The President has announced she will not attend the Philippine Military Academy homecoming this weekend (because of a startling coincidence involving assassinations plots) . She is in a mess of her own making, and which requires loyalty at a time when her officials have to wonder if it’s worth it to lose all, for her. Read Tony Abaya’s column to understand why Jun Lozada has engaged the sympathy of many people and why government’s resources have failed to impeach his credibility.
As Mon Casiple muses,
The instruction of the president for government to work with private business sector, academe and Church in the anti-corruption work and the sudden interest of the Ombudsman and DOJ in the ZTE-NBN case aim to seize initiative in the issue. The NBI raid on Lozada’s office, on the other hand, is more in the same league as the failed discrediting of Lozada for corruption.
Many top officials in the GMA administration have been put on the spot, had their reputation besmirched, or are in danger of prosecution themselves because of their actions in defense of the Arroyo family. They are under intense pressure from their own families, friends, and peers to stand for truth and decency on the issues confronting the First Family.
The signal role of the Lozada case is in bringing forth these pressures. In turn, the pressure on the president to resign will intensify. Ironically, the effective pressure may come from her own official family and camp rather than from the outside.
The Palace has also had to backtrack on its attempt to divert public attention by means of prematurely launching it’s amendments scheme. The Vice-President, for obvious reasons, has begun to grow a spine.
Yesterday, the Inquirer editorial pointed out that what is undeniable, is that the administration’s engaged in a Conspiracy. One that entailed a whole roster of officials collectively insulting the intelligence of the public, as Manuel Buencamino sardonically demonstrated in his column.
The group Action for Economic Reforms, in calling for the resignation of the President, puts it this way:
Criminal justice will come, but now is the time to take political action……
The first family is the capo di tutti capi, the boss of all bosses. The Macapagal-Arroyo family has turned the Philippine government into a mafia family, with Cabinet men, congressmen, and other functionaries as their mob lieutenants. We have state capture not by the elite but by a Filipino mafia headed by the first family.The Philippines is not lacking in laws and institutions against corruption and plunder…
Much effort has been undertaken to address chronic corruption…
Despite all this, what is missing is the simplest answer to the problem: Fighting corruption is a question of leadership.Since the leadership itself is brazenly engaged in plunder, corruption remains unabated. Under the leadership of a non-corrupt president, anti-corruption programs and institutions will be effective. Under a corrupt presidency, the same programs and institutions only become a protective veil for corruption itself…
With GMA’s repeated betrayal of the public trust, she has no right to sit as President a minute longer. All other officials involved in the ZTE-NBN deal, including Secretary Romy Neri, DOTC Secretary Leandro Mendoza, and members of the NEDA-ICC must step down from their government posts. The officials involved in the abduction of Jun Lozada and its cover-up in the media, such as PNP Chief Avelino Razon, Secretary Lito Atienza and DILG Secretary Ronaldo Puno, must likewise step down.
We must expunge the Philippine Mafia.
And yet even as more and more people add their voices, from Harvey Keh to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (perhaps, taking its cue from the national lawyer’s association, and perhaps statements such as Jovito Salonga’s, the law school governments of the Ateneo, UP and other law schools are reportedly meeting and are expected to call on the President to resign) to the Makati Business Club (and if there were any divisions in its ranks, they’ve closed ranks over Secretary Favila’s threat to unleash the BIR on businessmen; as Boy Blue replied, “bring it on!”) except for that old Palace reliable, Vivianne Yuchengco, the debate goes on and on about the President. The debate is distilled to its essence by this quote from the play, A Man for All Seasons:
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And 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 you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Yet we know that in real life as in the play and film, More ended up imprisoned and put on trial, charged with treason: bearing the full brunt of “Man’s laws,” because the King wanted him forced to publicly recant his private opposition to the King’s divorce and remarriage, which More found contrary to God’s laws. The world remembers him as a man who submitted to the law, to prove his fidelity to a higher one. Recognition the laws of man can be flawed, and man’s justice profoundly unjust.
There is another gripping scene where More is undergoing trial (“betoken,” as used in the dialogue, means “be a sign of; indicate”) and his refusal to publicly take an oath as demanded by the king is taken as proof positive of treason:
Cromwell: Now, Sir Thomas, you stand on your silence.
Sir Thomas More: I do.
Cromwell: But, gentlemen of the jury, there are many kinds of silence. Consider first the silence of a man who is dead. Let us suppose we go into the room where he is laid out, and we listen: what do we hear? Silence. What does it betoken, this silence? Nothing; this is silence pure and simple. But let us take another case. Suppose I were to take a dagger from my sleeve and make to kill the prisoner with it; and my lordships there, instead of crying out for me to stop, maintained their silence. That would betoken! It would betoken a willingness that I should do it, and under the law, they will be guilty with me. So silence can, according to the circumstances, speak! Let us consider now the circumstances of the prisoner’s silence. The oath was put to loyal subjects up and down the country, and they all declared His Grace’s title to be just and good. But when it came to the prisoner, he refused! He calls this silence. Yet is there a man in this court – is there a man in this country! – who does not know Sir Thomas More’s opinion of this title?
Crowd in court gallery: No!
Cromwell: Yet how can this be? Because this silence betokened, nay, this silence was, not silence at all, but most eloquent denial!
Sir Thomas More: Not so. Not so, Master Secretary. The maxim is “Qui tacet consentiret”: the maxim of the law is “Silence gives consent”. If therefore you wish to construe what my silence betokened, you must construe that I consented, not that I denied.
Cromwell: Is that in fact what the world construes from it? Do you pretend that is what you wish the world to construe from it?
Sir Thomas More: The world must construe according to its wits; this court must construe according to the law.
In More’s case he submitted, as a believing Christian, to the secular power precisely because he was obedient to a higher authority: one that compelled him to bow down before the laws of man because they are as nothing compared to the laws of God, which required fidelity to the death.
The law, he recognized, could serve as defense for certain things but there come points when the law compels obedience even when the law itself is unjust; yet compels that submission because the law’s limitations are clear, it cannot intrude into the distinctions a person’s conscience creates between what is legal and what is just.
A similar question was tackled by the scientist Stephen Jay Gould, when he discussed how the debate between those who believe in science and those who look to a supernatural authority are engaged in a futile debate. See his essay Nonoverlapping Magisteria:
I believe, with all my heart, in a respectful, even loving concordat between our magisteria — the NOMA solution. NOMA represents a principled position on moral and intellectua] grounds, not a mere diplomatic stance. NOMA also cuts both ways. If religion can no longer dictate the nature of factual conclusions properly under the magisterium of science, then scientists cannot claim higher insight into moral truth from any superior knowledge of the world’s empirical constitution. This mutual humility has important practical consequences in a world of such diverse passions.
By all means the law is often our shield against injustice, but there are certain forms of injustice our laws are impotent to address.
What is at stake is the position held by the President of the Philippines. A position not hers by right, but by grace; a position only temporarily hers and not her inalienable possession like her life, for example. What she can claim a right to is a fixed term; but the term is hers by virtue of certain assumptions, among them her receiving a popular mandate that is genuine and not so marred by controversy as to make it suspect; or that she continues to enjoy the confidence of the people who consider her fit to continue in office.
The supreme law, the Constitution, gives her the opportunity to declare herself unfit to hold office at any time (resignation); it grants the power to declare her unfit for office not only to Congress, by means of a prosecution begun by the House and a political, not judicial, trial in the Senate; and even to her subordinates, the Cabinet, who can declare her unfit for office and who can even force a vote in Congress; and it grants the public at the very least the right to petition government for the redress of grievances and enshrines the citizenry as the ultimate arbiter of what is legal: for, if need be, the public can overturn the fundamental law of the land by means of revolution (if it succeeds).
Her critics do not call for the murder or assassination of the President, or that she should be denied the chance to adequately defend herself in court; but what they assert is that the President may continue to enjoy the presumption of innocence as far as the courts are concerned but no longer enjoys that assumption as far as the public is concerned; that in a sense, in the face of the President’s acts of commission and omission as well as those of her henchmen, a significant portion of the population has what lawyers call a moral certainty of her guilt; this moral certainty does not meet, as of yet, the requirements of the courts when it comes to depriving her of life, liberty, or property; but it is more than enough in the political sphere, to justify citizens calling her to relinquish her office.
Because, as Joker Arroyo in a previous incarnation declared, we cannot afford to have a country run by a thief. Whether it was run by thieves in the past or will be run by thieves in the future is absolutely irrelevant and immaterial, if your honors please. We are talking about the incumbent President and no one else. We can deprive only the incumbent President of office and no one else; the punishment is specific because it can only apply to one person at a time.
What is the law’s is the law’s; what is the people’s as a political entity is entirely something else.
The question is how the people, as a political entity, should dispense with political questions, such as the fitness of their head of state and government for office. Public opinion and the threat of impeachment drove Nixon from office; de Gaulle, facing student protests and a lost referendum vote, resigned. Politics recognizes force majeure when it comes to the terms of its highest officials: when a party loses the US House of Representatives, traditionally the Speaker from the party that lost Congress resigns his seat; it is not just in parliamentary systems that there can be votes of confidence -whether in elections or in mobilized public opinion.
Oliver Cromwell embarked on his dictatorship by dismissing the Long Parliament with these famous words on April 20, 1653:
It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, andenemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye haveno more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter’d your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil’d this sacred place, and turn’d the Lord’s temple into a denof thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress’d, are yourselves gone!So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!
And this is the warning that echoes down in history: in face of wrongdoing or plain incompetence, the longer people confuse procedures for actual government, the greater the temptation to banish those fussing over procedures to restore what’s right. But one needn’t embark on the path of dictatorship to realize that an essential attribute of the democratic system, is the opportunity it affords to discard a discredited leader, rather have the whole system go down in flames to preserve one person’s political life.
As the British parliament agonized over the question of whether to continue its fight against Hitler or surrender, one MP, Leo Amery, quoted Cromwell in urging Neville Chamberlain to resign:
Some 300 years ago, when this House found that its troops were being beaten again and again by the dash and daring of the Cavaliers, by Prince Rupert’s Cavalry, Oliver Cromwell spoke to John Hampden. In one of his speeches he recounted what he said. It was this:
‘I said to him, “Your troops are most of them old, decayed serving men and tapsters and such kind of fellows.” You must get men of a spirit that are likely to go as far as they will go, or you will be beaten still.’
It may not be easy to find these men. They can be found only by trial and by ruthlessly discarding all who fail and have their failings discovered. We are fighting today for our life, for our liberty, for our all; we cannot go on being led as we are.
I have quoted certain words of Oliver Cromwell. I will quote certain other words. I do it with great reluctance, because I am speaking of those who are old friends and associates of mine, but they are words which, I think, are applicable to the present situation. This is what Cromwell said to the Long Parliament when he thought it was no longer fit to conduct the affairs of the nation:
“You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go”
Chamberlain resigned; Churchill became Prime Minister, despite the great misgivings, even obvious mistrust, of his peers. When Chamberlain died, Churchill, in turn, paid tribute to his predecessor:
It is not given to human beings, happily for them, for otherwise life would be intolerable, to foresee or to predict to any large extent the unfolding course of events. In one phase men seem to have been right, in another they seem to have been wrong. Then again, a few years later, when the perspective of time has lengthened, all stands in a different setting. There is a new proportion. There is another scale of values. History with its flickering lamp stumbles along the trail of the past, trying to reconstruct its scenes, to revive its echoes, and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days. What is the worth of all this? The only guide to a man is his conscience; the only shield to his memory is the rectitude and sincerity of his actions. It is very imprudent to walk through life without this shield, because we are so often mocked by the failure of our hopes and the upsetting of our calculations; but with this shield, however the fates may play, we march always in the ranks of honour.
At stake, let me repeat, is the President’s political life; as to the sum total of her life we can’t pass judgment, yet, though it is, of course, possible that in retrospect, when that time comes, she may come off better than she seems, today; or worse. But it is not too soon, to pass judgment on her fitness for office. This is a judgment call in which the law is only relevant in terms of our layman’s appreciation of what it’s spirit ought to be, and whether under her leadership, the government has proven itself faithless to that spirit.
The question however, settled in many minds, remains unsettled in the minds of others; it hinges, in those minds, on whether the dangers of an aroused public are so grave, as to justify denying the public their sovereignty; it is a question involving fears as old as Edmund Burke’s condemnation of the French Revolution:
Were all those dreadful things necessary? Were they the inevitable results of the desperate struggle of determined patriots, compelled to wade through blood and tumult, to the quiet shore of a tranquil and prosperous liberty? No! nothing like it. The fresh ruins of France, which shock our feelings wherever we can turn our eyes, are not the devastation of civil war; they are the sad but instructive monuments of rash and ignorant counsel in time of profound peace. They are the display of inconsiderate and presumptuous, because unresisted and irresistible, authority. The persons who have thus squandered away the precious treasure of their crimes, the persons who have made this prodigal and wild waste of public evils, (the last stage reserved for the ultimate ransom of the state), have met in their progress with little, or rather with no opposition at all. Their whole march was more like a triumphal procession, than the progress of a war. Their pioneers have gone before them, and demolished and laid everything level at their feet. Not one drop of their blood have they shed in the cause of the country they have ruined. They have made no sacrifices to their projects of greater consequence than their shoe buckles, whilst they were imprisoning their king, murdering their fellow citizens, and bathing in tears, and plunging in poverty and distress, thousands of worthy men and worthy families. Their cruelty has not even been the base result of fear. It has been the effect of their sense of perfect safety, in authorizing treasons, robberies, rapes, assassinations, slaughters, and burnings, throughout their harassed land. But the cause of all was plain from the beginning.
But we are heirs, not to Burke, but to the Frenchmen he condemned; even Rizal was convinced, if not of the desirability, then at least of the inevitability, of revolution; else our national narrative would still be that of a province of Spain or State of the Union. We can detect at least a familiarity with his arguments, by way of Rizal: who ultimate advice was, you cannot force events, they will unfold in their own good time (see my disquisition on Rizal’s Pilosopiya ng Pagtitiis).
Well, things are unfolding, but it would be wrong to assert they will unfold in a precise, pre-determined manner. But they are unfolding in a manner that is demolishing the arguments used, so far, by those who wanted to keep rationalizing their implied or overt support for the administration.
This is just political noise? The increasing decibels of public protest are preferable to the silence of the tomb or the cold vaults where even colder cash is piling up for the President’s favored few.
They are all the same? Perhaps when they could moderate their greed; but the greed is unmoderated, it is accelerating, and along with the avarice is an out-of-control contempt for every Filipino, rich or poor, educated or not, urbanite or rural dweller, who dares defy the administration.
What will it achieve? An end to the insanity, closing a chapter to the hubris, restoring the enfeebled democratic muscles of the electorate, reviving the dulled sense of right and wrong of a public.
What about the economy? For those who believe in trickle-down, removing the dam that has held captive the people’s money; for those who wanted prudence and professionalism in the management of our natural and financial resources, the chance this will finally happen and not be feigned.
It boils down to the administration’s scale of greed at the very least matching, if not exceeding, that of the government that preceded it. And a public realizing that it must stand up to it, end it, punish it, for now it sees its your style, or lack of it, but your performance while in office, that must be the sole, standard, measure of a leader’s fitness for office. The mafiosi in slippers and the mafiosi in an expensive suit are both plain thugs.
The President overturned her policy of preferring BOT deals, to add to the debts of the country, to obtain foreign funding for a project whose cost was bloated by the demands of her family and allies. To consummate this deal, she left the bedside of her potentially dying husband to please her allies. She would have pursued it, if the public hadn’t opposed it. Yet she has kept trying to find more and similar deals. This is just part of the pattern, one that consists of her recklessly spending government finances, then figuring out a way to blunt the effects of her spending, only to find new ways to spend that involve accumulating unnecessary and indefensible obligations.
Minguita Padilla asserts that the inflated commission demanded by Abalos equals the annual budget of the Philippine General Hospital: multiplied five times. I’ve heard another assertion that the amount equals the annual budget of the Department of Agriculture.
A few weeks back, a dispirited critic of the President asked another critic (an agnostic if not an atheist), “Do you think God put her here to teach us something?” And the agnostic/atheist critic instantly replied, “Yes, to teach us freedom isn’t gained so easily.”
The long road began, for some, in 2001, for others, in 2004, for others, in 2006 and so on. They have come together, taken time to understand each other, hammered out consensus, taken stock of past mistakes and appropriate things to do; all the while hounded by those united in support for the President because she dressed better, spoke better, was better-educated and showed better executive control, than her predecessor.
But when, as now, she’s revealed as nothing better than him, and in many ways worse because if he was slothful, she has been industrious in undermining institutions, intimidating any organization critical of her, and corrupting the various petty crooks and mulcting officials who have always been there, but who have grown fat, proud, and left stupefied by her drowning them in money and in stripping them of whatever self-control and professional values they had left.
The result is that the enemies of the people should really be named Legion -for they are many; the ones in the cabinet who serve her with enthusiasm and no scruples; the soldiers she has infiltrated into sensitive civilian posts; the business communities she has turned into her propaganda organs; the rank-and-file who have lost even the nominal prestige their positions should accord them.
The line of men and women who have abandoned all pretenses to serving the public, who are reduced to serving the President and her family, according to their humiliating whims, has grown so long that the President’s leaving office will only be the first step in a process that will many of the formerly well-connected turned potential social and political pariahs.
But it’s that first step that can and should unite us. It unites those who wanted it years ago, with those who have come to see as a necessary thing, only now. We are together now, having seen not only the best, but the worst, in each of ourselves; but collectively, better for coming together now.
What to do? Make a list. Those who can no longer deserve a position paid for from the public coffers, and who must resign immediately. Those who supported the government to the extent they advocated means no genuinely democratic government would have conceived of adopting in the past. Those whose perks and power are made possible by their closeness to the President, who cast aside their own reputations in her service.
And make a list of the things that failed to work: impeachment, presidential commissions, appointments to departments and the judiciary, the military, only to cause those institutions grave scandal and the gutting of professional pride and esprit de corps.
And make a list of the things you want, and not the things you hate; for it is easy to hate but difficult to be for certain things. Clean elections? Greater or less party discipline? Efficient and honest tax collection, social services as a right of the people and not personally-bestowed patronage? The list is yours, but armed with similar lists, there we will have the chance to come together with a truly meaningful reform agenda.
But until then: march.
Until then: make noise.
Until then: write, call, text, to share what you feel.
From now on, forget your past mistakes, or disappointments, and focus on the task at hand.
They say: they represent public opinion.
We must say: we do!
You must say, I have had enough with feeling helpless, or fearful, or embarrassed over past loyalties; instead, I will stand, not someone, but for me; and if there are many like me, I will link arms with them; and whatever happens, let it not be said that at the country’s present opportunity for redemption, you were will trying to find excuses to postpone the inevitable.
The Black and White Movement gives you three opportunities to register your protest:
1. Log on to our website — www.blacknwhite-movement.com and register your name to declare your support for Jun Lozada.
2. Send text “Sa Totoo Tayo” to 0915-3296830 to be counted. Also, text this message to all of your friends and relatives: “Kung naniniwala kayo sa sinasabi ni Jun Lozada, text “Sa Totoo Tayo” to 0915-3296830. Visit www.blacknwhite-movement.com for latest count and activities.”
3. And if you’re in Metro Manila, join us on Sunday, February 17, 2008, 10 AM at La Salle Greenhills for a Mass organized by President Cory Aquino and the La Salle brothers in support of Jun Lozada and his family.
The time to act is now. Sa Totoo Tayo. Now na!
if the
meeting between neri and ping lacson together with jamby and lozada himself happened in december then i can say that the public was
treated to the greatest performance of all times with lacson as director and jamby as the script writer.
why won’t neri just come out and expose whatever he wanted to expose. why is he using the best of both worlds. the protection of the government, his friend and the opposition.
so many behind the scenes that people would not believe them anymore.
supremo, na quote ko ang statement nang kinaukolan, pero napasama ‘ta lahat pati comment ko.. alam naman nila kong sin-o sila at sila lang naka-alam kong sino sila.
“how do you trust a person peddling for change when after you buy their idea, – Carl.
as ross perot once said, when you buy a used car, look under the hood. there may not be an engine, even though it looks sleek outside.
Carl Said..”Because all these people who were calling Erap’s head to roll during Edsa 2 are the same people who are saying that we’ve actually gone worse with Gloria.
How do you trust a person peddling for change when after you buy their idea, they come back and say that what you bought was rotten?”
Eh natanso nga ang mga Pilipino ni Arroyo. Anong mabuting gawin? Humanap na iba hanggang makakita ng hindi tanso kundi ginto.
Kamote:
“You can actually applaud them [Marcos and Erap] for not being bloodthirsty. That’s a very big difference on what we have now.”
You’re correct. That’s when “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely†(Lord Acton). Too much greed and too much power (including its passionate obsession) hang together. It makes a leader unhesitant to erase those who oppose them. When Gloria attains her goal to stay in power beyond 2010 (read her lips, and those rabid congressmen pushing for cha-cha), we may have another marcosian worse than Marcos and Erap combined.
per Benard..”as ross perot once said, when you buy a used car, look under the hood. there may not be an engine, even though it looks sleek outside.”
Kaya naman patuloy ang paghahanap ng mga Pilipino ng kotse, ang mga kotseng nabili dati panay kalawangin pala. Ilang beses na silang natanso pero hindi pa rin sila maglulubay hanggang makakita ng tunay na tumatrabaho.
quote:supremo, Hawiianguy,kanmote….
“No the people who are in EDSA were lucky. Marcos and Erap had balls to not to succumb from their General’s wishes to just kill everybody in that place. You can actually praise what they did. You can actually applaud them for not being bloodthirsty.
That’s a very big difference on what we have now.”
from inquirer…
MANILA, Philippines — The military on Friday beefed up its forces around Metro Manila, bringing in armored vehicles and light tanks from the provinces and placing two divisions up north on full alert in support of a commander in chief buffeted by fresh political scandals.
sabi nga, “Laban, eh di laban”
malala pa ngayon keysa METROCOM!
Pilipinoparin,
I hope those armored vehicles and light tanks won’t fire live ammos to the marchers mistaken for “destabilizers.”
When they do, yours and Kamote’s fears are sustained. Fortunately, they didn’t, for now.
That grim scenario may also become an invitation to Devils’s warning about the onset of another kind of “people power.” I hope not.
In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.- George Orwell
God bless Master Jedi Jun Lozada!!
To Mike, who said :”One thing that struck me about the rally (I was there till almost 8 p.m.) was how widespread the anti-GMA sentiment is. The left, the youth, the Church, the workers, businessmen, farmers, urban poor, etc., were all represented–and some of these sectors are even allergic to each other.”
GMA will sense that the animosity against her has really gotten widespread to troublesome levels when rallies against her are simultaneously held in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao (or at least 5 different cities).
To hold anti-corruption rally in 5 cities:
++ metro-Manila — a given
++ 4 other cities :
– target for 500 demonstrators per city
– 10 organizers (8 foot-soldiers + 2 leaders);
With funding for 2 weeks for 40 to 50, organizing simultaneous rallies across the islands should be achievable.
For the 4 cities, one can choose from Baguio, Los Banos, Davao, Cebu, GenSan, Naga. Aim for cities with large student populations.
Mike: I am not saying that the anti-GMA sentiment is only strong in the NCR region.
What I am saying is this. Firstly (my quick and dirty calations show that) with P2Million, one should be able to organize simultaneous rallies across the islands.
So my point is that those who can drop P2million without batting an eyelash are NOT betting against GMA. Whether it is because the moneyed-elite are just too closely linked to GMA, that they are fearful of opening the Pandora’s box, or they are fearful-fearful, it appears those with cash to spare are preferring to wait for 2010. [Note: 10 upper-middle-class putting P200,000 each still gets to the 2-mil target.]
FOOTNOTE: Once you plunk down the two-mil, then you are committed, so two-mil now will have to be followed by a series of cash-expenditures in the P3Mil-per-event range.
Honasan really does not have that much money, does he?
upn, i think only an individual, or group, with inexhaustible source of funds and gargantuan obsession for the spoils will undertake such a project. show the money and they will come, even for just rice and noodles. that is, if the “organizers/leaders” will not pocket it first.
besides, i think the promdis are not as bellyachers as their metro manila counterparts. they usually listen to their governors and mayors.
And above-item shows why a 2-party system has its advantages. Dissipate the resources across 5 groups and the strongest of the 5 may still be weak.
btw, 2 representatives for each sector to demonstrate would not amount to much. widespread, yes but substantial, no – not enough even to be noticed by the media.
show the money, even for just rice and noodles, and they will come. Wave the placards, and the reporters and TV cameras will come.
But the opposition does not seem to be that well-organized yet — organized in a cold-blooded manner working with pesos, budgets, timelines, surveys, people-counts and forward teams.
And again, I am not in a position to say as to how strong the anti-GMA or anti-government sentiments are in the provinces. I know what Mang Isko will probably say, though.
…..magandang araw mga guys, wherever you are!
I didn’t pass by the rally yesterday, since I thought that the mass tomorrow in La Salle is more my thing.
Pero tuwang-tuwa ako sa balita ngayong umaga, na naging mapayapa ang lahat ng pangyayari. Pagkatapos kong basahin yung dyaryo kanina, nagsisisi ako dahil na-miss-out ko yung rally kahapon.
I attended a small protest with Fr. Reyes before, and he is one of the most peaceful, positive and colorful personalities who meets sacrifice and self-deprivation with a very happy face. I look forward to attending the next gatherings which will be led and organized by these people in the future.
Dark Army Rising
With Gloria’s continuing push for a zombie-like resurrection of Charter Change exposed several weeks ago, she has no choice but to admit “supporting” moves to rewrite the Constitution. As with all half-truths, we must also recognize the lie.
She said that she would not “spearhead” the Charter Change initiative; however, how many times in history does a general physically spearhead the attack of an army? A commanding general is nearly almost always at the rear or if in a forward position have a vanguard of crack bodyguards hacking a way through.
Beware of the twisted statement, while for most of us we can see the frontline of this Orcish horde led by Local Government Officials, rest assured that behind them issuing the orders is Emperor Palpakparin herself.
Of course the assertion of her Praetors that she is not interested in extending her term beyond 2010 is a flat faced lie. Not less a lie than Gloria a year or two ago was saying that Charter Change was “dead”. Her habit of lying then stabbing in the back is obviously showing.
Tactical movements toward the Charter Change objective have already started. JDV is out (though he is still self-deluded), Local Government orcs fired the opening salvo, and the latest is Gloria’s statement of “supporting moves” in rewriting the Constitution revealed by no less than herself to Reuters seal the devil’s pact.
As such, organizing must not only go on but must be expanded, the clear and present danger patiently explained, and more people mustered against the creeping army of darkness marching towards Charter Change. We must build this up in a steady yet strong growth, let us discard the “instant gratification” syndrome, learn from the lessons of the past and renew our push against the approaching army of darkness.
from Randy David: Should bishops lead political actions?
It is a setback when we allow others, no matter what authority they think they have, to think and decide for us. We should be able to do that on our own. Until we can, we are just pawns in other people’s games.
The thing about it is, we are no longer a miserable colony. We are a sovereign nation and we have to hold ourselves responsible for our misery or happiness – no one else can be held accountable for it, not one person – we are all in the same boat. We have to accept the collective responsibility or suffer.
On Randy David’s column: but we all have to follow someone. In the light of a leadership vacuum here in the Philippines, who do we turn to?
The reason why I did not attend the rally yesterday is that I really don’t trust UNO the way it is right now. The primary players in UNO are the same people who I lost confidence in during the events leading up to Erap’s ouster (I was pleasantly surprised when the faces who led it yesterday were people I could trust).
I sincerely hope that the rally yesterday is the emergence of a third force in Philippine politics, the beginnings of a leadership which can represent true opposition against corruption and coercion in Philippine society.
why this such accusations of yours do not prosper and do not look nice to the people?
…because of the way they deliver it to the mass.
they are so “bastos” to ones personality. they do not respect ones personal self. they profess freedom and democrazy but they do not want to respect other’s freedom.
these actuation of theirs just reflect their “bad egg” in themselves.
….will you (those anti-personalities) please have some reflections? have yourselves some mirror.
jm, do not be bluff. they are still in the back ground!
they are just lurking. wanna bet?
Salamat sa mga paala-ala kahapon. Wala namang nabasagan ng ulo ano? Peaceful naman ang rally.
The best thing about the rally yesterday? No politicians!
Finally, some self-restraint from the “malapit-nang-kami-na” crowd!
UP n student,
“Every so often, think about What are my responsibilities? when thinking about freedom.”
yan ang wala sa mga Pinoy. puro freedom ang hinihingi, ayaw naman yung mga kaakibat na responsibilities.
kaya nga natatawa ako sa pangalang “Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility”. Ang media puro freedom lang ang gusto!
Oo nga pala: Media have the ‘responsibility’ to safeguard freedoms!
so what did we see yesterday? the usual noisy few..
its about time these noisy few respect also the greater majority of people who just wanted to go on with their lives..
yes lets have charter change -federalism.. so that imperial manila can not impose on us their kind of logic
Based on what the evening news said last night, only about 9,000 people showed up at that much-hyped rally in Makati. And by 7:30 p.m., Julius Babao said that a good number of rallyists had already begun dispersing. People were bored perhaps? Hmmmmmm. Is Lozada’s 15 minutes of fame almost up?
James,
Go ahead and discuss your proposal on Federalism. Maybe you dissertation would be enlightening.
BTW, in the previous proposed Charter Change; the Federalism option was bound within that same Charter (although in a somewhat sneaky approach).
If I remember right; Federalism was still going to be within the bounds of that parent Charter so it was if it was going to be through the workings of a law that will be crafted later.
The parent (proposed) Constitution would still have been the yardstick of whatever federalism was supposed to empower local units.
It might have been naive for anyone to expect yesterday’s rally to be another People Power (although that would have been nice). However, I think we may be in the stage that the country was in after the assassination of Ninoy.
In those early years, people were starting to realize the need–and work up the nerve–to resist the tyranny of the Marcos regime. Although the crowd that attended the funeral of Ninoy was very large, rallies that followed were much smaller. Many were the voices that belittled the rallies, claiming they would not amount to anything and complaining that they were just causing trouble. However, had these rallies not reminded the people constantly of the nature of the Marcos regime, I doubt that People Power 1 would ever have happened.
It is in this light that I view yesterday’s rally as an excellent start. It is first gear. If, by its corruption, the GMA administration continues to stoke this engine of outrage, the gears will shift upwards, reducing inertia and making it easier for more people to act.
Well now. Yet another typically mediocre street circus has come and gone… 😀
The problem with Bunye, et al is that they still believe or want us to believe that all this is the handiwork of the opposition or some opportunistic forces. They cannot believe in a genuine people power movement, and alam lang nila political skirmishes and deception, I pity them…
And as for those who want freedom but are not willing to work for it? Get off your lazy asses! You’ve been freeloading far too long you gutless, pitiful, spineless, bunch of cowards! Freedom with responsibility my ass! Work for it first! Then moderate it, talaga naman some lazy bastards will say anything to justify doing nothing.
Even if one does “something”, if it is not DIFFERENT from the other “somethings” done in the past, then how one earth can one expect a DIFFERENT outcome.
Kung panay ocho-ocho sa Ayala na lang ang alam natin, talagang hanggang ocho-ocho na lang talaga ang Pilipinas. 😀
Having said that, yesterday’s rally was a huge improvement over previous anti-GMA protests. The administration ignores it at its own peril.
Ika nga ni Ka Totoy Talastás ay tanggapin na lang natin ang katotohanan na hindi magbibitiw sa Presidente Gloria at hintayin na lang natin ang eleksyon sa 2010. Ang tanging magagawa natin sa dalawang natitirang taon ni Gloria sa Malakanyang ay ang bantayin ang kanyang Administrasyon at katigan ang dapat katigan at batikusin ang dapat batikusin.
Benign0, it matters that we do “something” together (i.e. in greater numbers) and with persistence. In EDSA and EDSA Dos, we may have had the numbers but once soon afterwards, we took our eye of the ball and retreated to our private lives. And then, we illogically blame the EDSAs instead of the apathy that followed for the abuses and injustices that we are witnessing. Remember that what has persisted since 2001 is apathy, not people power.
Whether she steps down in 2010 remains to be seen. The scenario I’m seeing is that she will try to ram a parliamentary system down our throats and become prime minister for life.
But assuming she does step down, in the next two years, I’d rather join rallies to “moderate their greed” than to sit quietly and embolden them to secure their golden parachutes.
“Benign0, it matters that we do “something†together (i.e. in greater numbers) and with persistence”
You know what PRODUCTIVE persistence is?
(1) Working through the proper channels and doing so PERSISTENTLY through those channels.
(2) Persisting in CONSISTENTLY voting with our heads rather than with our ocho-ocho faculties.
(3) Persistenly holding ourselves to account for the characters we VOTE for.
Persistent street circuses, on the other had, merely become amusing when done often enough..
when was the last time benign0 voted in a philippine election?
“However, I think we may be in the stage that the country was in after the assassination of Ninoy.”
To put things into perspective, economic conditions are much better at present than what they were when Ninoy was assassinated in 1983. At that time, the country was forced to declare a moratorium on its debts and the value of the Philippine peso plunged drastically to less than half of its value against the U.S. dollar. To defend the Peso, the Central Bank raised interest rates to as high as 50%. This triggered a severe recession, which lasted almost 4 years, and paved the way for mass discontent. The harsh economic conditions then prevailing provided an important element to the events leading to EDSA.
Then there was the mutiny of Enrile and Ramos, which brought in an armed element, and became the direct spark to EDSA.
So far, recent history has shown that rallies are ineffective unless two vital conditions are present:
One, is the existence of a tough economic environment.
Second, the presence of an armed component, primarily the Armed Forces, to tilt the balance of power.
Those conditions were present during EDSA. They were also present in EDSA II, since the country was still badly affected by the Asian financial crisis. During that crisis, which began in 1997, the Peso plummeted to 50% of its value against the U.S. dollar, reminiscent of 1983. The Peso dove from P25-$1 to P50-$1. The economic malaise lingered well into 2001. And yet, despite the tough economic situation, the final outcome was eventually decided only when the AFP withdrew its support from Erap.
I believe these to be very essential reasons to explain why, despite the political noise, people are reluctant to take action at the moment.
Well done Manuel, excellent post. Analysis with passion.
Here’s an idea for the revolutionary folks. Throw a couple of grenades at the crowd during the next rally. The administration will be blamed, emotions will flare, and the desired mass riots that will force the president to step down will follow.
ptt, i think that statement reflects on how much you value human life.
Hmm, I think he means working through the channels i.e. through untouchable cheats in COMELEC. The Garci scandal and Bedol issue as of yet is covered-up and unresolved… among many things.
Malacanang’s Dummy Guide to Handling Public Outrage
(OR How To Show It is in A State of PANIC!)
BAWAL MAGSIMBA Sa LASALLE!Cabinet members will be sacked!
NASAAN ANG EBIDENSIYA?Tanong ng palace spokesman(Dr.Golez)
TAKUTIN SILA NG MGA TANGKE!(military show of force)
IPADALA ANG BIR!(threat to Makati Business Club)
LAGYAN NG SPY CAMERA!
Equalizer,
Tungkol sa camera sa La Salle; para daw sa pag-monitor ng traffic ang camera… Oo, pang monitor ng traffic ng mga pumapasok na oppositionist at civil society … sa tagal na nilang pakapal ng mukha, ngayon pa sila mahihiyang aminin.
I just saw these “rallies” on TV just this minute.
Supot naman e.
Tapos panay mga Gabriela and all these Laban ng Masa (or whatever [fill-in-the-blank]-ng-masa) leftist morons who have nothing better to do than indoctrinate and politicise otherwise benign student and social organisations.
Jude:
I think we are already in a “tough economic environment”.
Nung pinapalabas yung commercial “Dama ko ang asenso”, parati kong tinatanong yung mga tao sa paligid ko lalo na kung ‘di ko kilala — dama mo ba talaga ang asenso? Only those with relatives abroad are coping well, and even they feel bad for relying too much on overseas remittance. Do you think these people feel really great when they are in a dependent condition to an “ate” or a “kuya” who is remitting money from abroad?
Just about the only cheerful people I see around are those working in call centers, and it’s hard work despite the pay — long, odd hours putting up with foreigners swearing at you over the phone. You lack sleep, you lack family time, and just about the primary thing you look forward to is the cold bottle of beer you enjoy after a long hard week. It’s not even stable work, since many of these people quit so as to eventually move on into different work, only to go back to doing call center work because it’s hard to find employment in other industries.
And this is all set in the backdrop of rising prices in goods, electricity, and oil.
In summary, you will have to look at what is behind the purported “economic gains” — those who are working in it are far from contented with their lot in life.
In these critical times, I often reread the words of the American poet Archibald Macleish:
“How shall freedom be defended? By arms when it is attacked by arms; by truth when it is attacked by lies; by democratic faith when it is attacked by authoritarian dogma. Always, and in the final act, by determination and faith.”