The Long View
Good Frodo and Evil Gollum
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:28:00 11/22/2009
IN book two of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” Celeborn, elven co-ruler of Lothl0rien, speaks directly to the readers as much as to the Fellowship when he counsels, “Do not despise the lore that has come down from distant years; for oft it may chance that old wives keep in memory word of things that once were needful for the wise to know.”
Chances are you’ve read or watched “The Lord of the Rings,” Tolkien’s saga in three volumes of how a reluctant hero is tasked with destroying a Ring of Power as a squabbling alliance of Hobbits, humans, dwarves and elves backs him up and fights titanic battles against the evil Sauron and his gruesome dark hordes. The epic is about Good and Evil, and how individuals can be one or the other, or even both, depending on the circumstances.
Some months ago Jim Paredes quipped that Noynoy Aquino is like the reluctant Hobbit hero Frodo Baggins, and that all those flocking to his aid and assistance are like the motley cast of characters that comprised the Fellowship of the Ring.
Tolkien the narrator observes of hobbits, as much as of men, of people in books as much as of people in real life, that “There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow.”
In Book Two, the message is amplified in an exchange between Gimli the dwarf and the elf Elrond, representatives of races that do not like each other but now allied in a common quest, yet the two still disagree on how to approach the physical and even moral perils of their quest.
“Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens,” the action-oriented Gimli starts off. Elrond the jaded elf replies, “Maybe, but let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the nightfall.” Gimli counters, “Yet sworn word may strengthen quaking heart,” only for Elrond to pragmatically respond by saying, “Or break it.” This is the eternal conflict between purists and realists.
At a time when there’s a general desire to see righteousness reign in our politics, there is too great a danger of self-righteousness intruding its discordant voice, insisting, on one hand, on impossible standards for individuals while ignoring the need for a common cause to confront the greater danger. This is the danger of pride substituting for true conscientiousness.
Quite early on in Book One of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” in the second chapter, the reluctant Frodo and the wizard Gandalf discuss Gollum, the deranged previous holder of the Ring of Power from whom Frodo’s uncle, Bilbo, had taken the ring; throughout the saga Gollum represents the problem of Frodo the Good, requiring the at times sincere, and most other times, deceitful, assistance of the generally Evil Gollum.
From the very start, Frodo thinks it’s a bad thing to have to engage the help of bad people and tells Gandalf, “He deserves death.” Gandalf’s answer is instructive, laying down a theme that will persist to the end of the saga, as he repeatedly counsels the members of the Fellowship of the Ring against the perils of confusing the righteousness of their cause with the pride of self-righteousness.
“Deserves it! I daresay he does,” Gandalf agrees; but adds, “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies, but there is a chance of it. And he is bound up with the fate of the Ring. My heart tells me that he has some part to play yet, for good or ill, before the end; and when that comes, the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many – yours not least.”
Tolkien repeatedly returns to this theme of redemption – whether partial or complete – for the bad, or the merely confused, a possibility that should temper the self-righteousness of characters themselves fully capable of departing – temporarily but at times, disastrously – from the path of righteousness. Pride, he perpetually points out, feeds the divisions self-righteousness creates and which harms Good and promotes Evil.
As the elf Haldir of Lorien, responding to the bickering and simmering tensions between allies, points out in another chapter of Book Two: “In nothing is the power of the Dark Lord more clearly shown than in the estrangement that divides all those who still oppose him.”
Gandalf himself, in Book Three, returns to the basic lesson Haldir propounded: “We are all friends here. Or should be; for the laughter of Mordor will be our only reward, if we quarrel.” Something he returns to again, much later on in Book Five, where once again self-righteousness has provoked discord and to which his reply is, “Let us remember that a traitor may betray himself and do good that he does not intend. It can be so, sometimes.”
Hope is what enabled Good to conquer Evil – for at the heart of hope is the humility to give all a chance to help fight Evil, without sneering at motives. A humility based on belief in redemption for those who once served Evil. Frodo could not do it alone, he needed help; help came from all quarters and much of it tainted by mixed motives as shown by the thoroughly bad Gollum.
Every character wrestled with the dilemma of fighting for Good yet being confronted by Evil, internal and external. Hope subdued pride, humility fostered unity and trust in Good allowed individuals as well as kingdoms to conquer the Ultimate Evil, Sauron.
As the fair elven Galadriel had told the impatient dwarf Gimli in Book Two, “I do not foretell, for all foretelling is now vain: on the one hand lies darkness, and on the other only hope. But if hope should not fail, then I say to you, Gimli son of Gloin, that your hands shall flow with gold, and yet over you gold shall have no dominion.”
Eh, saan na ang mga maaangas ng Maynila, saan na ang mga lovers of free speech ng middle class? When we need to be vocal we fall silent, but froth in the mouth when all that happened was a broken nail. Yan talaga puro yabang pa-sigaw sigaw kunwari matapang magmura. Eto ngayon, warlord din katulad ng mga Pangandamans.
Ang totoo nyan eh kaya naman ng maski sibilyan lumaban sa mga katulad nitong mga ampatuan. Unlike the Abus and the MILF, they’re not trained soldiers. Pero sa kanila kasi ang autoridad. What we need is for the civil sector to pressure Malacanang. I don;t feel that we are putting enough attention in this. MLQ3 said he think we are responsive enough to this inhuman loss of human life. I personally think the middle class just wants this to go away, unprocessed. Something like this happens, folks, you gotta think and feel about it. Napaka bobo byo naman if you think this will just go away. This needs to be hammered into something resembling a just structure.
Demcracy needs to be asserted or even foisted in. Right now, unfortunately, the populace is the only keeper and enabler of democracy, not the duly elected government. You say the Internet is power, show it.
Because if they don;t listen then I’m afraid some of us will just have to go away while those who cannot have to fight. You do not just explain your side to Barbarians, you have to fight them.
Nick, I would agree with you up to a point. Two points I’d like to make-
1. Marcos was the ultimate pragmatist of course, who skillfully mastered geopolitics to squeeze out all the benefits he could from the US in the form of foreign aid, multilateral and commercial loans. Unfortunately, we can see how he squandered that opportunity with his crookedness.
2. To lead 90M people takes not only managerial competence, but inspirational leadership. One area where pragmatic idealism produces results is in the trust department by creating social capital. There is so much gridlock at the moment because citizens do not trust the state. That is why pure pragmatism is not enough.
The kind of people who support Noynoy are those starstruck ignoramuses who try to force parallelisms between this pathetic saga of his to dramatic telenovela-like stories and fantasy books. They like to think that a happy ending will inevitably ensue if their protagonist exhibits the same characteristics as their fairy tale heroes. This forced association between Noynoy and Frodo can only be described as the work of a retard. I do not expound because if you read the piece everything will be self explanatory as long as you know how to think.
The Cusp,
Actually as far Marcos was “pragmatic”, he wasn’t as pragmatic as he should have been because he ultimately got kicked out for not delivering on what matters most to the entire society (which most people don’t consciously realize, but their stomachs do) — THE ECONOMY.
Marcos failed on that because his economic policy was based on taking on massive international loans which he “loaned” to his drinking and golfing buddies (his “cronies”) who ideally were supposed to develop the economy. Unfortunately, they didn’t deliver, and instead they kept creating companies that merely had paperwork and a facade, but no real operations. That explains why the first few years of Martial Law were relatively ok because right after getting those loans and passing them on to his friends, they were spending part of the money to put up their “show.” But after that, they produced nothing, produced no real profits, and the debts eventually could not be repaid to the international creditors, leading on to what became the economic crisis of the early 1980’s – leading on to Noynoy’s father’s death, further triggering the massive currency devaluation that was due to happen to the non-payment of loans in the first place.
Why did Marcos fail? Because he chose the wrong cronies. As soon as he saw that some cronies weren’t up to task, he should have immediately replaced them and reassigned more able people. But he didn’t do that. He valued loyalty and friendship more than delivering on results. Alternatively, he could have just focused his loans on developing major public physical infrastructure, then massively invited foreign investors like what Singapore did. But alas, he didn’t do that.
In the end, we have a pragmatist in Marcos who wasn’t pragmatic enough to do what had to be done in order to DELIVER THE GOODS (Real Economic Development) so that he could stay in power and thus his failure therefore meant economic crisis leading to an internal power struggle (which prompted Ninoy to come back to the Philippines to “discuss with Marcos”, but got him killed instead) and then Marcos’ ouster.
As I said, a real pragmatist would know what he needs to do in order to stay in power, and more often than not, that means DELIVERING THE GOODS.
Marcos was pragmatic, but sad to say, he was NOT PRAGMATIC ENOUGH.
Having a REAL PRAGMATIST, therefore is a good thing… Having a REAL PRAGMATIC IDEALIST would be the best thing, because such a pragmatist would not merely be content to deliver “just enough” to keep himself in power, but would, perhaps, seek to deliver spectacular results for the greater good of the majority (and that’s where the IDEALISM comes in: doing what you do not just for yourself, but also for others).
As for the ordinary people, my point is that if everyone (or at least the majority of Filipinos) learned to be pragmatic as well, then we would all demand results from our leaders – whom, if we are pragmatic enough to choose equally pragmatic leaders – would be forced to deliver on them because of the people’s results-orientation.
But alas, Pinoys are too lazy to analyze things based on results. Everyone just wants to look at intentions.
Heck, even MLQ3 is too lazy to answer my questions and wants me to scour through his blog just as he wants ordinary people to go through all the disparate piecemeal statements of each and every candidate in order to have an idea of what each candidate stands for.
*
MLQ3, you’re not wiggling out of this one. What’s your stand on Noynoy?
Are you for or against him?
What are your answers to the assumptions I made about you? True or False? 😉
Hmmmm… Now I’m curious as well, MLQ3. Can you be a bit more categorical with your position on Noynoy’s candidacy in terms of what his pitch means not just to you but to the society he aims to govern from 2010 to 2016?
If you ask Noynoy what his position is on a specific matter, do you want the same kind of answer you’ve been giving here? “Go find it among my writings…”?
To be fair, we as voters are in a position to DEMAND that our politicians serve the information to us in a structured form that makes their positions clear.
You don’t have to MLQ3 because you are a writer, not a politician answerable to voters, and your published body of work is there for all to dissect and mine for meaning.
But then there is also the option to step up and respond to these simple True-or-False questions.
hello.
seconding some previous visitors’ requests, i would like real “long view” thorough answers from you, not a noynoy style answer like
bullet points would help, if preferred.
thanks.
There’s a number of obvious, easily-expressed problems facing this country that will fall to the next president to solve, for example:
–There is a lack of peace and order.
–There are too many people who do not have enough to eat.
–There are too many people who do not have gainful employment.
–The government has an insufficient income, and that which it does have is managed poorly.
–There is widespread corruption and lack of regard for law and consistent procedures in public and private institutions at all levels.
–The population is growing at a rate beyond the abilities of the country to support them.
And so on, I could add more but let’s not belabor the point. These are enough to start, because they are all problems that the current and past administrations have failed to effectively address. Forget the head-in-the-clouds nonsense coming from the mouths of most of the candidates. Forget concepts that do not put food on tables, roofs over heads, and desks in classrooms like “clean governance” and “uniting the people” and “strengthening democracy.” Forget that all the candidates say they will address these and other problems — that’s a given, of course they will. What’s important is HOW.
The problem I see with the candidates — I think it’s a rather acute problem for Senator Aquino, but I’m not necessarily singling him out in this — is that they are ignoring the basics. They are thinking about the top three levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy, when the two larger, fundamental ones below are not yet sufficiently managed. You can’t decorate a penthouse in a building with no foundation or ground floor, no?
So then, since you are a far more articulate advocate for Senator Aquino than the candidate is himself, how does he intend to address these fundamental problems? We already know he will, he said so. So did everyone else. What, specifically, sets him apart and gives him superiority over any other candidate?
If there are no answers for those questions, then on what basis should anyone prefer him over anyone else?
As I said, I’m not singling anyone out, and I certainly realize that the same question can — and will — be posed to Senator Villar and his supporters, Mr. Teodoro and his supporters, and all the others. But you’re the Aquino man, or at least the most literate among them, so you get the call: In terms that make sense to my under-educated, working-their-butts-off-just-to-feed-themselves neighbors can understand, what will Senator Aquino do to make their lives better?
maybe mlq3 is now with villar or gibo? or perlas?
My understanding is you will be able to look at his platform when he files his candidacy papers. My understanding is other candidates intend to do likewise, too.
I’m sure that Manolo can more than adequately answer all of the challenges you’ve raised as he is The Explainer held in high regard by my friends. In fact I want to see for myself how well he responds to your questions, because when he does we will see in no unclear terms everything that a second Aquino presidency will bring.
Simply, i do not understand what you are trying to say in this article.
Can you make it more plain?
As you see, if you intending this for all Filipinos of all social, intellectual levels then you are speaking your mind in a level where only a part of the whole will be able to understand it.
A righteous man full of information (as yourself) will speak his mind not in rhetorics or analogies which only a handful can allude to but in full and specific statements that the lowliest of man will understand.
This way, they (the readers, the personalities involved, and all others) can understand what the f*** you are talking about
and can answer in specifics to only the items you have referred too and not unravel a whole shitload of crap that is not related to your topic. You as the writer will probably feel more fulfilled if this happens.
Andy, sorry, the point I wanted to make was made precisely in the manner I wanted to make it.
Nick MacYavelley and his elementary display of his latest study of a 15th century philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli below.
MLQ3,
Here are my assumptions about you:
1. You are a supporter of Noynoy. True or False?
2. You are well-informed. True or False?
3. You are intelligent. True or False?
4. You are not stupid. True or False?
5. You are not clueless. True or False?
Explain which assumptions are FALSE, Mr. Explainer.
===============================================================
Nick, we are already in the 21st century and you are still trying to understand the works of a long forgotten 15th century man and hastily apply it on a very patient and credible professional writer as MLQ3.
It never works. Needless to say we are in the era of multiple choices.
Instead you can research Germany war history and straighten out its realism (compare it to your claim) rather than messing with MLQ.
“My understanding is you will be able to look at his platform when he files his candidacy papers. My understanding is other candidates intend to do likewise, too.”
So you’ve said, on more than one occasion, I believe. Fair enough. It’s my understanding that filing will occur on Saturday, so that by Monday (I understand Mr. Aquino is a regular church-goer, so we’ll cut him some slack for Sunday) we should have his (or the LP’s, which would also be ‘his’) platform. Is that an accurate interpretation? And, since the SC ruling has eliminated the ‘campaign period’, is it also a reasonable expectation that he will entertain questions about his platform?
I’m sorry but this is rather unclear to me (maybe because I’m no LOTR fan?) so I was hoping for clear key points I could tell my lolas who’ve become cynical.
Hey d0d0ng,
I don’t really get what you’re trying to say, but Machiavelli is not only not long-forgotten, but is a regular study resource for anyone with even a casual interest in politics. Along with many other writers you might consider “inappropriate” for the 21st century. You should try reading some. And include some German history while you’re at it, because Mr. MacYavelley is, despite his rather cringe-inducing nickname, reasonably accurate in his generalization.
I forgot to quote what was unclear.
“Andy, sorry, the point I wanted to make was made precisely in the manner I wanted to make it.”
That didn’t help me at all.
67xray on, “You should try reading some. And include some German history while you’re at it, because Mr. MacYavelley is, despite his rather cringe-inducing nickname, reasonably accurate in his generalization”
===============================================================
Ben Kritz, you are not at all that smart as you flouted in your blog. Before you open your mouth, it would have been better if you read Nick MacYavelley posting above for his claim and screwed up Germany history.
That is big “If” in if you are that smart per your claim. You need all the luck with your “Consulting” business.
dodong = mlq3?
d0d0ng,
Where exactly is my analysis of Germany screwed up? The fact is, the Germans were hurting too much from the effects of the Treaty of Versailles, as the punishment placed on it was indeed too harsh, so much so that Germany’s economy just couldn’t take it. And as usual, crisis gets people very emotional.
While the Germans can be some of the most logical and “coldly analytical” people, they are still human beings with emotions. The effects of the crisis they experienced made it easy for their emotions to be played with. That being said, the rhetoric that Hitler then used on them very clearly resonated with their predisposition to want to hear something that would make them feel good and find a convenient scapegoat for their difficulties.
Now, if the Germans HAD NOT BEEN SUSCEPTIBLE TO EMOTIONAL MANIPULATION – so that they remained coldly skeptical and logical, then maybe they would not have been seduced by Nazi rhetoric delivered convincingly by Hitler.
If you could speak German (obviously you can’t, neither can Manolo, just look at how he didn’t know that the umlauted u {ü} should definitely be spelled as a “ue” when using a diaresis-less character set) and watch the videos of his speeches, you could actually feel his passion being extremely contagious. MLQ3 definitely needs to read up more on German history, IMHO, and sign up for a class at Goethe Institut so that he gets the basics of German down pat and refrains from trying to show-off some the non-existent German he knows.
You should too, d0d0ng. 😉
*
So, what say you, d0d0ng?
And why are you doing the fighting for Manolo anyway?
Is he too much of a sissy to come here and answer the questions he should be answering himself?
d0d0ng,
Okay genius. Teach me German history. Did Hitler manipulate German feelings towards the Versaille Treaty, the terrible economic conditions, and the unstable and ineffective Weimar government to his and the Nationalist Socialist Party’s advantage, or did he not? And if he didn’t, please explain what he did. Because what’s-his-name actually approached making that point (although not as clearly as I just did), and so far all we’ve gotten out of you are insults and a lot of hot air.
I was under the impression that Mr. Quezon tended a blog that was not routinely trolled by your sort, and I am rather disappointed to have been mistaken. Since I don’t find him disagreeable even if I disagree with him, I’ll refrain from calling you the spineless jackass you really are here, and you’re welcome to come over to my page to go a few rounds.
Nick, let me post it again.
“You screwed up Germany history by stating that Germans being impractical and unrealistic were easily seduced by Hitler. Tsk, tsk. It is completely the opposite. Germany’s economy was a total disaster following WW1 and the world demand for war reparation. Being practical and realistic, Germans embraced Nazism for Hitler’s solution to food shortage, hyperinflation and unemployment.”
Nick, you cannot come to somebody’s place and call a person names. Why don’t you try to make statements based on facts or you are just short of it and resorted to dirty personal attacks.
Or you cannot understand that I can speak an opinion which happens to be favorable to MLQ but still my own opinion wether you like it or not.
d0d0ng,
Okay, now you’re making a little more sense, but that other guy wasn’t TOTALLY off the mark, either. Read William Shirer; Hitler told the Germans exactly what they wanted to hear, and if they had listened a little more with their heads than their hearts, they would have seen through a lot of his glowing promises. And, not to completely lay them blame on them, he did actually follow through, for a while. But the Nazi economic system was a house of cards, not to mention the racial ideas, and plenty of objective observers – such as Shirer – could see it easily enough.
Still, no reason for you to be rude. I’m sure the owner of this blog is man enough to speak up for himself, if his honor has been impugned by one of his visitors.
Andy Diaz on, “Simply, i do not understand what you are trying to say in this article.”
Then this article is not for you.
Andy Diaz on, “As you see, if you intending this for all Filipinos of all social, intellectual levels then you are speaking your mind in a level where only a part of the whole will be able to understand it.”
Then obviously, you can read that it is not the intention.
Andy Diaz on, “A righteous man full of information (as yourself) will speak his mind not in rhetorics or analogies which only a handful can allude to but in full and specific statements that the lowliest of man will understand.”
Go read your bible. Jesus speaks of rhetorics or analogies in parable.
Let me borrow your “what the f*** you are talking about” to tell a person to do according to your (let me borrow again) “whole shitload of crap “.
😉
“Still, no reason for you to be rude. I’m sure the owner of this blog is man enough to speak up for himself, if his honor has been impugned by one of his visitors.”
You are barking at the wrong tree. Please read again all the postings above and see who is rude.
Actually, MLQ3 has nothing to prove to you. But then from a person who announced his profile “Too smart for my own damn good”, you have personality issues of proving yourself. That is really bad especially if you are in consulting.
d0d0ng,
Look at what you said:
“Germany’s economy was a total disaster following WW1 and the world demand for war reparation. Being practical and realistic, Germans embraced Nazism for Hitler’s solution to food shortage, hyperinflation and unemployment.â€
Everything there except for one part is wrong. You were right – and saying the exact same thing I said when you said:
1. Germany’s economy was a total disaster following WW1 (I said that way up there, you’re just mouthing it again)
2. …and the world demand for war reparation – I said that again when I mentioned the Treaty of Versailles imposing much on the German economy. So what the f*ck is your problem? You’re saying the exact same things I was saying.
The problem started when you said:
“Being practical and realistic, Germans embraced Nazism for Hitler’s solution to food shortage, hyperinflation and unemployment.â€
That’s where you totally went off the wrong route, d0d0 *este* d0d0ng.
I did say that the Germans are normally logical and analytical people – which of course means they’d normally be practical and realistic. But the Germans did not embrace Nazism because they felt that Hitler’s solution to food shortage, hyperinflation and unemployment was practical and realistic.
Instead, if you or MLQ3 were intelligent enough and able to analyze history (or human nature) properly, the both of you would know that:
1. Major crisis (economic or otherwise) can breed emotionalism because people become extremely desperate and cling to anything that can give them hope or alleviate their despair, sadness, and depression.
2. Demagogues can feed on the emotional fragility of the ordinary people in times of crisis to seduce them with rhetoric that makes them feel good and puts the responsibility for all the bad that happens to them to an external source or to a source within their population that is increasingly isolated from the mainstream and misrepresented as being outsiders.
3. Extreme Emotionalism IS NOT practical nor realistic because extreme emotionalism IS NOT LOGICAL nor RATIONAL. Remember, d0d0ng – as well as you MLQ3 – that when a demagogue MAKES APPEALS TO EMOTION and when people BUY IT (subscribe to the emotionally-charged ideological preaching), they cease to be practical and realistic because their emotionalism strips them of their ability to think logically and rationally.
*
This is why you – d0d0ng and MLQ3 – have a very mistaken view of German History. You very erroneously and stupidly try to misrepresent the Weimar Crisis-era Germans as being “practical and realistic which is why they embraced Nazism.
Who taught you what you know of history, d0d0ng? Did MLQ3 teach you that crap?
Germans embraced Nazism because they were feeling low & depressed and then came Hitler preaching a very FEEL GOOD Ideology that told the Germans that they had to be proud of who they were because they were “special people” and that the only reason that they were suffering a crisis was because of the scheming manipulations done by an international network of Jews outside & INSIDE Germany.
67xray has given you the name of the author of an extremely authoritative book: The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich – a copy of which, by the way, was found in Ferdinand Marcos’ bedroom the night he fled Malacañang.
Read it and learn your lessons anew. And please tell your teacher MLQ3 the new lessons you’ve learned.
There was nothing pragmatic/practical, realistic, logical, or rational causing the Germans to embrace Nazism. It was precisely because they dropped all reason and logic (and thus dropped pragmatism/realism) because they were emotionally-manipulated by Hitler’s rhetoric which made them feel good about themselves at a time when the Financial Crisis, hyperinflation, lack of jobs, food shortage, caused them to have self-doubt, depression, sadness, anomie, low self-esteem, and so many other negative feelings.
You really are MLQ3’s disciple, huh?
Very faithful and dedicated to your master. I admire your dedication.
I noticed the note that someone made up there identifying you as MLQ3, and you know, it makes sense…
You only do seem to pop out of nowhere whenever MLQ3 is hopelessly unable to defend his views, especially when real intellectuals far more informed and more logical than he is totally tear his views apart.
Anyway d0d0ng, maybe you are MLQ3, maybe you’re not.
But you know, we’re all waiting for MLQ3 to be man enough to answer the questions himself instead of smugly pretending that he has more important things to do.
MLQ3, like it or not, has a following because of his name. Unfortunately, his hogwash harms the Philippines because he misleads a lot of the ordinary not-so-well-read people to take on the wrong ideas and the wrong advocacies.
Take his pro-Noynoy stand, for instance. Everyone who uses his/her brain knows that Noynoy is going to be a lousy leader. Everyone with half a brain knows that Noynoy is going to be a puppet of the old oligarchy, especially of the Lopezes and other old rich hacendero families just like his Cojuangco clan. Everyone who knows a thing or two knows that Noynoy is nothing but a “status-quo” keep-the-people-poor kind of guy. And even Noynoy’s supporters know that Noynoy does not have Ninoy’s eloquence nor intelligence, nor does Noynoy have his mother’s charm and charisma.
Noynoy, just like MLQ3, just happens to have a name.
Pareho pa silang THE THIRD!
Benigno S. Aquino III
Manuel L. Quezon III
But in fairness to MLQ3, at least MLQ3 is very well read, and very articulate. Marunong mag-explain and *well* MAMBOLA too. But Noynoy? He is utterly tongue-tied! Di makasalita ng tama. Laging bulol!
So d0d0ng, please get your master, MLQ3 to answer the question which I pose to him here:
MLQ3, knowing that you are intelligent and well-informed, why are you an advocate of Noynoy Aquino who is known to be an underachiever, and uninspiring leader, someone who has never really been a leader, a person who can’t make decisions properly, and person who doesn’t really read a lot because he knows so little?
Is there something you know, MLQ3, that we don’t know? Please tell us what that is that we don’t know.
Because it is clear that the Philippines, under Noynoy, will be a disaster, and you will be blamed as one of those who KNEW THAT HE WAS NOT GOING TO DELIVER but actively propped him up as the “nation’s hope” and sold him to the public as the SAVIOR of the Philippines ANYWAY.
I can tell they’re the same person by the display their individual thought processes progressing in like manner despite d0d0ng being shown as hostile unlike MLQ3’s usual self.
If this isn’t true then MLQ3 himself should be able to carry on with this debate without a certain “d0d0ng” creating a diversion.
After all, some people have expressed confidence in MLQ3 to be able to stand up for himself.
If this gets deleted, I’ll know the answer.
If d0d0ng tries to butt in again, it’ll give more weight to my observation.
If MLQ3 does take on each of the questions posed head-on, then he’ll secure his credibility a while longer.
i’d really like to hear manolo’s clarifications and insights so anybody else answering for him does him no good.it’s a very reasonable request.
jen, no offense but you seem to have been talking to the hand since last night. better rethink your misguided admiration if you don’t get a reply soon. i’d be disappointed too if i were conveniently ignored.
i’m beginnng to think noynoy isn’t really the opportunist in this scenario. it is those in his inner circle who are pushing him to run who are really looking to take advantage. this is actually one of my fears — that noynoy will just be a puppet.
considering his performance in the isang tanong forum, the more i think noynoy is not up to the task of leading others. of course my view of him may still change but only if he’d give me a chance to know what his plans are.
as for prominent people putting in a good word for noynoy, i feel that those who have great influence should be more circumspect in what they say about the senator. the least they could do is guide people and encourage them to choose their leaders well using their brains and not just their gut feel.
see, these are the false assumptions and conclusions i object to. you’re free to read what i’ve written and what i’ll be writing, just as i’m free not to play by your rigged rules.
Intellectual Hypocrites!!! You can not get the Results you expect to be without the people’s support. We don’t need eloquent, impressive speakers for President. We badly needed change that’s why we need a President who can be a Catalyst of CHANGE, one who can bring back DECENCY in the government, one who can act as a beacon light of HOPE and INSPIRATION, one who can serve as the rallying point for the people’s renewed TRUST and FAITH in the Government. These are what we and MLQ3 see in Noynoy Presidency for it is then and only then can we say that we can truly move forward to attain the results Mr. Macyavelley is yearning to see. We don’t need SOBRANG GALING at TALINO, SOBRANG SIPAG at TIYAGA at SOBRANG MAKAMAERAP.Tama na sa amin ANG MAKADIYOS AT MAKATAO, if that is romanticism to you. You can’t question our preference!!!
engr. jojo,
how sure are you noynoy is “the president who can be a Catalyst of CHANGE, one who can bring back DECENCY in the government, one who can act as a beacon light of HOPE and INSPIRATION, one who can serve as the rallying point for the people’s renewed TRUST and FAITH in the Government?”
please enlighten us.
intellectual hypocrites? are you saying voters who demand more from candidates because they are not easily convinced by platitudes, slogans and dramatic events are being hypocritical? i thought that is just being wise.
I’m disappointed by the responses posted by Manolo. I had so much expectation but the way this thread went, as with every other pro-Noynoy site that got its assertions challenged, the pro-Noynoy side always came up short both in substance or in adequately debating with people who disagree. I couldn’t join the conversation because even my smarter friends got stumped themselves.
Manolo, you had a real chance at showing everybody how much you deserve the credit everyone gives you as The Explainer, myself included, but you chose to let it slip like that. Never mind what your grandfather said; I had faith in what YOU could impart to all of us, because maybe your ability to communicate would make everything about Noynoy clear, and prove that we supporters of Noynoy don’t have our beliefs misplaced.
I’m really disappointed. This makes me doubt a lot of things about what’s been said about Noynoy everywhere.
Engr. Jojo, perhaps they’re not intellectual hypocrites after all. If they’re going to help people like me pick the best choices in next year’s elections, I’m listening to them from now on. Let’s admit it, even we don’t have all the answers.
I’m sorry to disappoint you, Jen. But I’m not about to play in the sandbox prepared by the others. However if you’d like a frank dialogue, by all means, please pose your questions and I’ll do my best to answer you, specifically.
MLQ3,
Why don’t you just admit that you’re totally stumped because you’ve painted yourself into a corner.
No one rigged anything, Manolo. You are the one that acts as Noynoy’s supporter, but when I and others ask you to substantiate your reasons for choosing a loser and uninspiring person to act as leader, you fold and use your sock-puppet d0d0ng to do your dirty work.
You’ve fooled people like this Jojo clown who – like stupid and totally clueless people – are like mice and lemmings led by the Pied Piper (YOU) to fall off the cliff.
Now answer the f*cking questions, Manolo!
By the way, guests like myself can’t rig the sandbox YOU OWN. This is your turf. By all means, spread your wings, Manolo. Prove us wrong.
Answer the f*cking questions!
nick, ask me person to person and not as a snarky s.ob. and maybe i will. otherwise, you’re free to express yourself but i’m free not to engage you when you demand a handshake after spitting on the palm of your hand.
Ok, MLQ3, fair enough. I am an S.O.B. because you were being unfairly evasive and did not answer simple questions.
Alright, I won’t heap insults on you any further…
MLQ3,
I’ve washed my hands, I’ve bathed, I’ve put hand sanitizer alcogel on my hands, and they’re now clean.
I haven’t spit on them, and now that I got your attention (and everyone’s been waiting for you to give them an answer), I very very respectfully…
ask you…
…to answer
…my question:
“Manuel L. Quezon III, it is obvious that the Philippines needs – at its helm – a leader who knows what he needs to do and knows how to do what he needs to do. Given that Noynoy Aquino is quite obviously not the type of leader who knows what he needs to do, neither does he know how to do what he needs to do…
…Why are you supporting his candidacy?
Can you explain to all of us how Noynoy Aquino will be able to be a good leader who will deliver on the most necessary and most important aspect of the country: Improving its Economy in order to alleviate the massive poverty that pervades?
Maybe you know something we all don’t know. So please enlighten us, MLQ3.
I respectfully ask this of you, because Noynoy himself is unable to do so at all (he can’t explain why he’s the best choice) and since you support his candidacy and happen to be one of the most vocal – and most articulate – of his supporters, the task falls on you to explain it.
I humbly and respectfully ask you to answer the questions that I and many others have raised regarding the Noynoy issue, and please refrain from avoid answering the questions by dismissing them with “the assumptions are wrong.”
Mr. Quezon, in case you would wish to use that as your reason for refusing to answer the questions asked of you, you should at the very least explain to us why you think the “assumptions are wrong.”
Yours truly,
Nick MacYavelley
Genius, History Buff, Theoretician”
kay mr. president manny villar, tiyak tayo na hindi ang mga nasa likoran (hal. sumusuporta na may mga personal interest)ang magpapatakbo ng gobyerno… makatwid siya ay HINDI PANG “FRONTPAGE ” lamang . o di kaya ay may ilang gumagamit lamang ng kanyang kasikatan (mga nagbabakasakali na manalo). at HGIT SA LAHAT SIAY AY PURONG TBONG PILIPINAS!(PURE FILIPINO, KAYA PURE MAKA-PILIPINO)
VILLAR SEGURADO TAYO NA MAKA-PURE FILIPINO( KATUTUBO NG MGA PULONG PILIPINAS)
so vote wisely !… VILLAR FOR KATUTUBONG FILIPINOS’S PRESIDENT !!!
kay mr. president manny villar, tiyak tayo na hindi ang mga nasa likoran (hal. sumusuporta na may mga personal interest)ang magpapatakbo ng gobyerno… makatwid siya ay HINDI PANG “FRONTPAGE ” lamang . o di kaya ay may ilang gumagamit lamang ng kanyang kasikatan (mga nagbabakasakali na manalo). DAHIL TIYAK TAYO NA MAY SARILI SIYANG SAPAT NA KAKAYAHAN NA MAMUNO! at HGIT SA LAHAT SIYA AY PURONG TUBONG PILIPINAS!(PURE FILIPINO, KAYA PURE MAKA-PILIPINO)
SARILING ATIN ANG DAPAT UNAHING PAGYAMANIN AT PAUNLARIN , BAGO ANG SA MGA DAYUHAN LAMANG SA ATIN!!! BE A TRUE NACIONALISTA!!!
KATUTUBO NG BANSANG ITO ANG SIYANG DAPAT NA UNANG PAUNLARIN !!!
SIPAG AT TIYAG WALANG IMPOSIBLE!!!
so vote wisely !…
marc,
ano muna plano ni villar? ano ang mga specifics ng kanyang sipag at tiyaga campaign?
siyanga pala may napansin ako sa isa niyang political ad na hindi ko nagustuhan. may isang karakter doon na nagsabi ng linyang halos ganito “mapalad sila kasi ipinanganak silang mayaman.” hindi yun ang eksakto pero yun ang mensahe.
hindi ako sangayon dito. ganyan ba ang mensaheng ipapakalat ni villar. parang hindi tama dahil bago pa man ang sipag ang tiyaga mas mahalaga ang pagkakaroon ng tamang “mindset.” ang linyang nabanggit ko sa taas ay maling “mindset.” kung tutuusin ganyan nga ang mindset ng maraming mahihirap ngayon.
alam naman natin na isinama ang linyang iyon sa kanyang ad para patamaan ang ibang mga kandidato partikular marahil si gilbert teodoro. ganunpaman hindi ako sangayon sa ganyang estilo. sa paggamit niya ng naturang linya sa kanyang ad para na rin niyang pinalalawig ang maling pagiisip na isa sa mga dahilan kung bakit hindi umaasenso ang mga mahihirap.
Engineer Jonathan Francisco,
(I have seen your website, so I know who you are)
You really are a piece of intellectually challenged work, aren’t you?
When you said that:
1. “We don’t need eloquent, impressive speakers for President.”
2. We don’t need SOBRANG GALING at TALINO, SOBRANG SIPAG at TIYAGA at SOBRANG MAKAMAERAP”
…do you realize that you basically admit that:
1. Noynoy is not ELOQUENT
2. Noynoy is not an IMPRESSIVE SPEAKER
3. Noynoy is not VERY COMPETENT (sobrang galing)
4. Noynoy is not VERY INTELLIGENT (sobrang talino)
5. Noynoy is not VERY HARD WORKING (sobrang sipag)
6. Noynoy is not VERY DILIGENT (tiyaga)
(what is “MAKAMAERAP?” – that doesn’t exist as a word)
But guess what, since you loudly proclaim and admit to the world that Noynoy is none of the above and is merely:
1. Religious – Makadiyos
2. Pro-people – Makatayo
the question is HOW WILL NOYNOY translate his religiosity and so-called “pro-people” stand into something tangible that benefits the Filipino People and the Philippines as a whole?
HOW, Engineer Jojo?
Are you really an Engineer? Because if you really are an Engineer, then you should think about the HOW, and not just the “what does he say” question.
HOW and WHY are questions that Engineers preoccupy themselves with, and since you have no interest in those questions, then it is clear that you are a sub-standard “engineer.” You only care about platitudes, and nothing about TANGIBLE RESULTS.
Guess what, Engineer Jonathan Francisco…
It is because of people like you who don’t care about tangible results that you choose losers like Noynoy to lead the country that causes the country to be a major FAILURE.
We all want a country that moves forward and succeeds.
The question is HOW. And your lack of interest in asking the question HOW or finding answers to the question HOW is why Philippine Society is the way it is.
You said so yourself, Jojo. You admitted yourself that Noynoy is incompetent, unintelligent, not hardworking, not diligent, and you admit that he cannot express his vision for a better philippines clearly enough. (don’t deny it, Jojo, you painted yourself into a corner!)
So Noynoy can’t answer the question on HOW to make the country better, but even “WHAT HIS VISION FOR A BETTER PHILIPPINES” itself is unclear because he can’t even express it properly – BULOL siya! so what the hell is your real reason for supporting Noynoy?
Admit it: You have no reason. Everything is just about emotionalism and sentimentality.
Everything that keeps you rooting for Noynoy is all WISHFUL THINKING.
It’s a fantasy, Jojo, and while it feels good to “fantasize”, without a clear vision of what a better Philippines should look like and without a HOW-TO-GET-THERE plan on how to achieve that vision, Noynoy will win the election, but fail to deliver.
In the end, even you will be disappointed and miserable.
And you will be bowing your heads in shame in front of those of us who said “TOLD YOU SO.”
Noynoy = Empty Promises = Disappointment = Failure to Deliver
Noynoy = A Lousy Philippines
*
If you disagree, please say why, Jojo.
(And MLQ3, if you want, please help Jojo answer. Share your point of view…)
Well the LP platform is out now. So the question is “What’s next?”
Meanwhile many who have come on board with a better appreciation of the role platforms play in an election are now sharpening their pencils for the task ahead – evaluating this platform and framing future engagement with Noynoy and Mar with it.
The question is, will Noynoy be a good party member — and good presidential candidate — and run with his party platform?
What do you think MLQ3? Or do you think I have spit on my hand as well? 😉
Read again. That’s not the LP platform. That’s the platform of Noynoy’s campaign, specifically -the plan of government. The distinction is important because LP is only part of the broader coalition supporting his campaign. I think engaging on the platform will be healthy and he was the first candidate to publicize his platform.
Wow, this is all too funny. People of the world, it is all very simple. We all have our preferred candidates. There is no need to impose your standards/beliefs on others. If you think Noynoy is not fit to be president, then DO NOT vote for him. Why waste your time arguing with people who feel otherwise. I really find it funny that you have to scrutinize every single bit that Noynoy is or does. Who are you guys voting for anyway?
I am personally supporting Noynoy because i see him as a man of integrity and honesty. Isang taong alam kong hindi magnanakaw at gagawa ng katiwalian. Am i sure of that? No. Is it enough for him to be president? Of course not. Is he really up to the task? Is Villar up to the task? How about Gibo? Is there an end to this discussion?
Let me ask you this. Is there one single person out there who is perfect for the presidency? Can one ever be ready to become president? I really don’t think so. Not Cory, not Old Man Ed, not Gloria, certainly not Erap.
Engr. Jojo is right, we need someone who can inspire us and be the hope that we all have been longing for. Noynoy is that person for me. Did you see him on prime time news last night? Is he really that dumb?
Now, if you see it in Villar, Gibo, Jamby, Ely Pamatong or that chicken tuktulaok guy, then by all means vote for them. It is that simple, Again, no need to put down MLQ3 or Noynoy for that matter. We are, after all, thinking individuals who have different standards. Different strokes for different folks, folks.
neign0, sorry, forgot you’re in Australia,
here’s platform:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23268483/Noynoy-Aquino-Platform-of-Government
here’s common credo adopted as unifying principles by all candidates affiliated with ticket:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23268556/Our-Common-Credo
i’m definitely confused as to the LOTR references above. why noynoy as frodo? is he really.
i saw the movies, havent read the books… is there anything in the books that makes the connection, er, more obvious?
this letter might help, gabby
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/letterstotheeditor/view/20091127-238642/Battle-between-Good-and-Evil
sadly, it doesnt.
i have a few straightforward questions.
1)is noynoy frodo? why is noynoy frodo? do u agree that he is frodo? why not someone else?
2) “confusing the righteousness of a cause with the pride of self-righteousness.”
in the 2010 elections, who is being self-righteous? why/how are they being self-righteous?
3) “for at the heart of hope is the humility to give all a chance to help fight Evil without sneering at motives.”
this is perhaps most confusing. in the movies, whose motives were being pegged as wrong? gollum WAS a crook. he was a USEFUL crook, but he betrayed them later.
as i remember, the issue wasnt sneering at motives. the ring corrupted anyone who held it. everyone agreed that the hobbit was the best to hold it.
turning to the elections, assuming that what u wrote is true, are you saying that redemption is a good criteria to elect someone to office?
thanks. i am extremely confused — none of this makes SENSE. its not even that we have different opinions, or points of view. the LOGIC isnt very clear.
gian,
it really is funny that you’re imposing your belief that engr. jojo is right. as far as i’m concerned, discussions such as this do serve a higher purpose and that is to get all possible points of view. it is also perfect that the discussion is happening here in mlq3’s popular blog because anyone who happens to pass by here would be able to read all the points that have been raised. consider this a form of voters education.
i think you should try to see the value here. i think you’d agree that a lot of voters including those among the educated do not really think first before deciding whom to vote. they just follow the herd, mindlessly.
again, just consider this a form of voters’ education.