Toots Ople and I arrived at Makati City Hall yesterday late in the afternoon, when news of the Court of Appeals TRO had already broken. So it was pretty jolly in the vicinity except for the area around the old city hall, where the Palace-appointed New Order was supposed to have set up shop, and where many lost-looking military people were standing around scratching their heads and texting.
We alighted in a sidestreet and made our way through the kind of courtyard in front of the new city hall, jostling through boiled peanut vendors fish ball vendors and milling crowds of delegation, some standing, some seated, around a stage, from which was blaring “Handog ng Pilipino sa Mundo.” A barker was calling the roll of the barangay delegations:
Barker: “East Rembo!”
Left corner: “Hoorah!!”
Barker: “West Rembo!”
Right corner leaps to its feet: “Yippee!”
Barker: “Palanan!”
Sizeable group stands up and roars: “Yihee!”
Barker: “Poblacion!”
A huddled group waves its arms: “Yehey!”
Barker: “Forbes Park!”
-silence, and then giggling from the huddled masses.
Barker: “Tejeros!”
Right corner: “Hoorah-yippee-yahoo-yehey-yihee!”
Hordes of energetic senior citizens circulated, apparently braced to fight for free dentures, movie passes and birthday cakes to the death (democracy hath no fury like a constituent defending his entitlements). Massed lines of traffic aides in yellow were in formation at the entrance, but people were going in and out of the city hall freely.
Inside (and it was my first time to visit the Makati City Hall) the relentlessly-marbled first floor, the windows of various offices were open and there were people patiently sitting waiting for whatever-it-was-they-were-there-for to be attended to. We were directed to the elevators and finally rode one up to the 21st floor, where people milled about or clustered in corners depending on their political affiliations. Various barangay delegations would march in and out to demonstrate their loyalty to the mayor, who was seated in one of the smaller board rooms.
We dutifully shuffled in and said hello to Binay, who was on his cellphone but would cup the receiver to acknowledge his visitors. After a few minutes there was a minor huddle and then Binay disappeared into his office, apparently to take a look at the TRO.
“Si Gloria, si Gloria!” the crowd suddenly murmured. It turned out to be Gloria Diaz.
Newsbreak carries a report on the TRO, and pictures of the celebrations later that evening. Borrowing a phrase you first saw here, folks, Amando Dorinilla says the Palace is engaging in brinkmanship. Ellen Tordesillas thinks the Palace decided to defuse an explosive situation. It could have gone out of control, as a deadline for action today loomed. It could afford to give the opposition a temporary sense of victory -without, however, proving things either way.
Is the Palace merely trying to save face? It remains defiant it seems. Binay’s people expect more attempts through other means (Sandiganbayan or even the Ombudsman) to remove their mayor.
Meanwhile, more moving of the chess pieces by the Queen. A Binay aide told me the most nerve-wracking moments were early in the standoff and yesterday morning. Early on, they were virtually defenseless in city hall; yesterday morning, they were also unsure if people would stand up to a military assault on city hall. Perhaps their opponents sensed, too, that they’d moved too slowly and the besieged mayor had managed to turn public opinion and the political momentum against them.
Overseas, the Guardian reports that even the Bush administration’s admitted, for the first time, that it’s facing a Vietnam-like scenario in Iraq:
The admission from President Bush that the US may have arrived at a turning point in this war – the Tet offensive led to a massive loss of confidence in the American presence in Vietnam – comes during one of the deadliest months for US forces since the invasion.
Yesterday the number of US troops killed since October 1 rose to 73, deepening the sense that America is trapped in an unwinnable situation and further damaging Republican chances in midterm elections that are less than three weeks away.
No surprise then that the Republican Right and its fellow travellers are using the “vote Republican or Dubya will be impeached by Communists!” argument to hold the base together.
In the punditocracy, the Inquirer editorial delves into the pressure being applied by the Palace on the Supreme Court.
Dr. Rene Azurin of One Voice pens a warning to those who’d willfully ignore history.
Max Soliven declares war on Mark Jimenez.
In the blogosphere, people weigh in pro and con regarding Binay. In the good riddance corner are Unsent Postcards and joeydaninja, while in the it’s persecution corner are The Write Stuff, and Mental Pornography and El Bisyador and Manila Boy and My Sanctuary; a Makati City resident, shh…. the mind is talking… says they didn’t notice much (and explains why they like their mayor):
well, bilang isang mamamayan ng dakilang lungsod *ehem* ng Makati, masasabi kong maganda naman ang pamumuno ni Binay… nararamdaman naman namin na bumabalik sa amin ang binabayaran naming buwis… hindi literal na bumalik sa amin ang perang binayad ng mga magulang ko, bagkus, sa mga serbisyo at mga proyekto ni Binay para sa mga taga-Makati (o mga Makakati… ehehe)… kasi hanggang sa pagsilang, unang picture ng baby saka ng nanay pagkapanganak, health service tulad ng Yellow Card at diskwento sa gamot sa mga Senior Citizen at iba pa, hanggang sa mga cakes para sa matatanda, pati sa kabaong ng namatay at bulaklak, sagot ng pamahalaan ng Makati… madami pang mga pa-eklat na proyekto na talagang kapakipakinabang… masasabi kong alam ni Binay ang “kiliti” ng masa… kaya hindi ako magtataka kung patuloy pa rin siyang iboboto ng mga tao dito…
A Texas showdown is what it is, Pala-isip says. An OFW in Hong Kong takes a look at the brouhaha over Binay’s wearing a military jacket, something lilac republic also comments on. Philippine Commentary had lawyer Alan Paguia as a guest blogger and that got reactions, too from Buddy Blogs and Upoytaoism. Also, Confessions from the Edge says the Department of the Interior is courting contempt.
A pox on everyone’s houses, courtesy of Alternation101: he says everybody, without exception, is guilty of something-or-other sooner-or-later. earl_johnm paints his views on Philippine television in equally bold strokes.
Technorati Tags: constitution, media, military, One Voice, people’s initiative, philippines, politics, president, war, Washington DC
mlq3, your insight re the lost generations is precise. like this one “the generation born in the 60s should have been coming into its own a decade ago; and the martial law baby generation coming into power now, but the leaders today are the leaders who should have been leading twenty years ago, which is another reason there’s such a wide gulf between the leadership and the public.
this is the thing about marcos people refuse to see. he literally left the country retarded. he was like a paralyzing stroke that means we are hobbling along like people relearning how to walk, talk, and eat and not soil ourselves”.
Marcos is gone but and his pernicious ways are the one that our present politicians copy. Edsa 1 and 2 is not a strategic failure in the sense that it improves our lessons from the past jsut like any revolutionary event. But if you are a participant to the events and you have seen the follies right in front of your eyes one cannot view it as just another history lessons better left to the academicians and theoreticians.
Re EDSA 1 it has done its job in ousting Marcos and restoring our civil liberties but it failed to inspire our people to reject the condemnable acts that Marcod did. Under Marcos our bread and our liberties were taken from us. But after Marcos the bread is still not there. Worst, we are mislead to think that our liberties are there.
John M, i understand your frustration with the likes of Bong, Sassy and company but unfortunately a lot of people are not moving because they are of like mind but because they no longer want to help the transfer of power to another set of GMA 2. They now realize that if they let ERAP stayed, most likely GMA will not be there now. Many now sees that ERAP’s sins are not as heinous as GMA’s. The center is now “segurista”.Do not worry. Be patient, the people will stop the cha cha and will act to have the 2007 election. Then what? Of course, try to kick GMA out before 2010 thru the impeachment.
my attitude about bong austero has always been: he is not a gma supporter and it is wrong to treat him as one. obviously though, his mistrust of the opposition is useful to the palace, and his views can inadvertently be useful to palace propagandists.
the same applies to sassy lawyer who is too independent-minded to be anybody’s stooge, which doesn’t mean her arguments or even her column isn’t beyond being used as a tool by the palace for its purposes.
there is a gigantic difference, though, between being paid apologists of the palace and being used as apologists of the palace. it would be slander, for example, to say either connie or bong are prostituting themselves to the palace. it would be equally slanderous to compare them to alex magno.
though i do think in the end there is more of a chance for bong austero to openly come out for the opposition than for connie to ever do so -but then it’s practically impossible for me to be objective about connie just as it is impossible for her to be likewise about me.
mlq3,
The ideology of indifference is unassailable, its rhetoric, unengageable. Whilst sitting passionately and intelligently on the fence as a strategy, the tactics of opposed sides are easily portrayed as fanatic extremes in relation to each other, and the broad, ill-defined “middle.” Curiously, there is both antidote and riposte to this ideology. Itself.
hah. you’re the one to talk, cathcath. i’ve been called pro-erap, pro-marcos, pro-fpj before.
i think the most accurate is pro-lacson or anti-edsa dos, but most of the time, i don’t even contradict the labels anymore.
i was anti-erap and pro-arroyo before btw, but the venom, nastiness and extremism displayed by many of those who hate erap has helped me change some of my political views.
and even though i like lacson, i’ll probably not vote for him, if there’s a special election to replace arroyo.
why? because he’s seen as divisive. and may not be the right person to lead this country at this time.
we need somebody who can unite the country. i’m willing to vote for somebody like drilon as a “transition president” (full six years, 2007-2013)
HVRDS,
Revolution,The US removed the brits and continued to reevolve,thus there is reevolutltion.
The Russians removed The Tzars evoleved to communism,now reevolving to Putins definition of democracy,which Putin still does not know what as long as it is not Bush’s democracy.
Now our dear Philippines, we had many small wars only magnified by our history books but a revolution,I don’t really know….The So called Us Hispanic war just extended here,and who knows what the American s were after:sugar,manila hemp or heavenknows.The Fil American war was a result of a drunk american soldier shooting a filipino and it went on for decades….but have we reevolved,we still do not know if we really have an independence day because of the knowledge that we really never threw out the Spaniards.it was a result of US Hispanic theatrics and do we really have our identity or have we ever had our identity.
But I do not see any reevolution of any sorts,all are accidental, including those so called EDSAS….
mlq,
I agree with you. They are Arroyo’s buffers. The austero’s and the sassies serve to rationalize fence-sitting. Their emphasis on issues when it comes to GMA and on personalities when it comes to the opposition is fertile ground for the cultivation of fence-sitters. It renders any issue irrelevant, no matter how valid, because the personality of those raising it becomes the issue.
At the same time, we are not allowed to attack GMA or her followers personally. Issues like the Garci tapes, the Pidal accounts and all that must be dealt with as legal , technical and procedural issues and not as political issues which, in the end, are all about whether a certain personality is fit for office or not.
Lately, when I look at polls, I pay attention to the percentage who don’t respond. I always add them to the column of those who approve of Arroyo. I wouldn’t be surprised if Arroyo aims more at increasing their numbers than getting people over to her side. They are the ones that prevent a critical mass from forming.
Look at the latest SWS polls and their Net Satisfaction Rating. Add the satisfied and dissatisfied and you will see it falls significantly short of 100%. Review those figures on the impeachment . There are many who didn’t respond one way or the other.
We need to see if the fence-sitters are growing or decreasing. If growing, from whose side are they coming from ? and if decreasing, which side are they moving to?
i agree with mlq3(@5:32pm), while we can more or less write-off the closet Arroyo supporters, i am not losing hope when it comes to the ones who still harbor the illusion that GMA is a benign presence. Rego has a point that with this bunch, it is also question of hearts and minds. Somehow, they still have 2010 in their heads as some sort of imaginary deadline. They have to realize for themselves the strategic stupidity of their inaction (most specially their willingness to trade freedoms just to move forward), the eventual consequence of which has been described by hvrds above:
“When the contradiction reaches the level of extreme political action – war – there will only be two sides and the middle usually will bear the brunt of the casualties.”
With that, i think it is worth considering Bafil’s suggested answer to melvinsky’s question for the“coming together of the “critical mass†(or masa, really) and “ what jm has referred to as the “small ‘thinking’ section of the silent majority”.
The middle’s (i.e. One Voice, EDSA2 crowd) role is not to present a new leader. Even if we did, after Arroyo, our credibility is shot, and the masses will most likely not vote for him or her. We should just focus on removing what melvinsky has identified as “the people who now opress us [the same ones who] used to be our comrades in the trenches“. They are, after all, our own sh*t which we have to clean up.
It is then up to the masses to vote their chosen leader. In this, we can leverage what JM has identified as ” the Filipinos’ emotionalism, personalism and fatalism” which is the “antithesis to analysis that risks paralysis“. If it’s Binay or Lacson – so be it. In the meantime, the middle should get out of the State (which we prematurely entered in 2001) and its corrupting influence and go back to the public sphere as part of oppositional civil society. From there, we will be in a better position to fight for our advocacies for clean government, against cronyism. and protection property rights. It goes without saying that to do this, we need to have a measure (and may have to fight for) political rights.
From the outside, we will also be better able deal with the recurrence of what Carl (and Mik) has described as the “drastic transformation that overcomes former oppositionists when they are in power.” The difference is, this time around, we as a people should be psychologically and logistically prepared. Knowing what is to come, the proper action is not to go ‘boo hoo’ and sulk in a corner. We have to just accept that a lot of those who will get power will be corrupted and we have to put in the mechanisms in place to deal with them accordingly.
John@7:22pm, i think what we need is more people just like you who have the ability to possess ‘strong opinions, weakly held’, which some say is the secret to wisdom.
cvj,
Very good points. But more than the ideas, the positive attitude imparted is effective antidote to the prevailing ‘silenced majority’ malaise.
More than issues, political orientation or a peculiarly effective propaganda style, it was ‘attitude’ that worried me about Mr. Austero’s ‘open letters’. He was, in effect, exploiting the silent majority vulnerability in such a dire and frustrating predicament.
More than a ‘silent majority’ ideology, what we need to encourage is good ‘silent majority’ attitude:
“this time around, we as a people should be psychologically and logistically prepared.”
manuelbuencamino said: “Why do people always bad mouth EDSA 1?”
People do not badmouth EDSA 1, its own failure and lack of substantial accomplishments for the majority of citizens speak ill of itself. EDSA was a sham revolution which created many expectations but only turned out to be more of the same. EDSA didn’t liberate the majority of the citizenry from poverty, nor did it increase opportunities for most of the people. It only created or restored its own cronies and oligarchs (the Lopezes, the Lopas, Peping Cojuangcos and other Kamag-anaks, to name some) and made pacts with the very devils they had once vowed to make examples of in order to level the playing field (Marcos cronies and courtiers like the Camposes, the Ramon Cojuangcos, Lucio Tan, Antonio Floiriendo, the Zamora brothers, William Gatchalian, just to name a few). The Aquino administration also soon entered into political partnerships with Marcos-era warlords and politicians like the Singsons, the Josons, the Dy’s, the Villafuertes, the Espinosas, the Monforts, the Zubiris, the Dimaporos, among others. It even came to terms with the person Cory Aquino herself once accused of killing Ninoy, Danding Cojuangco, who had perpetrated the coconut levy scam and defrauded millions of coconut farmers. Don’t tell the 11 million coconut farmers that EDSA gave them justice. To make things worse, the ravenous trapos who were thrown out by Martial Law made a comeback with a vengeance and made wild and wooly politics an entertaining diversion while failing to address the matters of development and creating economic opportunities and growth. Then came the power crisis with its rolling blackouts, 8 to 12 hours daily, which inflicted so much hardship and inoconvenience on the populace. Sino and nasunog sa EDSA 1? – – – The many millions of Filipinos who were defrauded when they thought that there would be real and honest change, not just a change of personalities and factions.
mlq3,
If a man’s prime is 21 and sired a son 5 years late and if his son, in turn, sired a child at 16 is the grandson ‘sychronized’ to the original ‘historical clock’?
In this regard, is GMA early, late or misplaced — at the wrong place, at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. She occupied Erap’s half term and FPJ’s first half, so far.
Aren’t the causes for political ‘retardation’ recurrent in history? 300-yr retardation because of Spanish colonization, and so on, 6-yr retardation so far due to GMA’s illegitimate regime? Worse than retardation, GMA’s destruction of institutions it took generations to establish would result in political regression. No wonder rule of force not of laws is our future a few more years with GMA.
jm, recurrent, yes or more accurately, always lurking as a danger. mos dangerous is when leaders do not cultivate successors. and so while we have had quite a few leaders with extremely long careers, another thing marcos was different from his predecessors was that he would not -because he could not- cultivate successors. every one of his predecessors had consciously groomed successors, even magsaysay in his brief stay in power. a dictator can never do so -one more reason those who were willing to tolerate marcos eventually rebeled when the best that could be assumed was a power struggle between enrile and imelda.
you may find this interesting, incidentally:
http://www.slate.com/id/2151852/nav/tap2/
mlq3,
“consciously groomed successors … a dictator can never do so” — history’s verdict on Fidel Castro’s success or failure as a leader hinges on this point. Cuba’s retardation is stretched to the limit. Fidel’s longevity was opportunity for transition, but it wasn’t done as Lee Kwan Yu did.
Revisiting Marcos dictatorship: At a certain point, as soon as normalcy was achieved, Marcos should have restored and given due course to democratic processes — let the people decide, whatever the consequence, the people learn from experience. Isn’t trust in the people the mark of a true leader? If GMA is not the legitimate, rightful President, do we have the true one in our midst? Can GMA be convinced, by moral suassion, to trust the people and call for a snap election? convince GMA to avoid Marcos’ mistake — not that Marcos called the dare, but that he called it 10 yrs late. Isn’t giving due course to democratic processes, for the people to exercise its sovereign will, the remedy from retardation?
How was the leader to generation cadence synchronized in history? through elections or revolutions?
Given the kind of politicians in power, is a shift to parliamentary system another cause of ‘retardation’?
re slate’s Colonial “Master of the Island”, update: neocolonial “Master-mind of the Island”,
Carl, only extreme idealism would lead someone to build such a causal chain. The immediate and unmistakable outcome of EDSA was to oust Marcos and restore our civil liberties. It also, taking off from mlq3’s thesis above, prevented further political retardation under Marcos. The rest of the story may consist of betrayals, mistakes and missed opportunities (interspersed with some real improvements and success stories) but evil is as evil does so it is a stretch to trace every subsequent misfortune back to those five days in February.
One mistake people made across the board right after EDSA was to rest on their laurels and retreat from the public sphere. For example, after the Constitution was ratified, i remember Saguisag (who was part of the government then) saying that from then on, it was up to Congress to finish the job.
Another unfortunate distraction during those times was the witchhunt against ‘pinkos’ in government, which included targets such as Joker Arroyo and Teddy Boy Locsin. On the other hand, maybe the Communist scare was understandable then given the residual Cold war atmosphere, although most certainly, to bring up that same bogey today as GMA is doing so is ridiculous.
i had to google ’strong opinions, weakly held’, cvj. thanks.
Carl,
“EDSA didn’t liberate the majority of the citizenry from poverty, nor did it increase opportunities for most of the people. It only created or restored its own cronies and oligarchs…..”
What a cute statement to make. Tell me, where we better off under Cory or under Marcos?
Our economy was on a downward spiral when Cory took over. Marcos defaulted on foreign debt, capital flight was epidemic and no new investments were being made.
Did Cory renege on any debts? Was capital flight as bad as it was under Marcos? Did she not restore the confidence of foreign lenders and both local and foreign investors? And all that despite seven coup attempts. Look at the statistics and compare before you go mouthing off propaganda!
So poverty was not eliminated and not each and every Filipino got an equal opportunity but the question is did poverty increase because of her, and were there less opportuniies because of her? Did things get worse because of her?Would you have preferred to live under Matcos’ dictatorship?
And maybe you don’t care about civil liberties but those of us who care about it consider that to be Cory’s greatest gift.
Now, what did we gain from EDSA 2? Or at least what did we regain? And you think there is no difference between it and EDSA 1?
Is Arroyo better than Erap? Was the economy going downhill when Erap was ousted?
Are we freer under Arroyo than under Erap?
carl, manuelbuencamino,
why don’t you spare yourselves the effort of going deep into the economic aspects when discussing the outcome of EDSA 1? It seems clear to me it was all about getting rid of the dictator. Sure, people always have unrealistic expectations when a regime change occurs but that is another story. You simply can’t be weighing the scope of civil liberties and the performance of the economy on the same weighing scales, although some people – like the current president – would like you to believe so.
carl, re your 10/21 8:52pm post, excellent analysis on the sad outcome of Edsa 1. You forgot one thing, though: the careless, or hair-brained crafting of the the 1987 Constitution that is gradually proving to be a prime source of most of our national woes today. The ill-advised and out-dated protectionist provisions that hinder our economic growth (that mostly benefit the moneyed few in our society), the pandering to the left that enabled extremists from their ranks to continue their ideological “struggle” using the very instrumentalities they are seeking to overthrow, and the restoration of the largely-useless senate for the trapos and popular public figures (regardless of competence), are some examples of the systemic problems in governance that we are now confronted with as a nation. I really am sorry for GMA who is bearing the brunt of the hatred generated by all these frustrations.
edit: i should say “hare-brained”, not “hair-brained”.
bencard, that’s more than ‘one thing’. in any case, to answer your points:
“the careless, or hair-brained crafting of the the 1987 Constitution that is gradually proving to be a prime source of most of our national woes today.”
– that’s what JDV and Sigaw would like us to think, but that proposition is on empirically shaky ground. refer to the onevoice position paper so you’ll see how much of a distraction the Charter Change initiative actually is.
“The ill-advised and out-dated protectionist provisions”
– debatable, but can nevertheless be dealt with by an ammendment of those specific provision(s).
“the pandering to the left….”
– as i mentioned above, the suspected members of the ‘Left’ at that time included Senator Joker Arroyo and Congressman Teddy Boy Locsin which goes to show just how far right the witch hunters were. In the meantime, the real members of the left, student leader Lean Alejandro and Rolando Olalia were brutally murdered (the latter painfully tortured before being killed). That could hardly be considered pandering.
“restoration of the largely-useless senate…”
– resulted in the US Bases getting kicked out, a real milestone in the Filipinos’ journey as an independent people.
john marzan, hi. in your 10/21 1:51 post, you attempted to classify arroyo supporters into two groups. You seemed to forget to include one other group, which I don’t think you can ignore whether you like it or not, and that is: those who do not conclude, and therefore not convinced, that GMA “cheated” because there has been no “smoking gun” (i.e., proof) produced successfully (according to existing rules) by her enemies that she did. I had a running dialogue about this issue with cvj and mlq3 in another posting (something about “jailfree card”) that I don’t wish to repeat here. Just to remind you that we exist and that there is a respectable number of us which you cannot sneeze at.
Bencard,If you are referring to this part of the comment of mr. Marzan:
“But here’s the funny part, if you ask most Arroyo defenders naman, they all tell you they’re not pro-Arroyo. LOL.
a) closet Arroyo supporters who approve of what she did but have enough sense of shame to not want to be seen as siding with a cheater; or
b) honestly don’t approve of Arroyo’s cheating but [mistakenly] see her as a benign presence compared to the opposition.”
………
Then Mr.Marzan cannot include those mentioned by you above,otherwise all of them who conclude that there is no cheating say they are not Pro Arroyo,but continue to defend her…
Just became curious on your above comment,so I scrolled up and read it.
As to not grooming successors thing…In our local setting we all know why this is a near impossibility;that dreaded dynasty thing,where grooming of descendants is always vogue,and while their spawn is not old enough,their wife could take charge.
Good thing,it sid not happen in the national scene,otherwise a wife or husband of a president will take charge until his son or daughter can take over…
But I believe we must have a succession or continuity plan,so that leaders would not even think of becoming a dictator,for they will know that the nation would be in good hands…..
DREAM ON!
bencard, just to add to Karl’s logical explanation, john was referring to my October 21, 1:25am comment. i must admit that people who take your position do exist, but among Arroyo supporters, your school of thought seems to be rare compared to the “Yes, we know Arroyo cheated but so what” camp. It’s probably best to try to convince your fellow Arroyo supporters that she did not actually cheat rather than selling this idea to someone who belongs to the opposition. If you convince enough of them, maybe you’ll have a shot at putting the genie back in the bottle.
cvj, I’m talking about what I see as undesirable provisions of the 1987 constitution which were framed in the aftermath of Edsa 1, not how to change them. I, for one, support “Cha-Cha” not because Arroyo or JVD want them but because I sincerely think it will be good for our country now and for the long haul. Kicking out the U.S bases? I thought it ended with the termination of the treaty, not through the single-handed action of the senate. At any rate, the “kicking-out” could have happened anyway, with or without the “24 presidents” vying for royal recognition.
“pandering to the left” – again, i’m talking about the constitutional provision, not who were or were not Leftist at the time of its framing or what happened to them. Please…, read carefully the import of my statement before you respond, o.k., cvj?
Karl, you are missing the point that people like me who continue supporting Arroyo because we are not convinced that she “cheated” is a separate and distinct group from those classified by Mr. Marzan. I’m not trying to include us with either of Mr. Marzan’s classification. cvj, your
description of Karl’s explanation as “logical” is illogical. I don’t think my “idea” needs selling to anyone. I assume that everyone has his own brain to judge the issue according to his/her own concept of right reason. Saying our “school of thought” is rare is presumptious and intellectually arrogant.
Bencard,
What is truth? Is Gloria an honest person who speaks the truth? “I will not run”, “I am sorry”, “we’re on the verge of an economic take off”, “there’s no shortage of classrooms” ….
Tell me GMA is not a liar and a cheat. Gloria did not cheat because she said so and you believe her. What if Gloria admits she cheated, will you say then that she’s lying. We believe what we choose to believe but it does not change the truth. That is GMA is afraid of and fighting against, not the Senate, CHR, CBCP, Media, One Voice …
GMA did not stop lying and cheating after she was proclaimed your president. “She has mastered the art of double talk.” The Supreme court says she’s cheating the Law, her orders are unconstitutional.
Truth. That is the central issue about this person who wants to stay in the Palace.
This forum is powered by people’s search for truth amidst a continuing conspiracy by GMA and her loyalists to cover-up it up.
If you say so Bencard, and thank you for calling me illogical.
I do not however,miss out on the point that there are really people who are very logical not to see any smoking gun whatsoever for Gma’s not not cheating.(you started to mention logic,analyze that)
Schools of thought are like schools of fish. They are obviously “led” yet the synchronicity of their mass motions can’t be explained entirely by the “lead fish.” Now in ichthyology as in politics, it is not actually the “lead” fish that the school itself reacts to, but a scent of an idea, a seeming pathway in the murky waters ahead, a strategy for competing with all other schools of thought that contend with it for survival in a sea of ideas.
In the case of the “austeroids” I have suggested that that strategy is a professed ideology of indifference that makes the passionate, the radical, the concerned, the progressive, in any issue, ABERRANT with respect to the lowest common denominator, sometimes called “the mean” or “the average” of the population.
Realize that this strategy means austeroids agree with almost everything anyone says, but only to plus or minus one standard deviation from that mean. Every austeroid essay begins with a basic description of this “middle” position, which segues into some description and castigation of anything not within this 67% or so of the opinion ensemble. The conclusions are tendentiously predictable: a reaffirmation of the mean plus or minus some.
Understanding the MEME that leads a school of fish is the key to understanding its overall motions and mental habits.
The stock market index reportedly shot to a 7-year high after the Court of Appeals issued a TRO on the suspension of Binay. A 7-year high?! What does this mean? It means businessmen are happy with the TRO. It is happy with the decision of the Court. It also means that as long as the courts come up with such decisions and actions, the businessmen see light at the end of the tunnel. Let’s see how the stock market index next week at the much-awaited Supreme Court’s decision on Charter Change. Should the Supreme Court decide in favor of the PI pro-Charter Change, do you think the stock market will again shoot up to record levels? Or spiral down to the bowels of the Pasig River?
” In the case of the “austeroids†I have suggested that that strategy is a professed ideology of indifference that makes the passionate, the radical, the concerned, the progressive, in any issue, ABERRANT with respect to the lowest common denominator, sometimes called “the mean†or “the average†of the population.”
haha. aren’t austeroids meant to be deflected, or broken up to smithereens, lest they pose extinction to human survival and spawn political leeches?
manuelbuencamino said: “Our economy was on a downward spiral when Cory took over.”
It was. And the Aquino administration could have seized on the opportunity from the international goodwill generated by EDSA, but miserably failed. Instead, infighting for turf and spoils among its cohorts led to incompetence and blunders, among them neglecting the energy sector until it was almost too late. Hence we had 8 to 12 hour blackouts and the economy began spiraling downward again. It took Fidel Ramos’ drastic stopgap measures to halt the hemorrhaging power crisis, but at what cost? But the dire power situation caused by the Aquino administration’s neglect and incompetence was bringing the nation to its knees. And when people are reduced to begging for relief from the power outages, they can ill afford to be choosy.
manuelbuencamino said: “Did Cory renege on any debts?â€Â
That must be a joke, surely. Could that seriously be considered an achievement? Are our leaders supposed to be servile to the international banking community, even when debts incurred were patently fraudulent? Cory could have seized on international goodwill to ask for debt relief or debt reduction. Mandela did it. The present government of Iraq did it. Argentina under Kirchner did it. Other South American and African countries did it . . . but, let’s face it, Cory didn’t have the imagination or the leadership for it. And with Jobo Fernandez advising Cory (Marcos’ own central banker, no less – but related to the Cojuangcos by affinity – which again proves how our leaders cling to keep things “en familleâ€Â), the Aquino administration was captive to the interests of the international banks. Yes, manuel, give the banks their pound of flesh and let the people take the hindmost.
manuelbuencamino said: “And maybe you don’t care about civil liberties but those of us who care about it consider that to be Cory’s greatest gift. “
Oh, and it was Cory Aquino who gifted the Filipino nation with civil liberties? My, my . . . I wonder who mouths propaganda for the Cojuangcos and the Aquinos? manuel, you would be well-suited to act as mouthpiece for “Dear Leader†in North Korea.
What happened to the millions who massed at EDSA? What happened to those who carried on their lonely crusade against Marcos, right here on ground zero, while Cory Aquino was comfortably living the American dream in Boston? What happened to the 11 million coconut farmers who were defrauded by the coconut levy and were double-crossed and sacrificed at the Cojuangco family altar when Danding and his cousins kissed and made up?
Now, why would you want to compare EDSA 1 and EDSA 2? It is pathetic to make a comparison between worse or worst. Be positive. We have to strive for something better. EDSA 1 was a sham and a failure, so was EDSA 2.
As for comparing Arroyo and Erap, that is irrelevant. Erap’s term was certainly not noteworthy. The economy was certainly a shambles due to the Asian financial crisis and had not recovered throughout Erap’s term due to excessive politics and the manipulations done by Erap and his cronies, which shattered the credibility of our financial markets. Our Southeast Asian neighbors, on the contrary, already showed signs of recovery in 2001. Our economy still had not touched bottom. But it would be unfair to lay all the blame at Erap’s lap, so it can be left at that. Anyway, Erap is in jail. And the fact that he was ousted shows that a good number of people didn’t think his administration was doing well.
For anyone who still believes in the failed policies of the IMF-WB look to the two new entrants to the world economy. India and China. The world economy refers to the G-7 economies. Total world world GDP is approximately $35-$40T. Trade in goods and services is between $4-$5 Trillion. How does an economy like China blow away the world when real property is still owned by the State and they protect property rights.
The two most protectionist economies in the world are China and India. Once you have closed capital accounts your economy is effectively closed. So how come they are leaving everyone in Asia in the dust?
“As governments ponder these alternatives, they would do well to consider the following astonishing fact: Despite the tremendous wave of neoliberal reform that swept over the continent during the last two decades, only three economies in Latin America managed in the 1990s to outdo the performance they had experienced under the inward-looking, populist policies of the past. Chile remains a success, in part because it has taken a cooler attitude towards capital inflows than the others. Uruguay looks shaky and is hardly an inspiring example in any case because its growth rate has been anemic. And Argentina now lies in ruins. Its collapse reminds developing nations in Latin America and elsewhere that they cannot postpone much longer the stark choice they face. Either they will sacrifice sovereignty in a big way, or they will reassert it vigorously.”
Dani Rodrik is professor of international political economy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~drodrik/WB%20oped.pdf
http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~drodrik/shortpieces.html
And why we are wondering why google is so succesful as a business that started almost from scratch, looking at the big picture, like carl up there, instead of playiong favorite like a partisan loyalist that can only the other side of the river, but missed the water rising on the other side…
Bencard,
what’s this thing about “the restoration of largely useless senate”? GMA herself certainly didn’t mind getting elected there and “working hard” on legislation in the said useless body which no doubt helped her become a VP later on. And the rest is a history as they say. It is only know that the Senate is proving its constitutionally enshrined independence and speaking its mind that the Palace and its apologists like you are badmouthing it. I believe Filipinos will be grateful to the senators of today when they look back at the sad episode of GMA’s rule some twenty years from now.
Carl,
At the very least, Cory did not take away the civil liberties gained by the millions who massed at EDSA. Not even after seven coup attempts. Your Gloria on the other hand took them away. And only because unarmed civilians were expressing their opinions.Still want to put EDSA1 and EDSA2 on the same level?
Cory tried to get debt relief. Sec. of Foreign Affairs Manglapus even addressed the UN general assembly about that. Unfortunately, debtors, especially small time debtors like us, have no leverage when it comes to debt relief. We cannot threaten repudiation because banks will not collapse due to our intransigence. The compromise we got for debt relief was the mini-Marshall plan known as the Multilateral Assistance Initiative. Donor countries were going to infuse funds so we could grow and buy our way out of debt. In other words, they were going to help us pay our way out of our debt. That is the omly option they gave us. We could have reneged and seen all our assets siezed, like PAL planes landing in other countries, and we would have had to pay for everything in gold. The countries who got debt relief, well good for them. For whatever reason, whether strategic born of real politik or charity or whatever, lenders gave them a break but did not want to give us the same break. So sorry it didn’t turn out the way we would have wanted. And there is enough blame to go around among the donors and the donee including our repudiation of the bases treaty which made the MAI’s leading proponent lose interest in the program. Fact is we regained our credit.
Since GMA’s only claim to fame is her management of the economy then it is not irrelevant to comapare her to the man she overthrew in the same way that we compare Cory to the man she overthrew.
Compared to other ASEAN countries our stock market, during Erap’s time, recovered faster after the Asian financial crisis. Hit the stock market records, compare and refresh your memory. However it is true that BW burned a lot of people. But PLDT, SMC and many other companies made a lot of stock market punters, the small investors, very happy indeed.
“As for comparing Arroyo and Erap, that is irrelevant. ”
Are we better off under Arroyo than Erap? Debatable right? Were we better off under Marcos than under Cory? Not even worth asking right?
So how can you put EDSA1 and EDSA2 on the same plane?
Bafil,
I was not putting civil rights and economic performance on the same level., I brought up the matter because I wanted to pre-empt the stupid argument that the stomach is more important than the soul.
I was responding to Carl who said poverty was not eliminated etc. by Cory, which was leading up to the sort of argument that Gloria favors .
Bencard, intellectually arrogant perhaps, but true just the same. I am assuming you are not a paid hack and you seem to possess the faculty of reason. Intellectually honest and reasonable people who profess Arroyo’s innocence are rare. The kinds of defenses given on behalf of Arroyo that i usually see are:
– Self-defense: GMA had to do it to protect herself from similar actions by other evil politicians (from Geo, who admitted to being too scared to even mention the other politician’s name)
– The end justifies the means: so what if GMA cheated, i’m glad she did since she is the best person to lead us (from Toto, who may have been drunk at that time, which i suppose is what made him honest)
– Forgiveness: GMA said sorry, i forgive her, let’s move on (from Bong Austero of the Open Letter)
– Circular Reasoning: Congress declared her president so she must be legitimate (from Domingo Arong)
Other Arroyo defenders just sidestep the issue and of this group:
– Some ask mind-numbing, strategically misspelled rhetorical questions (Joselu).
– Others warns against the opposition’s motivations (Sleeping with Who).
– Some have made peace with the powers that be (Carl, who denies being pro-Arroyo).
– Some consider her the long awaited Shepherd (Cabagis).
– Others just want the constitution, particularly the economic provisions, changed (Emille).
The closest to your line of reasoning I’ve seen comes from micketymoc who quoted St. Thomas More:
““when the last law was down and the devil turned ’round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man’s laws not God’s, and if you cut them down – and you’re just the man to do it – do you really think that you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the devil the benefit of the law, for my own safety’s sake.â€Â
…but he also denies being pro-Arroyo. So you see, you are a rare breed even among Gloria’s legion.
Haha.. nice one cvj! Both funny and true.. Carry on!
manuelbuencamino, too many should’ve beens, could’ve beens, would’ve beens. In the end, they are just so many lame excuses that don’t wash. “Cory tried to get debt relief†. . . but couldn’t. Why? After the glow of EDSA? When we enjoyed the greatest goodwill from the U.S.A. and the international community since the fall of Bataan? Because her people were too preoccupied with trying to get their hands on the spoils from the Marcos regime. Imelda’s jewels here, Meralco over there, San Miguel, PLDT, Security Bank, UCPB, the barter trade . . . the list is too long to mention. And, because Cory, through the influence and kinship of Jobo Fernandez, was under the clutches of the international banks. After all, Jobo was the banks’ point man in the Philippines. After EDSA, nobody cared about the man on the streets. Nobody cared about our debts. Why could an almost unlettered man like Mandela do a charm offensive to get some relief? Why could a Kirchner hold the line and force lenders to restructure at 60 cents to the dollar? Why can Nigeria, despite its oil revenues, get debt relief? manuelbuencamino, you pitiful crybaby, underneath all your righteous whining, you are an apologist for certain vested interests.
As for stock market punters during Erap’s time, those with inside information, people with influence like Rene Cayetano or Jaime Dichavez were very happy campers indeed. But the economy was a shambles and hadn’t recovered from the Asian crisis. On the other hand, I would surmise that punters are also very happy now. After all, as Phil Cruz points out above, the stock market is at an all-time high. However, unlike you manuelbuencamino, I do not hold that up as a reliable barometer of the economy. Perhaps that is why you are so bitter at the turn of events. You are frustrated at every turn. Tough luck, man . . . don’t take it so badly. There are a lot more reasons to live other than your G – L – O – R – I – A .
Carl, I recall at the time the debate on whether to repudiate the debt was huge. Solita Monsod, for one, I believe, was for at the very least selective debt repudiation. But what I also recall is that precisely every move the government wanted to do was subject to intense debate, at least partially because the country was so prostrate at yet finally full of hope at the time.
So while it does seem certain huge mistakes were made -not repudiating Marcos debt, for one, and not only because of Jobo Fernandez but also Ongpin- you are stating this from the benefit of hindsight. The same would apply to the power crisis: but recall the scandal over the Bataan power plant was so huge and the case so messy, I don’t know if anyone can say it was so cut-and-dried until the blackouts started to take place.
Which again returns me to my earlier point: it is difficult to judge a succesful revolution by the failures of the regime established by that revolution. It’s like saying the French Revolution ought not to have happened, because of the Terror. That is to ignore what made the French Revolution possible, and even inevitable, in the first place, and how no one participating in its early stages could have possibly predicted the later Terror.
Carl,
I am banging my head on the wall for wasting my time on an idiot like you.
On hindsight, all the views posted are correct to a certain extent but i want to look more at prospective events. I voted for erap then but i joined the call for his impeachment. I voted for brother eddie since i have given him the benefit of the doubt more than the others which i consider as trapos. With the turn of events with GMA i found myself looking back and thinking that it could have been better if we just let erap faced impeachment and most probably finish his term. The re election of a sitting president just like Marcos caused the corruption of the electoral system as what gma did. Now i prefer a snap election if for some fortuitous gma leaves her office earlier. Otherwise, i prefer that pro-impeachment congressmen and senators win in the 2007 election. I do not prefer CHACHA under this administration. Once there will be a CHACHA(concon, con-ass,or PI) i prefer the presidential system with some modification:1) senators not voted nationally, maybe by region or by province to save on cost.2) two-party system since whatever happens there will only be an administration party and opposition party.3)Retain no reelection since there will be no sitting president to strongly corrupt electoral system. I prefer the presidential system because i believe that a gridlock just as now is much better than a tyrannical parliament.Besides efficient government is not fostered by a system of government. Good governance is fostered by a swift and even handed implementation of the law. Lastly the study concluding that there are more parliamentary government than presidential is faulty. Of it has to be so because many of new countries after the war used to be british or european colonies. Only the Philippines and some of latin american countries adapted the presidential system because of their proximity or link with the US.
Cvj, correction, please, I am NOT one of GMA’s “legion†of defenders. I am an “old†oppositionist. How old were you in 1967 (if already born)?
The point I raised that you mistakenly refer to as “circular reasoning†in defense of GMA is this:
Those who question GMA’s “legitimacy†should direct their complaint against the institution that bestowed the “legitimacy” of her assumption to the presidency, since GMA did not proclaim herself President. It was Congress that “proclaimed [her] elected.â€Â
The Constitution is clear: Congress is tasked to determine “the authenticity and due execution†of the certificates of canvass, and the “person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected.â€Â
So, it was this congressional proclamation the Constitution commands to be issued to “the person having the highest number of votes†that anointed GMA’s “legitimacy†as President.
Without that blessing, GMA is nobodyâ€â€even if she proclaimed herself Queen. Erap still claims to be President and Marcos insisted he still was, not Cory. Miriam believed she was.
FPJ challenged GMA’s proclamation. Later, members of Congress tried to impeach her (impliedly admitting GMA’s “legitimacy†in the process), claiming that she cheated, but failed miserably to muster the required number of votes.
So, unless Congress decides to conduct a REVIEW of the manner in which it determined “the authenticity and due execution” of the certificates of canvass and rescinds GMA’s proclamation based on that “review” (for the power to proclaim, to my mind, carries with it the power to “review,” in order to affirm or rescind that proclamation), or GMA is impeached and removed, Gloria remains, like it or not, to be the President of the Republic Congress “proclaimed elected.â€Â
So, back to the blame game: NO congressional proclamation; NO constitutional “legitimacy”; NO President GMA–the liar, the crook–to hate.
What is so “circular†about that “reasoning�
domingo raises a good and difficult point. it is one, however, that is not insurmountable.
i’m too tired right now but if you recall the reasoning that went into my decision to call on the president to resign, it had nothing to do with her election. at the time i felt that the president, even if you excluded the padding of the votes, had won by a whisker.
but what i thought then and still do, was enough to call for her resignation, was her dodging the question of cheating (“i am sorry” but for what?) and most of all, the coverup and obstruction of justice since.
that’s why since i did assume her legitimate, it seemed ok to push for impeachment after she refused to heed the call to resign (our right to ask for it, her right to refuse to heed it): i felt it was more than reasonable and possible to pin her down for violating her oath in her handling of the garci investigation, etc. the 2nd time around, i also felt that her behavior from july 05 to the present was enough to impeach her, even if you set aside the may 04 elections per se and only secondarily dealt with them as motive.
my point is, even accepting the legitimacy of her election and proclamation by congress, there’s grounds aplenty to ask her to resign and try to impeach her. not just once, but possibly, thrice.
domingo arong, I fully agree with your exposition and I’m surprised, no one from the other side (including “The Explainer” – no offense meant, mlq3) has so far called you “legalistic” as though it is a dirty word.
It is obvious that the rabid opposition (which includes the single-purpose Left and adventurous Right), desperate to oust GMA but could not find a legal basis for it, has tried and still trying to get a quick fix by (1) cajoling her to resign; (2) insisting that she admits she “cheated”; (3) staging a pitiful version of Edsa 1 and 2; and (4) a bungling coup d’etat that, of course, has gone kaput. Oh, they have done other things like: holding a kangaroo court to “try” GMA; unleashing Peter Cayetano, Susan Roces and the infamous “Hyatt 10”, among others; parading ineffective witnesses (with credibility problems) in apparently contrived “investigations in aid of legislations” in the otherwise non-performing senate; and enlisting members of the clergy with axes to grind like bishops Cruz and Bacani.
Fortunately for the greater majority of the country, all that strategems failed, and from all indications, the forces of hate will suffer eventually a decisive and final defeat.
cjv, those specific individuals you summarized who may or may not the defender of Ms Arroyo and her administrations are quite impressive individuals in their own right. I don’t personally know a single one of them, but I read Bong Austero’s essays and he seems a very reasonable person, who was able to rationalize all his points and views. Unlike Ms Arroyo’s rabid critics, who can only find the ugly sides of her, most of them can see at least a bit of ugliness and the beauty of her. I myself despise her steadfast refusal to relinquish her power with all the substantial allegations and obvious illegalities and corruptions that besiege the whole structure of her administration. But for the people (the public or the masses) who had seen the same or even worse, it is a matter of riding the tide lest they get drown in a sea of uncertainties . And the President exactly read the sentiments of the masses. Because the opposition, either in Politics itself and in most segments of societies, can not just come up with alternative ideologies or programs, or any plans at all that theirs is worth the chance to rise again. The masses has seen that the hope and vision they have, that any leader or political leaders that are entrusted to serve for the betterment of all men are the only ones getting better. And the same masses are very skeptical of the middle forces (or the middle class or the intellectual class), because they have seen plenty of them marched before bearing the promise of Hope and Prosperity to all, and they are Erap, Cory Aquino, Fidel Ramos, and Now Gloria Arroyo to name a few and now what? There are countless Representatives and Senators and top it up with thousands of civil servants, whose only ticket to a prosperous living is the trust of the same people who are their own victims now. Looking from the outside and with a perspective of nothing more than wishing the country where I grew up and spent the better part of my youth a speedy maturity that could have been taken place decades back, but was obstructed by the oligarchy, and the structures that was the legacy of our past and was embedded upon us and quite hard to depart. My analysis maybe as simple as it could get, coming from a very simple man, with a very simple needs and a simple wish for the best of the country that we are all looking forward to.. Thank you all..
domingo arong, my pologies for misidentifying your allegiance. i did not know your history as a person so i based my classification entirely on what you have written. i stand corrected. (i was born in 1967.) When you made the original comment (from October 13 at 4:12 pm in mlq3’s ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’ post), i responded (at 6:35pm) with the following:
“Domingo, the approach you recommend sounds good, i hope they [Congress] eventually go ahead and do that. In addition, aside from examining the certificates of canvass, Congress should shed light on the mechanics of Arroyo and Garci’s cheating operation because even if a recount establishes that she actually won, proven cheating on her part negates her suitability for office. Congress may be a ‘constitutional legitimizer’ but, unlike the Catholic Church, it does not have the power to absolve sins.”
However, i also added at 8:59pm (in response to Titanium’s post) to explain why i think your argument is a form of circular reasoning:
“…You cannot argue that Arroyo is ‘legitimate’ because she has been proclaimed by the ‘constitutional legitimizers’ when what is at issue in the first place is the validity of that proclamation in light of information that has subsequently been revealed. The instrumentalities of State are there to uphold the choice of the people, not to override it. After all, we are not yet under a unicameral parliamentary system.”
So while i agree with your recommended approach, i differ in terms of the starting point, i.e. the necessity of a Congressional review proceeds from the fact that GMA’s legitimacy is now in question.
Bencard@1:40am, your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs has reminded me of something i missed out on my previous comment (at 3:33pm). in addition to what has been listed above, another means of sidestepping the legitimacy issue is to use the opposition’s failure and GMA’s success at staying in power and obstructing inquiries that would lead to the resolution of this issue. The emphasis is on who the ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ are, not really on matters concerning justice. Success in obstruction becomes its own justification, when it should not justify anything. All it really does is to reveal how the balance of power is currently configured, a matter which is peripheral to the real issue.
cvj, in your 3:33pm retort (which drew cheers from The Bystander), you conscientiously enumerated the “defenders” of GMA who, however, deny that they are “pro-Arroyo”. I don’t need to or want to speak for them, but your conclusion that people like me (who believe GMA is NOT “guilty” because your group has not proven it by evidence) are “rare” is, as I said, presumptuous, to say the least. How can you be so sure that we are not the ‘silent majority’? Have you spoken to each and every one outside your group, or even your own group, for that matter? Have you read or heard all their opinions? The trouble is you are fond of unfounded generalization and in presenting a hypothesis as “fact”. I have pointed this out to you again and again but it’s like beating a dead carabao – a pointless exercise. That is intellectual stubborness, if not arrogance.
Bencard, on your claim that you echo the sentiments of the ‘silent majority’, my logical reaction would have been to point you to the surveys, but i realize that would be futile. When Abe previously pointed out (in the ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’ thread) that “Scientific surveys show an overwhelming number of Filipinos want GMA to be properly indicted…“, you dismissed it by saying that “cvj and Abe, surveys, my foot! Of course, the 70% who divided their votes between Poe, Lacson, Roco, Villanueva, and all the other “also runâ€Âs all against GMA would necessarily be reflected in those surveys, wouldn’t they?” Facts are stubborn things, so are delusions. The trick is to be able to tell which is which.