Hat tip to muddynights for pointing to the odd joker and The Intelligent Singaporean who thoroughly covered the controversy raised by the now notorious-line by the daughter of a Singaporean MP who snapped, “please get out of my elite uncaring face” in response to the angst of another Singaporean. More reactions can be found in Tomorrow.
Bob Barker’s retiring next year.
Man Blog presents on a “fabuleux” collection. Hat-tip to Captain’s log for the link.
The Electric Journal of Adel Gabot pens a cultural note: how would you translate/describe “nakakahiya”?
Madame Chiang watched the Marie Antoinette movie and found the audience interesting. And here’s something on the French queen’s fashion sense.
Apparently, the Spanish clergy were convinced the Chinese were addicted to sodomy. Read Señor Enrique’s research on the matter.
And even more lateral thinking: Rebecca’s pocket points to a peddler of baby toupees.
Pringles vs. Stax. My vote is for Pringles.
Superdickery.com courtesy of Paolo Manalo.
Technorati Tags: Blogging, gay, history, philippines
MAI was known as a multilateral mini-,arshall plan. We get some aid in cash and credits and some second hand hardware but we did not get billions in hard currency. Most of MAI turned out to be unfulfillef pledges.
Americans rebuilt Japan like Europe. The Philippines, I don’t know what they really did to their “brown brothers”. They even left tons of toxic materials in Clark and Subic, shot the Pinoys aroud Clark, something like “target shooting”? That’s what the demonstrators were telling before in the ’70’s. I don’t know the real score.
“Court papers show that Marcos siphoned $US23 million ($169 million in today’s money) from Japan’s war reparations into Charis. There is no suggestion Ms Hegyesi would have been aware of these transactions.”
This is a news article from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/03/1088488200806.html?from=storylhs
regarding Josefa Analisa Marcos, alleged daughter of the late
president to an ex-model.
So why are the Filipinos poor ?
jm, you’re right about Wee Shu-Min’s rant paralleling Bong Austero’s open letter. Even Austero’s justification that his letter was only meant for his circle of friends in his blog (what was it an “open letter” for. then?)mirrored Shu-Min’s naive excuse that she merely wrote for her blog that she thought was not widely read. If she really believed in her views, making a half-hearted apology (reminds me of someone saying “I’m sorry” on national television) was worse than not apologizing at all.
Jealousy and ingratitude are just some of the frailties of the human specie, particularly Filipinos. Oftentimes, charity begets resentment rather than gratitude against the giver and the gift is taken for granted, if not belittled, as though it was not needed at all. I’m not a psychologist, but I think that trait stems from false pride, if not low self-esteem.
In his well-documented book “Waltzing with a Dictator” Marcos was paid $100 million a year under the bases agreement for five years since 1977; $79 M in 1979 and $83 M in 1980 in economic assistance; at least $721 M loans were approved. As to what the Marcos regime did to these funds and credits, we can only speculate although misuse is an understatement. Of course, this is apart from the massive funding under the War Damage payment program after World War II. And what about the gargantuan loans we got from the World Bank and other foreign countries such as Japan, just to name one, for which we have to set aside a major portion of our annual budget just to pay the interests?
We may not have received the same amount as U.S poured in Europe under the Marshall plan, or in Europe and Israel, but that is not the point. The fact is we received substantial foreign aid over the years.
Why do we have to be so defensive about our miserable failure to make the most of that aid, and express envy over the rebuilding of Japan and Europe and investing in Israel (the only real U.S ally in the Middle East)? Is this just another “blame game” where the designated culprit is every one else but us?
Suggestion for ‘sayang’ is foiled.
Congressman Ron Paul is a Rep from Texas and is a libertarian who believes that the use of fiat currency is dangerous and we should revert back to the gold exchange standard. Now can we all help Greenspan with the current definition of money? Every person talks about investments and how we should encourage foreign investments? If most people do not know what money is and what is its current form how can you discuss intelligently? Also that would make Central Banks irrelevant.
Just look at Pedrosa who believes that she knows everything that has to be known and calls the justices of the SC ignorant of the laws. Adam Smith said that dogs cannot count their own bones but we can. He also said that two of man’s greatest technologies was writing and money.
Congressman Ron Paul asked him why the Money measure – M3 – has been growing for the past several years. WHY, If Inflation, which Greenspan claims to be trying to control, is caused by growth in the Money Supply, why has the FED allowed M3 to grow unchecked since 1992?
Greenspan replied, “… We have a problem trying to define exactly what MONEY is…the current definition of MONEY is not sufficient to give us a good means for controlling the Money Supply…”
Congressman Paul asked “Well, if you can’t define Money, how can you control the Monetary System?”
Greenspan replied “That’s the problem…”
Why does Japan need more babies if it is to survive and what Filipina women can do to help Japans debt problem?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=afEz6.oDmJ6Q&refer=home
What country is the premier issuer of junk bonds in Asia and would like now to be the junk yard of Asia and plans to send their women into indentured labor to Japan. Maybe we couold help in repopulating Japan.
Bencard, there is a diffence between ‘billions’ and ‘millions’ and it is not just the spelling. I believe the ‘aid’ in exchange for the US Bases is more properly classified as ‘rent’. Strictly speaking, it is not a ‘gift’. As for the US funding after World War 2, i would say ‘dapat lang’ as it was their bombs that were responsible for most of the damage.
Self-loathing (which seems to be prevalent among Filipinos as well) is a more accurate manifestation of low self-esteem.
“When the people of any particular country have such confidence in the fortune, probity, and prudence of a particular banker, as to believe that he is always ready to pay upon demand such of his promissory notes as are likely to be at any time presented to him; those notes come to have the same currency as gold and sliver money, from the confidence that such money can at any time be had for them.â€Â
“When national debts have once been accumulated to a certain degree, there is scarce, I believe, a single instance of their having been fairly and completely paid. The liberation of public revenue, if it has ever been brought about at all, has always been brought about by bankruptcy; sometimes by an avowed one, but always by a real one, though frequently by a pretended payment (in a depreciated currency)….. When it becomes necessary for a state to declare itself bankrupt, in the same manner as when it becomes necessary for an individual to do so, a fair, open, and avowed bankruptcy is always the measure which is both least dishonourable to the debtor, and at least hurtful to the creditorâ€Â
Adam Smith
What a debt dependent country (net importer of capital) like the Phils. should note.
“Smoke in the capital but do not inhale.â€Â
Why bad news for the Fund is excellent news for its clients (Martin Wolf FT)
The International Monetary Fund is in financial crisis. That will give its critics reason to cheer. But its supporters should cheer as well, for the reason the IMF is facing financial disaster is that its clients are not. The Fund needs crises, just as doctors need illnesses. But this particular doctor has been too successful. As a result, Fund credit outstanding has fallen to its lowest level in 25 years.
Bad news for the Fund is excellent news for its borrowers. Financial markets herald the reduction in the perceived riskiness of emerging market finance. Spreads have, as a result, collapsed. Investors are also pouring money in: last year, according to the March 2006 report from the Washington-based Institute for International Finance, the foreign private sector poured $400bn into the group of emerging market countries on which the IIF focuses attention.
“We do not need this money, thank you,†said the recipients. So, they pushed the money right back out again. Remarkably, a paper by three senior Fund researchers suggests they may have been right to do so: Developing countries that have relied more on foreign finance have not grown faster in the long run, and have typically grown more slowly. Does this mean that foreign finance plays no role in development? Not at all. What this does mean, however, is that there seems to be no benefit to being a net importer of capital. Emerging countries should smoke in the capital markets, but not inhale.
Martin Wolf, FT
I found a report via Google — Sept 1997 report from US Congressional Budget Office titled “The Role of Foreign Aid In Development : South Korea and the Philippines” — which documents billions in aid to South Korea and the Philippines. Bet 1966 and 1986, the Philippines received $33B, of which over $6.5billion (20%-plus)went to agriculture (e.g. Bicol River Basin project); 1.3B (4%) went to education (e.g. over 2,300 schoolhouses); $2.3B (7%) went to health (US focus on infant-mortality projects).
The report acknowledges what the whole world knows — South Korea did significantly better than the Philippines. The report also mentions specifically “poor development record in the Philippines reflects a climate of economic mismanagement and massive corruption, in addition to waste of large amounts of foreign aid”. The report also states “Foreign aid to the Philippines under Marcos years may actually have hurt the country’s development by reinforcing his economic mismanagement and corruption. Between 1966 and 1986, the international community gave $33B (in 1997 dollars) to the Philippines, most of which was intended to promote economic growth. But … poverty increased, and rural and urban wages declined dramatically.” In another section, the report states “Real wage rates for agricultural workers declined by 25% from 1966 to 1986; urban workers, both skilled and unskilled, fared even worse. Their wage rates declined by 69 and 73% during the same period.”
hvrds… There is a little detail that affects immigration into Japan — to the Japanese, the outside world does not possess “ethnic purity”. Immigrants in Japan now amount to only one percent. Even that modest figure consists mostly of second- and third-generation Koreans and Chinese whose ancestors were brought to Japan when it maintained colonies on the Asian mainland. Such immigrants frequent discrimination and are not accepted as “real” Japanese.
“Court papers show that Marcos siphoned $US23 million ($169 million in today’s money)…
This article seems to be misleading, if it is referring to change caused by inflation. I believe what the the article is trying to say is that the amount could have grown to $169M if it has been invested or have grown this much thru accrued interest.
To me the likes of Shu Min Wee are amusing, especially when they really are speaking naturally and deservely well within their rights to be called “elite”.
I always translate sayang with “tsk tsk”!
The reason may not be necessarily be “nagkakahiyaan” for not picking that last lumpia. It is that everyone feels that he/she doesn’t want to be branded or labeled as “matakaw” or turned out to be the one “nakalamang sa iba”.
Bokyo, i think the article refers to change caused by inflation and does not assume any return on investment or accrued interest.
UP Student, re: the 1997 US CBO Report – excellent googling, very informative not only on the matter of foreign aid, but also on the policies adopted by South Korea. It’s interesting that South Korea got the bulk of its economic aid much earlier (by 15 years) than the Philippines, where a similar volume of the aid kicked in only during the time of Marcos. The document admits to US complicity in propping up the Marcos regime:
“to the extent that $33 billion in foreign assistance (in 1997 dollars) to Marcos perpetuated his hold on power, it undermined the Philippines’ long-term development”
In another part, it says that “Similarly, in the 1970s and 1980s, Marcos received aid from the United States in part because the United States did not wish to see his government fall to a communist insurrection.” Too bad, if the US had allowed Marcos to be ousted by the communists, we may be growing as fast as Vietnam is today.
Beyond foreign aid, the document also enumerates policies that led to South Korea’s success:
Land Reform: “In 1945, 48 percent of families owned land. After land reform was completed, that figure rose to above 90 percent. That change had two important effects. It aided the equalization and distribution of wealth; South Korea’s later growth was characterized by a high degree of equity. In addition, class tensions were largely diffused, eliminating a potential source of political instability. Moreover, agricultural production did not suffer in the process.”
Financial Regulation – “Large, highly profitable private companies were clearly subordinate to the government, in part because the government controlled
domestic credit as well as the right to borrow abroad.â€Â
Export Orientation v. Import Substitution – “It relied heavily on an outward-looking, export-oriented economic strategy, but not exclusively. In certain sectors, such as rice production and heavy and defense-related industries, the government maintained a predominantly import-substitution strategy.”
Public Sector Management – “A good example of the government’s leadership in the economy was its management of public enterprises. Under Park, those organizations were efficiently run and contributed to government resources, partly because of the sheer determination of the political leadership to generate growth and to reform anything that might be a drag on the economy… For example, the government asked a private firm to manage Korean Air Lines when it was not profitable as a public endeavor.â€Â
cvj,
I just find the figures too much (+700%?), if it were in peso it would be possible, but dollar I am not sure if they have the right comparison or estimate.
I would like to translate “sayang” to “Oops”, meaning missing the chance or I could have made or hit it.
If the government is really serious in solving poverty, they would have track their progress. As in the rate of their success vs. the rate of other people coming into poverty. The “fight for or against poverty” has been taken literally pitting the poor vs. the government. The same way that eliminating poverty is taken as removing them from the city as an unugly sight or removing them from the streets like the sidewalk vendors. The chances or the choices should be there if they are really that serious.
Shaman of Malilipot,
“about Wee Shu-Min’s rant paralleling Bong Austero’s open letter.â€Â
Attitude. Bad attitude is what it’s about. Wee’s rant is an exhibition of BA – bad attitude. Bong’s open letter was advocating it.
Bokyo, your suspicions are right. USD169 million is too large if the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was used. In the ‘measuringworth.com’ website, it explains the 5 ways of computing the relative value of the US dollar.
$23.00 in 1971 would be worth the following in 2004:
$107.25 using the Consumer Price Index
$87.06 using the GDP deflator
$108.39 using the unskilled wage
$168.65 using the nominal GDP per capita
$239.01 using the relative share of GDP
So it looks like the writer of the article used nominal GDP per capita instead.
cvj, I was going to ignore your sarcastic post because UP student has pointed out that between 1966 and 1986, the Philippines has received $33 billion. In any event, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the millions I cited add up to at least 1 B (w/a B, not M) over the years.
But as usual you missed the point again. Whether millions or billions, and whether or not the money we got was rent, aid, gift or war damage compensation, we had that money but we failed to use it efficiently to improve our economy and alleviate poverty. Isn’t that what we are talking about?
Self-criticism is not “self-loathing”. It is a step towards resolving a problem, as when an alcoholic comes to terms with the fact that he is a drunk. It takes self-respect to look inward and admit one’s imperfection and then try to find a solution.
bencard, you are right to highlight UP Student’s finding that cumulative assistance to the Philippines has in fact totaled billions of dollars. However, the assistance received by Israel is orders of magnitude bigger. The nature of assistance provided is also different. The report referred to by UP Student says:
“Between 1966 and 1986, the international communitygave or lent [emphasis mine] approximately $33 billion (in 1997 dollars) to the Philippines…”
If you download the report, you will see a chart on page 93 that shows that US Economic and Military ‘aid’ has averaged a few hundred million annually. By comparison, Israel has received 3 billion dollars annually in outright Economic and Military grants (not loans) since the early 80’s. You also have to take into account that Israel has a population of 6 Million (compared to our 80 Million) so the share of assistance per person is correspondingly bigger.
When it comes to loans, the US has also granted Israel debt relief some time back. In contrast, we are still stuck with all those Marcos-era debts. Unfortunately, we’re not as valued an ally as Israel nor as poor as the other countries who have been granted debt-relief (We are classified as a ‘middle-income’ country).
As far as blame (or accountability) is concerned, you have to qualify what you mean by ‘we’. The Marcos government stopped being ‘we’ when it reconstituted itself as a dictatorship. The majority of the Filipino people who did not receive the assistance that was meant for them can rightfully consider themselves victims in this matter, and should not be lumped together with the culprits. That would be adding insult to injury. As a Filipino, i also cannot share in the complicity of the United States in propping up the dictatorship.
The Filipino people have enough challenges to face even without the spurious psychological burden of being unfairly compared to the Israelis.
cvj, read my lips, what did “we” do with the money that we received? Forget Israel (or any other country) and how much it got in aid. I think it is very childish to get preoccupied with how much was given to some one and to keep comparing it with what you got.
Marcos was our responsibility. He was a Filipino and we were the ones who put him in a position of leadership. In the eyes of the outside world, Marcos, as a problem, was our own making.
Of course, USA propped up his dictatorship because at the time it was perceived to be in the Americans best interest to do so. It is a cruel world, cvj. We, as a people, have to be up to it.
cvj, read my lips. What did we do with all the money we got? Forget Israel and how much it received in aid compared to ours.
I think it is very childish to get preoccupied with how much was given to someone and to keep comparing it with what we recieved.
Like it or not, Marcos was our responsibility. He was a Filipino and we were the ones who put him in power. As a problem, Marcos was of our own making in the eyes of the outside world. While his dictatorship may have been “propped up” by the US, it had all the right to do that in the belief, at the time, that it was for their best interest to do so. It’s a cruel world, cvj. As a people, we must be up to it.
My personal opinion as of this very minute is that the Philippines should just admit to “bad karma”. “It” is not our fault… just bad karma.
Burma is a country also in misery, but Burma can say that “the dog that ate the country’s economic homework” is the military dictatorship. This is acceptable because the repressive dictatorship has been in place since Marcos was booted out of Malacanang. Marcos as “the dog that ate the homework” does not fly anymore. “US imperialism” is also a weak excuse — Republicans and Democrats have moved in and out of the White House and the US closed Clark and Olongapo long ago. Very many years have gone by since Marcos left Malacanang — the Philippines has been freely choosing its rulers, from Cory to Ramos to Estrada to GMA. The country even has put “term limits” in the constitution. “Bad karma” sounds good.
*** SIDENOTE : Rick Santorum (100% behind Cheney, Bush and the Iraq war) is gonna bite the dust, and I’m happy!!!)
And the Republicans may lose Virginia because (a) Clinton (70% approval) is campaigning hard for Webb and Bush (30% approval rating) can’t show himself; (b) the military (Cheapeake, Va area) have turned negative on Iraq and most importantly, (c) the Republicans took the state for granted as a solid win that they have not put foot-soldiers in place (to knock on doors/man the phone banks to get out the vote).
Senator Allen(R) is also losing points based on the steering of government contracts to a company that gave him stock-options.
bencard, i would like to point out that the ‘childish’ comparison with Israel did not originate with me. The basic difference in our approach is that you lump together what i believe should not be lumped, i.e. the culprits (Marcos and his accomplices) and its victims (the people who were deprived of aid money). I admit that with the passage of time, as well as the inherently weak historical memory of our people, the line is getting blurry, but it is nevertheless there. I’m glad that, unlike with other issues, we are on the same level of reality as far as the USA’s role in propping up the Marcos dictatorship is concerned (perhaps because there are no ‘legalities’ that get in the way). Yes, it’s a cruel world, but it does not mean we just have to accept things as they are. Justice is an ideal we should always aim for, even in an arena as lawless as geopolitics.
UP Student, yes ‘bad karma’ is a handy philosophical outlook if we want to save ourselves the trouble of thinking too much. However, there is the right place and the right time for everything. Instead of resorting to ill thought out generalizations, we have to be more fine grained in our thinking. Path dependence is relevant to political, social and economic analysis. Marcos may have been gone for over twenty years but the effects of his rule are still here, as are the effects of World War 2 and the effects of the American invasion more than a century back. This is not done so we can excuse inaction our part, but to clarify and enhance our understanding.
Anyway, like you, i’ll be happy if Santorum and Allen are kicked out. I hope the American people vote wisely this time around.
cvj…. The Philippines is living its karma. Karma is not fatalistic pre-destiny but more the doctrine of responsibility — self-determination and accountability of an individual or a society. Devastation the months after a devastating storm is “bad luck”. Extreme poverty twenty years after “First Quarter Storm”…. karma.
UP Student, i’m assuming you’re serious, so let me try to make sense of what you just explained about ‘karma’ (in its ‘materialistic’ as opposed to the more familiar ‘spiritual’ variety).
At 7:24am, you said:
“My personal opinion as of this very minute is that the Philippines should just admit to “bad karmaâ€Â. “It†is not our fault… just bad karma.
At 1:48am, you added:
‘Karma is not fatalistic pre-destiny but more the doctrine of responsibility  self-determination and accountability of an individual or a society.‘
So ‘karma’ is that indeterminate zone where we can both not accept blame but at the same time accept responsibility for our unfortunate condition. It’s the element of taking responsibility that allows us to distinguish this from ordinary luck and thereby avoid taking on a fatalistic attitude. While this does not seem logical on its face, i must admit that it serves to fill in a previously unidentified, if fuzzy, category.
cvj, to be blunt about it, what I was calling “childish” is your constant comparing of the amount of aid US has given to Israel with what the Philippines got from it. It’s like a child whining on haloween night because he was given only 2 pieces of candy while his buddy got 5. I suggest you read again what I wrote.
I don’t think comparing Israel with the Philippines, in terms of what they have done for their citizens (which I first did), is childish.
UP student, I agree with you that we have to accept responsibility for our miserable condition. I think we have to do something about it. Perhaps we can start by doing everything we can to stop unsavory characters (including proven nincompoops in the senate, clueless “artistas” & other celebrities, Marcos’cronies and beneficiaries), and family dynasties. We could only do this if we could, somehow, help educate our masses that a vote is too valuable to exchange for any price, let alone a ‘bayong’ of cheap groceries, a few hundred pesos, or a meal of rice and noodles. Unless we can do this, its more bad karma for us!
p.s.: senator wannabees and reelectionists from all sides of the political spectrum flocking around an accused plunderer who is in detention, for a supposedly valued endorsement?? Only in the Philippines… only in the Philippines! Talk about “bad karma”.
Just got back and I noticed UP students blog about the Philippines receiving aid from the U.S. in the amount of $33 billion dollars. I hope he can come up with a validation of that figure. I sincerely doubt that figure. At the height of the 82-82 crisis the total foreign debt of the Philippines was in the vicinity of $25 billion. Debt and not aid. Most of the debt were sourced from private U.S. banks.
I think everyone has to first get on the same level as far as the evolution of the foreign exchange regime from 1949 till the present to become aware of monetary systems and monetary societies. It just would not work.
The science fiction series Star Trek – Space the Final Frontier- -and the Prime Directive covers this point nicely. We are in that Final Frontier – Human Consciousness – Cyber Space
I quote a recent piece done by Jeffrey Gartner (I love watching his wife on the Lifestyle Channel cooking.) She is a hot chubby Momma. He is currently Professor in Yale teaching Management and was a former Undersecretary of Commerce under the Clinton government.
“In a world where the dollar is supreme, Uncle Sam should be more responsible for international financial stability, not less. There would be an increasing compelling argument that the Federal Reserve should see itself as a global central bank, and the Congress and White house should see U.S. trade and finacial policy as keys to gloabl stability, not tools to further U.S. interests. On a recent visit to Yale, the mayor of Beijing said -only half jokingly-that it would make sense if the whole world had a vote in American elections, because U.S. decisions have so large an impact worldwide.”
“When historians look back on this period they may well give more wieght to the power that one-currency world conferred on the United States than that granted by our men and women in uniform, serving in Afgahnistan and Iraq. But whether Washington will recognize the responsibility that comes with this power-well, that will be the big question.”
I often wonder why some apparently educated Filipinos would have anything to do politically with the Estradas and other known incompetents with questionable integrity. Is it because political naivete has nothing to do with lack of education but is more about lack of REAL patriotism? For what would the country gain by putting these people in power except more “bad karma”. The sad reality is that these naive individuals will never accept blame for the harm they cause.
While Estrada is presumed innocent until convicted of plunder, how can he justify, politicaly, the seemingly inexhaustible funds he uses to house and maintain his multiple families and simultaneously bankroll the continuing cabal to unseat GMA. He could not have accumulated that fortune as a “B” movie actor at a time when million-peso payoff for an actor was unheard of. Even FPJ who had consistently been more popular, made more blockbuster movies, and stayed longer as movie super hero (not to mention his more traditional and quiet lifestyle) apparently did not make that kind of money. In the USA and elsewhere, anybody involved in that type of scandalous circumstances as Erap did would be dead politically without hope of resurrection. Any other politician who continues to kowtow with him would be sailing in troubled waters to say the least.
titanium: one word, nixon.
What about Nixon, mlq3?
titanium, he’s proof of how political disgrace is never permanent and crookedness is no obstacle to success.
mlq3, I may be wrong but I don’t believe Nixon ever bounced back to, let alone continued to have any influence on, american politics. Most notable republicans had to distance from him lest they be tainted simply by association. That is not the case with Erap to whom politicians of various colors converege like flies on a rotting carcass.
Bencard , simply labeling the opposing arguments ‘childish’ is not a valid defense. The amount of aid, the form it took and the time it was given are all relevant factors in the discussion. Just to summarize:
– the amount of aid given to Israel (estimated at 81 Billion US Dollars from 1949 to 2000) is a crucial factor in their continued development and survival.
– when it came to the form of assistance given, Israel received outright grants. we received our assistance mostly in the form of loans (concessional or otherwise).
– the US gave its assistance to a democratically elected government in Israel. In the Philippines, the US ramped up the amount of assistance during the time of Marcos (with well known adverse consequences).
Maybe it is true that, all things being equal, the Israelis have performed better as a people than us Filipinos. While that assertion is entirely plausible, i would just like to point out that, in the real world, all things have *not* been equal.
So, to make a valid comparison between the Philippines and Israel, the differences in background conditions and its corresponding effects have to be accounted for. Failing that, the comparison becomes nothing more than a trite observation.
Re: your comment to UP Student…one of the distinctive traits of members of the Philippine elite is its constant urge to ‘educate’ the masses. They fail to see that before they can offer to ‘educate’ the masses, they first have to educate themselves. The best form of education is that given by example.
hvrds, the figure quoted by UP Student is valid in the context of how the CBO study defined ‘foreign assistance’:
“For the most part, however, this study uses a broad definition of foreign assistance. It includes all money that would be classified as official development assistance, and it incorporates military assistance, political development programs, export promotion, debt forgiveness, and nonconcessional lending by all bilateral and multilateral organizations. Any money that benefits a developing country–grants, concessional loans, or nonconcessional loans–from a governmental or quasi-governmental organization is considered foreign aid. The only exception is the use of credit from the International Monetary Fund, which is excluded unless otherwise noted.”
In addition, the amount of assistance given (from 1953 to 1993) were stated in terms of their equivalent value in ‘1997’ dollars, not in terms of the nominal value in the year they were disbursed which would have given a lower figure.
You don’t give up, do you, cvj? I really admire your obvious talent for reconfiguring an issue under discussion to fit your “argument”. Please dont’t insult the intelligence of the readers who care to look at our dialogues.
It is a surprise you are defending UP student’s report of $33 billion comprehensive assistance the Philippines received. This after insulting me for saying that we got at least 1 billion u.s. dollars but failed to use it meaningfully for the benefit of our citizens (you were insisting millions, with an “M” not “B”). Does this show you can accept a valid point when you feel like it, or what?
bencard, as UP Student’s report has shown, you are right (and i was wrong) that cumulative economic and military aid to the Philippines has added up to more than a billion dollars. However, even that figure does not erase the disparity in the amount of aid given to Israel on one hand, and the Philippines on the other. As i explained above (at Nov 7, 2:46am and again at Nov 8, 9:05pm) a few hundred million dollars of economic and military aid per year is a far cry from the three billion dollars that Israel receives per year.
At the same time, there is no contradiction between UP Student’s report and my position because, as i mentioned (at 9:22pm above), the COB has adopted a broad definition for ‘foreign assistance’. That’s why it adds up to $33 billion (in 1997 dollars). My comment above (at November 6, 12:19pm) had to with US ‘aid’ (which is more properly classified as rent) in exchange for the US Bases.
We are in agreement that Marcos misused aid and loan money. Where we disagree is in the designated target(s) of blame/responsibility/accountability.
(I also consider the trail left by written, offline discussions in this medium as a useful feature. For one thing, it makes it more difficult to insult the intelligence of the readers or anyone else for that matter.)
cvj, I give up! However, re: “insulting” the readers’ intelligence, whether it is difficult or not, please don’t do it.
bencard, contrary to what you are insinuating, i haven’t and i have no intention to do so.
Regarding Senor Enrique’s Blogpost on the alleged widespread practice of sodomy on the part of the sangleys during the Spanish Colonial Period, I have the following statement to make:
1. Repeating the crude lies of Western Orientalism against his own people, the sangleys who fathered the founders of the Filipino Nation is a despicable act;
2. Edward Said described such crude lies as Western Orientalism which was designed to degrade the great Civilizations of Asia founded on Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism and Hinduism;
3. If the practice of sodomy was widespread among the sangley population due to “kinship-based immigration” and “lack of females”, why did the sangleys intermarry with indio women in such large numbers after the massacres of the early and mid-17th century? No need to kinky sex if you can have bodacious babes, right?
4. It is possible that the sangleys had anal sex with their children. For example, the sangley father of San Lorenzo Ruiz. Maybe that why he became the First Filipino Saint.
5. After the First Great Massacre of 1603, the Spanish authorities sent emissaries to China to explain their actions. But China disowned the sangleys. As it were, it was illegal for Chinese subjects of the Ming and Qing Emperors to emigrate. The moment they left China, they CEASED TO BE CHINESE. That means the sangleys are not even Chinese, legally speaking. Subsequent massacres forced many sangleys to intermarry with indio women to sire the mestizos de sangley who later founded the Filipino Nation.
It is a pity I think that Filipinos don’t even realize that they are degrading their own kind by entertaining such crude lies. After all, the sangleys fathered the mestizos de sangley who later founded the Filipino Nation. Rather viewing the sangleys as victims of White Christian Imperialism, Filipinos (include descendants of sangleys themselves) would rather white-wash their own cultural history and pretend they are white. In fact, many of these mestizos de sangley today would claim descent from Spanish Conquistadores, the very people who massacred their ancestors the sangleys.
San Lorenzo Ruiz, the first Mestizo de Sangley.
Jose Rizal, the last Mestizo de Sangley.
Sodomy? Yeah, right.
Regarding Senor Enrique’s Blogpost on the alleged widespread practice of sodomy on the part of the sangleys during the Spanish Colonial Period, I have the following statement to make:
1. Repeating the crude lies of Western Orientalism against his own people, the sangleys who fathered the founders of the Filipino Nation is a despicable act;
2. Edward Said described such crude lies as Western Orientalism which was designed to degrade the great Civilizations of Asia founded on Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism and Hinduism;
3. If the practice of sodomy was widespread among the sangley population due to “kinship-based immigration” and “lack of females”, why did the sangleys intermarry with indio women in such large numbers after the massacres of the early and mid-17th century? No need for kinky sex if you can have bodacious babes, right?
4. It is possible that the sangleys had anal sex with their children. For example, the sangley father of San Lorenzo Ruiz. Maybe that ‘s why he became the First Filipino Saint.
5. After the First Great Massacre of 1603, the Spanish authorities sent emissaries to China to explain their actions. But China disowned the sangleys. As it were, it was illegal for Chinese subjects of the Ming and Qing Emperors to emigrate. The moment they left China, they CEASED TO BE CHINESE. That means the sangleys are not even Chinese, legally speaking. Subsequent massacres forced many sangleys to intermarry with indio women to sire the mestizos de sangley who later founded the Filipino Nation.
It is a pity I think that Filipinos don’t even realize that they are degrading their own kind by entertaining such crude lies. After all, the sangleys fathered the mestizos de sangley who later founded the Filipino Nation. Rather viewing the sangleys as victims of White Christian Imperialism, Filipinos (include descendants of sangleys themselves) would rather white-wash their own cultural history and pretend they are white. In fact, many of these mestizos de sangley today would claim descent from Spanish Conquistadores, the very people who massacred their ancestors the sangleys.
San Lorenzo Ruiz, the first Mestizo de Sangley.
Jose Rizal, the last Mestizo de Sangley.
Sodomy? Yeah, right.
Speaking of kinky sex, Señor Enrique would be better off writing about how the Spanish Friars raped their indio parishioners right after their confessions. Some of the priests even had open sores on them, most likely as a result of contracting venereal diseases (there were no condoms back then).
In his two novels, Rizal tried to disown his ancestors, the sangleys, and his own people, the mestizos de sangley. Señor Enrique’s despicable behaviour of shamelessly repeating the crude lies of Western Orientalism is a disgusting insult to the memory of the sangleys who perished in the massacres of the early to mid-17th century and who sacrificed their entire lives for the benefit of their descendants, the mestizos de sangley like San Lorenzo Ruiz and Jose Rizal who later founded the Filipino Nation.
Sodomy?
Maybe Señor Enrique should tell the world how he does it with his own children by writing “The Joy of Anal Sex, Filipino Style.”