Manila hostage blunder

By admin | September 15, 2010

written for The Diplomat…

The announcement yesterday that some of the Hong Kong hostages killed in Manila last month may have been killed by ‘friendly fire’ is a painful reminder of the global embarrassment the incident caused. And the damage it could do to the Philippines’ international relations.

Although the incident was initially a domestic law and order problem, the deaths of nine Hong Kong tourists ended up thrusting it into global awareness. And the anger on show in the aftermath of the tragedy made something abundantly clear—if the two-month-old government of President Benigno ‘Noynoy’ Aquino fails to conduct a thorough probe of the incident, and if the police officers responsible for the rescue blunder aren’t punished, the issue could do lasting damage to the country’s relations with Hong Kong and China.

The basic facts of the case point to the culpability of the police. The drama, much of which unfolded live on TV, lasted for 11 hours, with the police failing to appease the hostage taker or secure the release of the bus passengers. When the police finally decided to force their way inside the bus, it ended with the violent death of nine Hong Kong tourists. Indeed, yesterday, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima is reported as saying that some of the hostages may actually have been hit by police bullets. The botched rescue operation, which was beamed live around the world, exposed the inadequate preparation of the Philippine police for a crisis.

But if the police bungled their jobs, it has been President Aquino who has been at the receiving end of some of the most pointed international criticism. Aquino was taken to task for: his apparent absence during the crisis and failing to form a committee to immediately monitor and resolve it; failure to take a phone call from Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang, who was obviously eager to be briefed about the situation; and for ‘smiling’ on TV when he visited the crime scene a few hours after the bloody ordeal had ended.

On top of all this, the site where the hostage crisis took place was in the same location that Aquino took his oath of office and delivered his inaugural address just two months prior—a moment when Aquino promised Filipinos that they could once again dream and become proud citizens of the world. Two months later, the Philippines (and Aquino) have become a laughingstock.

The incident has also rocked Aquino’s plan to make his first 100 days in office a sort of a preview of what to expect from his government over the next six years. Instead of aggressively pursuing his anti-corruption programme, which was his major election platform, Aquino is now expected to redirect his focus to convincing Filipinos and the rest of the world that he’s a capable leader.

But aside from proving his competence, Aquino also has to swiftly repair strained relations with both Hong Kong and China. Immediately after the hostage incident, Hong Kong issued a travel advisory against the Philippines and the Chinese vice premier cancelled his trip to Manila. The Philippines has to complete its probe if it wants to appease angry citizens and officials in Hong Kong and China, many of whom believe it was the inefficiency of the Philippine police that led to the death of their fellow citizens.

But securing justice for the memory of those slain isn’t the only goal for the Philippines. Officials also want to prevent anti-Filipino sentiment in Hong Kong and China—both major destinations for Filipinos seeking employment abroad—from fermenting. In addition, the Philippine government also has to be able to reassure the international community that it’s ready to defend the security of tourists and foreigners.

This is by no means the first time that the Philippines has become entangled in messy issues involving its neighbours. In 1995, for example, it downgraded its diplomatic ties with Singapore after a Filipina domestic worker was executed in Singapore for murder. For many years, relations between the two countries were chilly, and there were knock-on effects for Filipinos employed in Singapore. The Philippines government doesn’t want a repeat of such tensions, which could see restrictions placed on Filipinos working in Hong Kong, or further discourage its citizens from visiting the Philippines.

And the crisis could also have an impact on the Aquino government’s foreign policy by pushing the administration closer to the United States if China isn’t appeased. Aquino, in fact, recently cancelled trips to Vietnam and Indonesia, although he plans to follow through with his scheduled visit to the United States later this month.

The other option for Aquino is to forge closer ties with China, as a kind of apologetic gesture over the hostage blunder. But he can’t do this without upsetting the US, which considers the Philippines as a reliable ally as the US and China vie for supremacy in the region.

It’s a genuine dilemma for Aquino, and one he would have had no idea he was going to encounter when he first heard about the unfolding ‘domestic’ tragedy in Manila.

Posted in nation | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Politics of education reforms

By admin | September 9, 2010

Political solutions are needed to fix education problems because the organization and distribution of knowledge in a society has always been a political question. Those who want education reforms but reject politics are guilty of espousing an ignorant view of history and society. Schools are not autonomous sites that operate in an uncorrupted social universe. They mirror the imperfections of the community. They reproduce the values, habits, and know-how that are required for the survival of our social institutions. We cannot sincerely advocate a better education system without yearning and fighting for a better social set-up. If we really desire good schools, we should build a more progressive society. Therefore, the democratization movement inside schools should not be divorced from the struggles of various social forces. If we refuse to recognize the political character of education issues or the relationship of the struggle for meaningful schooling with the broader socio-political process, all conflicts inside schools would remain parochial concerns with no power to alter the educational landscape. De-politicized school conflicts pit teachers, students, and administrators against one another while the real enemies of the people are unscathed. Political school struggles should involve everybody in the campus against the unequal social order and those who defend and control it.

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

Curriculum design is the most politically important aspect of public education but the people are not democratically consulted on this matter. Technocrats and bureaucrats decide which subjects should be taught inside schools. Without the participation of the public, the school curriculum would always reflect the imprimatur of big business and the political party in power. Would the ruling elite endorse the teaching of concepts or the distribution of texts that undermine their hegemony? Their power is multiplied by making their narrow worldview the official knowledge in society. Through the schooling process, their self-serving notions of everything bear the stamp of universality which even their supposedly class enemies imbibe and embrace as their very own.

That is why the sex education issue provides an opportunity for those who wish to inject politics into the debate. The Catholic Church is right to challenge the inclusion of sex in schools if the hierarchy thinks it would violate the innocence of children. The Bishops are entitled to their own ignorance but we should support the idea that the public should have a definitive voice in designing the curriculum. Democratization does not only mean expanding access to education; it should also refer to the challenge posed by the working classes to influence the content of schooling. Otherwise, if we abandon the curriculum wars, our children will continue to believe in meaningless bourgeois mantras like “sa ikauunlad ng bayan, disiplina ang kailangan” and “kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.”

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

The Noynoy Aquino government seems serious in its plan to lengthen the school cycle. I am reminded by what the education adviser of U.S. President Richard Nixon said decades ago: “We are in danger of producing an educated proletariat. That’s dynamite! We have to be selective about who we allow to through higher education. If not, we will have a large number of highly trained and unemployed people.”

Reactionary educators in the Philippines are also afraid of the ‘educated proletariat.’ They want to reverse the mass struggle victories of the poor – free and compulsory elementary and high school education and the establishment of state universities in many provinces. We must remember that the proliferation of state universities in the 1970s-1990s became possible only after the student sector raised the issue of higher education access and equity as a national political question. Since then, building state universities has been synonymous with good politics. This is what reactionary educators are protesting today. Maintaining public higher education institutions is incompatible with the spectre of neoliberalism, the ideological vogue today.

The K12 proposal is perhaps one ingenious method to prevent the mass production of ‘educated proletariats’. PNoy’s education apologists are already announcing that K12 graduates need not proceed to college to receive more education. They want this new breed of graduates to immediately find work after K12 or if unsuccessful, leave the country.

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

The K12 is the latest manifestation of the state-sponsored design to impose a neoliberal type of education in the country. Or the pathetic attempt to restructure the education system under a neoliberal framework. If in the past the goal of education was to produce responsible citizens, it has been replaced with the imperative to produce obedient workers and consumers. Education has been reduced into a simplified sorting machine churning out employable subjects. The neoliberal dogma is worshipped in school altars which means more standardized examinations, focus on subjects demanded by industry, less time for the arts and history, reinforcing individualism and competition, reduced subsidies from the state, partnerships with companies which want more profit but are hesitant to admit it so they prefer to call it corporate social responsibility, and emphasis on the inevitability of globalization and all its accompanying evils. What about critical pedagogy? Progressive education? What happened to the idea of molding holistic individuals?

It is not wrong to revise the school system. But do not invoke the crisis of Philippine education to introduce more neoliberal reforms. Pagbabago, yes! Pero para kanino?

Posted in education | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Here come the commies*

By admin | August 29, 2010

They are the propagandists of the new government but they will deny it not because they are ashamed of their jobs but it has more to do with their rejection of the term propagandist. Propaganda is a taboo word for them since it is associated with overzealous militants. PNoy communicators (com men or commies for short) seem to be squeamish individuals who feel uncomfortable with boring names like public information officer or media bureau. But having a fancy name (Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office) does not modify their distinguished but sometimes odious task: defend the president at all times and at all costs; deodorize the stink coming from the palace; and confuse/mislead the public to hide the real state of affairs.

I’m surprised that nobody complained when Malacanang announced that Department of Education Secretary Armin Luistro and other Cabinet heads will undergo a ‘media handling’ seminar. Is media relations a delicate matter that needs to be ‘handled’? Truth articulation is an issue of ‘media handling’? Is this transparency?

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

What is wrong with the word propagandist? Marcelo H. Del Pilar and company and the 1896 revolutionaries called themselves propagandista. Senator Claro M. Recto launched the second propaganda movement in the 1950s. Activists have no problem with the propagandist branding since they willingly recognize that their political work involves the advocacy of a specific ideology. It is the liberaloids and reactionaries who refuse to be called propagandists because of their naïve but dangerous belief that they are not espousing any ideology.

PNoy’s Communications Group is a smart repackaging of an old function of the state. It targets the networked citizens who are always eager to communicate with public servants even if the conversation is virtual. The danger is to confuse delivery of information with competent public service. The greater danger is to equate political opinion with decisive political action. Beware, PNoy’s commies are sophisticated obscurantists who want to turn politics into “a mere passive commentary on current affairs, a kind of collective extension of reading newspapers.” (Alain Badiou).

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

The transformation of journalists-who-advocate-objectivity into PNoy commies is proof of the undeclared partisanship of media personalities. Behind every truth-seeking media reporter is a political animal raring to come out of the closet. A journalist needs to take political sides in order to convert truth into a powerful weapon of the public. Opinion pales in comparison with political action. A TV reporter or newspaper columnist who proposes a tax boycott but is not backed by a political group is only guilty of advocating an interesting but futile rant. The words of a journalist acquire materiality only if they are fused with political practice.

But do not assume that the only career option of journalists who finally want to effect change in society is to seek a post in the Palace or in one of its satellites. The other option is to follow a better just path: serve the people. This is what Satur Ocampo and Tony Zumel did in the 1970s: prominent media personalities who joined the underground revolution. Instead of defending discredited politicians or clinging to the bureaucratic state machine, journalists can choose to become the spokespersons and leaders of the people’s movement.

Pierre Bourdieu was right when he said that “there are people who exchange ideological services for positions of power” but there are also truth messengers who prefer to lend their skills in the service of the powerless.

Journalists (especially those working in the provinces) often speak to truth and many times they lose their lives fulfilling this sacred duty. But they cease to carry the seal of freedom of thought the moment they unabashedly join the party in power. Their claim to independent thinking is finally exposed as a sham. Worse, they relinquished their dignified position as public intellectuals to become defenders of the putrid status quo. When they articulate the imperative for pagbabago, they no longer mean it.

It is useful to borrow the words of Antonio Gramsci when he distinguished a diplomat from an active politician. Gramsci wrote that the diplomat “inevitably will move only within the bounds of effective reality, since his specific activity is not the creation of some new equilibrium, but the maintenance of an existing equilibrium within a certain juridical framework” while an active politician is someone “who wishes to create a new balance of forces.”

PNoy’s commies are the glorified ‘diplomats’ of the modern era who are “full of idle speculation, trivial detail, and elegant conjectures.” Meanwhile, Ocampo and Zumel are good examples of journalists who became ‘active politicians’ – “men of powerful passions, partisans, creators, initiators.”

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

Before the hostage blunder, the tact of the PNoy commies was to package the new president as an everyday man. Make him complain against tax deductions (even though his net pay is P63,000. Compare it to the financial assistance received by farmers from Hacienda Luisita). Make him follow traffic rules. Make him lose his wangwang privileges. Allow an MMDA cop to issue a traffic ticket to PNoy’s sister Kris. Remove his face in government billboards (but continue posting yellow ribbon tarpaulins and pagbabago streamers).

The spin to make the hasyendero son a champion of the ordinary masa is suffocating. Please make him more human but not through token, insincere gestures. Bumenta na yan sa Hollywood.

But after the hostage tragedy, I’m sure PNoy’s handlers will change their strategy. To address the lingering doubt on his competence as a leader, they are expected to present PNoy as a new leader with political will. Good luck with that. Just a minor appeal: stop the unfunny acting.

*Of course they are not communists. Magpapacheeseburger ako nang major major kung komunista ang mga yan. Anyway, I subscribe to Sartre’s opinion of anti-communists.

Part 1: Noynoy and ‘impossible reformism’
Part 2: Noynoy and the ‘boss’

Posted in media | Tagged | 3 Comments

Asia’s Water Crisis

By admin | August 24, 2010

written for The Diplomat….

Wracked by droughts, floods and simmering tensions, Asia’s governments need a more co-ordinated approach to water crises.

As the contradictions of Asia’s water challenges have been laid bare this summer—with millions affected by flooding while others are hit by droughts—one thing has been made clearer: the coming water crisis could exacerbate already simmering domestic and regional tensions.

Heavy monsoon rains have produced the worst flooding in Pakistan’s history, with more than three weeks of flooding leaving at least 1,500 dead and more than 4 million homeless. Millions of Pakistanis already require humanitarian assistance, yet the likelihood that many more could be added to this list has grown with the announcement that 200,000 have been evacuated as flood waters continue to rise in Singh Province in the country’s south.

Meanwhile, flash floods and mudslides have submerged some villages in China’s Gansu Province, killing hundreds and leaving more than a thousand missing. Today, Chinese state media announced 250,000 had been evacuated in the north of the country after the Yalu River burst its banks.

But while attention has been focused on disasters in Pakistan in China, South-east Asia has been hit by its own torrential downpours. Last month, Singapore suffered three major floods—an unprecedented number for the prosperous city state—with even the shopping and financial districts hit in the first serious flooding disaster in the city since 1978.

Vietnam has also been affected, with many parts of Hanoi under water last month after a major storm struck the country. What added insult to injury in Vietnam’s case is that the flooding came after a nine-month dry spell that disrupted the country’s power supply (about a third of Vietnam’s power source comes from hydroelectric power plants whose operations have been adversely affected by falling water levels in the Mekong River).

And Vietnam hasn’t been the only country in the region to face the twin curse of droughts and flooding. The Philippines (recently ranked by the Belgium-based Center for Research and Epidemiology Disasters as the most disaster-prone area in the world) was last year hit by 14 meteorological and 9 hydrological disasters, the most devastating of which was last September’s typhoon, which unleashed the worst flooding in Metro Manila in 40 years.

This year, although floods have been a regular occurrence in Manila since the start of the wet season, the June-July rainfall was insufficient to increase water levels at the Angat Dam—the principal source of fresh water in the country’s capital. The result has been both tragic and somehow comic: Residential homes are flooded, but there’s no water in the faucets.

To top all this, Thailand is also this year experiencing a longer than usual dry season and was forced to postpone the rice planting season for a month, which will have knock-on effects around the region as Thailand, like Vietnam, is among the world’s top rice exporters.

It’s an alarming pattern—both flooding and dry spells across Asia are becoming more intense, and occurring more frequently, each year.

So how should Asian governments respond? For a start, they can do better than simply blaming God or Nature, arguments rolled out by one Singaporean minister to explain the massive flooding there.

Flash floods, landslides, and other symptoms of climate change are also in part man-made disasters. In the case of Singapore, for example, some experts blame excessive property development in the city for rising floodwaters, while the Gansu landslide in China has been linked to massive deforestation, mining activities and the construction of several hydropower plants in the area.

Inadequate government planning is also a major reason for the rising human casualties. The Philippines drafted comprehensive flood control measures as early as 1976 but failed to implement the proposed engineering solutions to minimize the harmful impact of the annual floods. Water rationing is now being undertaken in Manila precisely because previous governments have failed to develop or tap other sources of clean water. If Malaysia doesn’t learn from the mistakes of the Philippines, it’s estimated that it too could encounter a water crisis in 2014.

But swiftly addressing these problems is about more than the immediate goal of saving lives in individual countries—doing so can also help prevent regional disputes. For example, the construction of several dams in China along the Mekong River has been pinpointed as one reason for the drop in water levels along the river, which is vital for servicing the water needs of Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam (though of course China resents any suggestion that its damming activities are causing environmental problems for its neighbours).

There’s potential for such disputes to turn into conflict. For countries like Singapore confronted with scarce water supplies, it’s crucial that sustainable water agreements are inked with adjacent countries. Singapore has a water agreement with Malaysia, but the deal comes to an end next year. Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad pondered in a blog entry whether it’s time to charge Singapore for the water it buys from Malaysia at adjusted market prices. This comes at a time when Malaysia is blaming Singapore’s land reclamation project for flooding in the Sungai Johor area. Could Malaysia and Singapore end up battling over clean water next year?

This isn’t, of course, the only potential flashpoint over water in Asia—India and Pakistan have already been widely cited as two countries at risk of conflict over Himalayan water sources.

But it’s still unclear whether there’s any urgency to take a more broad-based approach to tackling these problems.

Regional governments find plenty of time to meet and discuss trade imbalances, poverty and terrorism. But recent crises have demonstrated that it’s time they also stopped seeing problems such as the floods in Pakistan as simply national, internal issues and started taking a regional perspective instead. Failure to do so may well prove nothing short of disastrous.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Edukasyon, Wika, Teknolohiya

By admin | August 15, 2010

Talumpati sa Luzon-wide assembly of UP students. Agosto, 14, UP SOLAIR.

Magandang umaga. Noong Huwebes, Agosto 12, ay Pandaigdigang Araw ng mga Kabataan, kaya pagbati sa inyong lahat. Ngayong 2010 ay pandaigdigang taon ng mga kabataan. Mabuhay ang lahat ng naghahangad ng tunay na pagbabago.

May tatlong magkakaugnay na paksa ang nais kong talakayin ngayong umaga. Una, pag-usapan natin ang ugnayan ng pag-aaral, trabaho, at ilang panukalang reporma sa sektor ng edukasyon. Pangalawa, dahil buwan ng wika, nais kong tukuyin ang silbi o papel ng wika sa pag-unlad ng ating komunidad. At pangatlo, ano ang dapat nating batanyan sa nakakabahalang pagtitiwalang binibigay natin sa teknolohiya.

Robot

Napanood ninyo na ba ang TV ad ng Berocca? Bida sa patalastas ang isang kabataang empleyado. Sa opisina, siya lang ang tao. Lahat ng empleyado ay mga robot. Bida siya dahil kasingbilis o mas mabilis pa siya sa robot kaya naman pinalitan niya ang isang empleyadong robot.

Alam ninyo mayroon akong anak na limang taong gulang kaya ang napapanood ko araw-araw sa TV ay Playhouse Disney o kaya Nickelodeon. Minsan nalipat ko ang channel sa isang lokal na istasyon at itong patalastas ng Berocca ang napanood ko. Nagtataka ako dahil walang nagrereklamo tungkol dito. Payag ba tayo, payag ba kayo, sa mensahe ng patalastas: na dapat kumilos tayo na parang robot para manatili sa trabaho; na dapat kasingbilis tayo ng robot – hindi napapagod, hindi nagrereklamo, tuluy-tuloy kung magtrabaho. At kung hindi ka robot kumilos, maghanap ka na lang ng ibang mapapasukan. Kasi ang kailangan ngayon diumano ng mga kampanya ay globally competitive, efficient, productive workforce.

Dati, kapag sinasabi nating ginagawa tayong robot ng kasalukuyang sistema ng ekonomiya, ang tinutukoy natin ay ang paulit-ulit na trabaho natin sa pabrika araw-araw dahil bahagi tayo ng assembly line production. Ngayon hi-tech na kaya may robot na sa pagawaan, at tayo pala yun. Mga taong-robot, sinasanay na mekanikal kung mag-isip at kumilos.

Walang nagulat sa patalastas ng Berocca dahil ang mensahe nito ay tila sumasalamin lang sa katotohanan. Tanggap natin ang mensahe. Tanggap natin ang banta na dapat maging masipag tayo tulad ng robot kundi marami diyang taong-robot na pwedeng pumalit sa atin. At para sa mga kabataan, tulad ng bida sa patalastas, payag tayong maging robot basta may trabaho, basta mataas ang bayad – kahit gabi ang pasok, kahit hindi ka Pilipino sa trabaho, kahit pagod na ang lalamunan mo sa kakahello sa iyong mga tangang kausap.

Ang sinisisi ko kung bakit humantong sa panahon kung saan ang makapangyarihang tao ay pumayag maging de-susing robot ay ang ating mga eskuwelahan. Sinanay tayong mag-isip tulad ng robot. Tinuruan tayong manabik na maging robot. Hindi ba’t ang payo sa atin, mag-aral ka para makakuha ka ng magandang trabaho sa hinaharap. Tiisin mo ang terror teacher, boring lecture, at tila walang katuturang mga textbook – lahat ng sakripisyong ito ay sulit dahil magiging mas mabuti ang iyong buhay kapag nakapagtapos ka ng pag-aaral.

Eto ang tanong ng maraming iskolar: tayo ba ay nag-aaral para maging highly-paid worker sa hinaharap? Para yumaman? Kung ito ang pangunahing layunin, hindi ba’t makitid ang pananaw na ito? Napakaspesyal ng edukasyon, makapangyarihan ang bisa ng edukasyon para lang ituring itong isang tuntungan para makuha ang ating dream job.

Dapat ang silbi ng edukasyon ay hindi ibatay sa taas ng suweldo natin sa hinaharap kundi sa ating karakter bilang tao. Tayo ay nag-aaral para maunawaan natin ang ating pagkatao (humanity, human dignity), ang ating kultura, at sa pamamagitan ng karunungan ay magtutulak ito sa atin upang pagbutihin ang ating sarili, pagbutihin ang ating pakikitungo sa iba, at kumilos para sa pag-unlad ng ating komunidad. Kung epektibo ang edukasyon, namumulat tayo sa katotohanan ng ating paligid, at tayo ay nagtatanong kung bakit ganito ang sitwasyon samantalang kaya namang maging iba ang kaayusan. Dahil sa ating pagtatanong, nakakasalamuha natin ang iba pang tao na may pareho ding mga tanong at magiging simula ito ng pagsusulong ng isang magandang adhikain. Eto ang diwa ng pagiging iskolar ng bayan, nagsisilbi sa kapwa. Hindi iskolar ng bayan ngayon para maging makasariling taong-robot sa hinaharap.

Balikan natin ang ating pagkabata. Ano ang pangarap ninyo noon? Maging superhero? Maging bida sa totoong buhay? Matayog ang ating pangarap. Mayaman ang ating imahinasyon. Tapos tayo ay nag-aral. Tayo ay nag elementary, nag high school, nag kolehiyo. Ano ang pangarap ninyo ngayon? Sa inyong high school yearbook, ano ang nilagay ninyong sagot sa tanong na: What do you want to be 10 years from now? Doctor? Engineer? Architect? Accountant in an international credit agency? May sumagot ba sa inyo na gusto kong maging magsasaka? Maging NGO worker? Gusto kong baguhin ang mundo?

Yan ang kasalanan ng mga eskuwelahan: Sinabi sa ating malaya tayong mangarap basta ba kikita ka sa pangarap na yan. Maging praktikal, dapat asikasuhin muna ang sarili. Tapos na ang panahon na kung saan ang mga tao ay handang ibuwis ang buhay para sa mga abstraktong prinsipyo.

Kaya ako ay hindi lubos na sumasang-ayon sa panukalang dagdagan ng dalawang taon ang basic education cycle. Batay sa mga balita, gusto ng pamahalaan na isulong ang repormang ito para madali raw makakuha ng trabaho ang mga bata. Maging employable. Isasama na raw ang vocational-technical skills sa kurso para pwede na agad tayong magtrabaho pagkatapos ng high school. May mali sa puntong ito. Kung ngayon nga ang mga college graduate ay nahihirapang magtrabaho, ano ang garantiya na ang mga graduate ng 12-year education cycle ay mas madaling makakapagtrabaho? Hindi dadami ang trabaho kapag 12 years na ang basic education; hindi rin awtomatik na lalago ang ekonomiya. Ito ang maling paniniwala: na ang edulasyon ang sagot sa lahat ng problema natin sa ekonomiya.

Hindi ba kayo nagtataka kung bakit maraming estudyante ay walang ahitasyon sa loob ng eskuwelahan? Hindi kaya dahil huminto na silang maniwala sa pangangaral ng matatanda na edukasyon ang susi sa kaunlaran? They feel alienated from the schoolwork which is supposed to prepare them for greater things in the future. Kaya ito pa ang tanong ng mga iskolar: Bakit hindi natin gawing kasiya-siya ang proseso ng pag-aaral? Na iparamdam sa mga bata na ang edukasyon ay pakikinabangan nila ngayon; ngayon at hindi sa isang pinapangarap na hinaharap.

Kapag tayo ay nanonood ng sine, iniisip ba natin na ginagawa ko ito para magkaroon ako ng magandang propesyon sa hinaharap? Hindi, dahil gusto nating maaliw sa oras na yun. Ganun din dapat sa pagpasok sa paaralan. Gusto kong matuto, pinili kong mag-aral dahil masaya ito at may pakinabang ito sa akin ngayon. Natutututo ako at dumarami ang aking mga kaibigan.

Hindi yan ang kalagayan ngayon. Malungkot ang sitwasyon ng ating mga eskuwelahan. Paano liligaya ang mga bata kung siksikan ang loob ng classroom, mali-mali ang textbook, walang banyo, mainit, kulang ang mga pasilidad? At ngayon ang dinadanas na torture ng mga bata ay gusto nating pahabain ng dalawang taon?

Wika

May isa pang kasalanan ang ating mga eskuwelahan. Tinuruan tayong mahalin/yakapin ang isang dayuhang wika at maliitin ang ating sariling wika. Kung itutuloy ang dagdag na dalawang taon sa eskuwelahan, anong wikang panturo ang gagamitin? Anong kurikulum ang itatakda? Sa Kongreso may mga panukalang gamitin ang wikang Ingles sa mga eskuwelahan. Dapat maunawaan ng ating lider ang kahalagahan ng pagkakaroon ng iisang wika na magbubuklod sa atin. Mas madaling matuto ang bata gamit ang ating wika, at higit sa lahat tayo ay nagkakaintindihan.

Nais kong ihalimbawa ang inaugural speech ng pangulo. Basahin natin ito sa jejemon, na napili kamakailan bilang salita ng taon

anG pAg+ayoh ME HIR nGuAyon @Y PATuNUaeH Nah KAYoh aNg AKing tunay nu@H L@kuAZ JeJeJ3jE ♥♥♥♥♥. Nd Me !nU@kuAluah naH dUARat!N6 T@yOH Sah puntOnG 1toh, nah AK0w’3y ManUnumpah s@H hu@rap niNy0h VilAnG !nYong p@NGuloW. nd KOW p1NanGaRAp m@G1ng tagAPa6tu@GuyOd n6 Pag-Asah a+ tAg@pagMu@NuAH NG mGaH suL!r@n!n nG @t!Ng b@yu@n.

u@nG l@yUn1n KOW Z@h vuHaY AEH ZiMPle ♥ xD ♥ l@Ng p0wZ: magIng tapAt ZAh AK1ng MGaH MAGulang At s@h baYAn vILuaNG 1ZaNG mUaran6ual nAh @N@K jejejEjE, m@vaIt NaH KuYAh, aT maBut1ng mamAmay@n powZszsszZ.

Basahin naman natin sa Bekimon:

ang pagtayeklavu ni watashi ditetch ngayon ay patunay na kayeklavu ang aking tunay na lakas chenelin. hindi ni watashi mudrakalatchi na darating jotons sa puntong itechi tarush, na watashi’y kikirounumpa satchi harap sokaw bilang jokawng panguleklavu. hindi ni watashi pinangarap maging tagapagtaguyod ng pag-asa at tagapagmanatchi ng mga suliranin ng ating bayan.

ang layunin ni lolabelles sa buhay ay simple lang tarush: maging tapat sa aking mga magulang at sa bayan vilang isang marangal na anak tarush, mabait na kuya, at mabuting mudramayan.

Sa wikang Ingles:

My presence here today is proof that you are my true strength. I never expected that I will be here taking my oath of office before you, as your president. I never imagined that I would be tasked with continuing the mission of my parents. I never entertained the ambition to be the symbol of hope, and to inherit the problems of our nation.

I had a simple goal in life: to be true to my parents and our country as an honorable son, a caring brother, and a good citizen.

At sa ating pambansang wika:

Ang pagtayo ko dito ngayon ay patunay na kayo ang aking tunay na lakas. Hindi ko inakala na darating tayo sa puntong ito, na ako’y manunumpa sa harap ninyo bilang inyong Pangulo. Hindi ko pinangarap maging tagapagtaguyod ng pag-asa at tagapagmana ng mga suliranin ng ating bayan.

Ang layunin ko sa buhay ay simple lang: maging tapat sa aking mga magulang at sa bayan bilang isang marangal na anak, mabait na kuya, at mabuting mamamayan.

Hindi ba’t tagos sa damdamin ang mensahe ng pangulo sa orihinal na teksto? Kung gusto nating pagbutihin ang komunikasyon sa bansa, gamitin natin ang ating wika. Kung naantig ang inyong puso noong mapakinggan ninyo ang inaugural speech, higit na magiging mabisa ang pag-aaral ng mga bata kung ang wikang naiintindihan ng lahat ang ating ginagamit.

Hindi jejemon, hindi bekimon ang may salarin kung bakit mababa ang kalidad ng edukasyon sa bansa. Mga indikasyon lang yan ng pagiging dinamiko ng wika batay sa paggamit ng tao. Higit na malaking pinsala sa kaisipan ng ilang henerasyon ng mga Pilipino ang pagdebelop ng struktura ng karunungan sa bansa na nakabatay sa wikang Ingles.

Internet

Ang huling paksang nais kong talakayin ay ang pagtukoy sa mga nakakabahalang impluwensiya ng internet sa pagkilos ng mga kabataan. Marami na ang nasulat ukol sa positibong papel ng internet sa pagpapakalat ng impormasyon. Ang pakay ko ay magbigay lang ng ilang paalala na hindi lahat ng aktibidad natin sa internet ay may magandang dinudulot.

Eto ang optimistikong pagtingin sa ugnayan ng internet at pulitika: sa pamamagitan diumano ng malawak na pamamahagi ng impormasyon – teksto, larawan, video, ilustrasyon, podcast, – magbubunsod ito ng bukas na komunikasyon sa lipunan. Lilikha ito ng spesyal na kilusan ang mga citizen journalist kung saan ang impormasyon o katotohanan na pinamamahagi natin ay siya ring armas para labanan ang mga tiwali. At kapag malaya ang palitan ng impormasyon, ito ay magtutulak sa tao na kumilos para sa pagbabago.

Ideyal ito. Pero hindi ito ang nagaganap batay sa aking obserbasyon. Imbes na magtulak sa mga kabataan na makipagkapit-bisig sa iba, napapatingkad pa nga ang indibidwalismo. Virtual activism, hindi social interaction ang nangyayari. Imbes na katotohanan ng lipunan ang ating sinusuri, katotohanan ng ating mga buhay ang pareho nating binubuyangyang sa publiko, tinitingnan at tinititigan. Hindi internet activists ang nabubuo, kundi mga makabago at hi-tech na narcissist sa virtual at totoong buhay.

Halimbawa, may isang larawan tungkol sa kahirapan ang na upload sa Facebook. Sa ideyal na sitwasyon, pagkatapos mo itong titigan, mahihikayat kang umaksiyon. Gagawa ka ng kongkretong hakbang sa offline na mundo para may mangyari. Pero kadalasan ang gagawin mo, you will like it sa FB, at pag nabasa ito ng mga kaibigan mo, they will also like it. Malay mo ang isa, gumawa ng cause para dito. Marami ang magiging fan ng cause. Tapos ang litrato ay magiging viral na, makikita sa labas ng iyong network of friends. Tapos may magtweet nito, tapos ireretweet ng isang sikat na twiterrer. Masayang-masaya ka na. Pero paano kung hanggang internet na lang umikot ang mga aksiyon? Laganap nga ang impormasyon, pero mananatili lang itong impormasyon hangga’t walang interbensiyon sa totoong mundo. Dapat, pana-panahon isarado ang inyong computer.

Nakakabahala na may mga kabataang nag-iisip na pwede nilang baguhin ang mundo kahit nakaharap sila sa internet. Mas nakakalungkot yung mga naniniwala na hindi na dapat kumilos, mag-organisa, makibaka dahil mas epektibo daw ang maging aktibista sa internet.

Alam ninyo kahit libu-libo pa ang pirma sa isang online petition, hindi yan mababasa ng mga pulitiko. May mga kasamahan ako sa Kongreso na hindi marunong magbukas ng computer.

Simple lang naman ang mensahe: ang susi sa pagbabago ay nasa sama-samang pagkilos ng mamamayan, sa totoong mundo, hindi sa Farmville o pag-iiba ng ating FB status update araw-araw.

Nagiging mas matalino raw ang tao dahil sa internet. Maaaring tama. Pero nagiging tamad din tayo.

Maglista tayo ng ilang salitang pang-aksiyon: maglakad, tumakbo, tumalon, lumangoy, buhatin, tadyak, suntok, tumalbog, yakap, halik, hawak, dukot, lagok, lunok, taob, dapa, gulong, ikot, magpadulas.

Maaaring ngayon alam pa natin ang ibig sabihin ng mga salitang yan dahil naranasan natin ang mga yan noong bata pa tayo. Pero ang aking pangamba ay unti unti na silang nagiging banyagang mga salita. Paano at bakit? Kasi ba naman, araw-araw ang ginagawa natin ay iisa lang: click. Left-click. Right-click. Double-click. Fast click. Silent click.

Click para tumawag at kumausap ng kapwa tao. Click para magpahayag ng damdamin. Click para gamitin ang imahinasyon. Click para magbasa, mag-aral, magturo. Click para kumilos para sa pagbabago. Click para magpatawa, magmahal, at magpaiyak ng kapwa. Kung may one ring to rule the world ang Lord of the Rings, may one word to rule the world: click.

Pagbubuo

Modernong edukayon. Oo. Pero mas mainam kung kritikal na edukasyon. Higit na mabuti kung makabayang edukasyon. Pag-aralan ang mga wika ng mundo, pero pambansang wika ang gamitin bilang wikang panturo. Gamitin ang teknolohiya bilang kasangkapan sa pagbabago. Huwag magpagamit sa teknolohiya.

Posted in speeches | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

‘Kayo ang boss ko’

By admin | August 12, 2010

…these were the most important, symbolic words in the June 30 inaugural speech of President Noynoy Aquino or PNoy. It was an appropriate sound byte for a leader who received a substantial PCOS-assisted mandate in the recent elections. It was during Erap’s inauguration in 1998 when the common tao last heard a leader deliver a similar pledge of service in a seemingly unambiguous language. It was headline material too for media outfits which have chosen to be less critical in the post-Gloria milieu. For historians and linguists, they can compare and analyze the chosen words in the inaugural speeches of the last three presidents: Erap’s ‘pwersa ng masa’, Gloria’s ‘mamamayan muna’, and PNoy’s ‘kayo ang boss ko.’

The obvious intent was to assure the poor that PNoy will not abuse his power. He wanted to establish his credential as a pro-democracy and pro-poor icon. He also sought to distance himself from Gloria who is both unpopular and unloved because of the correct public perception that she behaved like a mafia boss in Malacanang. Thus, the use of the word ‘boss’ was persuasive as criticism in reference to the unmatched arrogance that characterized the administration of PNoy’s predecessor.

It can be argued as well that the ‘Kayo ang boss ko’ speech is a classic example of how a minority president can successfully rally his supporters and inspire others to believe in the fiction that the current situation has stabilized to a point when there is no more political option other than to trust and follow the marching orders of PNoy and his family. Here lies the danger. It is when political choices are almost clear that the real political situation is obscured from public view. Beware of obscurantists who try to invalidate the right of the people to struggle/to resist by obfuscating the truth about the political conditions of the present.

‘Kayo ang boss ko’ is riddled with contradictions; politically speaking, the term boss is problematic – but it was deployed in the inaugural speech as a rhetoric tactic to confuse the public, to make the fighting masses abandon the desire for a better and genuine new social order.

‘Boss’ is actually a proof that PNoy is not the legitimate heir of the People Power movement; another reminder that he is not a revolutionary leader. The word ‘boss’ connotes feudal and unequal relations; it is not the proper linguistic code that symbolizes the sincere yearning of a leader to serve his constituents. The binary opposite of boss is employee. By implication, PNoy presented himself as the principal devoted employee of the land. Does this mean that the boss-employee relationship will govern the interaction of the people (the glorified bosses), and PNoy (the supposedly clean employee) in the next six years?

If it is true that a People Power episode took place this year as claimed by PNoy apologists, shouldn’t it be reflected in the choice of key words in the inaugural speech? It is revealing that the word ‘boss’ was used since it means that the crusade to find the righteous path is not a movement participated by equals or comrades but by bosses and employees.

Was the ‘kayo ang boss ko’ line really directed to all Filipinos? We were easily impressed with the ‘boss’ speech that we forgot to ask if PNoy really meant to make us instant bosses in a land where landlords, druglords, jueteng lords and other dark bosses are almost untouchable kingpins. Perhaps PNoy’s real target was the middle forces: the urbanites who are always inconvenienced by the wangwangs, and the service personnel who understandably accept and obey the rules that dictate boss-employee relationships.

And in his speech he did specify the boss – those who elected him into office, his election supporters, partymates, sisters, relatives. We can only claim to be the boss if we were part of the election machinery that catapulted him into power. His apologists even questioned the right of the political left to demand a reform agenda in the PNoy administration since the left supported another candidate in the presidential race. Apparently, there are excluded bosses in the new government.

The ‘boss’ reference is somewhat hilarious too if we take note of the fact that PNoy is surrounded by doctrinaires and fundamentalists who no longer believe in the ‘public’ – those who advance the notion that the ‘people’ no longer exist; that there is no more ‘we’, collective, and community. Instead, there is only the all-powerful individual who absorbs and shares tiny bits of data everyday, the global citizen pinoy who is skilled but ignorant of history, the consumer who buys non-essential goods from oligopolies, and voters who supports the viagra-strong (thanks to lakas-kampi apostates) Liberal Party. PNoy, the son of Cory, may have genuine affections for the little people whom he fondly calls the ‘boss’, but I am certain that his underlings do not recognize the existence nor do they respect the political power of the collective ‘boss’.

It is essential that the ‘we’ should strive to be more visible, the ‘boss’ should assert its power, the ‘people’ should speak. We should declare ourselves as constituting the ‘boss.’ We should organize, we should be a collective so that PNoy will listen to the ‘boss.’ We should not surrender to PNoy and his partymates the right to decide which set of ‘bosses’ should be given more power in the new government. We should not allow the yellow media and the big business friends of PNoy to usurp the will of the collective in naming the ‘people’ in society. Bring back the people in People Power so that we can tap its radical potential. In the meantime, as long as the people are seduced by deceptive words like ‘boss’, no fundamental change will take place even if we are treading the daang matuwid.

There are worse consequences if we fail to organize ourselves into a powerful collective of bosses. Congress will continue to proclaim itself as the House of the People; and Danding will continue to be called the big boss of Philippine politics.

Part 1: PNoy and ‘impossible reformism’

Posted in nation | Tagged | 2 Comments

She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-in-the-Plenary

By admin | August 5, 2010

Privilege Speech delivered on August 4, 2010. The drafting of this speech was a collective effort. Thank you @kabataancrew.

Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleagues.

I wish to speak about the events this week which I think might affect my duties as a member of this House. We are all adjusting to the new situation: a former president is now a member of Congress.

Sabi ng marami, we are now at the crossroad of history. In the President’s own words, narito tayo ngayon sa isang punto kung saan pipili tayo kung alin ang tatahakin nating landas—ang daang baluktot o ang daang matuwid.

Cliché as it may sound, it is imperative that we assess the previous roads we have taken in order to properly determine the best route towards national progress. It is required that we deliver a post mortem to the previous administration. We should not entirely abandon this duty to the Truth Commission. As the representatives of the people, we have to articulate the sentiments of our constituents. It may not be good news for some, but there are people in this country who do not echo the sentiments of the previous government, who do not equate infrastructure with performance, GDP growth with genuine progress, people who do not live in delusion.

Sa proseso ng paglalagom sa nakaraang administrasyon, it is inevitable that something unpleasant will be delivered on the floor about the previous government. Because the truth Mr. Speaker and fellow representatives, outside this confined space of bright lights and grandeur is a world of darkness, of glaring poverty, of suppressed freedoms.

This is the dilemma, and this is I ask to all of you: How do we perform our duty without offending “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named” in the plenary? Which should we value more: the sensibilities of House members or the right of the people to hear the truth about the past government?

I fear that 50 years from now, when historians will review our journals, they will only find glowing remarks about You-Know-Who or She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-the-Plenary. Why? Because all the remarks that deal with the unpleasant, the ugly realities of the past government have been removed from the records under the guise of upholding decency and decorum. Sadly, this was backed by the House leadership which is affiliated with the new government that promises an era of change. The same government which proclaims, “there can no reconciliation without justice.”

This week, Representatives Walden Bello and Teddy Casino were accused of disrespecting a fellow member by delivering allegedly “unparliamentary” remarks in their speeches. Parts of their speeches were removed from the records particularly those referring to the corruption and human rights violations of the past administration. Your honor, this sets a bad precedent.

I have been here only for one year, 16 months to be exact, but long enough for me to hear speeches of fellow members criticizing fellow members.

Let me cite a few examples:

June 1, 2009: Former ANAD partylist Representative Jun Alcover blatantly and without basis named progressive partylist representatives as a “scourge of deceit and brutality.” He accused Representatives Maza and Ocampo as adherents of an inhuman ideology.

December 4, 2009: Former Bantay Partylist Representative Jovito Palparan accused Samar Representative Reynaldo Uy of having a private army.

Last day of session of the 14th Congress. Former A Teacher Partylist Representative Piamonte accused Representative Sarmiento of the same partylist of corruption and told him to “resign and shut up.”

In these instances, no one objected. No one moved to strike from the record such accusations that reek of malice and fallacy. The leadership allowed the speech to be included in the records.

My point is this: striking off the perceived unparliamentary remarks is not the only option. The body, the leadership, can tolerate to hear negative remarks. It is not encouraged but we have a practice of allowing members to stand on the floor and criticize, sometimes viciously criticize, a fellow member.

Today, there seems to be this worrisome obsession to find “unparliamentary” words in our speeches. It might send a bad signal to other members, especially to new members, that privilege speeches about the past government is ok, as long as they are not unpleasant in the ears of the supporters of “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.”

I listened to the speeches of Bello and Casino, and I didn’t find any shocking expose, no new revelation. To use the words of Minority Representative Lagman, “bitin nga ako.” What they merely delivered was the sentiment of the people. Believe it or not, we have fellow Filipinos who believe that the previous government is guilty of spectacular crimes against the people. And maybe Representatives Bello and Casino think that the use of strong words to drive a point is needed. And the political situation today is such that colorful language must be used to remind us that “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” must be held accountable.

I understnd where Bello and Casino are coming from, especially Representative Casino who was holed up here in Batasan for several months in 2005. They are both part of the movement which attempted year after year to force the Congress to probe the alleged wrongdoings of the past government. The problem is wala kasi tayong closure. Now that the “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” is part of congress, would you expect the two to sing praises for her?

Lahat na lang ba ng negative remarks about “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” ay dapat tanggalin? Should I expect to hear only pro-You-Know-Who speeches in the next 3 years? What if a supporter of She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named stand on the floor and begin to enumerate the so-called achievements of the previous government? What if I also stand on the floor and move for the removal for what is to me offensive words? Would that be allowed by the leadership?

I hope the recent mania to scrutinize the speeches of anti-“She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” solons is not a symptom of our unwillingness to accept the truth about what happened in the past government.

It is tragic that we are more offended by the use of words that speak to truth, words that refer to acts of crime, rather than with the crimes itself.

My proposal is to give House members, especially members of the former opposition the freedom to speak and speak without fear of being censured about the past government. If it is founded on lies, it will not hold water. No one will believe them. Trust fellow members that they are capable of substantiating these allegations. Do not censor our speeches. Let the people judge. Let history be the judge. Do not purify and cleanse the records in the name of decorum.

Posted in speeches | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Dancing prisoners

By admin | July 29, 2010

When the Michael Jackson single “They don’t care about us” was released fourteen years ago, it immediately generated controversy after Jewish groups pointed out that the lyrics of the song (“Jew me, sue me”) has a tinge of racism in it. The pop superstar was forced to apologize by removing the controversial lines in a new recording.

Jackson did two music videos for the song: the first video was shot in location in a Rio de Janeiro community in Brazil to highlight the plight of the poor and the second video was shot in a prison to dramatize the rampant human rights abuses in the U.S. Despite his good intentions, Jackson was accused of exploiting the conditions of the poor for commercial gain.

Fast forward to 2010. Jackson’s long time choreographer arrived in the Philippines to train about 1,500 inmates from the Cebu Provincial Detention and Rehabilitation Center on how to perform the dance drill of the controversial 1996 song which was seen by the public in the smash-hit “This is it” concert film. The widely anticipated performance of the Cebu prisoners was uploaded on youtube in time for the DVD release of the film.

It is aptly ironic that the same Jackson song which drew accusations of racism; the same song which have two videos that overexposes poverty and human rights violations, was the chosen song for the Jackson tribute performance of Cebu’s famous dancing prisoners.

Were the prisoners informed that the song was penned by Jackson to make visible the human rights abuses in society? Were they aware of the music video which was shot inside a prison? Did they realize that Jackson’s choreographer taught them the dance moves not in behalf of the Jackson estate but through the sponsorship of a commercial recording label? Was the choreographer conscious of the fact that many of the prisoners in the Philippines are guilty of poverty crimes and most likely his Cebu trainees are also victims of a biased and unfair judicial system?

Filipinos are amused over the global popularity of Cebu’s prisoners but this dancing spectacle deserves to be probed if it really benefits the prisoners.

Do prisoners have the right to refuse if they are chosen to be part of the dancing group? Do they receive compensation? If they stopped dancing, will prison reforms also stop? Jackson fans are impressed with the disciplined dance moves of the prisoners but we should ask if prisoners are punished if they commit mistakes during the practice sessions.

Cebu prisoners gained worldwide fame in 2007 when their rendition of Jackson’s Thriller dance went viral on youtube. Because of their internet exposure, the dancing prisoners quickly became a tourist attraction in Cebu. Like tourists in a safari cruise, foreigners visit the provincial detention center to witness amazing and sometimes hilarious dance moves of the “tamed” prisoners. Maybe tourists will tell their friends that dancing is a good therapy for wild animals, rapists, and murderers.

The dance routine was originally conceptualized by prison officers as a form of behavior conditioning. Then it became a money making event. Dancing prisoners are happy since they claim to enjoy more benefits than other non-dancing prisoners. The incentive to dance is not really to practice art but to receive better prison treatment. Dance to impress visitors to generate funds. Dance to eat more regularly and sleep comfortably. Dance to make the Philippines famous in the global arena. Prisoners are exploited since they have no choice but to obey the instructions of their officers: dance or else. What is doubly painful is that prisoners are enjoying the exploitation.

It is an odd lonely spectacle. Prisoners dancing in front of judicial authorities and the satisfied officials reward the subjects with token reforms and the usually forgotten promise of reviewing their pending cases. Prisoners have to use their bodies if they want to attract the attention of concerned officials. Prisoners have to work harder and please more people if they want some of their basic rights restored. Is prison reform the real desire of the prisoners? What about justice? Freedom?

No one will admit it but Cebu’s dancing prisoners represent many Filipinos who dream of making it big in the global village. What many Filipinos desire is the approving gaze of the colonial masters. Like the Cebu prisoners, they sing and dance and perform many spectacles in the internet to catch the attention of Hollywood, CNN, and other global media icons. They become heroes if they are praised by western critics. Oh yes, the subalterns could sing and dance, and mimic their western idols. This seems to be the new Filipino dream. Surprise the world by acting, singing and speaking in a non-Filipino manner. Prove that the colonial subjects are capable of reproducing what the masters are doing. Say hello to the world. Sing like a white diva and rock star. Serve the master well and maybe the loyal servant will inherit the master’s fabulous wealth in the future.

Posted in nation | Tagged | 8 Comments

Sona 2010: Notes from the plenary

By admin | July 27, 2010

Speech delivered at the UP College of Law.

President Noynoy Aquino or PNoy spoke in Filipino. He addressed the people inside the plenary as “my fellow government workers.” He immediately tackled what everybody wanted to hear from him: the anomalies of his predecessor. He cited the depleted calamity funds, rising budget deficit, and bloated benefits of executives in government corporations. It reminded me of Erap’s Sona in 2000 when he blamed Ramos, who was listening to him inside the plenary, for the deteriorating peace and order situation and many other problems of the country.

I wanted to hear more corruption scandals involving Arroyo and her minions. Sana next time hindi lang medium level corruption cases. At pano kaya ang korupsiyon sa mga sikat na ahensiya tulad ng Customs, DPWH, at Deped?

And is corruption (or even mismanagement) the root of the power and water problems? Sadly, no discussion about environment sustainability, climate change, and environment impact of lopsided economic development.

What did the president mean when he complained that power is sold cheaply by Napocor and that MRT fares are too low? Does he intend to raise these prices soon?

It is inaccurate to describe the Sona speech of PNoy as an anti-Arroyo piece. Sa totoo lang he championed many programs of Arroyo, for example:

– He mentioned the Conditional Cash Transfer program several times;
– Public-private partnership; which is in essence a rearticulation of the privatization mantra. BOT? Ano bago dun?
– Establishment of grains terminals/post harvest facilities. Again, this is no different from Arroyo’s program to boost agricultural productivity. Mas malawak pa nga ang programa ni Arroyo: FIELDS – F for fertilizer, I for irrigation and infrastructure, E for extension and education, L for loans and insurance, D for dryers and other post-harvest facilities, and S for seeds. And speaking of land, what about agrarian reform?
– Improvement of the railway system. Bahagi rin ito ng super regions program ni Arroyo.
– Reducing cost of doing business. Every year reminder yan ng World Bank and other credit rating agencies to improve competitiveness daw. At dahil framework ng big business ang bitbit sa pagpapalago ng ekonomiya, noon at ngayon, kay Arroyo at Aquino, walang nabanggit tungkol sa wage increase or labor benefits.

On fiscal responsibility: tama lang at rebyuhin ang binibigay na fiscal incentives. Tama lang na habulin ang mga smuggler. But we should also review the tax cuts for the rich and the superlow tariffs imposed on imported goods. In short, review the neoliberal economic policies.

It is commendable that he spoke against cartels. He wanted a better and more transparent procurement law. He is supportive of the whistleblower bill and the strengthening of the Witness Protection Program. But civil society is asking: What about Freedom of Information Bill? Reproductive Health?

PNoy talked about basic education. What about higher education? Public-private partnership din ba ang framework sa paglikom ng pondo para sa mga pamantasan?

PNoy failed miserably in the human rights department. Hindi sapat na panagutin ang lahat ng mamamatay tao. Tukuyin niya ang mga salarin. Kasuhan. Ikulong. He should have stated that he will not tolerate torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings and that military officials who are involved in these crimes will be punished.

Reminder to PNoy: Mindanao is not just a “situation.” It is time to view the whole island of Mindanao differently. Besides, do we say the “situation” in Luzon or Visayas when discussing the problems in these areas? Imperial Manila has its own set of problems which are distinct to the problems of Bicol, Cordillera, and other parts of Luzon. Ganun din sa Mindanao.

About the proposed peace talks, dialogue is futile without addressing the roots of rebellion. Ceasefire should not be equated with peace. What about systemic and structural violence engendered by the policies of the state?

Ang sabi niya sa CPP-NPA-NDF: huwag lang batikos, dapat may solusyon. He should review the past peace agreements to understand the comprehensive program of the extreme left. PNoy showed his utter disdain for the armed left. Notice that he had kind words to say about MILF and he didn’t require the group to offer alternatives.

“Huwag lang batikos, dapat may solusyon.” – convenient and overused argument by impotent politicians or parties in power. Yan din ang sabi ni Gloria noon sa oposisyon: tama na ang batikos, maghain kayo ng solusyon. Yan din ang payo ni Gloria kay Noynoy noong eleksiyon: huwag lang retorika, dapat may programa rin. Ngayong nasa kapangyarihan na si PNoy, nakakalungkot at ginamit niya ang argumento ng mga pulitikong sensitibo sa kritisismo.

Dapat basahin niya ang mga kolum ni Conrad de Quiros na tumutukoy sa bisa at karapatan ng tao o ninuman na magbatikos. Na ang pagbabatikos ay isang mapanlikhang gawain. Ito ay bahagi ng proseso ng pagbabago.

Payo kay PNoy: lubusin ang hangarin ng taong bayan na makulong si Arroyo. Noong Lunes, nasa loob ng plenaryo ang mga mayor na partido pulitikal; kahit kaming militante ay pumasok sa Batasan para makinig sa Sona. Andun si Erap, Ramos. Andun ang mga Marcoses: si Imelda, Bongbong, Imee at Irene. The Marcoses were there to listen to an Aquino. Sino ang nawawala? Dalawang mambabatas na nasa Hong Kong. Isa nakakulong dahil sa drug possession at isa na tila ayaw marinig ang mga baho ng kanyang administrayon. Dapat talaga nilubos ni PNoy ang bira kay Arroyo. Kaya tama si Congressman Lagman, bitin ang Sona.

Noong matapos ang Sona, pumalakpak ang U.S. ambassador kahit hindi siya nakakaintindi ng Filipino. Bakit kaya? Siguro dahil wala siyang narinig na mga salitang Visiting, Forces, at Agreement.

Read: Sona 2009

Posted in speeches | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Filipino youth, HIV/AIDS and reproductive health

By admin | July 19, 2010

* Speech during the Parliamentary Side Event on the Integration of Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights and HIV/AIDS at the eve of XVIII World AIDS Conference 2010 in Vienna, Austria

Access to Sexuality and Reproductive Health Rights (SRHR) services: Are youth programs meeting the needs of young people? Let me immediately answer the question with respect to the Philippine situation: There is little or no SRHR services for young people in the Philippines. Programs are not sufficiently meeting the needs of young Filipinos.

What is the relevance of the Philippine situation in relation to the global campaign to fight HIV-AIDS? Let me enumerate some issues which might be applicable also in your countries.

First, enacting a law to combat the problem of HIV-AIDS, sadly, at least in the Philippine case, is no guarantee that HIV-AIDS cases will also go down or that SRHR services will be delivered to the people. The Philippines was the first country in the region to pass a law that laid a legal framework on how to protect people living with HIV-AIDS. This was in 1998. A master plan was drafted to tackle the issue. An AIDS council was instituted. The government also implemented surveillance and education programs in various provinces.

But despite these efforts, which by the way are only good on paper, HIV-AIDS cases have risen in the Philippines. They have risen at an alarming number, in epidemic proportions. Let us look at some of the numbers.

The Department of Health reported that in the year 2009, a total of 709 cases were recorded as compared to only 508 in 2008. The agency also said that two HIV/AIDS cases were recorded daily. There are 4,218 people living with HIV in the Philippines. Male HIV patients outnumber the female. The victims are getting younger.

So here is the paradox: the Philippines may be one of the first countries to recognize the seriousness of the problem despite registering only few cases in the 1980s up to the early 1990s but today it is facing an explosion of HIV-AIDS.

It is right to claim that it has already accomplished MDG6 but civil society and health practitioners are not rejoicing because of the rising number of HIV-AIDS cases. Globally, the trend is going down and the number of young people affected with the disease is also decreasing. The reverse is happening in the Philippines.

Next lesson: The Philippine case highlights the need for proper information and accurate reporting. Then and now, HIV-AIDS cases are underreported. The problem is worse than we think. Health authorities believe that HIV cases are 5x worse than what is actually reported. It is not good that HIV-AIDS cases are rising; but somehow it is already forcing our leaders and our people to admit reality – that HIV-AIDS situation in the country is getting worse and a more effective intervention is needed to prevent the disease from spreading.

To obtain a clearer picture of the situation, programs must also encourage the patients to seek government help. Testing (voluntary) must be done to give immediate help to those infected with the disease. How do we encourage HIV infected persons to seek medical assistance? Patients are willing to come out if adequate services are offered, and more importantly, if social stigma is removed. This is a sad reality. Instead of providing moral assistance, friends and relatives are sometimes abandoning HIV patients. Even health workers must be taught not to discriminate against people infected with HIV. In short, government must fight misinformation, disinformation.

Third lesson: Intervention should target specific groups. In the case of the Philippines, the main carriers of HIV, for the longest time, are migrant Filipinos. There are more than 8 million Filipinos working and living outside the Philippines. As a preventive measure, the government has mandated the holding of health seminars for Filipinos who are planning to leave the country. But is this enough?

Recent government statistics reveal that aside from migrant Filipinos, another major grouping of HIV-AIDS patients come from workers in the Business Process Outsourcing sector. Most of the workers in this industry are young, fresh college graduates.

It is ironic that the exodus of professionals to other countries, and the BPO sector which was hailed by the government as the country’s sunshine industry, these dollar-earning economic activities of the Philippines, are also among the top producers of HIV-AIDS patients. Hope turns to nightmare for some Filipinos working in these sectors. Is this the price of progress? Since the government is not expected to abandon its labor export policy, and since it continues to encourage more BPO investments, programs must be developed to prevent the spread of HIV in these industries.

Fourth lesson: impact of devolution of health services. Devolution was meant to empower local governments and to deliver better health services. The aim was to remove the negative impact of a centralized health system. But our experience shows that devolution could also lead to the abandonment of the government role to provide health services. Local governments, which are now in charge of government hospitals at the local level, are complaining of insufficient funds to maintain hospitals, health centers, and other services. For small provinces, this means the people are unable to access vital health programs, including reproductive health programs.

Fifth lesson, and most controversial issue in the Philippines in relation to reproductive health. The government is held hostage by the Catholic Church. The Philippines is one of the two countries in Asia with a Catholic-majority population. Catholic bishops wield enormous influence in Philippine society. Politicians are afraid to antagonize the bishops who can use their clout to undermine the local and national leadership. Result: the government is only promoting natural family planning. Abstinence. Many local governments are not providing reproductive health services. Condom use is not promoted since the church views it as a promotion of promiscuity. Reproductive health is equated with abortion. Pills, IUD, and other artificial contraceptives are described by the church as poisonous health products.

Young people, especially the poor, cannot easily access reproductive health services in health centers. Because there are no teen health centers, young people are forced to self-medicate. Unmarried teenagers cannot comfortably consult health workers on reproductive health issues for fear of being stigmatized and reprimanded by the elders.

The church is also opposing the introduction of sex education in schools. We renamed it into reproductive health education but the church says it is still sex. We renamed it again as Teen Wellness Program but the church is stubborn in its opposition. They see sex everywhere. By the way, the new education minister is a prominent Catholic educator.

If young people are deprived of their right to be informed about reproductive health in schools, where will they learn these things? Parents are responsible for this type of education but we know that parents are often uncomfortable discussing this sensitive topic in front of their children. The school setting is the most appropriate venue to teach comprehensive sexuality health. Or if we want to follow the Church, the other alternative is to allow the students to continue believing in the unscientific and sometimes dangerous views of their peers about sex and reproductive health.

Education is the key to protect the young against HIV-AIDS. It discourages the young not to engage in risky behavior. It gives them accurate knowledge and awareness about their bodies and the risks involved in having unprotected sex. Filipino politicians who subscribe to the doctrines of the Catholic Church do not realize the role of education in empowering the sexually-active young since they view public discussion of sex as taboo and they are in a state of denial with regards to the sexual activities of the young.

Parents must be involved in the sexuality education program, especially since the Church regards them as the only acceptable teachers on sexuality. Community education is also essential to make them aware about the risks of unprotected sex and the need to respect the sexuality rights of young people. Adults need to be reoriented about the components of reproductive health. This is needed to counter the lie peddled by the Church that reproductive health deals only with contraceptives. They presented the issue as a battle between pro-life and pro-choice advocates. This is unfortunate since reproductive health is all about the protection of life – of protecting pregnant mothers, infants, teenagers, and the general well-being of the people.

Another proposed mode of education is to tap the potential of the internet. Popularize reproductive health concepts and services by maximizing the social networks. Young people, at least for the urban residents, are accessing the web everyday. They can be reached through popular networks like friendster, facebook, and twitter. We should use the internet as an alternative platform to remind the young about their reproductive health rights.

The national government must not reject or surrender its role in leading the fight against HIV-AIDS. It must exert political will by refusing to be bullied by the Catholic Church. There must be a multisectoral coalition to address this major social and health problem, which is now an epidemic level. The grassroots, including civil society, should be active participants in the campaign. But the government should not use the involvement of the grassroots as an excuse to reduce its role in the battle against HIV-AIDS. The people must assert greater government participation, not less, if we want to seriously address the problem.

The state must be reminded that RH rights are human rights. And denial of reproductive health services constitutes a violation of the basic rights of the people.

Note: I delivered a shorter version of this paper because of time limitations. Thanks to Mon and Ann of PLCPD for the materials on the current HIV-AIDS situation. The speeches of Rep. Garin (here and here) are also recommended readings. Thanks Emee of UNFPA for the ideas on youth reproductive health.

Posted in speeches | Tagged , | 2 Comments