Friday, 4 July 2014

What's wrong in criticising?

What's wrong in criticising? 

At first, apologies for most readers for some of this writer's, as well as other's works as 'dark,' 'radical', when it comes to views related to arts, culture, politics, and even science and technology, especially if one, two, or three writeups opposes the decadent, corrupt order comes a negative expression from those chose to content with.

Been working as a writer for years, engaging in topics about culture, arts, and politics, it seemed that those issues are interconnected regardless of what's being shown and said so. And regardless of separating politics and culture, there will always be politics involved in regards to Mideo Cruz's artwork as well as the state's snub in accepting Nora Aunor as National Artist, so is science when it comes to health matters such epidemics in the countryside.

Admittingly speaking, this writer has sought the difficulty when it comes to making writeups despite much number of readers being counted. Most writeups, actually are tempered with politics, culture, and science and technology with conclusions. The critique about those whom taking pictures of themselves wearing too scantily for nothing is an example tackling art and society, yet it is also tempered with social matters citing that these people whom doing so comes from the lower classes, and hence contrary to those whom did pose nude for a painting. 
And somehow made this writer ask himself about those pictures: "Why not they pose nude instead of trying hard to pose something that is 'trying hard'? For sure theirs, no matter how 'artistic' they did doesn't reflect reality nor signifies beauty and youth, vigour and strength."

Much more if the topic is about reviving Filipino industry, promoting small and medium enterprises, a culture  that is modern yet rooted in its heritage, a nation that is capable of standing up on its own through its own. And few amongst the many who had read this person's writeups in this page would understand this. Movies like Leon Miguel's Graceland had been promoted here in this page and gave a real approach such as relating it to the real conditions such as bureaucrats preying on young girls like former Congressman Jalosjos. 

But seriously, being an activist isn't all about criticizing the present order, but also offering sound solutions in which the system chose not to offer. Promoting cooperatives would had been encouraged by the system as one of its rhetorics, but on the other hand they unjust open doors to those whom pitting down cooperatives and the desire to industrialise the nation. For sure some of you had shared the same disgust but chose to keep it by themselves than to express freely as most care less about everything except their very own self-gratifications in life, some would even say about their own little way of making change as a solution, but does it mean will it ever resolve a perennial crisis? You may hate the protesters in the streets, but if you offer no other solution other than your whining guised as idealism then you are a hindrance than those whom clamoring for, for they are the ones who work yet failed to be given. Did you speak about land reform and industrialization? If not then you had failed to heed the call of workers and peasants marching in the streets and listening to their clamor. You had afford to smoke cigarettes, but for sure you whine for the price of a stick goes higher than before. You can't stay contented as well, for the more you endure the crisis, no matter how you save your change for rainy days yet not enough to ensure your needs comes complaining. 

In fact, there was one time when yours truly had read a writeup condemning radicals and its actions as stupid. That writer, whose self-pride and narcissism unveiling, had afford to talk "shit" without understanding why these radicals are criticizing the system up to filling the walls with statements and calling it as vandalism. Here's a quote to attest his reactionary nonsense:

"...why don't they just shut their big diarrhetic mouths up-and start leading the government, the institutions, and the judiciary system? Why would you destroy the world that nurtured you just to prove your ideal is correct?"

What an effort for that person to say those words such as leaving those matters to the untrustworthy, he had hated the protesters, the radicals, the revolutionaries, and the disenfranchised masses while self-proclaiming himself to be one of the most well-versed, coloured analyst whom had seen such protest actions from Recto to Mendiola and the forums at Diliman or at Loyola Heights. So narcissistic indeed to vent his nonsense and he glorify his own actions that acually pointing every shit to himself than the protesters! The system had failed to provide those which is necessary for national and social development for most of them are corrupt and self-centred; ask those from the middle class, whom are against Aquino how and why they treated the president's "righteous path" like any other shit such as Arroyo's since there's no difference in those two such as corrupt and power-hungry. Again, did the estates broke up? Ended contractualization in most enterprises? Putting an end to the power of the so-called oligarchs and plutorcrats? Nope, The more he fails to provide solutions other than leaving matters to the system, then that person is all but a reactionary to most issues, and being a reactionary is plain and simple: stupid, much stupid than his so-called statement. He may've been right on some parts, but he still failed to understand why they are still clamoring, if not struggling, much more that he had chose to live comfortably that made others think he is escaping from an inconvenient truth such as today!

Anyways, as most commentaries in this page are aligned with radicalism, even those of literature and art, then condemn it as you wish. This person and others had just said it least intellectually and constructively in the issue, much more if has to offer solutions as well. After all, the aspirations of the past and of the present still left unrealized and instead what's been shown is its contrary, therefore what's wrong in criticizing them? 

If speaking on behalf of industrialization to produce including consumer goods like RTW shirts and whitening creams is a mistake, of a country standing up on its own against its rivals and slanderers as wrong, of women emancipated as contrary to prevailing norms and mores, then perhaps this person, like others whom had shared the same ideal, reality, and consciousness guilty as been charged of. After all, people of today had its own consciousness limit to what is bought and sold, what is consumed and disposed. 

That's all for now,
Thank you.