GMA sucks (as usual)
This would be my first post for this blog. I'd have loved to write a new one, maybe a welcome sort of essay, but I am not in the mood right now, so I picked this one up from my few papers still intact in my hard disk. Don't know why. Maybe just to show my dissapproval of the present government.
I wrote this as a reaction paper, during the 2nd semester of school year 2002, for my Polsci 165 subject. I actually misspelled the name of the author. It is not Kerkliet but I don’t know the correct one; I lost the paper I reviewed. It is rather long, but among my written reaction papers, this is one of my favorites.
Reading it now, I think I was just being too idealistic when I wrote it. Or just being pessimistic. But with GMA as our president, I think it is only fair that I lose my faith in our democracy. What have she done for us? Someone should assassinate this midget/whore.
Here it is.
The Left and the Masses
The lengthy critical essay of Benedict J. Tria Kerkliet (Contemporary Philippine Leftist Politics In Historical Perspective) which historically dissected the supposedly conflicting state of the Philippines leftist movement from its inception up to the present time, and which she summarized, with unquestionable piece of undoubtedness, that the Left, having barely survived its anemic past and still having to face a seemingly dark future, though “is by no means a unified political movement, untroubled or unopposed. But neither is it dead. It is vibrant and will likely remain so for a long time.” And which I couldn’t agree more.
The recent discussion about the current condition of the communist party in the country provides us some perspectives to ponder with, starting with the very important question of whether it still can accomplish its almost improbable objective of gaining control of the Philippine politics. The CCP and its armed tentacle, the NPA, have been waging its protracted People’s War against the Philippine government for over 30 years now, with no relative success whatsoever. Even at its peak, during the 80’s, with their members reaching hundred thousands, they were not able to penetrate the widening gap between them and the government.
Kerkliet listed down three crucial factors why the Left is not moving progressively in its “noble” goal, and why it is seemingly still stuck in its organization of its members despite the long years it had. The first factor, according to her, is the conspicuous differences of the tactics and goals among the leaders and its members. Two factions, indeed, have emerged out of this strong discrepancy of opinions and ideologies: the reaffirmist, headed by Joma Sison, and which dogmatically preaches the doctrine of Mao Tse Tsung to its cause, and the rejectionist, led by the late Ka Popoy Lagman, and which is a firm Lenin follower. Although both believed in the importance of armed struggle, the means of how they can secure the power from the hands of the existing government present the problem. The reaffirmist only considers one thing in its battle; bloody revolution and nothing else. There’s no alternative. It’s the only way for them. While for the rejectionist, bloody revolution is possible and probably fruitful, but it’s not the only means available. They argue that legal struggle like joining in elections can be an effective way to penetrate the wall created by the government.
The second factor is the focus of the battle. Is it is in the rural areas or in the cities? The Maoist-inspired reaffirmist thinks the violent take-over must begin in rural areas, then, having a total control over every rural place, will march toward the city for the decisive revolution. Just what Mao has done in China. The rejectionist, on the other hand, believes that time has changed, that the old view (i.e. rural domination) is now becoming obsolete in the face of swift technological and economical transformation. Their perception is that the country is no longer a peasantry-type of society, which was what the communist had seen in its initial sprouting, but has become a capitalist, with the laborers cramming inside the crowded, poverty-stricken metropolis and cities instead of the far-off and still-underdeveloped rural areas. For them, the venue of the war is in the urban region. This is where the Left must concentrate their effort.
Finally, Kerkliet brought in the questions of the governance and decision-making of the communist party. Who is in-charge of the decisions and planning? And who is actually doing the decisions and planning? There are some people in the party who says Sison and Jalandoni are the only ones who call the shots for them. Dictatorship. But when in fact, they have democratic centralization in their system. Arguments and ideas are supposedly discussed in every level of the organization. But the continuing enlargement of the party has uncharacteristically left the planning to a select few, a clear overview of the lack of communications among the leaders in the party. Soon, bickering and back-stabbing have dominated the cause of the Left, leaving its goal in disarray and in temporary suspension.
Now in the new millennium, and after more than 30 years of near-fatal struggles and existence, the CCP-NPA is still breathing. And although it can still bite, it is no more as dangerous as its bark, which is the only thing it can do right now, given its present maladjusted condition. They can brag to the whole world that they could overthrow the present government, yet we all know their resources, right now, are not at par with their empty boast. But it doesn’t mean that they are dying, and siding with Kerkliet’s observation, I think the Left would continue to live. There is no argument there. For it is not really a question of existence, but rather, of realization. Can the Left, after suffering waves of setbacks and disappointments in its over thirty years of fighting, still have what it takes to fulfill its promise?
I dare not to answer it pointblank. But the political situation in the country, worse than ever, presents a rare window of opportunity that is so wide-open and enticing you can’t help but believe that it can actually happen. Or perhaps I am just being too positive in my thinking.
Let’s see. Our political system right now is one in confusion. So many political and social events and upheavals have transpired in the last five years, which is a sign of an unhealthy nation. The election of Erap in 1998. The accusations against him. The much-publicized impeachment trial. The supposed EDSA Dos victory. Ascension of GMA as the new president. Hatred of the masses in Mendiola. The Abu Sayyaf issue. Balikatan 2001. Senate impasse. And GMA even had the guts to claim that this nation is “a strong republic” in her SONA!
When Erap overwhelmingly won the 1998 presidential election, it was said that it was the revenge of the masses, because for the first time since Ramon Magsaysay, the poor masses were able to put someone in Malacaňang whom they can readily identify with, and which they can proudly say belong to their abused class. And this is their voice in a democracy. They were given chances, and they responded with Erap as their main man.
But the elite would allow none of it. Even in the first months of Erap’s tenure, it was obvious that the elite will do everything in their limitless resources to shoot him down. They contradicted and opposed almost all of his programs, projects and ideas, disguised in the form of national interest and social vigilance. And before you notice it, the EDSA was once more filled with people, trying to overthrow another regime. Courtesy of the big capitalist people, plus the own ineptness of Erap himself. The masses were divided. Confused.
Enter GMA. She was given power simply because it was what the Constitution provided, and nothing else. She was not really popular at that time; her public charm had left her when she decided to jump off ships amidst the attacks on Erap’s administration. It was perceived as a political career move, and not based on principles or what was right and wrong. In the end, she probably thought it was the right move.
Her own administration is a typical Filipino management. Utang na loob. Political patronage. Thinking of future. And this future surely doesn’t refer to the Filipino people, but to her own political future. Disgusting.
Now, the masses are in limbo. In recent surveys, it was reported that majority of the Filipinos were losing hope to everything that were happening to our country. Some said they would like to go abroad and escape the hardship of life here. In this grim scenario, we can see the hopelessness, the disenfranchisement of the masses. One factor we can consider as a recipe for the Left’s ambition to finally win their war.
Thirty years is such a long time for a man to consistently embrace his chosen political ideologies and without any concrete positive results to hold on, it is only understandable for him to be felt alienated, to question the stagnation of his belief, the ultimate cause he’s dying trying to fight for. And although such is the fate of the members of the Left, we can as well say the same to the Filipino as a whole. The democratic system where they are living is not doing anything to help alleviate their unenviable status in the society. On the contrary, it has become the kingdom of the capitalist and the elite to further strengthened their power and wealth. And the fall of Erap, their “savior”, from power only adds to their massive anguish and despair. A change of scenery is not far from their options.
Though the government may not admit it, the reality says we are living in a very unstable, weak political sphere, open to onslaught, revolutions, and coup d’ etat. And the Left must realize that. That they are here to offer both hope and alternative solution. If the masses turned into Erap as their savior during the last election, then it would be interesting to see if the Left can turned themselves into something the masses would cling their dreams on. They were not successful before, but with our sickening and worsening system right now, and the masses continuing to search for their next God, Left has its hands full.
I wrote this as a reaction paper, during the 2nd semester of school year 2002, for my Polsci 165 subject. I actually misspelled the name of the author. It is not Kerkliet but I don’t know the correct one; I lost the paper I reviewed. It is rather long, but among my written reaction papers, this is one of my favorites.
Reading it now, I think I was just being too idealistic when I wrote it. Or just being pessimistic. But with GMA as our president, I think it is only fair that I lose my faith in our democracy. What have she done for us? Someone should assassinate this midget/whore.
Here it is.
The Left and the Masses
The lengthy critical essay of Benedict J. Tria Kerkliet (Contemporary Philippine Leftist Politics In Historical Perspective) which historically dissected the supposedly conflicting state of the Philippines leftist movement from its inception up to the present time, and which she summarized, with unquestionable piece of undoubtedness, that the Left, having barely survived its anemic past and still having to face a seemingly dark future, though “is by no means a unified political movement, untroubled or unopposed. But neither is it dead. It is vibrant and will likely remain so for a long time.” And which I couldn’t agree more.
The recent discussion about the current condition of the communist party in the country provides us some perspectives to ponder with, starting with the very important question of whether it still can accomplish its almost improbable objective of gaining control of the Philippine politics. The CCP and its armed tentacle, the NPA, have been waging its protracted People’s War against the Philippine government for over 30 years now, with no relative success whatsoever. Even at its peak, during the 80’s, with their members reaching hundred thousands, they were not able to penetrate the widening gap between them and the government.
Kerkliet listed down three crucial factors why the Left is not moving progressively in its “noble” goal, and why it is seemingly still stuck in its organization of its members despite the long years it had. The first factor, according to her, is the conspicuous differences of the tactics and goals among the leaders and its members. Two factions, indeed, have emerged out of this strong discrepancy of opinions and ideologies: the reaffirmist, headed by Joma Sison, and which dogmatically preaches the doctrine of Mao Tse Tsung to its cause, and the rejectionist, led by the late Ka Popoy Lagman, and which is a firm Lenin follower. Although both believed in the importance of armed struggle, the means of how they can secure the power from the hands of the existing government present the problem. The reaffirmist only considers one thing in its battle; bloody revolution and nothing else. There’s no alternative. It’s the only way for them. While for the rejectionist, bloody revolution is possible and probably fruitful, but it’s not the only means available. They argue that legal struggle like joining in elections can be an effective way to penetrate the wall created by the government.
The second factor is the focus of the battle. Is it is in the rural areas or in the cities? The Maoist-inspired reaffirmist thinks the violent take-over must begin in rural areas, then, having a total control over every rural place, will march toward the city for the decisive revolution. Just what Mao has done in China. The rejectionist, on the other hand, believes that time has changed, that the old view (i.e. rural domination) is now becoming obsolete in the face of swift technological and economical transformation. Their perception is that the country is no longer a peasantry-type of society, which was what the communist had seen in its initial sprouting, but has become a capitalist, with the laborers cramming inside the crowded, poverty-stricken metropolis and cities instead of the far-off and still-underdeveloped rural areas. For them, the venue of the war is in the urban region. This is where the Left must concentrate their effort.
Finally, Kerkliet brought in the questions of the governance and decision-making of the communist party. Who is in-charge of the decisions and planning? And who is actually doing the decisions and planning? There are some people in the party who says Sison and Jalandoni are the only ones who call the shots for them. Dictatorship. But when in fact, they have democratic centralization in their system. Arguments and ideas are supposedly discussed in every level of the organization. But the continuing enlargement of the party has uncharacteristically left the planning to a select few, a clear overview of the lack of communications among the leaders in the party. Soon, bickering and back-stabbing have dominated the cause of the Left, leaving its goal in disarray and in temporary suspension.
Now in the new millennium, and after more than 30 years of near-fatal struggles and existence, the CCP-NPA is still breathing. And although it can still bite, it is no more as dangerous as its bark, which is the only thing it can do right now, given its present maladjusted condition. They can brag to the whole world that they could overthrow the present government, yet we all know their resources, right now, are not at par with their empty boast. But it doesn’t mean that they are dying, and siding with Kerkliet’s observation, I think the Left would continue to live. There is no argument there. For it is not really a question of existence, but rather, of realization. Can the Left, after suffering waves of setbacks and disappointments in its over thirty years of fighting, still have what it takes to fulfill its promise?
I dare not to answer it pointblank. But the political situation in the country, worse than ever, presents a rare window of opportunity that is so wide-open and enticing you can’t help but believe that it can actually happen. Or perhaps I am just being too positive in my thinking.
Let’s see. Our political system right now is one in confusion. So many political and social events and upheavals have transpired in the last five years, which is a sign of an unhealthy nation. The election of Erap in 1998. The accusations against him. The much-publicized impeachment trial. The supposed EDSA Dos victory. Ascension of GMA as the new president. Hatred of the masses in Mendiola. The Abu Sayyaf issue. Balikatan 2001. Senate impasse. And GMA even had the guts to claim that this nation is “a strong republic” in her SONA!
When Erap overwhelmingly won the 1998 presidential election, it was said that it was the revenge of the masses, because for the first time since Ramon Magsaysay, the poor masses were able to put someone in Malacaňang whom they can readily identify with, and which they can proudly say belong to their abused class. And this is their voice in a democracy. They were given chances, and they responded with Erap as their main man.
But the elite would allow none of it. Even in the first months of Erap’s tenure, it was obvious that the elite will do everything in their limitless resources to shoot him down. They contradicted and opposed almost all of his programs, projects and ideas, disguised in the form of national interest and social vigilance. And before you notice it, the EDSA was once more filled with people, trying to overthrow another regime. Courtesy of the big capitalist people, plus the own ineptness of Erap himself. The masses were divided. Confused.
Enter GMA. She was given power simply because it was what the Constitution provided, and nothing else. She was not really popular at that time; her public charm had left her when she decided to jump off ships amidst the attacks on Erap’s administration. It was perceived as a political career move, and not based on principles or what was right and wrong. In the end, she probably thought it was the right move.
Her own administration is a typical Filipino management. Utang na loob. Political patronage. Thinking of future. And this future surely doesn’t refer to the Filipino people, but to her own political future. Disgusting.
Now, the masses are in limbo. In recent surveys, it was reported that majority of the Filipinos were losing hope to everything that were happening to our country. Some said they would like to go abroad and escape the hardship of life here. In this grim scenario, we can see the hopelessness, the disenfranchisement of the masses. One factor we can consider as a recipe for the Left’s ambition to finally win their war.
Thirty years is such a long time for a man to consistently embrace his chosen political ideologies and without any concrete positive results to hold on, it is only understandable for him to be felt alienated, to question the stagnation of his belief, the ultimate cause he’s dying trying to fight for. And although such is the fate of the members of the Left, we can as well say the same to the Filipino as a whole. The democratic system where they are living is not doing anything to help alleviate their unenviable status in the society. On the contrary, it has become the kingdom of the capitalist and the elite to further strengthened their power and wealth. And the fall of Erap, their “savior”, from power only adds to their massive anguish and despair. A change of scenery is not far from their options.
Though the government may not admit it, the reality says we are living in a very unstable, weak political sphere, open to onslaught, revolutions, and coup d’ etat. And the Left must realize that. That they are here to offer both hope and alternative solution. If the masses turned into Erap as their savior during the last election, then it would be interesting to see if the Left can turned themselves into something the masses would cling their dreams on. They were not successful before, but with our sickening and worsening system right now, and the masses continuing to search for their next God, Left has its hands full.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home