang nagmamahal, hindi uubra ang mga ganitong simbolismo at posturang walang silbi. Dapat tapat sa panata. Dapat ramdam ng mamamayang bumubuo sa bayan. Dapat pag-ibig na marubdob, mabagsik subalit matamis.

Dahil ang pag-ibig niya ay mapagpalaya

Tulad sa telenobela, masayang pagtatapos ang pangarap niya. Pero ligaya na hindi pangdalawang tao lamang. Pag-ibig na mapagbigay, nagsasariling mundo subalit bumabago ng mundo. Aanhin ang saya ng dalawang puso kung mayroong dalawang bilyon na lugmok sa pagdurusang pwede namang maiwasan o tapusin. Kaya ang pag-ibig niya ay para sa isa at para rin sa lahat. Pag-ibig na bumibihag at nagpapalaya. Sa isang lipunang marahas, pag-ibig at pakikibaka ang tanging pag-asa na magpapalaya sa lahat.

Posted in reds, youth | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Malaysia Strengthens Sedition Act

By admin | May 8, 2015

Written for The Diplomat

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has made two contrasting pledges with regard to the Sedition Act of 1948. First, during the election period in 2012, he vowed to repeal the archaic law. Then, two years later, he announced that the law would be strengthened to preserve domestic harmony. Last Friday, Najib’s allies in parliament upheld the latter when they passed a bill that made several amendments to the Sedition Act.

Some government critics will no doubt be relieved that the amendments included the removal of provisions that make it seditious to criticize the government and the judiciary. Overall, though, the new law represents a greater threat to human rights and free speech. The maximum jail term for general sedition cases has been increased from three to seven years. A new provision allows for a penalty of up to 20 years for seditious activities that result in physical harm or destruction of property.

The government argues that the new law is necessary to prevent malicious individuals from using the Internet to cause divisions in society. In particular, the law is said to be the government’s response to the demand of certain groups in Sabah and Sarawak to secede from the Malaysian Federation.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi admitted this in a statement given to media. “Last time, there was no Internet and non-verbal communication over social media. Those days, we didn’t have groups of people inciting people (in Sabah and Sarawak) to get out of Malaysia.”

But the government’s determination to maintain unity was affirmed at the expense of establishing a environment conducive to a free media.

One of the amendments empowers the Sessions Court to issue a prohibition order on a seditious publication that would “likely lead to bodily injury or damage to property” or that “appears to be promoting feeling of ill will, hostility or hatred” between different races or classes on the grounds of religion.”

The Institute of Journalists Malaysia (IJM) warned in a statement that the ambiguity of the terms “likely” and “appears” could be open to abuse and misinterpretation. It also finds the prohibition order to be “an unfairly harsh punishment,” especially since it has no expiry date.

Another amendment allows the court to issue an order to remove seditious content from publications issued by electronic means, such as online publications. Those who are found to be “propagating” seditious messages will be prohibited from accessing any electronic device.

The IJM said this particular provision will have a negative impact on online journalism: “The inability to access tools of the trade will mean online journalists’ careers are at risk and threatens the existence of legitimate news portals. The prohibition on ‘propagating’ seditious speech or their publication also means that online news portals cannot share allegedly seditious remarks on social media and RSS feeds will cease to exist, further silencing discussion on policies and issues which are of national interest.”

For Janarthani Arumugam, president of EMPOWER, a media advocacy group, the term “propagation” is too broad, and could be invoked to silence online users: “One assumes that a retweet and a Facebook share would be considered as propagation. Would these broad and vague terms also make it an offence for journalists, activists, and ordinary people to quote allegedly “seditious words” when commenting on or criticizing them in any publication?”

Even the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein is concerned about these provisions: “These proposals are particularly worrying given that the Sedition Act has been applied in many instances to curb the legitimate exercise of freedom of expression in Malaysia.”

He was probably referring to the scores of critics, journalists, academics, activists, and opposition politicians who had been arrested in recent months for alleged sedition.

The new Sedition Act makes it possible for citizens to freely criticize government officials but it doesn’t mean it has ceased to be a tool for repression. For former law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, laws like the Sedition Act “are made not to maintain harmony, but to maintain the government in power.”

Malaysian Opposition Rallies for Anwar

Written for The Diplomat

Ten thousand Malaysians joined the #KitaLawan (We Fight) rally last Saturday to press for the release of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. It was Malaysia’s first major rally of the year, and was organized in response to the high court decision affirming the sodomy conviction of Anwar.

Anwar is serving a five-year sentence after he was found guilty of the sodomy charge filed by a former aide. But Anwar said the case was politically motivated and he accused the judges of “bowing to the powers” in “murdering the judiciary.”

The number of people who attended the rally was impressive, since the police had earlier warned organizers that they might be arrested for sedition.

“If they are gathering to intimidate the government, and others, this is wrong,” said police Deputy Inspector-General Noor Rashid Ibrahim.

But this didn’t deter ordinary Malaysians from showing up in the streets and gathering in front of the Kuala Lumpur City Center. To their credit, the police also exercised restraint during the actual event and allowed the program to end peacefully.

“We are proud to hold the record of (our rallies) causing no damage to public property, not having ever caused unrest and we have gathered with noble intentions, and shown courage to resist continued oppression,” said Batu MP Tian Chua as reported by alternative news magazine Malaysiakini.

The rally also overcame the reported reluctance of some members of the opposition to give full support to the event. Some even instructed opposition politicians to focus on constituency work instead of joining the march.

But Malaysian NGOs, activists, and concerned citizens who marched in the streets showed that the #KitaLawan rally was more than just a pro-Anwar mobilization; instead, it also became a political event that united various groups against the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Opposition coalition president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail was inspired by the crowd that joined on March 7.

“At first we were saddened, but now our spirits have been renewed and we will continue the struggle. Anwar’s imprisonment has given us more push to continue our struggle,” she said.

Nurul Izzah Anwar, a second-term MP and the opposition leader’s eldest daughter, opined in an interview with Global Voices that #KitaLawan represented the aspiration of Malaysians to restore democratic rule in the country. “Any regime that imprisons it’s opposition leader does not practice democracy. The rally is a manifestation of the undercurrent of support for reforms and change in this country. In particular the change of the ruling elite.”

#KitaLawan rallies were also held by Malaysian migrants and students in other countries. In London, one of the speakers in the solidarity action was former British minister of state for trade Richard Needham.

But not everybody was happy with the Saturday rally. Gerakan Youth chief Tan Keng Liang urged the police to arrest the organizers of the “illegal assembly” and for causing traffic jams and livelihood losses in the city. “They have no right to disrupt the lives of other Malaysians. If they wish to demonstrate, then do it peacefully in a stadium,” he said.

Last Saturday’s #KitaLawan rally was smaller compared with the hundreds of thousands that joined the Bersih and Reformasi democracy actions in the past. But the movement is still starting and it has the potential to gather and mobilize a broader segment of the population, especially those who are already disappointed with the leadership of the ruling coalition. This is a promising year for Malaysia’s democratic forces.

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

How to write against the Left

By admin | April 22, 2015

Written for Bulatlat

Start by insinuating that it’s evil to be associated with the Left, for example ‘Beware of Left-leaning groups’. There’s no need to elaborate; simply insert the term ‘Left’ in a sentence to warn innocent minds about the threat posed by Leftist individuals, groups, institutions, and ideologies. To make it more convincing, tag the Left with loaded descriptions such as godless, anti-Filipino, anti-democracy, pro-China, and terrorists. Even the seemingly objective word ‘militant’ suggests aggressiveness that furthers the stereotype of the Left as passionate but irrational creatures.

After the initial demonization technique, accuse the Left of trying to sow violence and chaos. Again, there’s no need to back up the charge with evidence. What is effective is to isolate the Left by depicting it as a monstrosity in mainstream society. Spread fear in the hearts of the people about the trouble that the Left will allegedly bring if it is allowed to operate in the community.

If a Leftist has a sensible proposal, reject it and persuade or even force others to do the same. Why? Because the Left always has a hidden agenda; it is always concocting a conspiracy that will create mayhem in society. If other political forces and traditional politicians are quiet about their political aims, it is called political strategy. But the Left – it cannot be allowed to practice the fine art and science of politics because its goal is disequilibrium, its methods are dictatorial, and its advocates are uncouth. The new order imagined by the Left will be administered by perverted ideologues who have no sense of humor. Watch out, the Left will hijack and subvert our democratic way of life.

In the academe, describe the Left as dogmatists. Ask why it is stubbornly clinging to a single creed and contrast this to your so-called postmodern approach of mixing theories. Proceed by calling them enemies of pluralism and democratic discourse. Label them Stalinists who are intolerant of opposing views. Or present yourself as a scholar who respects multiple perspectives (except the viewpoint of the Left, of course). Or proclaim that all shades of democracy are welcome (but not national democracy).

Debunk the claim of Leftists that their worldview is scientific. Remind them that they don’t have a monopoly of truth and that grand narratives in the social sciences are no longer fashionable. Replace the tired jargons of the Left with post-political, post-ideological categories such as multiculturalism, civil society, and tripartism. It’s already suffocating and boring if we continue to talk about Leftist themes such as alienation, surplus value, and collectivization. Too Western, male-centric, logo-centric, passe. Time to move on by tackling marginal topics such as sexuality, gender roles, and exotic cultures.

The big themes should be replaced by micro politics; and language games rather than social commitment should be the priority of a true scholar.

During debates, it is useful to raise the specter of dead communist leaders like Stalin and Mao. Repeat the standard depiction of these leaders in the bourgeois press as superbads and villains of modern history. Even if the debate is about education reform or labor rights, always try to redirect the discussion towards the crimes against humanity purportedly committed by Stalin, Mao, and the Khmer Rouge. If the Leftist counters by reciting the horrific sins of capitalist regimes, denounce him for deliberately obfuscating the issue.

Remind the Leftist that Marx is a thinker whose ideas are applicable only in the mid-1850s. Ridicule his decision to read a philosopher who wrote the Communist Manifesto in the 19th century. Ignore the Leftist who will argue that if Marx is already irrelevant in the 21st century, then what do you call the teachings of Adam Smith who died in 1790? Should we then stop reading the Greek classics and stick to modern fiction like Twilight? Ignore all these and insist that Marx, and only Marx, has nothing insightful to offer to our students today other than discredited concepts like class struggle.

Hit hard and proudly assert that socialism clearly didn’t work as proven by the demise of Soviet Russia. Instead of socialism, why not embrace the infinite possibilities offered by capitalism? Indeed, why turn our backs on a system that gave us world wars, mass hunger in the age of plenty, wage slavery amid the creepy accumulation of fictitious capital, and totalitarian regimes disguised as liberal democracies?

Question the sincerity of Leftist personalities. Why is Joma enjoying a luxurious life in Europe? (Forget his refugee status). Why are activists patronizing American-made products if they are genuine nationalists? (Adopt a distorted interpretation of their anti-imperialist demand). Why is the Left silent over the bullying behavior of China? (Try googling ‘Bayan Muna against China’). Why did activist legislators use pork barrel funds in the past; they must be corrupt (That’s why they remained poor after three terms in Congress).

After doubting their motives, attack their tactics. Rallies only cause inconvenience, their participation in elections is a case of opportunism, labor unions hurt the economy, the punitive and resistance actions of the New People’s Army are criminal and terroristic. Blame rallies for causing destabilization or scaring away investors. If there’s a broad political event that threatens the ruling order, disrupt it by presenting it as an unholy alliance between the Left and other sinister forces of the elite.

Use the tyranny of numbers to confuse the public about the relevance of the Left. How can the Left legitimately give voice to the poor if its candidates habitually lose in senatorial and local elections? The masses who join rallies only represent a noisy minority manipulated and brainwashed by the Left.

Discredit rallies since these are the visible and most familiar political representations of the Left. Dismiss rallyists as paid protesters (pambili daw ng bigas), deplore protest actions as impotent interventions that only amplify negativity in society, and deny the effectivity of slogans to inspire the public or even clarify a complex social issue. In other words, depict rallies as ordinary and even inferior political actions. Be careful not to leave a hint that joining rallies is an outstanding example of practicing direct democracy. Never ever mention it and instead exaggerate the disastrous impact of rallies on the city’s traffic and garbage problems.

As an indirect stab to the strategies of the Left, give extra attention to other initiatives that seemingly offer durable solutions to national problems by bloating their reach. (Self-help, civic volunteerism, social commerce). Encourage people to look inwardly or to be active in non-political associations instead of supporting the lost causes of the fighting Left.

And since we really believe that the case against the Left is solid, urge the state to be ruthless against it and its sympathizers. Throw the books at them, including the Red Book. Arrest the usual suspects, with or without a valid court order. Good communists are dead communists, or at least make them disappear. And if debating is useless, choose the lazy but tried and tested red baiting option. Activists, dissenters, and other critics might be correct some of the time but unfortunately they are Leftists. The iron fist of the state and its repressive apparatuses should be applied on them if they will not renounce their beliefs. Challenge them to denounce the NPA as a terrorist group, and if they refuse, then they must be one of them. This is how we preserve peace and promote democracy in our freedom-loving society.

***********************

Some really believe that they have witty rants against the Left but many of their arguments are actually unoriginal and formulaic. Some uncritically repeat Cold War rhetoric that never bothered to recognize the dynamism of Leftist movements in the 21st century. Some are too naïve that it’s unnecessary to make a rejoinder. Perhaps they unconsciously absorbed the petty remarks against the Left from schools, mass media, government agencies, and other conservative opinion-making institutions. We were heavily bombarded with anti-Left propaganda, disguised as neutral information, that when we encounter Leftists in our happy community, our impulse is to violently disagree with their views and reject their proposals.

We think the Left is too negative but have we ever wondered why we are too negative when it comes to the Left? Or why do we recoil when we detect a Leftist viewpoint while we are capable of tolerating other philosophies?

The Left is often disparaged for its simplistic analysis of what is happening in our world. Academics mockingly ask, can the Left improve its style and brand? Their student leaders echo the appeal by poking fun at some of the Left’s slogans like ‘Imperyalismo Ibagsak!’

But what if the real necessity today is not the rebranding of the Left but the unlearning of our misconceptions about it? That the greater tragedy is not the stubborn adherence of the Left to its principles and style of work but our refusal to acknowledge that it offers the most cogent and comprehensive political program which can immediately and ultimately empower the weak and downtrodden in the country. If unimpressed by the vocabulary of the Left, can you at least take time to study its substantial agenda for change? Give the Left a chance to turn this society upside down.

We worry too much about the faults and inadequacies of the Left as if we are really concerned about them. As a political movement, the Left should continually assess and review its impact on society, and this includes listening to the valid criticisms raised by supporters and the general public. The Philippine Left cannot survive this long if it’s indifferent to criticisms or if it has failed to update its methods. Let the debates continue, let a hundred mini-rectification movements prosper.

As for the unofficial style guide of ranting against the Left, perhaps the Left’s ideological adversaries already know by now that the revolution cannot be defeated by merely spreading fallacies, innuendos, and malicious intrigues against it.

Posted in reds | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rising Child Labor Abuse in the Philippines

By admin | April 6, 2015

Written for The Diplomat

Child labor exploitation is worsening in the Philippines. In 2011, the Philippine National Statistics Office reported that there were 5.5 million working children in the country, 2.9 million of whom were working in hazardous industries such as mines and plantations. The agency added that 900,000 children have stopped schooling in order to work. The following year, the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR) released a survey that showed that one out of four workers in palm oil plantations in northeast Mindanao region were children below 18 years old.

Last month, the Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education Research (EILER) published a baseline study which confirmed the prevalence of child labor in mines and plantations in various parts of the country. In plantation communities, about 22.5 percent of households have child workers. In mining towns, child labor incidence was 14 percent. The group noted that the youngest worker interviewed in the study was five years old, although the common age of child workers was 12. The group learned that 76 percent of child laborers have stopped attending school. Most child laborers were working for 10 hours a day, or 13 to 16 hours a day in some extreme cases.

Child laborers in oil palm fields often serve as fruiters, harvesters, haulers, loaders, and uprooters. Meanwhile, child laborers in sugarcane estates work in weeding, harvesting and fetching of water. Banana plantation workers are assigned in bagging and de-leafing duties. Outside banana plantations younger children are involved as banana peelers for rejected bananas which will be dried and processed as animal feeds.

In mines, child laborers usually fetch water, carry sacks of rocks, load thick logs that are used to support the underground tunnels, or become errand boys of regular workers. They are also reserve workers or relievers whenever regular miners cannot come to work.

Girls in mines work in gold panning or provide services to miners such as doing their laundry or cooking meals.

EILER observed that child workers are exposed to extreme weather conditions, long working hours, and harsh environments while using substandard tools and equipment. In plantations, trucks would pick children from their homes and bring them to makeshift tents that are located in nearby provinces to stay and work there from two weeks to one month without their parents. And since most plantations use harmful agro-chemicals, the children are also directly exposed to these threats.

Children in mines are handling dangerous tools and are made to work without personal protective equipment for long hours. They are also vulnerable to social hazards like the use of illegal drugs inside the tunnels to keep them awake for hours.

“The nature of their work which provides very little wages coupled with the fact that they skip school means that child laborers are unable to break from the families’ cycle of poverty, perpetuating the problem of inter-generational poverty among the poor families in the plantation and mining industries,” said Anna Leah Escresa-Colina, executive director of EILER.

She added that low wages, contractualization, and lack of livelihood for families as some of the factors pushing children to work even in hazardous and difficult jobs to augment family incomes.

Ambassador Guy Ledoux of the European Union emphasized that “it is important that dissuasive penalties are imposed in practice on persons who subject children to work in hazardous or exploitative conditions.” The EU provided assistance in conducting the study on child labor in the Philippines.

The EILER study confirmed earlier surveys about the high number of children working in hazardous industries. It also highlighted the failure or inadequacy of government initiatives to address the problem. As the world marks the 25th anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Philippines must be more aggressive in combating the worst forms of child labor in various parts of the country.

Questions Raised About US Anti-Terror Cooperation

Written for The Diplomat

American soldiers did not join in any actual combat but they did provide intelligence, training, real-time information, equipment, and aircraft in a successful but controversial anti-terror operation in southern Philippines.

This was one of the findings of the Board of Inquiry of the Philippine National Police, which was created to probe the operation which killed 67 Filipinos, including 44 members of the police elite unit Special Action Force (SAF). The January 25, 2015 operation in Mamasapano, Maguindanao succeeded in killing Bali bomber Zhulkifli Bin Hir/Zulkifli Abhir (Marwan) but was also viewed as a tragedy because of the high number of casualties.

Marwan was a Malaysian citizen who escaped to the Philippines after the Bali bombing. He was a wanted international terrorist with a $5 million bounty placed by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The police operation to arrest Marwan raised several issues that have undermined the leadership of President Benigno Aquino III. The president was accused of violating the chain of command when he designated a suspended police general to coordinate the operation. The police general also failed to properly inform the army and even the top leadership of the police about the operation.

Another blunder is the failure to coordinate the planned attack with Muslim separatist rebels who control the area. The rebels are not linked to Marwan and they have a ceasefire agreement with the government. Aside from Marwan’s team, it was the rebels and other private armed groups which figured in a deadly clash with the police.

There is also the issue about the unclear involvement of the Americans in the operation. Residents recalled seeing foreigners and a flying object in their village during the week of the encounter. But an information officer of the U.S. embassy told local media that “no U.S. surveillance drone was used” in the operation.

Last week, the police finally released its report about the Mamasapano incident; and it tackled, among others, the role of the Americans in the operation.

Below are excerpts of the report:

“Six American nationals were at the Tactical Command Post in Shariff Aguak starting on the eve of the operations to provide real-time information (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaisance) to the SAF troops.”

“The US counterparts provided real-time information on the actual movements of friendly and enemy forces in the area of operations…by providing technical equipment and aircraft, which they themselves operated.”

“The severed left index finger of Marwan was sent to two representatives of US-FBI waiting at General Santos City.”

The report emphasized that “there were no armed US troops engaged in combat in the area of operations.” It added that the technical support was valuable because the police “was able to elude large enemy formations, thereby avoiding further casualties.” It also recognized the medical evacuations performed by US personnel. It did, however, note that the decision to submit Marwan’s finger to the FBI is not standard procedure; the DNA sample should have been turned over to the local police crime laboratory.

The report is probably the first time that a government agency has given details about the involvement of the U.S. in local military operations. The implications are also staggering. Based on the report, Americans were aware of an anti-terror operation, while the army, the acting police chief, and the secretary of Interior and Local Government were only informed about it on the day itself, when the attacking forces suffered heavily and needed reinforcement and artillery support. The Americans were even stationed at the Tactical Command Post.

Senator Ralph Recto is curious to learn more about the involvement of the Americans. “Let me clarify: I do not object to the American’s [six] assistance in hunting down terrorists, but in this particular case it seems the US role was extraordinary. Up to what extent can we allow them to play a role?”

“Because it is clear to me, this wasn’t just assistance in providing intelligence; we were given equipment. Look at the situation: the PNP [police] did not coordinate with the AFP [army] but they coordinated with the Americans; there’s something amiss there,” he added.

Congress, which suspended public hearings about the operation, will probably ask for more information about this issue once it resumed sessions.

Aquino’s credibility as leader and commander-in-chief has been eroded because of the Mamasapano operation. It also affected the ongoing peace negotiations with Muslim rebels. As for military cooperation with the U.S., expect rising skepticism among local leaders.

Posted in nation, youth | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Why we should reject the sentimental activism of reactionary bureaucrats

By admin | March 29, 2015

Written for Bulatlat

Some reactionaries in the bureaucracy erroneously assume that their activism in the past makes them intellectually and even morally superior over the present generation of change advocates. Some probably misjudged their bohemian lifestyle as activism or they could have lied about their political record. But there are really existing apostates in various agencies of the government. Some are quiet about their renegade years, some continued to espouse progressive views, but some are disturbingly wicked and unabashedly repressive. Some are more fascist than the fascists; or in the Philippine context, more Marcosian than Marcos, and more Imeldific than Imelda. Worse, they arrogantly insist that they cannot be accused of ignoring the plight of the common tao since they are still guided by activist principles. Scary!

Even scarier is the claim of these former radicals that their new brand of activism deserves state approval. But they easily appear pathetic when compared to the anti-Establishment cause. Perhaps to redeem their political credibility, they often invoke the glorious activism of their yesteryears. There are 50 shades of ‘walking dead’ radicals turned reactionaries but they use almost similar arguments in their ideological battle against their former comrades. For example, they loudly and repeatedly proclaim that activism is already irrelevant, or that it was useful and necessary in the past but no longer valid today. They caricature activists as a pitiful bunch of angry young persons who were indoctrinated or bought to join a lost cause.

Some are tactful in dissing the Left. They recognize the role of activism in politics but they also quickly dismiss it by demonizing the struggle, and tilting the discussion towards the other supposedly superior forms of political engagement. They usually cite the positive legacy of activism in their lives, and some are exhorting the public to respect activists, but they always emphasize the futility of perpetual dissent. According to them, activism is a commitment that must be immediately discarded or diluted to make a concrete impact on real politics. Suddenly, political compromise is elevated as the ethic worth fighting for.

This is a classic case of arrogance and conceit. They really think that other people, most especially the young, are incapable of making rational decisions. That when they became activists, they were motivated by genuine feelings of patriotism, but those who succeeded them were already insincere. From their point of view, history stopped when they abandoned the cause. It means political resistance is already obsolete. How convenient for them to declare the end of an era which coincided with their political conversion. Is it political luck that they happened to be activists when it was still the vogue; and after they renounced their political beliefs, activism also lost its mojo?

Ex-activists who consumed too many perks in the pork-controlled bureaucracy are naturally the rabid defenders of the status quo; hence they cannot be expected to be objective or believable when they sing praises for mainstream politics.

But there are those who climbed the ladder of the bureaucracy because of merit; and those who maintained their integrity and progressive vision while holding enviable positions in high society. Do their life stories invalidate activism? It is dangerous to equate individual advancement with social change. A flourishing career of a single person doesn’t translate into prosperity for the rest of society. There is no evil in desiring success but once you attained your dreams, why stop others from uplifting the conditions of the marginalized? Activism will not deprive you of the chance to gain more opportunities. Activism promises to democratize wealth creation and political participation.

Unfortunately, activism is perceived as a threat by those who wanted to monopolize power and the riches of this world. Even former activists could not tolerate the spread of radicalism since this might disrupt their profiting schemes and the flow of goods in their money-operated world. And so they are aggressively discrediting activism to discourage people from fighting for a better and new world. They wanted to preserve the existing order even if they once championed its dissolution. For them activism is something they can brag to everyone while isolating those who speak and act like activists. And they are ready to decorate the most despotic policies of the party in power with progressive trappings. Opportunistic collaboration seems inadequate to describe their behavior.

Nostalgic activism is a special and powerful act of remembering. It should be promoted to create ripples and waves of solidarity across society. But if it’s used to serve the selfish interests of the elite or to block the forward march of the people’s movement, then it mutates into a monstrous political sentiment. It is activism that disempowers the poor, a defanged activism that looks substantial on paper but actually empty in real life.

However, ex-activists have the right to argue that they cannot remain in a movement which they perceive to be grossly impure, imperfect, and error-prone. They could have stayed, though, and work or struggle with others in strengthening the people’s movement. Instead, they offered their so-called pure hearts and innocent minds in the service of the incorruptible bureaucracy. They couldn’t accept the alleged excesses and shortcomings of the people’s movement and so they chose to become highly paid operators and glorified underlings of saintly trapos and bourgeois political parties.

They gave up eternity in favor of convenience. They succumbed to the ephemeral “servicing of goods” instead of building an entirely new world founded on the principle of just distribution of goods. What they possess are a few overrated tangibles that have little value in making life more meaningful. They wanted to reclaim the activism of their youth; but how can they do that without severing ties with the oppressive state machinery?

Posted in reds | Tagged | 4 Comments