In today’s Inquirer editorial, the paper thinks the government’s trying to politicize the price of gas; this reflects the attitude of people like Norwegian Would who think we’ve moved forward since the days of subsidized oil:
It is now close to a decade since we finally smashed the old illusion that oil price subsidies were pro-poor, perpetuated for a long time by the middle and upper class leaders of so-called ‘people’s organizations.’ Note that at that time nominal prices were below 20 dollars per barrel. Now the high is about five times. But we don’t hear of any outrageous manifestos that the increase is caused by the local ruling class in conspiracy with foreign capitalists, do we?
Despite its moderate optimism, the Inquirer’s Sunday editorial proved prophetic, in a sense, as it warned of the consequences if politicking intruded into the Batasan bombing investigation too early. The news reported Ermita clears Salapuddin on Batasan blast which led to backpedaling on his part, today: Palace executive says he did not clear Salapuddin. But the damage has been done: as Senator Genaro Magsaysay famously said, “less talk, less mistake.” The dangers of higher-ups saying something were obvious to begin with.
Last Thursday I had a chance to run into Rep. Roilo Golez whose observations, however, made sense to me. He said that if assassination was the aim, then the opportunity presents itself in two places: where the target lives, and where the target works (incidentally, on Wahab Akbar, see Torn and Frayed and Sidetrip with Howie Severino).
Add to this, he said, the fact that we don’t have a suicide bomber culture, and that includes killers intent on killing themselves, too. So an assassin would make saving his own hide a high priority. This limits the opportunities, Golez said. Between home and work, the target’s convoy would make assassination difficult. You’d expect home to be well secured. But work -well, in the case of Akbar, the opportunity was there, particularly as he seemed to have suffered from a false sense of security while at the House, leaving by the same entrance like clockwork. An assassin, Golez observed, would run the risk of being gunned down after shooting his target, unless he was capable of making the 300 meter dash to the main entrance before anyone noticed what had happened. This means, if a getaway is important to the assassin, a bomb would be best. The other possibility, that the bombing was undertaken by a rogue element within the military, is a possibility Golez’s very uncomfortable with. No such inhibitions from Inner Sanctum.
Still, Amando Doronila says Blaming Abus was convenient for probers while Uniffors remains puzzled by the use of a bomb to do something small arms fire could have accomplished.
Scriptorium says the bombing raises three questions (read the whole entry, particularly his belief our society isn’t about to fall apart, just yet):
First, how could they think to do it? For while the legislators are not deemed epitomes of integrity–and in recent years, in fact, the Lower House has seemed lower still, a very expensive rubber stamp fit for a Queen–, they are legislators nonetheless, anointed with the ill-used but still real dignity of representing the nation in its districts and sectors; and an attack on them remains, by constitutional fiction, an attack on us. The bombing was therefore not only an attempt at mass murder–or perhaps at simple murder with multiple collateral casualties–but a national lese majeste, an brazen act of political sacrilege that makes us shudder for its confidence and contempt.
This takes us to the 2nd concern: Who then is safe? If our legislators with their security force and phalanxes of bodyguards can be attacked at the very center of their power, then what of us–who, when we ride the trains and enter the malls, have only private guards to keep us unharmed, searching our bags for bombs they would hardly recognize, shielding us more from comfort than from danger? The Glorietta “gas explosion” was bad enough; and even as we continue our daily routines, we know that we’ve gone back to the second lowest step of Maslow’s hierarchy (if, that is, we ever left it, or ever ascended from the first). One can hardly blame the tourists and investors for staying away, for they have a choice. We have none, and must go as before, though perhaps adding a prayer for safety to our morning rituals.
The 3rd concern proceeds from the foregoing: What next? Was this but the first ledge of a descending cascade of violence, unleashed by maybe Maoists, Islamists, Arroyoists, or random thugs? Will our government seize on it as an excuse to formally impose martial law, which it has proven all-too-willing to do for the most intangible reasons? In this light, though the intentions behind the attack are still uncertain, and its economic and social results remain to be seen, the needed policy response is already clear: For the sake of the nation and its people, the violence must be halted now, and its real perpetrators must be identified and prosecuted as soon as possible–but the means used must not, through excess, threaten to destroy the very ideals they seek to protect. More anon, perhaps, when more facts come to light.
More questions are raised by Postcard Headlines. But Mon Casiple asks the real question on everyone’s mind: are they Coincidences or real political moves? He’s a bit ambiguous on this score:
At the moment, the political situation points to the imperative on the president to make a decisive decision soon on which path she will take to ensure her own survival beyond 2010. The name of the game right now is called “transition management.”
She does not have much time left for her to decide (and make this public) since all the options require long and difficult preparations. All the interested political actors–within and outside her ruling coalition, local as well as foreign–know this. All are exerting pressure to push their own agenda and–the jackpot–to be the one to manage the transition.
Of course, GMA may not really leave the scene–witness her pronouncements on a charter change initiative. There are some in her coalition who wants to use the charter change to extend her term in power (and their own) and they are moving heaven and civil society to make this happen.
However, the chances for this are slim, unless her administration scatters the opposition and unleashes white terror on civil society. The desperate temptation to declare martial law or a state of emergency stem from the reality of a people’s resistance to charter change under GMA’s tutelage.
It is a coincidence that dramatic events such as the Batasan bombing, the Dalaig assassination, or the Glorietta incident occur one after the other in this moment of political conjuncture. Still-unfolding events will show whether these are real coincidences or planned moves in a game of political strategy.
Meanwhile, bureaucratic intramurals: Battle looms over control of Justice.
Overseas, see Malaysia Demos: Sound and Fury, Signifying Little in Asia Sentinel.
My column for today is The future’s bright (and thanks to the San Jose-Recoletos student publications editor-in-chief, who blogs at ~~peAceOuS viCioUs~~ for her kind words). On a Visayas-related note, see Boljoon Dig part 1 and Boljoon Dig part 2, in CAFFiend, on some remarkable archeological diggings there. Interesting entries, on provincial history, in Kanlaon and A Nagueño in the Blogosphere. Interesting notes, too, in The Magnificent Atty. Perez, referring to the Iloilo-Cebu connection.
Elsewhere in the blogosphere, I failed to read Blackshama’s Blog’s reaction to my columns on Marcos. But now that I have, you know, I’m working on a theory. Marcos established a New Society as the dominant discourse: it justified the scrapping of the liberal-democratic order created in 1935; and it was,actually, the justification for Edsa 1 and even Edsa Dos -and explains the refusal of what was once Marcos’ strongest constituency, the middle and upper classes frightened by Communism, to be politically engaged since 2005. Neither Edsa created a New Society, so why bother?
Think of it. Sift through all the reasons people give for not being politically active since 2005 (never mind examples of extreme social alienation, as shown in , or of guilt, as expressed by Hello Tiger Kitty), sift through the things people enumerate as everything wrong with this country (oligarchy, etc.) and then sift through what they want -basically, a Year Zero- and where it might be headed (a swing to the Right, suggests Ren’s Public Notebook) what do you have?
Ang Bagong Lipunan!
Another idea to explore is described in History Unfolding’s entry on Politics and Fourth Turnings:
William Strauss and Neil Howe, who wrote Generations and The Fourth Turning, divided American history into periods of approximately 80 years, called saeculums (Latin for a long human life.) In turn they divided each such period into four “turnings,” a High, an Awakening, an Unraveling and a Crisis. After the civil war crisis, the High lasted approximately from 1867 to 1885, the Awakening from about 1885 to 1905, the Unraveling until 1929 or so, and the crisis through 1945. In our own time the High ran from 1945 to 1965, the Awakening from then until the mid-1980s, the Unraveling from about 1985 until. . .sometime in the last 8 years.
This is a concept that resonates with me, because I approached recent events along similar (though not as intricate) lines in.
The Marocharim Experiment on the sociology of dance moves. It’s sad to note Patsada Karajaw has vanished from the blogosphere.
Technorati Tags: Blogging, books, constitution, economy, Edsa, history, House of Representatives, Marcos, media, military, mindanao, philippines, politics, society
if trillanes indeed was bent on making pagbabago, that he was a revolutionary — the point is not the winning or the loosing — but it’s having the courage to stand for what you say you’re standing for. this trillanes could be forgiven for being an idiot — but what totally discredited him was that he was a coward, pure and simple — like what he was in Oakwood. people rally behind leaders who are credible and are really truly courageous — e sa Oakwood pa lang e, he showed his true colors na. No wonder, nobody went sa Manila Pen — see it’s not because he lost in Oakwood or Manila PEn — it’s his cowardice that’s the problem.
he’s a politician, not a soldier. mark his words, what he was saying yesterday — again the ones who came with him were denied leadership. heck, i’d respect him if he at least put up a fight, but no he did not. he exploited the media for what all it was worth. and then he said that he was surrendering for the sake of innocent people — now what kind of bull crap was that, as if that would hold — only traditional politicans use that line.
It’s disingeneous to criticize Trillanes for not choosing to die for the benefit of disinterested spectators especially when there is the real possibility of taking other brave reporters and activists with him.
madonna, you may add this “I” line, “Like soldiers, we’re going to face this.â€Â
now, as to where i can i find a govt like that, the answer is Thailand. Thaksin allowed King Bhumibol and all the generals to speak out against him and call on the people to depose him. devils
you’re forgetting something, the king and the generals are free men unlike the case of trillanes & gen lim who are fugitives. if the latter’s rights are not restricted, i don’t think there would be any problem for their actions. they can call for press conferences anywhere they like without forcing their way in till kingdom come and the authorities will have no reason in stopping them. besides, what you wrote above about thailand’s king and the generals, isn’t it happening in the phils also? are those anti-gloria forces calling for her ouster being restrained or rounded up unlike thailand?
cvj,
i, for one am and was not a disinterested spectator — believe me all filipinos probably were interested and tuned in to to the tv yesterday.
those reporters were not not brave — they were just doing their job, di ba? and doing a scoop that’s good for the outfits they were working for and as for the activists, read my previous post re: other people with him.
by golly if he went the way of going to a hotel, scaring at lot people and forcibly entering it at a time when he is being tried by the courts — he should been prepared for the worst — like dying eh? he was a fujitive in fact and a shoot to kill order — had he been not a duly elected senator — would have been justified by this administration.
the problem was he blinked and he is a coward.
madonna, the fact that you’re not a disinterested spectator and yet you call Trillanes a coward for not choosing to die makes you a free loader.. How is that different from the audience during the Roman Times who watched gladiator combat and enthusiastically gave a thumbs down (or was it thumbs up)? Given this, do you think you are really worth dying for?
a freeloader? cvj, can’t you read what i’ve written? since oakwood, i have never believed in trillanes — so how can i be a freeloader to his cause? i have never ever supported him.
Given this, do you think you are really worth dying for?—> What’s this? I don’t get it.
Watching gladiators in combat during Roman Times is an ill metaphor. I don’t see your point here.
Oh allright, you’re asking if I, being a Filipino and a freeloader in your majestic opinion is worth dying for by a mucho politiko like Trillanes? Heck, I didn’t forcibly enter a hotel and acted like hero with no balls — so go ask Trillanes that question.
Besides, I did not ask Trillanes to go to Manila Pen and die for me. Did I? But HE apparently wanted to show the nation in a show of brinkmanship that he wanted to die for his country — but he did not have the courage of his wrds.
Madonna, it’s not what you wrote about Oakwood that makes you a freeloader. It’s what you wrote about wanting Gloria to resign (at 1:19 pm above). You demand that others do the dying and then call them cowards if they don’t oblige.
and who are you to utter these words? have you walk the talk lately?
since your president trillanes and his followers have been saying that they are doing their acts for the fil people, then we, the people have the right to criticize him for his failures and his stupidity (add to that his being a senator-try rereading the pdi’s editorial). after all we, the people are the ones who suffer the consequences for these kind of actions. and if he does succeeds, then people may accord him that praise for doing such courageous act (regardless if the result is for the better or for worst). but i don’t think you can call or judge people balimbing for this kind of reaction. you know, there are numerous false prophets and messiahs on this planet.
and cvj, may kasabihan tayo, “walang mang-uuto kung walang nagpapautoâ€Â. don’t be mad if some people here will criticize your idol. afterall, you’re just a spectator just like us.
…and watching gladiators do combat is a fitting metaphor to the reactions of people to yesterday’s events. Only now, instead of the audience congregating in an actual Colloseum, you have them gathering in blogs.
hello cvj, i don’t demand that trillanes die for his cause (where did I write that?), he’s the one who’s the poseur here, showing by his words and actions na willing mamatay — and then coming up short.
the fact that i still want Gloria to resign does not mean thatI am freeloader to Trillanes (baka ikaw? because apparently it bears down in your conscience so much? — as I said I have never supported him since Oakwood — so how can I be a freeloader? I have not goaded him or his companions to forcibly enter MAnila PEn did I? So what’s with the freeloader talk?
I’m not the one who is asking someone else to die on my behalf.
You do not have to write it explicitly but the conclusion can be derived:
Your Cause = wanting gloria to resign.
Trillanes’ Cause = wanting gloria to resign.
therefore, applying the law of transitivity:
Your Cause = Trillanes Cause
Yes, that’s why i’m more circumspect in someone to die for me. I did not begrudge his prerogative to surrender since he does not owe me (or anyone) his life.
Sane ones?
You must be kidding. For someone who is a military strategist, he should know that a couple of tear gad would rener them helpless, he just gave up because there were no alternative courses of action in mind?
And he thinks that the he is the savior to be supporte by the people. That’s not even heroism that he displayed in Manila Pen. That’s stupidity.
cvj,
my statement about revolutionaries willing to die for their cause is a matter of my opinion and a widely shared belief the world over. you’ve twisted my statement into saying that i was “demanding” trillanes to die for his cause (questionable cause? for himself? –more like it, than his country per se). why? don’t i have the right to comment or critize him — and yes, despite the fact that i advocate for gma’s resignation?
so you’re lumping all anti-gma who happen not to be pro-trillanes as freeloaders (great logic there huh) — examine the fallacy here… those who are anti-gma are not necessarily pro-country… go figure..
cvj,
so how ever did you know that trillanes’ cause is for gma to resign? his cause is more about his career, not the country and asking gma to resign is just a means to his cause… and my cause? did you ever discuss to me about it? presumption, presumption,,,,,
madonna, so if you were not demanding Trillanes to die because of his cause (which is also your cause, as shown by the equation above), then why do want him to die? For your viewing pleasure? To prove a point? How are you then different from those in the crowd who, watching people on the ledge of a tall building considering suicide, shout for them to go ahead and jump?
and your loathsome kind? is carping worth dying for?
Perhaps not grd, but then again, i’m not the one calling Trillanes a coward.
the fact that i still want Gloria to resign does not mean thatI am freeloader to Trillanes (baka ikaw? because apparently it bears down in your conscience so much? – Madonna
Yes, that’s why i’m more circumspect in someone to die for me. I did not begrudge his prerogative to surrender since he does not owe me (or anyone) his life. –cvj
so if your conscience is bothering you — why should it translate that i should bother with mine? law of trasitivity eh? Check your logic kiddo!
Madonna, you just called someone a coward for choosing to live instead of dying just prove a point, so i don’t expect you to have the same sort conscience as mine.
kid, you’re such a fan of trillanes — your logic is running riot.. you should be the master of logic, not the other way around just an advice. REPEAT AFTER ME: i am not demanding or did not demand that trillanes die.
allright, cvj, for you, i shall not call trillanes a coward.
i have not called him a coward either, just plain stupid.
Geo, sorry just saw your response (at 9:15 am) above. If you can give me your exact coordinates (0,?), i can include your results in my blog.
“Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago Friday filed an urgent resolution asking punitive action against Trillanes for leading the power grab Thursday at the Manila Peninsula Hotel in Makati.â€ÂGMA NEWS
For once,I agree with Lady Miriam.Senator Trillanes is not above the law!
BUT,may I ask Senator Miria DefensorSantiago ,How about GLORIA?
“No man (or woman) is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man’s permission when we ask him to obey it. Theodore Rooseveltâ€Â
How could so many scandals of an elected(?) president and her cadre remain unexplained, unchallenged, and unpunished? When? Probably never.
We’re not talking mistakes, here. We’re not talking poor judgment or failed policies. We’re not talking politics as usual, with its underhanded array of pork and perks. But we are talking about very serious violations of the public trust, and very possibly the law, perpetrated by the elected(?) leader of this nation and her handlers.
Even more amazingly, we are talking about the shameful reality that not a single one of these offenses has been investigated by a truly independent, non-political, neutral commission, armed with subpoena powers and adequate funding, and answerable ONLY to the people of Philippines. Not a single one.
What ever happened to the investigation of:
* The National Power Corp. (Napocor) -CPK-Kalayaan rehabilitation project.
* The race horse importation fiasco.
* The overpriced Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard exposé.
* Misuse of the fertilizer funds,
* The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. scandals.
* The jueteng scandals.
* the ZTE-NBN scandal(â€ÂBuck off!â€Â).
* The Bribery of Governors and Congressmen in Malacanang.
* The MOTHER of ALL SCANDALS :THE HELLO GARCI Mega Scandal that influenced the last Presidential elections.
* The Extra-Judicial Killings of Activists as reported by the United Nations special raporteur on human rights.
* And many more…
What’s left to be said? Not very much. Gloria Pidal has had a free pass to do as she pleased since 2001.She and her political operators have not been held accountable for any crime against the people of this country. Gloria is above the law.Why?
cvj – “Yes, but the military acting with the people has more probability of ending well than the military acting alone.”
cvj, if you imagine that a (realistic) happy ending to yesterday’s sad episode was possible, I’d like to hear it.
micketymoc, if Barias and his SWAT team went to Malacanang and chose to arrest its illegal occupant, then that would have been a happier ending. That would have ended our 3-year (many say 6-year) hostage situation.
cvj, I said “realistic.” 😉
I’m also surprised you chose the phrase “hostage situation” to describe our situation under Arroyo. Forget for a moment that I disagree with your characterization: how do you convince people who don’t feel like hostages that their freedoms have actually been curtailed all this time?
Malacanang is just a few kilometers away. The Armed Forces and the Police has the firepower. The people will be relieved while the apathetic crowd won’t mind too much as long as traffic is not affected. Every aspect of the operation is realistic (though by no means easy). The biggest hurdle is psychological i.e., for the authorities to face the fact that Gloria Arroyo is a bogus President and to act accordingly.
I’m surprised that you’re surprised. Hasn’t the debate between the rabid opposition and the move on crowd revolve on whether it is best to remove her immediately or to let her stay until 2010? Implicit in that is Gloria’s determination to hold on to power, so the move on crowd does not want the struggle between the opposing sides to endanger the economy (aka ‘the hostage’).
The true measure of freedom is what the State does to those who express dissent, so if people feel free just because they don’t rock the boat, then that really does not say anything. By that standard, even Singapore can be considered ‘free’.
I still don’t understand why people seem to think that the problem of the Philippines is just related to one personality – GMA. At the end of the day, even if we remove her from power, do you think the problems go away? It doesn’t even matter who replaces her as the same problem still exists.
Whether it’s someone from the center, right or left, it still doesn’t really solve any problems. The Philippine situation is very hard to solve because we as a people, are not united. There is no ideology to speak of that would basically espouse our country’s aspirations. Democracy in its present free wheeling American style form has not worked for the benefit of the populace. Communism is dead as an ideology.
We still in a very feudal society with the politicians serving as the present day datus who the populace pay tribute to. These people wants us to pay tribute to them and not them serving us as our representatives.
Question is: What do we do?
True, “dissent without action is consent,” as Lim said on TV, but dissent without true popular support, learning from past mistakes and understanding of reality is failure of dissent.
If Trillanes were smart enough, he has to endure his jailtime first, making proper statements from his cell, analyzing past mistakes and learning from them, creating a proper political strategy within the framework of the law, and once given freedom he would have ample opportunity to change the world.
Unfortunately he couldn’t wait. That really pissed off my brother-in-law who’s an ardent Erap supporter.
cvj
curious lang ako…a lot of people had been able to say their piece about Mrs. Arroyo’s corruption and illegitimacy in public…and in fact, it goes as far as being printed. People have not been jailed, right? So, that isn’t being free yet then? In your beloved Singapore, they won’t even show some cable channels because they’ve been critical of the Sing government before. I am just using your definition as you defined it in your previous post.
I am calling him a coward. He’s not fighting in the battlefield. He’s fighting in a posh hotel.
He hid under the skirt of and 83 year old bishop and another geriatric former vice-president.
Teh real activists fought in Mendiola. Some of them died there. Some of them died in prison after torture. Ten thousand of them were victims of martial law.
And some cluleless guys here comment that this is worst than the martial law of Marcos. haah.
Have you experienced demonstrating during the time Marcos? Because if you were, just like my brother, you must have experienced being sprayed by bullets from a machine gun while running away from the military.
Ito curfew lang umiiyak na kayo. Sheesh
We are not united because we have not taken our democracy seriously. The elite and middle class look pass Arroyo’s cheating because they believe she was the superior choice to FPJ. How can we be united if we do not respect each other’s aspirations?
It is disingeneous to complain that democracy does not work when you are one of those who are keeping the system from working properly.
I second the motion CAT. The problem right now is that people just react negatively to whatever pronouncements the authorities have because of their plain hatred for the regime of GMA. So anything done by the military and the police is all wrong kasi galit sila sa presidente.
As I said before, any government worth their salt will not take this challenge to their authority sitting down. Kung papayagan nila si Trillanes na mga rant and rave, eh di parang you’re allowing him to fan the flames of revolution. Di tanga ang gobyerno. The problem with the anti GMA folks is that they’ll grasp at any straws just to bring the government down. Kung si Trileleng ang gagawa…sige lang..if it fails, then lets move on to the next destabilizers and try again….
Tell that to Jonas Burgos. Tell that to Musa Dimasidsing. Whatever residual freedoms we have, people have fought to maintain. It’s not like Arroyo has not tried to curtail our freedoms with her PP1017, CPR, EO 464 and HSA.
Where were these RATs (Rambunctious Admirers o Trillanes) when they were inveigled by their Pied Piper to join his cause?
Tending your poultry? Same fowl with same feather, howls together.
Ay cvj…eto na naman tayo..in the same way that the rest of the populace can choose FPJ to be their leader, so does the upper and middle class…or are you saying they don’t have a vote now?
Now, if it means that logistically, the upper and middle class can muster enough forces to win over the votes against FPJ, wala kang magagawa, that’s politics.
The romantic views you espouse (or maybe leftists views would be more accurate?) does not work in the real world. Realpolitik dictates that aside from popularity, one must have the political machinery to translate them into votes.
Ganun talaga ang buhay. ( I will grant you that GMA was an exception. OK?)
What have you got against people saying free wheeling American style democracy doesn’t work in our culture? May disconnect nga eh. I did not say democracy will not work. I said free wheeling American democracy doesn’t work. Maybe a cross between socialist and democratic systems may suit our culture better as our people.
And who are you to tell me I am one of those who prevent the system from working? Ang yabang mo naman! Mahirap talaga pag feeling morally superior.
I did not tell you. You told me.
so what does that have to do with me preventing the system from working. I am saying it from the perspective of politics. She’s the de facto commander in chief and ergo she will defend her regime. It doesn’t mean I agree with her. It just means that’s the real political situation at this time. There’s nothing in there to suggest I (moi, ako, gua, etc. etc.) is preventing the system from working.
Ang problema sa iyo…kung anu ano na yata ang binabasa mo and you start imagining what people are thinking inside their heads instead of taking whatever they say in the commentaries at face value.
Discuss ideas. You certainly seem to love to slam down people if they don’t agree with your view of the world. And to think YOU’RE the one who loves to espouse the democratic ideals. (Shades of GMA???)
Silent Waters, you and i know that you use the term ‘de-facto’ because she was not legitimately (i.e. democratically) elected. Yet you believe that she is entitled to defend her regime because it is a ‘National Security’ issue (as opposed to what devilsadvc8 calls an issue of personal security issue). That is tacit acceptance of an undemocratic arrangement.
THat’s the point, de facto means she was not legitimate…then it follows SHE and the rest of her supporters , whether military or civilian, BELIEVES, it’s a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE.
It’s an OBSERVATION, for crying out loud.
I do not believe she’s legitimate. But because she is the sitting president, all government entities will treat any attack against the government as a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE. That’s the point.
Now, if the military and civilians decide to go against the government (which you MUST admit has not happened yet), then it still is a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE.
Even during the time of Marcos and Aquino, for as long as they’re the ones sitting in power, it si considered a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE by the whole government structure.
Ang hirap kasi sa inyo, yung galit niyo kay GMA clouds your ability to distinguish facts and opinions.
Its really hard to defend the indefensible. The issue here is Trillanes not Gloria. There is really nothing much defense for Trillanes other than to muddle the issue with the alleged crimes of Gloria. Haay, CVJ.
What do we do?
What we need to do is to capture the imagination of our people. In the last election, Trillanes almost captured the imagination of our people. He got elected. But the people did not lift a finger when he was not allowed to hold office. With his latest caper, he is history.
The problem is us. In order to change us, we need to influence our collective mindset. In order to influence to the collective mindset, we need to capture the imagination. Psychology is part of the solution. Unfortunately, everybody is too focused on politics.
Thanks rego.