Friday, August 24, 2007

The Malu Fernandez controversy

Game over. Tapos na. Nag resign na sya.

I read this controversy here. No comment ako when I read the blog. I am neither of the two. I am not an OFW and I am not a jetsetter. The conflict is all about point of view.

Sabi ni Malu na nagpapatawa lang daw at may specific target audience sya. Syempre para sa mga nasaktang OFWs, hindi acceptable yung explanation ni Malu at mas lalung na insulto yung mga OFWs, at least those who wre very vocal against her. Sabi ni Malu, she was just stating facts. Pero the way she presented her facts ang naging offensive. Clash pa rin ng point of view yan. Sino ang tama at mali? Depende sa point of view.

From personal experience, I did feel embarassed being Filipino when I boarded a flight back to Manila from Bangkok. Nakasabay ko yung mga so called byahera. They buy stuff from Bangkok and bring it to Manila to re sell. Para makatipid, iha hand carry nila yung malalaking plastic bags na punong punong ng pinamili nila. Hindi na hand carry yun kundi hila hila luggage. PInagtitinginan sila ng ibang pasahero pero paki nila. Wala silang pakialam. Ang sa kanila, naghahanapbuhay lang sila.

Again point of view yan. Wala akong karapatang sabihihan ang mga byahera na i check in nalang nila yung mga bagahe nila para hindi nakakahiya. Ang airline lang ang may karapatan nun kaso tinotolerate.

Hindi ko pa na experience yung mag byahe na maraming nakasabay na OFW. Ini imagine ko, siguro ang ingay sa eroplano. Ganun na lang siguro kaingay ang kwentuhan at tawanan. Sa point of view ng mga OFW, wag silang pakialaman dahil excited silang maka uwi. Pero sa mga tulad ni Malu, nakaka irita ang ganitong sitwasyon. Kaso ang nasulat ni Malu ay yung tungkol sa pabango na may halong kahambugan kaya pinagtulungan sya.

I can imagine where both sides are coming from. Paradigm shift is a two way traffic, not just one way. Malu should have been sensitive enough to understand why OFWs behave the way they do. At the same time, OFWs (this is just an assumptiion based on my byahera experience) to be more considerate of other passengers trying to get some sleep in the plane by keeping their voices low. The problem is labeling. Ang problema sa ilang OFW nagiging reflection nang buong OFW community.

At the end of the day, I believe Malu Fernandez has no intention to malign. Unfortunately, offensive naman talaga yung sinulat nya kung sa point of view ng OFWs titignan. It's good Malu resigned. At least nagkaroon ng closure for this particular issue.

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

I am not attending

Last year, I attended the first Good Citizenship Movement (GCM) Congress held at UP NCPAG. Tomorrow, the second congress will be held but I am not attending.

My attendance in last year's congress is through my membership in the Ang Bagong Pinoy (ABP) Movement. For several months, the ABP has been inactive. Not even a single meeting from the core has been held. Essentially, it is only the yahoo group that allows some members to communicate with each other. I am not attending this year's congress not because of ABP's inactivity. It is because of the fact that the campaign is a government sponsored congress which wasn't exactly clear to me last year.

My personal advocacy is good ciitizenship but I cannot support a good citizenship campaign initiated by government, by this government.

I am no fan of GMA. GMA is an execellent example is a bad citizen. When she did not fulfill her word not to run for president during a Rizal Day speech she made, I have lost all my respect to GMA. I believe she cheated in the last election. She is capable of doing that. It is in her character because she is a bad citizen. She practices politics of patronage to the highest degree. She has allowed her two sons to run for congress. She has kept all military men, from Cimatu, to Ermita, Ebdane, Mendoza, Reyes who were loyal by rewarding them cabinet positions. Atienza is now a cabinet member because of his blind loyalty to her. GMA has no integrity. You cannot trust the words that come out of her mouth. She said she will step down come 2010 but she can always change her mind. GMA is just the kind of person I cannot trust. She is not the ideal citizen. She is not a good citizen.

That is the problem of a good citizenship campaign coming from government. It has no credibility just like its leader. It will be a very hard sell. I think the campaign is an attempt to deodorize GMA's administration. Chances are people won't heed calls for good citizenship from this movement.

Sunday, August 5, 2007

Monsod vs. De Quiros

An interesting read from two Inquirer columnists regarding the request of Senator Trillanes to attend sessions in the Senate.

The Trillanes myth for Monsod and Wrong math for De Quiros.

Both columnists expressed their views regarding the ruling of Judge Oscar B. Pimentel on denying Senator Trillanes certain privileges. The two columnists attacked the issue from opposing angles. De Quiros questioned Judge Pimentel's competence while Monsod doubted Trillanes idealism and principles.

De Quiros obviously didn't check on Judge Pimentel's background for being clueless how Pimentel became a judge. His insults towards the Judge got so much space on his column. De Quiros called the ruling idoitic. That Pimentel doesn't know the difference between apples, oranges and bananas and the meaning of the word "precedent". De Quiros insinuates as if Pimentel was appointed by GMA as RTC judge when in fact he has been a judge for the last 30 years. The following rejoinder from an Inquirer reader may help us know more about Judge Pimentel.

Monsod meanwhile was very blunt with her criticisms on Trillanes specially on his failed coup attempt. Obviously, there not an iota of sympathy from Monsod towards Trillanes. Chances are she did not vote for him. Monsod did take her time to check on the background of Judge Pimentel.

Between the two, I will side with Monsod.

I believe that De Quiros and Monsod mean well. What they express is what they believe is for the greater good. That they both have no personal agenda. That they are both righteous individuals and competent in their own fields.

My problem with De Quiros is his satanic view on GMA. Everything that is connected with GMA is evil. Pati pag utot ni GMA dahilan ng paghihirap ng Pilipinas. Simply because Judge Pimentel's ruling is to GMA's advantage, Judge Pimentel is now evil himself. Oppose GMA and you become a saint to De Quiros. Do or say something that will make GMA's life easier and you instantly become devil. Somewhere along the way, De Quiros has stopped being reasonable.

It's fine to stage a coup as long as it is against GMA. It's ok to steal as long as you steal from GMA. It's ok to cheat as long as you cheat againat GMA. Curse all you want as long as you curse GMA. That is an extreme way of interpreting De Quiros views.

Many people from the opposition, including De Quiiros, are wondering why we are not out in the streets to oust GMA. The common response is, who will you replace GMA with? The opposition will respond back by saying, let's oust GMA first and worry about her replacement later. The people are not buying. I am not buying.

GMA is part of the problem but she is not the only problem. I don't believe ousting GMA will solve our woes. We are all part of the problem. We all have to take responsibility for our woes. We are where we are because of what we are.

I did not vote for Trillanes. He is simply trying to become a Honasan copycat. Just because the Ramos-Enrile coup succeeded, it does not give them the license to engage in the same adventure. Unfortunately, their adventure is what captured the public's imagination.

Monsod dismally failed in her attempt to get a seat in the Senate. I did vote for her. Her loss is merely a reflection of what we are as a people. We are not yet ready for reasonable people like Monsod in our politics. But we will get there.

In the meantime, let's watch the Trillanes saga in the Senate. In spite of his 11 million votes, I doubt if people can be mobilized to form a critical mass to put pressure in our courts to allow Triallanes to attend sessions in the Senate.

Saturday, August 4, 2007

Baka makalusot

Nananghalian ako kanina sa may isang side sidestreeet sa may Carriedo, Manila. Napansin ko na pwede nang daan ng mga sasakyan ang Carriedo dahil pinaalis na ni Mayor Lim ang mga structures ng mga vendors sa gitna ng kalye.

Sa gitna ng aking pagkain, biglang naglitawan ang mga vendors ng mga mansanas at prutas tulaktulak ang kanilang kariton sa sidestreet na kinakainan ko. Ayun, nagkakahulihan ng mga illegal vendors sa may Carriedo mismo. Alam ng mga vendors na ito na bawal ang ginagawa nila pero sige pa rin sila, baka makalusot.

Nagbibigay naman ng permit ang city hall para sa mga nais magtinda pero masgusto nilang nakikipag patintero sa mga nanghuhuli. Bata pa ako, ganito na ang kalakaran doon sa palengke sa Olongapo. Hanggang ngayon, ganun pa rin ang sistema. Matgpunta ka sa mga palengke lalung lalu na sa Divisoria, normal na ang pagtataguan at paghahabulan ng mga illegal vendors at mga tauhan ng city hall. Ginagawa at ginagawa ng mga vendors ang pagtitinda kahit laam nilang bawal, baka sakaling makalusot.

Sabi nila masarap ang bawal. Mas lalung sumasarap ang bawal kapag nakakalusot. Minsang makalusot ka, malaki ang posibilidad na uulitin mo kung ano man yung bawal na gawaing ito.

Sa gobyerno, oras na makatikim ng simpleng lagay ang isang empleyado, tuloy tuloy na yan. Ang isang nakikipagtransakyon, oras natutong magbigay ng lagay kahit alam nyang bawal, tuloy tuloy na rin yan. Kapag sa umpisa nakalusot, uulit at uulit na yan.

Si Ramos at Enrile, nagbarikada noon sa Camp Crame dahil huhulihin na sila ng mga tauhan ni Marcos. Alam ni Ramos at Enrila na bawal yung ginawa nilang yon pero sige pa rin sila. Ayun, nakalusot. Yung isa naging pangulo at iyong isa nangarap ding maging pangulo pero hanggang Senado lang ang kinaya ng powers nya.

Si Gringo, tumulad kina Ramos at Enrile. Malas nya di sya nakalusot. Si Trillanes, nagbakasakali ding makalusot kaso minalas din. Ang sinusuwerte pa lang ay si GMA. Nakipag usap sa isang Comelec commissioner kahit alam nyang bawal baka sakaling makalusot. Malas nya na wiretap sya pero hanggang ngayon nagpipilit pa ring makalusot.

Lahat ng gumagawa ng kabulastugan, katiwalian, kalokohan o anu mang labag sa batas, lahat yan ginagawa, kahit mali, dahil baka sakaling makalusot.

Iyan ang isa sa mga ugali nating nakakapikon. Alam nang bawal ginagawa pa rin, baka sakaling makalusot. Kapg hindi natin ito nalabanan o nabago, itaga nyo sa bato, habang panahon na lang tayong lulusot ng lulusot.

Pero may magagawa tayo. Kailangan lang na ma inspire tayo para magkaroon ng kolektibong pagbabago. Sa isang good citizenship campaign, mababago natin ito.

The collective silence

With all the political killings and disappearances that are happening around us, Jose Ma. Montelibano laments why are we not out in the streets to condemn the killings. Even US solons have urged GMA to act on the killings.

The absence of collective outrage may be explained by the absence of a collective sense of nationhood.

Those who are silent about these killings, view these killings as a fight between the left and the right. They are silent because they are not part of any of these groups. They are mere watchers on the fight between these two protagonists.

We all know that the killings are condemnable. We should rise up against it if we are morally upright citizens. But unfortunately, we are, collectively, not good citizens. It is more of a norm to look in a different direction when we see unlawful acts. Good deeds, good citizenship, volunteerism, heroism are very common news items because they are not the usual way of things are done. Apathy, distrust, hopelessnes is not news because these are the prevailing attitude. These are the norm.

The absence of a collective sense of nationhood results into a collective silence towards political killings. A campaign on citizenship will help bring about this sense of nationhood. With s strong sense of country, we can easily mobilize our people to pressure government to act on the killings. With a better collective moral value, it may be difficult to find individuals who will execute these dastardly acts. Our moral values have become so low that life has become so cheap. The absence of a collective outrage to condemn the killings is a reflection of what we are as a people, walang pakialam. But we can do something with this kind of collective attitude. We are just too busy with our individual advocacy and agenda.

Julia’s death inspires 57 US volunteers

Maraming salamat, Julia.