‘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

Sex and the Censors in Asia

By admin | July 15, 2010

Part 1: Politics and immorality in Southeast Asia

written for The Diplomat

South-east Asian governments are increasingly censoring ‘immoral’ web content. Do they have political motivations as well?

Last February, the Indonesian government dropped plans to filter ‘bad’ content through its Multimedia Content Screening team after the plan met with strong public opposition. Yet, undeterred, it’s now reviving the proposal in the wake of a celebrity sex tape scandal that continues to shock young and old alike in the world’s most populous Muslim-majority nation.

The government points to the ease of distribution the Internet offers, which has meant the tape of showbiz stars Nazril Irham and Luna Maya apparently having sexual intercourse has circulated widely since it was first uploaded. The controversy has provoked an outcry among conservative forces in the country who have called for more moral protection for young people, and the government has responded by moving to enforce an Internet blacklist enabled by an anti-pornography law passed two years ago.

Indonesia isn’t the only South-east Asian country to be rocked by such a scandal—there was a similar case in the Philippines last year, which paved the way for the passage of an anti-voyeurism law; lawmakers have also crafted a cybercrime bill. Today, posting of pictures depicting ‘sexual or other obscene or indecent acts’ on the Internet is now deemed a cybercrime offense.

In Cambodia, meanwhile, the government is proposing establishing a state-run exchange point that would allow it to control all local Internet service providers, a move supposedly aimed at strengthening Internet security against pornography, theft and other cybercrimes. The draft regulations are yet to be finalized, but the government is expected to seriously pursue the measure after it found itself powerless in a recent furore over illegally taped women bathing at a monastery.

In each of these cases, opposition to a tightening of the rules has been relatively subdued, in stark contrast to the outcry when South-east Asian governments make more overtly political censorship decisions.

Thailand earned cyber notoriety for becoming the first country in the world to shut down 100,000 websites for containing ‘dangerous’ material, and it famously punishes bloggers and website administrators for violating its strict lese majeste law. Vietnam, meanwhile, has been accused by Google and McAfee among others of launching cyber attacks against selected websites, including those that advocate opposition to bauxite mining, a controversial issue there.

Such moves usually elicit global condemnation among Internet users, media groups and human rights organizations. Governments can, of course, always ignore their noisy critics, but they risk losing international credibility (and business), meaning that governments with at least the trappings of democracy can’t afford to censor online media for extended periods.

So what can they do? Use the ruse of blocking ‘harmful’ websites instead.

Burma, which has some of the most draconian Internet regulations in the world, drew only mild protests from democracy groups after it used powers introduced by the ruling junta to ban two weekly journals for posting photos of female models in short pants.

This aggressive drive to eliminate sex and sexual images from the online world could be a symptom of the rising tide of conservatism in many South-east Asian nations. But it could also be because of recognition by governments that the fig leaf of protecting young people from harm also allows the introduction of potentially useful, tough checks on online freedoms.

Indeed, the morality card is being played to produce ‘desirable’ behavior among populations even when the strategy undermines respect for some of the region’s diverse cultures. When Indonesia passed its anti-pornography law, for example, Bali’s governor protested that the law runs contrary to local traditions where nude statues and erotic dances are still sometimes popular. Cambodia, for its part, blocked websites supposedly showing sexual images, including reahu.net’s artistic illustrations of ancient bare-breasted Apsara dancers and a Khmer Rouge soldier.

The problem for the public (but perhaps an advantage to governments) is the vague definitions of what constitute pornographic, indecent, immoral and obscene acts. Activists here in the Philippines are worried that the cybercrime bill I mentioned earlier would leave it solely to the government to decide what should be banned as ‘improper.’ Today, displaying certain body parts is immoral under the law, but tomorrow the state could decide that immoral or dangerous activity includes participating in certain anti-government rallies.

Now that governments have mastered the tools and techniques of censorship in the traditional media, they’re testing the limits of online regulation. And Indonesia’s efforts to enforce its blacklist will prove a useful test case: Indonesia has more than 40 million Internet users and is acknowledged as the Twitter capital of Asia. If it succeeds in filtering web content, other countries in the region are expected to follow its model.

The potential benefits for governments with an authoritarian bent are obvious. Censorship not only reduces access to information—it also weakens the power of Internet users to form online groups of like-minded people. Even if web censorship has noble intentions, therefore, it’s still an unwelcome distraction for governments who would be better served coming up with more creative, realistic and less potentially nefarious rules for responsible Internet use.

If we want to protect our young people the solution is to educate them, their parents and their communities, and to provide them with relevant information about the potential risks of surfing the web. More information, not less, is what’s needed if governments really want to protect their people.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Noynoy Aquino and ‘impossible reformism’

By admin | July 6, 2010

“When I was still in the Guest House, I asked for the logs which listed those who had visited President Marcos. I compared them with those visiting President Aquino. They were the same people – they came from the same companies, shared the same business views, the same mindset, and they went to the same parties.” – Joker Arroyo, June 28, 1992 Sunday Inquirer Magazine

Cory used her People Power mandate to restore the wealth and influence of the pre-Marcos oligarchs. Despite being a revolutionary president for a brief period, the only revolutionary legacy left by Cory was the revival of the privileges of the cacique class to which she belongs.

Meanwhile, Gloria tapped the unfinished potential of People Power to assume the presidency. But unlike Cory, she didn’t establish a revolutionary government to clip the powers of her predecessor. She preferred instead to maximize the built-in authoritarian features of the political system to strengthen her rule.

Cory the People Power president was caricatured as Cory Calamity at the end of her term. On the other hand, Gloria the second people Power president would become the most unpopular leader in the country’s modern history. Will Noynoy, the new yellow king, suffer the same fate of Cory and Gloria?

In 1986 and 2001, there were visible collectives in the streets. People Power was understood as the concrete and determined set of actions of the people, of the “boss”, in public spaces. Today, the streets are quiet. Wangwangs could be heard because the visible collectives have been silenced.

Despite the desperate but pathetic attempt of the liberaloids to replay the People Power sequence, there was no spectacular public uprising this year. Indeed, Noy apologists summoned the eternal appeal of People Power but they did so for electioneering purposes. They reduced People Power into miniature and safe political actions by advising the public to wear yellow ribbons and to vote for Noy.

After Edsa Tres, Gloria rejected the idea of People Power since she was afraid of its real subversive potential to refashion a new social order. Noy and his factotums are perhaps worse than Gloria since they diluted the radical content of People Power by transforming it into an election tactic.

The absence of visible People Power means the people, the “boss”, have weaker influence in the new government compared to traditional power groups like big business, the U.S., and Danding. The threat of People Power is essential to demand small but symbolic reforms from the new president. People Power convinced Cory to release political prisoners in 1986 and to enact a token land reform program in 1987. People Power forced Gloria to resume the peace talks with armed rebels in 2001. If there is People Power today, it has been copyrighted already by the yellow army generals surrounding Noy. Beware: these creatures are behind the billion-peso peace bonds racket and the Strong Republic mantra of the early Arroyo years.

If there was no People Power, how did Noy win? Arroyo was intensely hated by the public and Noy benefited by fanning the anti-Arroyo flames in the country. He also had to thank Kris for the masa appeal and kamag-anak Danding for the billions. Journalists have already exposed the substantial contribution of Wall Street to the campaign kitty of Barack Obama. When will local journalists report that Noy spent more than his rivals during the campaign period? When will the media identify the big business campaign donors of Noy?

Noy’s hairline is unimportant. What is crucial is to name him for what he really is: a conservative politician representing the interest of the landlord elite. Noynoy’s adoption of the PNoy persona popularized by erstwhile critical media networks is (to rephrase Pierre Bourdieu) a very smart and very modern repackaging of the oldest ideas of the oldest reactionaries. Noy’s class background, political thinking, and even the circumstances of his election victory mean that PNoy doesn’t symbolize change; it is a desire (even nostalgia) for the preservation of the old order.

I agree with Antonio Negri when he asserted that the 20th century is impossible reformism. Negri of course was referring to capitalism in the 20th century which can only exist as reformism. In a different context, we can cite the modern political history of the Philippines as a symptom of the impossibility of reformism. After 1946, the system functioned for two decades but it suffered a crisis which allowed Marcos to rule as dictator until 1986. Cory tried to rehabilitate the state machinery by restoring the pre-Marcos structures of power. The system functioned again for almost two decades but it also went into self-destruct mode which allowed Arroyo to rule for one decade. Noy now wants us to join him in the righteous path and most likely the path he is preparing would lead us back to where his mother had brought us.

Marcos and Gloria are both unloved by the people but their admirers insist that infrastructure projects were their best legacies. Did Gloria finish what Marcos started but failed to complete in 1986? Is Noy’s role then to fulfill the broken dreams and promises of Edsa?

What if the system is really designed to fail? Two decades of brutal social and political experimentation, then a brief reformist phase. That Marcos-Arroyo figures would always rise since they are necessary evil elements to prevent the system from disintegrating. That Cory-Noy heroic figures are bound to appear and reappear to restore factory settings in the system. Is this the best of all possible worlds? Is this the best the system can offer? Is reformism the only option to refresh the political project?

Hegel’s concept of “surpassing” is instructive. According to him (via Badiou), “the finite is what comes out of itself only in order to remain within itself. The finite is what surpasses itself within itself. Instead of an alteration of self there is only an iteration.”

Did we survive the nightmarish Marcos-like Arroyo years so that we will endure the Cory-like PNoy years? Oh dear. Is this change?

The proposal is to think of a politics that would interrupt the bad cycle. Politics that does not advocate mere repetition but an unrepeatable political event. The task is not just to unmask PNoy. The greater challenge is to finish the revolutionary project of the 20th century.

Related articles:

20th century Philippines
Gloria and Cory
1986 and 2001

Posted in nation | Tagged , , , | 13 Comments

Mensahe ng pasasalamat

By admin | July 5, 2010

Batay sa talumpating binigkas sa anibersaryo ng Kabataan Partylist, Hunyo 19, 2010 na ginanap sa UP Diliman Kolehiyo ng Edukasyon

Maraming salamat sa ating dalawang emcee. Si Lee, mga kaibigan, ang nagdisenyo, naglay-out ng ating mga logo at iba pang animasyon na ginamit noong kampamya. Salamat Lee at Mabuhay ka!

Sa lahat ng fans ng Lakers, congratulations! Sa mga fans ng Celtics, may susunod pang taon. At para sa mga tulad ko na fan ng Golden State Warriors, pwede pang mangarap.

Kami ni Ipay ay natutuwa at dito sa Kolehiyo ng Edukasyon tayo nagtipon para gunitain ang ating anibersaryo. Ako po ay nagtapos sa kolehiyong ito. Ang gusaling ito ang isa sa pinakalumang struktura sa pamantasan. Welcome po sa Eduk!

Noong 2004, nakakuha ang Anak ng Bayan Youth Party ng 213,000 boto. Noong 2007, ang Kabataan Partylist ay binoto ng 228,000 katao. Ngayong 2010, umabot na sa 418,000 ang ating boto. Higit sa 70 percent ang tinaas ng ating boto.

Noong isang taon lang ako nakapag oath taking, delayed ng dalawang taon ang ating tagumpay. Pero makasaysayan pa rin ang tagumpay na ito. Tayo ang kauna-unahang grupo ng kabataan na nagkaroon ng kinatawan sa Kongreso. Kung naghintay tayo ng taon para pagtibayin ang ating tagumpay, hindi nagtagal ang ating paghihintay ngayong taon. Kahapon po ay nag oath taking na ako bilang kinatawan ng kongreso sa harap ni Senator Chiz Escudero, na tulad natin ay may adhikaing pabor sa interes ng kabataan at mamamayan.

Noong 2001, ang Bayan Muna bilang boses ng maliliit na tao ay nakapasok sa kongreso. Noong 2004, ang Bayan Muna ay nagkaroon ng dagdag na kapanalig na partido sa kongreso nang manalo ang Anakpawis at Gabriela. Noong 2009 ang bloke ng mga progresibo ay higit na pinalakas sa pagpasok ng Kabataan Partylist. At ngayong 2010, ang mga guro at sektor ng edukasyon ay nagagalak sa pagkapanalo ng ACT Teachers Partylist. Lima sa nanalong top 20 partylist sa nakaraang halalan ay bahagi ng Makabayan Coalition.

Makabuluhan ang tagumpay na ito. Sa kabila ng pananakot at pang-iintriga ng militar, nanalo pa rin ang mga progresibong partylist. Tumaas pa nga ang boto ng mga partylist natin – ang kabuuang bilang ay umabot na sa 3.2 milyon. Desperado ang estado at mga pasista sa kanilang hangarin na hindi tayo magwagi. Bukod sa pagpapakalat ng mga materyales na black propaganda, tinakot at binantaan nila ang buhay ng ating mga miyembro, kandidato at alyadong lider sa buong bansa. Pero nanatiling buo ang tiwala’t pagmamahal ng masa sa atin. Gumamit man ng sindak ang kaaway, hindi tayo iniwanan ng taong bayan. Lumalawak pa nga ang ating impluwensiya at suporta. Ang bala ng kaaway ay nauubos, ang mga gobyerno ay bumabagsak at natatapos pero ang mapanlabang diwa ng masa ay kasing tatag ng sumisikat na araw.

Noong 2001, pangulo ng bansa si Gloria Arroyo. Noong 2004, nanalo siya sa tulong ni Hello Garci. Noong 2007, siya pa rin ang nakatira sa Malakanyang. Ngayong 2010, mga kasama 11 araw na lang, tapos na si Gloria! Masaya ang lahat!

Makasaysayan ang araw na ito dahil araw ng kapanganakan ni Dr. Jose Rizal, ang ating pambansang bayani. Ito rin ang anibersaryo ng pagkakatatag ng ating partylist. Nitong nakaraang linggo ay nagpulong ang pambansang konseho upang rebyuhin ang ating karanasan sa halalan. Batay sa mga ulat, mayroon na tayong mahigit 50,000 kasapi sa buong bansa. Aktibo ang mga balangay natin sa mga mayor na eskuwelahan at rehiyon sa buong bansa. Kahit sa maliliit at malalayong isla ay may nangampanya para sa ating partylist. Sa facebook ay nanguna tayo sa mga partylist na may pinakamaraming fans: mahigit 63,000 na ang bilang ng fans ng ating facebook page.

Ngayong 2010, ang Kabataan Partylist pa rin nag-iisang partido ng kabataang Pilipino sa Kongreso. Para higit nating maunawaan ang halaga nito, tandaan na daan-daan ang konseho ng mag-aaral sa buong bansa, daang-libo ang mga Sangguniang Kabataan, daang-libo rin ang mga sibikong organisasyon; pero nag-iisa lang ang partylist ng kabataan sa kongreso, at yan po ang ating Kabataang Partylist.

May 187 partylist ang lumahok sa halalan pero nagawa nating manalo at maabot ang ika-labing-pitong ranggo. Ang mga katunggali natin ay dekada na ang naipong karanasan sa halalan samantalang ang kalakhan ng mga miyembro natin ay ngayong taon lang nasabak sa laban. Hindi lalagpas sa 23 ang average edad ng ating mga opisyal samantalang kalakhan ng mga miyembro natin ay hindi pa aabot ng 20 ang edad. Pero sa kabila ng kakapusan ng karanasan natin, tayo ay nagwagi at naunahan pa nga natin ang maraming partylist. Sa mura ninyong edad, nakapagpanalo kayo ng partylist sa pambansang halalan!

Nanalo tayo kahit hindi tayo contractor ng presidente o kamag-anak ng mga warlord at political dynasty. Hindi tayo namili ng boto o nangako ng mga proyekto sa mga lokal na opisyal. Hindi tayo nandaya o nag-isip man lang mandaya sa pamamagitan ng pre-shaded ballots at reprogramming ng Compact Flash cards. Kaduda-duda ang sobrang tinaas ng boto para sa lahat ng partylist. Taktika ito para makapasok ang mga pro-Arroyo partylist.

Nais kong kilalanin ang mga martir ng ating organisasyon: Marjorie Reynoso, Jonathan Bernaro, Ramon Regase at Lito Doydoy ng Maco, Campostela Valley. Si Cris Hugo, Ambo Guran, at Farly Alcantara ng Bicol. Ipagpapatuloy naming ang inyong laban!

Kilalanin natin ang mga pambansang organisasyon na nagtatag ng ating partylist: Anakbayan, League of Filipino Students, Student Christian Movement, Karatula, College Editors Guild, at ang organisasyong kinabibilangan ko, ang National Union of Students.

Kilalanin natin ang ating mga nominado: si Ken Ramos ng Anakbayan, Renil Oliva ng Cebu, Atty. Kat Castillo ng Leyte, at si Mark Louie Aquino ng National Capital Region. Tinitiyak ko sa inyo na hindi anak ng presidente o Cabinet member ang mga nominado natin. Pagbati rin sa anim na miyembro ng Kabataan Partylist na nanalong konsehal sa Panay.

Narito ang ating mga pambansang opisyal. Nakikita ko si Vencer, ang ating all-around na secretary-general at webmaster. Si Anna, ang nangasiwa sa pollwatching at national coordination. Si Sarah, ang ating Chief-of-Staff at kumanta ng ating Lady Gaga jingle. Narito rin ang ating mga provincial and regional coordinator.

Narito rin ang ating online team. Salamat at number one tayo sa internet!

Kilalanin din natin ang dalawang pinakamatandang miyembro ng Kabataan Partylist: si Tito Bernie at Ka Romy.

Salamat sa inyong lahat. Salamat sa lahat ng nagtiwala sa Kabataan. Salamat sa suporta: sa mga napuyat, napagod, nasaktan sa kampanya. Sa mga nasunog ang kamay sa kakaluto ng gawgaw para pandikit sa poster. Sa mga miyembro natin sa kanayunan na walang makitang pader na pwedeng lagyan ng poster. Sa mga nag house-to-house kahit may El Nino. Sa mga nabastos, nasaraduhan ng pinto, namura, napahiya sa pangangampanya. Sa mga miyembro natin na sumasakay ng MRT/LRT at kunwari’y inosenteng nag-uusap kung ano ang ibobotong partylist sa halalan. Sa mga napudpod ang kamay sa kakatext. Sa mga naubusan ng prepaid internet load dahil araw-araw kailangang i-facebook message ang mga kaibigan. Sa mga namolyeto, nagdikit ng sticker sa mga dyip, trike, at pedicab. Sa mga biglang napakanta, napasayaw, napa emcee sa mga programa para lang ikampanya ang Kabataan. Taos pusong pasasalamat sa inyong lahat!

Sa mga nakatira sa HQ na dinanas at sinapit ang halos lahat nitong nakaraang tatlong buwan. Naputulan ng kuryente, naubusan ng tubig, nawalan ng bigas, may kumain ng iyong ulam, kulang ang pamasahe sa dyip. May mga nabuo at naputol na relasyon. May bagong panganak. At dahil laging gutom, puyat, at pagod sa HQ, di minsan ang mga alitan. Sa inyo na nag-ayos ng mga motorcade, pedicade, calesa-cade (sa Vigan). Sa inyo na nag-ayos ng mga sortie, malaki man o maliit. Sa mga nangampanya sa mga Wowowee concert ng Nacionalista Party. Salamat, salamat po.

Ang tagumpay ng Kabataan Partylist ay para sa inyo at para sa lahat ng naghahangad ng pagbabago. Para rin ito sa mga jejemon, jeprox, hiphop, emo, cono, kanto boy, gangsta, geeks, sa mga batang ama at ina, sa mga frat, sa mga makabayang aktibista, sa lahat ng kabataang Pilipino. Ang Kabataan Partylist ang inyong boses, sandigan sa loob ng kongreso.

Ngayong tapos na ang halalan, sisimulan natin ang paghamon sa bagong administrasyon. Adyenda ng kabataan igigiit natin. Tunay na pagbabago ang ating sigaw. Hindi tayo maghihintay ng 100 araw. Kikilos tayo ngayon.

Hindi pulitika ng pork barrel ang ating prayoridad. Bagong pulitika. Hindi sapat ang mabuting pulitika. Dapat progresibong pulitika. Pulitika ng pag-asa, pakikibaka, at pagbabago. Yan ang bitbit ng Kabataan Partylist sa muli nating pagpasok sa kongreso.

2007 Thanksgiving speech

Posted in speeches | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Seeing and politics

By admin | June 30, 2010

Part 1: postblogism

To see is no longer to believe.

There was a time when people had to look up into the sky to search for answers about the mysteries of life. We raise our eyes to the heavens looking for clues about our existence. Astronomers and astrologers gaze at the stars and planets to discover their meaning in relation to our own planetary system.

We are curious creatures. We are explorers of the world. We are adventurers.

To understand the realities of the globe, we only had to open our eyes. We use our eyes to probe the riddles of humanity. Often, after seeing something interesting or extraordinary, we are pushed into action. We are motivated to deepen our knowledge about this enigmatic thing. In short, the first step towards the affirmation of truth and the need for change is to see.

Hindi lang buksan ang iyong mata. Idilat ang iyong mata.

The problem today is that we no longer gaze at the stars. We no longer want to touch the fleshy, spongy, rough surface of the planet. We have lost the patience to look for answers by peering into the distance. We are refusing to open our eyes to the ugly realities of our society.

Yes, we are still using our eyes to see the world but we no longer go out to experience reality. We are satisfied “to see” in the comfort of our homes. It seems our eyes couldn’t resist the glare of our TV sets, computer screens, cell phones, ipods and other gaming devices. Truth is validated if it appears in front of our computer windows. Emile Zola once wrote that “you cannot claim to have really seen something until you have photographed it.” Using Zola’s words, we can say today that you cannot claim to have really seen something until you have seen it in the internet.

What is worse than refusing to see? Paul Virilio warned that “our contemporaries no longer want to see, they want to be seen by all.” The best example is our facebooking activities. We want to be seen by everybody on Facebook. We are exhibitionists. We upload our photos and videos on Facebook. We have redefined the meaning of privacy. Suddenly, the lives of everybody are now an open (face)book. Susan Sontag’s term of self-surveillance is appropriate in describing our internet habits.

So we have two issues: 1) we refuse to see; 2) we only want to be seen.

What is the problem of refusing to see? We can’t solve the problems of man if we do not open our eyes. Or worse, if we only use our eyes to observe others or if we continually compare ourselves with others. Or if we end up as cyber voyeurs. Virilio wrote that the information revolution is really a revolution of generalized snooping. Think of webcams and camera phones.

What is the problem of only wanting to be seen? We can’t be good neighbors if we are satisfied with looking in the mirror everyday. How can we feel the pain of others if we are obsessed with our Facebook profile? The world does not evolve around us. The center of the earth is not us. There are more important things on this planet other than our puny concern about an unflattering picture on Facebook which was tagged by one of our friends.

It is wrong to think and assert that providing instant and realtime information to everybody will inspire people into action. The reverse might happen. Over-communication might actually prevent people from doing something. And it is already happening.

For example, pictures of poverty are retweeted on Twitter, shared on FB walls, liked by FB friends, reposted in blogs to the point that they were seen by everybody in our online network many times over. This is the “obscenity of ubiquity.” And there is no guarantee that viral blasting the images would provoke people to do something concrete about what they have just seen. Why? Sontag reminds us that “pseudo familiarity with the horrible reinforces alienation, making one less able to react in real life.” She adds that the “feeling of being exempt from calamity stimulates interest in looking at painful pictures, and looking at them suggests and strengthens the feeling that one is exempt.”

But it is not just overexposure to the real that discourages people to act. The “art of seeing” itself is gone. Moholy-Nagy mentioned eight distinct varieties of seeing – abstract, exact, rapid, slow, intensified, penetrative, simultaneous, and distorted. Meanwhile, Alvin Langdon Coburn wrote that the camera is an instrument of ‘fast seeing’. Sontag wrote about us having a photographing eye used for photographic seeing. Today, we have internet eyes which are used not to see but to consume vast amounts of information in realtime. We don’t even blink anymore. We are too overwhelmed with the power of the cyberspace that we refuse to reduce our intake of data believing that doing so would deprive us of the chance to access the great truths of our time.

Surfing the web is not a sightseeing activity where we can experience and witness the marvels of the world. Most of the time, it is only a glorified and eye-stress inducing celebration of the trivial, inconsequential and boring information tidbits about ourselves and our neighbors. But because we believe that internet data is the truth and web surfing is the modern and safe way of seeing, we proudly share our new knowledge with the less informed others. Sharing of internet-sourced knowledge becomes the preferred mode of political action of the 21st century man.

The challenge then is to restore the radical power of seeing. The truth is not located in our RSS and twitter feeds. It is out there.

Reference:

– Susan Sontag, (1977) “On Photography”, Penguin, London
– Paul Virilio, (2007) Art as Far as the Eye can See (Translated from the French by Julie Rose)
Berg Press

Posted in media | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Youth, Employment, Migration

By admin | June 27, 2010

*Keynote speech delivered at Mandarin Oriental last June 23 during the launching of the YOUthink session of the Department of Labor and Employment and the National Youth Commission

Good morning, honorable speakers and resource persons, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen.

I would first like to congratulate the Department of Labor and Employment, the National Youth Commission, and other partner organizations for this successful launching of the first ever YOUthink sessions.

Thank you for this opportunity to share my views about a very important topic. I understand that you broke tradition by allowing a young person, instead of senior officials of the department, to keynote this gathering. I appreciate the gesture and the risk you took by choosing a young activist-legislator to discuss the youth-employment-migration issue.

Let me begin with a question: Do we really understand the Filipino youth today? We can cite numerous statistics about the young population, for example – the Philippines, which has a predominantly young population, also has the highest overall unemployment rates in East Asia and the Pacific Region. It also has the highest rates on unemployment among the youth, according to a 2003 study by the World Bank. Young Filipinos are twice as likely to be unemployed than those in older age groups. This condition was further worsened when the economic recession kicked in because of massive retrenchment and lay-offs.

Young workers are at a disadvantage given their lack of experience vis a vis the lack of job opportunities. Every year for the last decade, at least 300,000 new graduates are added to the labor force, and consequently, a majority of them figure in the increasing unemployment statistics.

In January 2008, the government reported that 50 percent of the unemployed 2.7 million belonged to age groups 15 to 24. Of these, 461,000 or 35 percent were able to graduate from college, while an estimated 700,000 unemployed youth either finished high school or at least reached undergraduate college levels.

Indeed, these numbers clearly illustrate the seriousness of the problem. However, I think these numbers do not present an adequate description or they fail to contextualize what the young are really thinking and feeling today.

I am young, well, compared to my colleagues in Congress, I am young. But I cannot confidently assert that I belong to the new generation. They speak jejemon; my batchmates prefer the Kris Aquino version of cono taglish. They are emo; we prefer to be called existentialists.

Let us try to understand the youth aged 15-24. The oldest of this age group was born in 1986 while the youngest was born in 1995. How old were you in 1995? Or should I say how young were you in 1995? The output of today’s event will change the lives, hopefully for the better, of the new generation. Let us think of them and their future during the plenary session.

It is imperative that we first recognize how the young are interpreting the world because the last thing we want is to alienate them. We can’t offer solutions that do not address the particular needs and desires of our youth. There is the danger of assuming that what is good and effective for our generation will be easily accepted by our youth today.

So what are the key events and ideas in the past 15 years that could have influenced the worldview of our youth?

First, this generation grew up believing that the labor export policy is a permanent and natural economic policy. They believe that migration is the only way they can fulfill their dreams. Isn’t it tragic that a generation of Filipinos is holding on to a believable fiction that life is always better in other countries?

Second, this generation was exposed to the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. These have shattered the people’s confidence in the economic system but I believe that these economic shocks have also further encouraged young Filipinos to look for jobs in other countries where companies are in need of cheap labor.

Third, the rise of the service sector is best exemplified by the booming Business Process Outsourcing industry. Working in a BPO firm is now a popular career option for young Filipinos who do not want to leave the country. But many young workers in this industry are not aware of their labor rights and they even think that they do not experience labor problems just because they receive above minimum wage salaries.

Fourth, the spectacular decline of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors has led to dwindling number of available jobs in the country, especially in the rural areas. Filipinos in the provinces are flocking to the cities in search of jobs and economic opportunities. Just think of Manny Pacquaio – before he became a boxing legend, he went to Manila to escape poverty in General Santos.

Because of perceived low income derived from farming, more and more Filipinos are leaving the agricultural sector to join the urban population. This is unfortunate since we are an agricultural nation. What is surprising is that while we are experiencing low productivity in the rural areas, young Filipinos seem to be experts in expanding their agricultural estates in Farmville.

Fifth, the basic education curriculum was revised in 2002. What is the impact of this revision on the skills training of students? Did it equip our young people with proper knowledge and experience to survive in this competitive world of ours? The new president wants to overhaul the schooling system and maybe he can also order the review of the curriculum in our public schools.

Sex education, renamed as teen wellness program, is now part of the curriculum. Consumer education, climate change, human rights will also be taught in schools. What new topics should we propose to make our students productive citizens in the future?

When I was a college freshman (in 1996), the most popular course offering in the country was computer science. Computer schools mushroomed throughout the archipelago. Today, the number one course preference of students is nursing. Why? It is obviously linked to the high demand for health workers in other countries. The academe-industry relationship must be reviewed.

Sixth, the first wave of large-scale emigration began in the 1970s. Let us assume that the workers who left the country during this period are already retiring and will return soon. They are the parents and relatives of the new generation I am talking about. The return of the senior citizen OFWs will put pressure on young Filipinos to look for high paying jobs and most likely they will also seek employment abroad to replace their parents and relatives who have already retired. The Philippine government, therefore, must step up its reintegration and retraining programs for returned overseas workers.

Seventh, the internet and mobile technologies. This generation is sometimes called the networked generation. They can’t leave their cell phones at home and they surf the web everyday, at least for those who have internet access. On the plus side, it has expanded economic and social activities in the country thanks to more accessible communication devices. On the negative side, it has permanently affected the writing skills, study habits, and reading proficiency of students. It has also reinforced the individualist tendencies of young people who always want to be seen by all on Facebook.

Allow me to review and highlight some of the points I mentioned earlier.

During my undergraduate years (and that was more than a decade ago), the migration of Filipinos workers was referred to as brain drain. Then economists began to preach about the positive impact of migration. Braid drain became brain gain, brain circulation, ot brain exchange. But in recent years, the exodus of Filipino health workers – doctors, nurses, midwives, and health educators – has shown how migration can almost disrupt the delivery of basic social services in the country. I agree with former Health Secretary Jaime Galvez Tan when he described the phenomena as brain hemorrhage. From braid drain to brain hemorrhage; meaning skilled workers are already leaving the country in alarming numbers.

In Japan, the concept of lost generation is related to the economic crisis in the 1990s which produced a generation of young Japanese with no full-time employment. Using the economy as a yardstick, can we describe migrant Filipinos (from OCW to OFW) as belonging to the lost generation? They are talented Filipinos who are forced to wander in other countries to pursue their dreams. Can the dollar remittances compensate for the loss of our skilled human resources?

The labor export policy also created another lost generation – the children of OFWs. They grew up while their parents are far away. Parenting in these modern times is accomplished through letters, telephone conversations, and internet chat. Often, OFW parents shower their children with consumer goods to ease the guilt of leaving their families. What is worse is that children of OFWs will grow old thinking that earning money and fulfilling a dream can only be realized by migrating to distant shores.

I believe that the long-term solution to youth unemployment and the best alternative to migration is to strengthen the domestic economy. Jobs, livelihood, vibrant national industries. The new president should review the country’s economic policies which yield good economic numbers like GDP growth but contribute little in alleviating the plight of poor Filipinos. If rich countries are adopting trade protection measures to support their local industries, why can’t we do the same?

Jumpstarting the local economy is not the mandate of DOLE alone. It is the national government which should address the need to mix sound economic planning, relevant education, efficient health system, and sustainable development when formulating national policies.

Young workers are often discriminated in the workplace. Many are subjected to different forms of harassment in offices. Most of the time, young workers do not complain for fear of losing their jobs. Docility can also be traced to the youth’s ignorance of labor laws. What we can offer to young people is information about their labor rights. We can help them assert these rights in the workplaces. We can teach them the value of forming unions and associations to advance their collective interests. This is no longer an easy task since the dominant ethic today is to pursue individual interests. The rise of the service sector produced a new breed of young professionals with little or no sense of collective solidarity.

We also have to think of creative methods to get the attention of the youth. Everyday they are bombarded with all kinds of data, both serious and silly, when they access the internet. We should try to present the topic of labor rights in such a way that it will make them briefly forget Justin Bieber and the cast of Glee.

(According to Pierre Bourdieu,) unemployment is a form of structural violence in society. It deprives individuals the right to have a meaningful life in the present by making the future uncertain. It isolates individuals from the community which prevents the formation of solidarity.

It is not just about creating new jobs for the young that really matter. The concern of everybody, both the public and private sectors, both young and old, is to decide as a community whether we want to continue living in a society where a big part of the population is denied the chance to contribute something substantial to the progress of the country. We should also ask ourselves whether it serves our interest, in the long run, to continue sending away the best and brightest of our young generation.

There is always the expectation that something new is going to happen every time a new leader emerges. But change is impossible to achieve if we do not assert the kind of change we want for our country. The challenge then is to start working for the change we really want, and the change we really need.

*Thank you Sarah for contributing ideas and relevant data in drafting this speech.

Posted in speeches | Tagged | 5 Comments