Monday, 19 March 2018

"Notes after الحــــــدود الملتـــــهبه (Flaming Borders)"

"Notes after الحــــــدود الملتـــــهبه (Flaming Borders)"

(a "Movie Review" accompanied by GIFs)

Its been days ago when this person watched that old movie from Saddam-era Iraq.

Made years after the Iran-Iraq war, the movie shows much about the battle scene if not romanticising the Iraqi side as passionate in defending their country, what more of desiring for Arab unity especially amidst Iranian attacks.

But for this writer, the movie showed was like any other propaganda. Yes there was a tone of Arab unity, but since Saddam Hussen 'Baathised' Iraqi cinema it turned out to be glorifying him as he rallied his people against Khomeini's Iran, or in his view: liberating Arab-majority areas from Iranian oppression.

Most of the scenes were focused entirely on the battlefront, of men in uniform doing commando-type actions, of braving the enemy's fire in the trenches, what more of firing guns at the enemy having its human wave attacks especially those of youngsters if not children running at heavily-mined fields with promises of "going to paradise" by their mullahs.

But, in spite of those battle scenes being emphasised, there were also scenes featuring family life, such as how a mother truly cared about her children after their father got killed because of his beliefs, if not how they supposed Baathism so much that they even had a picture of Saddam Hussein in the living room! Anyway, in any other propaganda movie it tried to invoke family values (such as respect for elders), trying to idealise the Arab family as a good example the way it invokes wartime patriotism of the Saddam's armed forces, aside those of unity and resilience as a form of resistance.

However, in spite of this 'praise', this person also shared his review some unlikely notes in it. Knowing that the movie was at first a propaganda, it tries to promote Saddam Hussein and Baathism as a better ruler and ideology for Iranian Arabs than those of Khomeini and his Islamic Republicanism- if not trying to insist that the war was a modern-day Qādisiyyah.
Otherwise, it reminds of a low-budget movie with all its campiness- thanks to their script and exaggerated scenes stressing on wartime/family values romanticism. Thus, one would think why on earth having watched that 1984-made Arab movie if not describing that the movie isn't even popular or even artsy unlike those of what most people accustomed to?

Anyway, here is a last GIF for this post.

Sunday, 18 March 2018

"Changing tones from a defender into an offender"

"Changing tones from a defender into an offender"

(Or how Harry Roque who once babbled about Human Rights
Suddenly end becoming an administration sockpuppet)

"Despots, Murderers, Torturers, beware!" These were the words Atty. Harry Roque stated in his Facebook post last August 16 2011 as he praised the Philippines being a 117th signatory of the Rome Statue, as well as becoming part of the United Nations' International Criminal Court.
For once he was co-chairperson of the "Philippine Coalition for the International Criminal Court", and had pushed the country to ratify the statue, as well as thanked former President Noynoy Aquino for the Philippines' eventual membership in the ICC.

However, nearly 7 years later, this once-human rights lawyer who afforded to take concern on 'so many atrocities brought about by the Arroyo administration' is currently working for a man who himself is accused of impunity- and this time trying to justify his boss's statements at the face of the press, even at the expense of his principles people praised for.
And one of which that makes people this time ridicule him as an apologist is the move to withdraw the country's membership from the court which he once advocated his country's inclusion.

For as his boss is currently being accused of a thousand deaths such as those brought about by its bloody 'war on drugs', and this time choosing to withdraw from the ICC alongaide his usual rants, Roque, like any other Duterte apologist, has to justify the administration's actions as necessary, if not trying to insist that his boss's statements are but hyperboles or whatsoever, enough trying to spare from getting immense ire from the people.

But, as a signatory to the Rome Statute, the Philippines falls under the jurisdiction of the ICC which defines "crimes against humanity" as “serious violations committed as part of a large-scale attack against any civilian population.” And from this statement also somehow enough if not too much for the administration and its apologetics to deny accusations if not making statements like "interfering one's business" or even compared ICC's concern to "inviting foreign intervention" as Duterte's brand of orderism, no matter how bloody it may be, is reinterpreted as an imposition of order by those who supported him- including those of Atty. Roque.
Ironically, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo whom Roque detests is also Duterte's ally in the congress- what a strange coincidence then that his boss's ally was the one whom he opposed years ago!

And yet regardless of their justifications there are also consequences from that kind of desire they wished and granted.
For according to Atty. Antonio "Tony" La Viña, that a non-membership with the ICC will pose a disadvantage especially those of Filipinos living or working abroad are subjected to war situations, what more of existing state-sponsored repressions that again, Roque once detested in the name of upholding Human Rights. What also worrisome is about Judge Raul Pangalangan, who, because the Rome Statute clearly provides that judges are nominated and elected from member states, and with the Philippines withdrew from the ICC, then it looks like he just might lose his seat as one of its justices- is Duterte and the rest of the gang forgot that there's a Filipino in that bench? Que barbaridad! Perhaps the late Miriam Santiago who supposed to be there years ago is now rolling in her grave!

Anyway, to be candid, that most, if not all of Atty. Roque's statements then and now are currently being read all over in various reports, makes a concerned citizen of this so-called "republic" bluntly ask this lawyer turned administration sockpuppet: "how much is your principles?" For knowing that for at once he opposed Arroyo's moves, insisted justice for the victims of Ampatuan Massacre last 2009, and this time justifying Duterte's impunic actions and statements, isn't it obvious that his principles are being compromised, if not thrown altogether as 'moved on' in favour of following his boss's dictum?

Perhaps, Roque et al. are just over-emphasise the word HARSH in the word the "law is harsh but it is the LAW" regardless of its consequences such as those coming from despots, torturers, and murderers.

Thursday, 15 March 2018

"Notes after Muñoz"

"Notes after Muñoz"

(Or "seeing inventions, meeting investors,
 and heeding their desire for a domestic-based development
through science and technology")

At first, this person is ought to say that if not for their efforts, the desire to modernise Philippine Agriculture using domestic-based science and technology will end in vain. 

For as he, in visiting the Bureau of Post-harvest Research and Extension in the Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, sought the chance of promoting and encouraging Filipinos to mechanise agriculture and to support local manufacturers, as well as inventors whose desire is to make Agriculture improve and Industrialisation be taken seriously as part of the government's development program.

Initially, the visit was a purely office matter, but with seeing prototypes displayed and of its inventors explaining, this person finds it interesting if not thinking that the visit itself was more than just work alone, nor even a leisure,  but of a desire to assert the need to take seriously the country's state of Science and Technology.

And with the pictures shown in this post, this person ought to say that there are chances of development if not for letting an economy be decontrolled no matter how the government afforded to make attention on their concepts, works, and discoveries.
For what this person realise is this: that it is too common to describe today's state of Science and Technology as a bunch of papers. Knowing that some, if not most of which were still in its conceptual stage, no matter how it was undergone editing or further elaboration just to get approved by its assessors; while other inventors were in dire need of support- especially those whose prototypes as being shown as well as tested by its creators.

And from there, this person, like others concerned, would say that if the government truly wanted to cultivate science and technology to improve the country, and at the same time seriously adheres in its neoliberal-globalist platform with its disdain for domestic based science and technology in favour of foreign-made ones, then what the heck are they talking about?

Anyway, the present order, although it tries to "make attention" on the country's state of science and technology is rather limited to just "giving crumbs" if not simply "moral support". Various bills been passed but few are taken seriously to address the matter, and numerous concepts such as "Filipinnovation" are marred by politics.

And other than the inventors themselves, other concerned ones includes groups who desired more than just promoting science and technology for the people with its inventions or discoveries meant to be promoted by the government for its "developmental goals". One of them is AGHAM, whom expressed concern regarding the country's state of S&T unlike those of its neighbours, as it said:

"Highly industrialized countries were able to develop technologies that benefit most of its population. Their products are enhanced by the latest scientific innovation. The ability to input technological innovation into the manufacturing sector and industry translates to the economic superiority of industrialized nations. It is therefore essential for the country to develop its science and technology." 

Truly indeed, knowing that from those countries they had to undergone industrialisation not just to improve agriculture or to utilise natural resources, but also to harness their knowledge skill so as not to depend on foreign imports and to save hard currency; and industrialists like Salvador Araneta wanted that way regardless of how multinationals oppose, if not threaten the Filipino's desire for one's own development.

But in spite all the bullshits that also affected the country's state of science and technology, what more of the economy in general, this person remains optimistic that the common man can convince that domestic-based development be seriously taken rather than depending on the policies of multi/-transnationals, in which making a country indebted, as well as to promote seriously the common good of future generations of Filipinos.
For knowing that despite today's administration's promises and "programs" to alleviate poverty and stimulate the economy, still, tens of millions of Filipinos continue to suffer crushing poverty while a handful of foreign investors and domestic oligarchs prosper. Sounds "usual" to hear this statement, if not to be described as radical by some, but with decades of obeisance to neoliberal globalisation policies, continuous exploitation of the country's natural resources and labour power remains a really concerning issue, therefore there will always be those who demand something better what more that they themselves can offer an alternative in which the existing order cannot provide with. With those inventions shown, one would say that the inventor's intentions are change-forming as it positively affects each and every sector such as those of the farmer who will gonna use and of the industrialist whom has to produce. 

But again, his visit there was all but work. Yet in seeing those and met the ones who afforded to create or discover, what more of their desire to change through science and technology lies something a country should or must not miss.

If not for the ones who actually hampers their growth, of restraining to take part in building a better future. 

Monday, 12 March 2018

"Is it truly, and really, for the well being of the people?"

"Is it truly, and really, for the well being of the people?"

(Or "Revisiting notes from Adolfo Borromeo
and the common man's desire to ensure a just, dignified life")

The book that brought the writer's attention
It seemed difficult to know whether the news is trustworthy or not, especially in regards to the present Duterte administration. For as his apologists, fanatical to the core or not, insists the "outmost to goodness" programs even most of these are rather described as controversial if not debatable.

However, there are news items, especially those which are newly-churned from their various sites, are likely concieved as "good enough" despite the fact that the basis is it's synonymity to the administration- be it free college education, medical services, irrigation for farms, and various forms of developments, even those of that controversial TRAIN LAW.

Sounds interesting though to most those acts of benevolence the administration did, or rather say to the self-proclaimed "socialist", but those acts isn't new at all- for these meant to be part of a program which mean to be realised many years ago if not for those who blocked its way or dilute its essence enough to keep their interests tight.

But what made this person finds it worth to ridicule was on how the admnistration still presents itself as an ensurer of the people's welfare in a time of expensive prices of commodities and unsound solutions. Ranging from problems surrounding rice to those of contractualisation, this person thinks that the present administration, just like its predecessors, "tries its best" to maintain order as well as their interest. The TRAIN Law appears to be "progressive" with all the promises of take home pay for lower-income workers and employees, but with existing taxes like the "Value Added Tax" included in the program, this person, like others concerned, finds the program like all other "welfare" programs as cheap gimmicks that requires oligarchs "having conscience enough" to contribute, when in fact the latter continues its profiteering first and ensuring the people's well-being second. 

And since this person talks about "welfare", few days ago, this person read a thesis made by Adolfo Borromeo (and supported by Diosdado Macapagal) regarding the "Welfare State" in the Philippine Perspective. Just like what Duterte was trying to enact, a "Filipino-style" welfare state appears to be paternalistic if not authoritarian but benevolent, trying to "ensure the common good" while at the same time continuing its "developmental program" such as infrastructure building (like today's "Build, Build, Build") and others. 

However, the difference between Duterte and Macapagal's vision lies in its intent: the former would be driven by a personal sentiment that appeased his supporters, while the latter wanted it to be imposed as a policy enshrined in the constitution- through incorporating in its declaration of principles and state policies:

"To the fullest extent that the national resources will allow, the republic shall be developed into a welfare state in which all the people shall enjoy a minimum standard of decent living relative to income, health, education, housing, employment and unemployment, security in any disability, child and old-age care, wholesome family state, liesure, and other phases of a full life worthy as human beings. It shall be the duty of Congress to enact the laws necessary to bring about the realization of this policy".

What more from a Manila Times article by Mike Wooton regarding the "welfare state" as:

" which the government provides pensions, medical care, education and unemployment benefits to the people. It was originally a strategy to form a middle way between communism and laissez-faire capitalism. Well, laissez-faire capitalism is certainly encouraged in these neo liberal economic days —free markets reign everywhere and at the cost of everybody, to transfer money from consumers straight to the pockets of the shareholders. Prices are set on what the market will pay rather than on any basis related to the actual cost of production."

And from it, it requires "well-designed taxation policies" which would ensure that the government had enough money to provide the social support services needed by its citizens in order to provide a life of appropriate quality and security.

Interesting isn't it? Knowing from that proposed article brought about by Macapagal shows that the programs were meant to be fundamentally part of the law and not of a campaign promise nor a politically-motivated agenda. And since political parties like PDP-LABAN, LAKAS CMD, PMP, and the Liberals afforded to babble "welfare" from the elections to the congress and at the cabinet seats, are they really trustworthy? Remember, they are also the parties whose economic policies has less if not none to do with genuine national development as it favours today's trends in international capitalism. 

Worse, given that the entire system as interest-driven, and the government sworn to upheld the status quo (with some minimal changes) it may end sneeringly dismissed altogether as any other "utopian idealism" that is worth dismissable in favor of an existing one that benefits them, after all, as what Borromeo said:

"The old-style, US-inherited, profit-motive, laissez-faire capitalism that has been mindlessly worshipped by so many Filipinos has never worked to provide them with a decent standard of living, and it has zero chances of success bow in these days of ferment and impatience..."

What more that even in this age of modern gadgetry, social media, and anything state of the art, age-old problems remain prevalent be it despotic landlordism, corruption, and betrayal of public trust. Lawmakers, mostly local elites, tried their best to "appear pro-people" with all their statements and actions, enough to lessen popular impatience if not to win their trust. In fact, Macapagal the "welfare statist" was also the same Macapagal who imposed the Decontrol Program on Trade which also contributed to the neoliberal policy based on free trade and multi/trans-national interference in the economy.

And sadly to say that with "over-bragged" programs brought about by those "reforms" like Free College education, free irrigation, and others, these are rather made in a time when landlords continue to prevail in the countryside, contractualisation and unfair labor practises, and the K12 program that is also in line with labour export. The TRAIN Law, which supposed to be "meant to support those programs", would have been "better" if not for certain provisions that harms the low-to-lower middle-income earners through increased prices in commodities and services, lack of a program that would ensure government having enough money to provide the social support services needed by its citizens in order to provide a life of appropriate quality and security, and the "Value Added Tax" in which its allocations be devoted to debt servicing. 

But again, these are but press releases trying to be brought to life by means of some semblance of "actions", yet in a time where trustworthiness is a major issue, what more that as mostly meant to silence down existing and potential dissent, is it really meant to uplift the haven't? Or just to create an impression as apologists churning their statements throughout and shared in its pages- only to found out that it rather intensifies protest once inconsistencies and betrayals of public trust unraveled within those so-called programs?

Anyway, the desire for social upliftment, what more of development, is more than just a sentiment nor a feeling, but of a duty especially to a community and to the people. If people truly demand a just economic order which includes replacing the prevailing US-inherited, profit-motive, laissez-faire capitalism supported by globalisation and neoliberalism, why not? 

Wednesday, 14 February 2018

"For Christ who loved man he dragged them from despair and into the thereafter"

"For Christ who loved man 
he dragged them from despair
and into the thereafter"

(Notes after the start of Lent)

At first, pardon for the title of this post, but just like John 3:16, the title speaks how he and his tasks been remarkable to each and everyone. And because of this, the value brought about by the works of the Lord Jesus Christ as through the eyes of every radical seemed to be greater than those who assumed to be "christian." 

For this great man, known as the "Son of God", the "King of the Jews", "The Anointed one", has spent all his life among the people. For there he carried a divine message for humanity which guiding them towards justice, wisdom, godliness, and love; and at the same time fought oppression, corruption, and various forms of injustices that affected his people-dragging them from the hell of this world into the hereafter.

And for this, it is expected that every Christian, regardless of its sect, as well as those who regard him of magnificence and high spirituality as any other known personage, corresponding to his elevated position, will follow his path.

Sounds too early for a Lenten message isn't it? But the season of Lent starts on this "Ash Wednesday", and Christians, regardless of its sect has to "Repent, and believe in the Gospel" as well as on the dictum "Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return." And for as Ashes also symbolize grief, in this case, it is the grief that brought out of sin and caused division from God. Ironically, that day is also Valentines day, and with its theme of "love" somehow that occasion equated to sacrifice, humility, and admission of one's humanness is also a time to show that like Christ himself, that love has to be selfless, virtuous.
However, given the present situations, it is admissible that humanity is indeed, "human" and susceptible to wrongfulness, and there are times people would describe "selfishness" as a virtue, that being unjust as human nature, virtues are even distorted enough to what more that there are those who do things in the name of Christianity, assuming to be pious and in moral perfection, yet in fact totally unaware of his teachings.

But again, from his message, what more of his actions and sacrifice, the anointed man invited humanity to follow his cross, which is also the path to mankind’s redemption and happiness; and also from his experiences he warned them against pursuing their evil desires, contaminating the purity of the human soul into depravity, cruelty and wantonness.

Furthermore, there are no more words to say in this message,
Thank you. 

Tuesday, 13 February 2018

Too true to be Sacral

"Too true to be Sacral"

Notes from the presentation made by the UP Repertory company
shown last Frbruary 13, 2017 at UP Fair, Sunken Garden,
University of the Philippines, Diliman

By Letty Guererro

It was early evening when this person went to the University of the Philippines in Diliman for its February fair.

Known for its series of booths, of music and anything that was worth respite for the students and for the community, that fair is also means to invoke sentiments as any other political action, although nowadays been almost replaced by anything that is, commercial.

However, one interesting presentation was a play made by the UP Repertory Company. Based from Genesis 22 in which God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah, the presentation was given a Filipino twist, this time replacing Abraham with Duterte and Isaac with the common Filipino who's greatly affected by the series of extrajudicial acts particularly those from the "war on drugs". Quite interesting knowing that from every verse Eshei Mesina narrated, to the actions made by its actors and actresses, the presentation somehow tries to reignite UP Fair's militant past as a way of protest.

Everyone did watch though, although expect not all would understand its message, if not ridiculing  it knowing that they "came for the well-known bands and not for some militant presentation such as inspired from the Bible and Oplans Tokhang and Kapayapaan." But still, the presentation continued till everyone somehow got its point such as how the system continues to retain the status quo-such as a bloodied one, and be intensified by a leader known for his assholeness.

Ironically, those who supported the administration are Christians. Regardless of their sect affiliated, for sure they've understood the biblical verse as well as the Apostles Creed that professes their faith. But, since they are supporters of an administration sworn to protect the status quo, what more of taking an act that is bloodied, they suddenly forget being Christians if not justify the killing as godly- no matter how many innocents be affect by that carnage.

Otherwise, the presentation may redescribe as blasphemous after using anything but sacral be it the Bible verse or the Apostles Creed, but still that presentation shows how a ruler, being conscienceless if not choosing not to heed his compatriot's insistence not to be killed chose to proceed his own doing, no matter how that compatriot as wrongfully accused if not innocent yet greatly affected by its own surrounding, in pursuit of restoring order. Apologists may nihilistically think of it as a necessary catharsis, with collateral damages be reinterpreted as a cleansing measure if not a means to return to stability even at the expense of a hundred, thousand, or even million lives. Apologists would also think that no matter how numerous deaths or unjust policies being done the presidency still "did something good" be it building a series of infrastructure to promises of an untaxed salaries to the lower-income earners. And the rising costs of goods and services, also from the views of the apologists, is likely to be intepreted as a "call for austerity".

Again, in spite of how apologists reinterpret that action, that the system, via the administration has made it happen that "sacrifice", while the people, sneered by a desire for that brand of "change", has chose to let it commenced. No angel may intervene the tyrant from doing his act, with the tyrant himself admitting that he doesn't care if he gone to hell as long as "his people he serve will live in paradise."

Thursday, 8 February 2018

Still in a state of struggle

Still in a state of struggle

Notes in a country's still-continuing past 
and its struggle for national-social change 

At first, this person, after reading various news  reports, of comments in social media, and in seeing various forms of social inconveniences, thinks that ever since most  people claim that life as truly unfair, then it is worth admissible that all history is consists of class struggles.

For in this continuing past, everyone hath wittnessed how developing nations struggled against the developed, and within those societies sought how the struggling masses battled against the elites; chaotic in its first impression the way those who record history has sought periods be like the Peasant Revolts of the Middle Ages or the heavily politicised masses of the French Revolution.

However, in spite of all the chaotic yet change-driven intents, there may be peace but as mere intervals, enough to consolidate forces and waiting for another scenario; there may be various forms of achievements enough to steer  developments to and fro, also enough to create a scenario. But to each in everyone who desired a place in the sun, a place wherein justice and honour be prevail, admits that there is a final conflict to face, even in a series of scenarios that would affect life and property - and from there will pave way to a genuine kind of development in which people from all walks of life be imbued with honor, trust, responsibility, equality, freedom, and love.

Sounds ideal it may be, especially with men like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, Jose Rizal, or Bonifacio expressed in their works, but it turns out to be real if to be taken seriously and at worse, fatally as every blood, mind, sinew, sweat, waters and weaves the tree and tapestry of a growing nation. That even Christ himself saidth that he came not to bring peace but a sword, and also from he, being the so-called prince of peace he expelled violently the moneylenders from the temple whom he described as the house of his father; 
And from that example one, such as a Church-going, everyday praying, Christian may think that ideal as desperate, foolish move especially that one has to be against the status quo. They may recognise the possibility of change, but, they chose to limit it such as a change in character than a social one. Filipinos desired for independence years ago, and there are men and groups involved in that kind of ideal, but there are Filipinos who rather contented in simple privileges with its next generations be like “we passed by those times, but why are we still the same? If I were they I’d be contented in this current state: to be simple.” Sounds Tandang Basio Macunat isn’t it? For alongside the pessimisms of Señor Pasta and of the faux-fabulousness of Doña Victorina, its generations continue to exist: in a form of nihil-apathetics choosing to “enjoy” if not pseudo-idealists whom preferred to be contented as fencesitters and mindsturbators.

But as a revolutionary who chose to take the bitter cup of sacrifice, poverty, and even death, a value-added contribution meant putting value to a megali idea such as a revolutionary change; From there it lies a continuity of a cherished tradition, alongside the creation of a new order that has nothing to do with the past whose nature as rotten; the former Soviet Union did that, so was people’s China, Korea, Vietnam, Albania.
And to think that in the Philippines, in spite of its independence this person and others concerned is ought to say that it becomes null and void for the prevailing system hinders the path to independence; for sure leaders assumed to be outspoken for independence yet do they truly adhere for it? Not to mention those who babble some change but actually emphasising self-interest; while its apologists, particularly fanatical ones, would still continue to insist that the change being brought from a ruler may also affect the system itself no matter how obvious that it cannot be, given the centuries-old despotic nature that the system treats change half-heartedly if not with disdain for it hinders their personal gains; leaders like Marcos, Duterte, or any other despots assuming to be "for the people" shows that their brand of "change" turns out to be an example of a Bonapartist move- with situations which reactionaries tries to appear themselves as for the people, and in some cases uses selective reforms enough to co-opt the radicalism of the popular classes. 
Marcos did that with his package of food distribution, housing, urban development, and even arts and culture; so was his successors like Duterte whose frankiest basis was to sneer people in the battle for hearts and minds, promising them with take-home pay for lower-income workers while at the same time continuing its bloodied campaign against the poor using the "war on drugs".

But in spite of all their intents, Marx argued that within the process, these personages tends to preserve and mask the power of a narrower ruling class. Fanatics may not believe in that idea what more in opposing and maligning the concerned for investigating and unearthing truths what more of instigating and asserting the need for a revolutionary change; and in the case of the University of the Philippines, students tend to oppose unjust ones and offer just solutions, while fanatics, with their narrow-mindedness treated them as  any other social delinquent and hence liable for their demise simply because of its idealism if not those of its actions. Duterte, like his predecessors, may have approved programs like free education in which apologists applauded for it; but again, like his predecessors, that decree does not stop students from getting concerned what more of getting opposed to the unjust policies the system tend to shove in everyone's throats. He did even threatened them with expulsions, prison bars, even deaths, so where is the freedom and democracy these apologists praised about?

Pardon for some ridicule if not skepticism knowing how the system, in presenting some changes is meant to consolidate theirs than to emancipate the have-nots. Rule of law has becoming a condified rule of men as despots condify their stupidity using a hodgepodge of gutter thoughts and legalese; but to think that in a semifeudal-semicolonial order hinders or negates development for the masses, aggravates centuries-old situations ranging from the peasantry to those of the labouring yet debt-strapped masses, will there truly be Cooperation between those who oppress and those who are being oppressed?

Sorry but that makes it impossible for the latter hinders the path to redemption.