Tuesday, 26 May 2015

By being indifferent just to add existing fires

By being indifferent just to add existing fires

Its been days passed as the workers of Tanduay Distillery in Laguna continues its strike since May 18.

From not being regularised for years, followed by a series of threats and intimidations from the management and its hired goons, water cannons and throwing of stones and bottles, Three hundred and ninety-seven workers, or 90% of its total workforce, with a meager wage of P315 (set to be lowered to P255 because of the Two-Tiered Wage System), no benefits (medical, sick leave, vacation leave or even bonuses), and no job security (they can be dismissed by the company anytime), Have rather chose to remain defiant and assertive in its call, and be supported by groups sympathised with their cause knowing that their calls are just.

Most media outlets did not broadcast about this, given that the said establishment is well known with its commercials featued and owned by a prominent businessman, that on the other hand is also notorious for its shrewd business practises: particularly those of tax evasion, and connected to corrupt personages such as the Marcos couple, and Ex-President Estrada.
But in these past few years till now, he has earned new titles, such as violator of worker's rights, landgrabber, and even a traitorous Chinaman if to include the racially-laced statements coming from the xenophobic right with all its Sinophobic statements.

But in this writeup, Lucio Tan, owner of Tanuay Distilleries and its affiliated companies under the "Lucio Tan Group", as well as his clique controlling the management, has to face the reality of the worker's call to have its job be legitimised, of given a decent wage and lving standards after years of working under contract, or if not, then likely to face another wave of problems that somehow meant putting him in big trouble knowing that being a shrewd scruplous compradore makes his actions liable enough for ostracism regardless of his so-called contributions.
And to think that he is listed on 2014 as Forbes Magazine’s 2nd Richest Filipino with a net worth of $6.1 billion or P270 billion, Tanduay Distillers Inc. alone, earned net sales of P10 billion and P12 billion on 2013 and 2012 respectively. Each day, Tanduay workers create an estimate of P15 million worth of products. This means, per P1 profit of Tanduay Distillers, only P0.003 goes to wages which will be divided to 397 workers!

So where is the justice in that company once controlled by the Ynchaustis and Elizaldes? Perhaps the lesser evil Manda of the past, with its benevolence was better than the greater evil Lucio with all the evidences shown in this post.

Ranging from featured photos and a video from Arkibong Bayan and Southern Tagalog Exposure would say that he, his clique, and even the present administration that afforded to brag about development and full employment fails to heed, of being indifferent and unjust rather than facing the issue and getting it resolve in a civil manner. 

But besides Tanduay, other companies such as Philippine Airlines also suffered by Tan's own policies. That once, Roger Soluta of Kilusang Mayo Uno stated that the people cannot forget the actions Tan did towards its workers picketing at Nichols Field, that somehow also shared the same experiences as Tanduay's with unjust layoffs and contractualisation. However, Tanduay's workers suffered most as it directly comes from the taipan's own stubborness, with his hired goons, allegedly coming from the prison cells of Muntinglupa afforded to charge and beat, if not security guards throwing stones and empty bottles on both people and vehicles, particularly jeeps and vans of those who came and sympathised with the struggling workers. 
And if that tension continues to persist, then what's next? Bringing a battalion of soldiers and create a scenario similar to Hacienda Luisita? Such actions may likely create that, and to show how shrewd a taipan would be as it fails to heed, much more in acting contrary to various press releases on their behalf.

Although true that he created scholars via his Tan Yan Kee foundation, of making his brand of development be bragged to mainstream media such as tie ups with Philip Morris for his Fortune Tobacco and Coors for his Asia Brewery, of being a Filipino multimillionaire in par with Henry Sy and Danding Cojuangco, it does not mean it can resolve his issue on tax evasion, landgrabbing, a crony capitalist allegedly siphoning people's funds and supported by corript personages, and a violator of workers rights be it from Nichols field in Paranaque to the Tanduay compound at Laguna.

And his indifference towards the plight of workers rather adds fire to an existing struggle, in a way his hired goons adds salt to a gaping wound of those yearning for a just employment, living wage, benefits, and justice. Where were those who cry China after that said incident? Where were the ones chanting sovereignty? If they afforded to chant sovereignty over the contested islands so should also shownit in support of the workers being unjustly disposed by a scrupulous, shrewd taipan trying to keep profits away from obligations.

Sunday, 24 May 2015

"Politically true."

"Politically true."

(Or an assessment-reflection on yours truly's writeups)

Seems that yours truly has spending his words on politics. 

In this page supposed to meant for art and culture, this writer has spent posting "common" people likely less to deal with: politics, economy, the desire to revisit science and technology, and others seemed to be less of an interest.

Starting with the latest posts, this writer somehow expressed concern over various issues, and in every report being read from various links somehow worth compelling to make a writeup enough for an assessment, if not an opinion. Besides that, being engaged in politics, no matter how controversial it is, is an encounter with reality, that somehow most would rather dare to escape instead of facing the fact that the society is a big political entity with this person, as a citizen concerning with socioeconomic realities, has to contribute no matter how it contradicts the wishes of the present order yet uplifts the interests of the people.

And that task means tiring. This person may still trying to revert to his initial interests such as his earliest post this page once featured, but most of this person's initial interests are also well connected to the society's daily actions. That in every old house being demolished, in every factory turned into a commercial complex, undergoes matters that has been also undergo through the ballot box and ceaseless debates featured in every newspaper page. That in every featured person trying to convey its expressions and contributions in their respective fields, invokes something that is beyond the scripts, dialouge, and intentions of their works. That in every music being played, the drawing being sketched, or the poem being declaimed, somehow relates to the current protest action that in turn, out of a really existing controversial matter. No matter how an individual tries to escape the reality that is politics will always undergo that same goddamn reality of being in a politicised society. Consumerism tried to dislodge politics using escapism with a series of advertisements, of showbusiness trying to dominate from print to social media, that somehow benefits the system as it tries to hinder people from seeking truth from facts. 
So are the others whom trying to negate public pressure with all its militancy, of not going beyond their rooms, and justify what they called as "parliaments of the social media" that is, currently looming and trying to replace the counterparliament that is, in the streets and in the session hall. 

And although it is inconveniently true that engaging in these tasks is arduous, of spending time on research, writing initial statements to a series of editing and adding additional views, isn't it that tiring for the mind, and to some extent, the body as it being bogged for being awake from afternoon till midday? Anyways, he may have spend making a poem yet his views turned it into a critique. The articles that tackle an idealised future did inspire to realise it yet at the same time knowing that it requires confrontation. The personalities or the establishments being featured had tried their best to become gamechangers in their respective fields, that somehow beyond the imagination of others. His sketches did focus on factories, old churches, and rebellious children instead of for chrissakes, that somehow reflects defiance against the system that dissuades people to dare their minds to create and of course, defy.

Anyways, despite odds, life will always be connected to the society, to politics, to the Republic as what Plato said, but time and again, as long as the system remains unrepentantly rotten, there will be those who trying to escape and deny the existence of truth amidst acknowledging it, and those who will confront thinking that the truth and change is in their hands. 

And hoping that this person, as well as others somehow wanted to make a reader understand this statement. 

That's all for now. 

Saturday, 23 May 2015

Alejandro Lichauco: A minister the Government failed to appoint

Alejandro Lichauco: 
A minister the Government failed to appoint

(or: "Remembering a National Economist, his works, and his aspirations")

"The truth shall free us, says the Bible, but Alejandro Lichauco in his new book, "Nationalist Economics", says that the truth shall feed us too- liberate us from the politics of poverty..."

These were the words Hilarion Henares stated about a man who envisioned a country that rolls its own sleeve and forge to assert its own independence. In his book, such as what he stated, did made students in trying to seek other answers the system failed to accomodate, if not disregard considering it was passé in favour of policies favourable to the system and dictated by outside agencies such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. It did tried to become a required reading in universities such as the University of the Philippines, Ateneo de Manila, and the University of Santo Tomàs, but in the end it was merely treated as a scholastic research work, a dissertation, a thesis, while concered groups, particularly those of radicals marching in the streets, adhere to that man's contribution to liberate his country from the politics of poverty.

And that man was Alejandro Lichauco, a man the government whom had failed to, if not never appointed to an higher post besides being a Senior Consultant to the Congressional Economic Planning Office and Head of the Policy Research Department of the National Economic Council (now as the National Economic Development Authority).

Like the late Claro M. Recto, Lorenzo Tañada, and Jose Diokno, personalities whom somehow people have called as "the Presidents the Filipino People never had", He may not been appointed as Trade Minister, or Minister of Finance, or any other higher post related to economics just because of his view that is different from the system tries to assert with, regardless of his credentials as a Harvard graduate (BA Economics and Bachelor of Laws). Yet despite being not appointed to an higher post (or perhaps the Government failed to appoint him) doesn't mean he should discontinue his lifelong aspiration of a nation walking and working on its own, that besides "Nationalist Economics", works like "The IMF-WB Group, the International Economic Order and the Philippine experience", "Towards a New Economic Order and the Conquest of Mass Poverty", "The Philippine Crisis", and "Hunger, Corruption, and Betrayal", did left some reminders, or Bluprints for a progressive society  a nation has to work over.  

In reading some of his works, Lichauco deserves the praise and constructive criticism rather than those who favour to become stooges of neoliberalism and imperialism. His economics speaks of domestic based development, focusing on production and the desire to ensure the needs of many given that the Philippines as abundant in natural resources enough to feed its people via industrialisation, agrarian reform, and genuine community development enough to ensure employment, services, products Filipinos yearning for. The system actually failed him regardless of his credentials, knowing that his inclinations counter those of the establishment, as well as outside agencies ranging from the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and other international moneylending agencies who at the same time imposing policies detrimental to genuine national development, while his works, his recommendations, as nothing but whinings if not research works fit for academic purposes, or bluprints that are left hidden in the archives waiting fir its eventual disposal. 

For a writer and lecturer of sorts, he serves as an inspiration for some Nationalist-oriented economists and aspiring National Industrialists, the way others had afforded to babble Adam Smith, Milton Friedman or Ludwig von Mises to the free trade school. And since he had a share of appraisers, he also had a share of slanderers whom are trying to destroy his views in favour of free trade and globalisation. That his slanderers may have called him supportive of the oligarchs with the logic of equating economic protectionism to those of oligarchs and compradores, but no! His protectionism is far from the way oligarchs interpret of, and oligarchs are also themselves compradores by nature, thinking about production via total industrialisation as detrimental to their commercial interests and favoring foreign direct investments. And although there are men like Gregorio Araneta, Elizalde, and Andres Soriano, whom had even tried to deal with domestic-based production as envisioned by the patriots of old, with their RFM, YCO, TANDUAY, and SAN MIGUEL as its brand names, it failed to steer beyond their interests being compradores (and landlords) and submissive to the interests of international moneylending agencies; but today's compradores like Lucio Tan, Manny Pangilinan, and Henry Sy, had altogether failed to emphasise "nationalist economics" of their forefathers and instead really emphasising their compradore inclinations "to the bones" that includes submission to neoliberal interests just to ensure their prestige and survival. If they afforded to read Lichauco's then maybe for a short while knowing that it has nothing to do, or contrary to, with their actually existing views interpreted as "realistic".  
That until today being insisted by today's economists and its apologetics. Yes, they yearn free trade, direct foreign investment, 100% foreign ownership of companies, and others aligned with neoliberalism and dependency on international finance capital. Yet the Philippines, amidst its façade of development being bragged by the system ranging from 1950s-era flour silos to industrial complexes dealing with assembly line and service industries, remains pre-industrial or as what Lichauco said: "an economy that belongs to the 17th century" with all the dominating haciendas, backward agriculture, and reluctance to rolling its own sleeves and forge, regardless of what this writer had stated such as flour silos and industrial complexes that requires assembled materials from abroad. "Even screwdrivers are to be imported from Abroad" as what Lichauco said in his lecture. 

After all, since the Philippines is newly industrialised country, then how come Hacienda Luisita has to employ hundreds of machete-wielding people to harvest sugarcane, is the Cojuangcos prefering old school manpower than a group of machine-operated harvesters? Of letting the steel industry be aborted decades ago simply because of cheap steel from abroad if not threats from outside agencies? No matter what they oppose, right was Lichauco et al. to revive the idea that was shelved during the 1950s. Bernardo Villegas, Gerardo Sicat, and other members of the free trade school such as in UP School of Economics, continues to assert globalisation and dependency on international finance capital, but in the end these ideas nothing but aggravating neocolonialism that a patriot has to oppose with in favour of Nationalist-oriented Economics! Even John Maynard Keynes who was once into free trade did eventually acknowledge the need for protectionism to ensure the basic industries, employment, and international reserves a nation has to keep and invest. Pardon to the reader to express this writer's view in disagreeing the free trade school that disregards industrialisation and emphasising import liberalisation. 

In his passing to eternity, Lichauco's aspirations will soon be realise. Through a common program that serves as a statement of unity, he and other patriots serves as a reference, an inspiration, and example to the succeeding generations worthy of an example. 

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

Burnt Offerings

Burnt Offerings

Source: Rem Zamora

It seems that one would think that about over a hundred laborers inside a factory doing everything that makes a cheap, lowly slipper: molding soft, raw rubber, cutting and trimming pieces for soles, assembling the product, checking for its quality, all prior to its distribution and selling. And perhaps with everyone's sensibilities would probably tell that theirs as decent, honest labor worthy of a decent living wage.

However, what everyone sees is its contrary. With 74 out of a hundred workers died in an accident last May 13, coming from a factory hacing lack of fire exits and substandard, cramped workplace, it seems that the tragedy is a major catastrophe as it involved people struggling for a daily living and an establishment eager to accumulate profits and disregard dignity. 

That somehow makes a really concerned individual (including yours truly) interprets as more than just an accident. There are instances that shrewd, scruplous owners, who at the same time administrators, chose substandard workplaces out of cheapness putting together both materials and men, of buying cheap and selling dear, of less worries about worker's plight from being contractualised to letting them die least they are not regular workers of that said establishment but of a contracted agency. Isn't it that stupid for that owner-administrator to disregard human capital and workplace improvement, especially in manufacturing a slipper that had even reached mainstream markets?

Well, given the shrewdness of the owner eager for profits and disregarding workplace safety and worker's dignity, then that accident is more than just an accident, but a holocaust. With the fact that these shrewd, scruplous owners, its dirty motives like contracualisation, disregardment of worker's welfare, and others related, all in favour of unjust profiteering amidst substandard workplaces. Simply by continuing its operation despite its non-adherence to proper health and safety standards, as well as violations of labor standards like the minimum wage, then it is a clear basis that the owners, as well as  lazy government officials, are responsible and should be held accountable in that kind of holocaust.

Yes, true to its term meaning "burnt offering" in Greek, the Kentex factory burning and the death of 74 workers is an offering to these fat cats and its greed-driven motives. But instead of a fulfillment of their wishes, it rather aggravates anger, coming from concerned citizens and groups, survivors of that catastrophe, and bereaved families of their fallen loved ones who are still asserting justice and accountability on these shrewd, scruplous owners. That regardless of being an accident, the owners are still held accountable knowing that they had failed to ensure their safety, welfare, anything that a company has to provide for its workers the way they afforded to gain profits from their saleable goods such as slippers.

Ironically, that establishment is also once implicated in the creation of fake well-known sandals coming from Brazil, and yet it continued to thrive until that recent tragedy, that Havana, a sandal coming from a factory that once making fake Havianas sandals were manufactured at the same place that had become a crematoria! Yes, a crematoria that brought its own holocaust and a series of controveries such as flaws surrounding safety procedures, worker's welfare, and the need for justice against scrupulous, shrewd owners still trying to evade alongside lax government officials. 

Well, amidst the tragic events, the message is clear that justice should be evenly dispensed, served at all costs. That workers, both died in flames and survived in its low paying hardships deserves the prize enough to ensure their survival. Obviously they don't want to work under cramped conditions and failing to survive ages and policies, but realities such as poverty is enough for a compulsion to work no matter how hard the condition, low its wage, desperate for their survival as laborers in that said site. Most news reports are now trying to water down the issue if not keeping it short so as not to be emphasised, but more and more concerned are trying to heed in that report bearing the tragedy and its connection to labour and a need to reclaim its dignity being makers of their slippers. Again, the issue is more than just an accident out of faulty wiring, but a holocaust in which shrewd owners trying to evade despite acknowledging the affected establishment as theirs.

And as for the authorities, likely enough for broken pieces of pottery carrying their names be thrown directly towards themselves by an angry populace. The people are tired of their inefficiencies and laxness amidst self-pride according to their statements.

Saturday, 16 May 2015

Notes after revisiting neglected calls

Notes after revisiting neglected calls

(Or "ramblings on "ideas" being "watered down" by the system
In the name of "economic development"")

By Kat Ulrike 

"If this person may ask, when will be the time an individual or a group, curious enough to deal with the past just to counter the present, will afford to look at the blueprints being left decades ago in the archives or salvaged from the waste bins, yet still feasible in this society in need of having its own?" 

As observed by the concerned, there are many blueprints that are well kept, yet unseen by many as it hidden in the archives for generations, most of which were considerable in this today's socio-economic situation, and possibly an alternative to the prevailing idea that requires subservient to outside policies as if the latter can provide really generous aid in pursuit of development. 
But then, it is obvious that instead of cultivating a truly national development, it is an ersatz, faux-national development based on the wishes of both outside policymakers, domestic compadore-landlord oligarchs, and its apologetics trying to insist the present as an era of international finance capital and thus, no room for domestic-based production and sustainability. That amidst modern things people enjoyed, most were rather offshore if not assembled with parts not made from its own. The latter, although it appears as providing jobs and a facade of stimulating production according to the wishes of the so-called developed countries does not mean it gives an enough opportunity to prove that the society is also capable of having these creations, obviously a mockery since it has no solid foundation such as a heavy industry to support the assembly line manufacturing sector.

Pardon to those whom are offended by these person's words, but citing the fact that the so-called newly industrialised country has no foundations to create sound industrialisation, of limiting industry to those of light ones, if not disregarding industry in favour of commerce and trade, then what is the use of learning the sciences and other necessary subjects in pursuit of national development despite seeing handicrafts and herbal medicines during trade bazaars? Noting that the nation is abundant in resources yet mismanaged by the system amidst its rhetorics, of what are the phrases like production and modernisation if not for the factories and the call to roll one's sleeve to man the engines, of making plans and be agreed by those supposedly working for the people? 
Having a policy of import dependence and reliance on outside investment does not guarantee having a developed country without stimulating domestic production and its proceeds going to further development (a la China, Japan, and Korea); and letting the system leaving matters to a group of con-men assuming to be for the economy shows its reluctance to support the demands if the people, save profit and keeping interests. 

Anyways, this writeup is not all about a battle between trade protectionism or liberalisation as what others likely to think of, but a call for a genuine national development that requires popular consensus, formulating ideas coming from both contradicting schools of economic thought, and its subsequent approval. For sure there is nothing wrong in formulating an idea that accommodates foreign investment yet protecting the interest of the folk via its own control of basic needs. And History showed that there are also attempts to create a bridge to accomodate both views in pursuit of domestic development, however while making discourse it becomes an object of ceaseless debate rather than creating consensus for the sake of the people seeking employment, communities yearning for development, access to goods and services, and a nation trying to roll its own sleeves and standing up on its own. 
To other may sound Keynesian with all the idea of spending in social works including mass transport and basic industries as well as welfare, or even NEP-like given the latter did also accomodate some outside investment (such as Armand Hammer) while at the same time building foundations for Socialism. China did the same example during Deng Xiaoping, yet instead of gearing towards Socialism, it end succumbed to Neoliberalism. 

But as for the Philippine experience, the attempt was all but rhetorical complimented by a façade of "action" with a different benefactee, much likely as if an icing enough to hid the core such as backwardness and negligence, corruption involving bureaucrats and compradores past and present. 
That somehow made the Centrist writer Charles Baynas, detested the "economic growth and development" that was made during the Marcos regime with an emphasis on his "nationalisation/industrialisation":

"Marcos’ attempt was to re-create the early Meiji Japan and Park Chung Hee South Korea model of industrialization. The problem is that while the ex-Samurai Landowners who got converted into industrialists in Meiji Japan and the ex-landowners in S. Korea who also got converted into industrialists were disciplined enough and COMPLIED with their governments and delivered, Marcos’ cronies did not deliver: they lived luxurious lives and lazily enjoyed the mountains of “free money” they had been allocated (which they were supposed to pay back since they were loans)"

Actually, prior to him there were attempts to recreate those examples, with men like Araneta, Soriano, Lopez, Concepcion, Halili, and Guevara once trying to become industrialists despite their landlord- compradore nature. However, with policies subservient to the wishes of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, it hinders their supposed intention to develop, if not limiting their "industrialisation" to those of semi-processed ones, assembly line, power, and consumer goods, or even sold by its competitors lock, stock, and drop (such as in case of Halili Beer and Mission Beverages to Soriano's San Miguel). And Marcos, assuming to be "nationalist" yet subservient to those of American interests, rather reduced his statements into crass rhetoric trying to appease developed countries for the sake of foreign investments. Yes, he had junked the controversial "Parity rights", he had made US bases a tie up with its Filipino counterpart as a "stepping-stone" to a possible takeover, yet he failed to assert further patriotic intentions, but instead letting his gang of corrupt bureaucrats and landed compradores takeover what was left, with his controlled media repackaged, making everyone hailed it as "nationalisation" or "industrialisation". 

But then, what Marcos did was not really a trying hard Meiji nor Yushin. That amidst attempts to do a protectionist-style import-substitution scheme the way groups coming from his predecessors trying to assert, his style of "import substitution" coming from his cronies would have been "trying hardly inspired" from the Soviet Union, particularly with its "New Economic Policy" (NEP) that had brought the rise of "NEPmen" or Middlemen-Bureaucrats.  Marcos, in pursuit of countering "oligarchs" of the old had tried to make a fashion out of landed gentries-cum-bureaucrats supporting him like Enrile, Floirendo, and Benedicto, while at the same time courting the existing compradore-landlord "oligarchs" Soriano, Zobel de Ayala, and Cojuangco, to become his own "NEPmen"; those who can't comply were given trumped-up charges if not gone exile in case of the Lopezes and Domingo M. Guevara. 
But as what Mr. Baynas said in his post, the Japanese and the Chosonese (Korean) compradores did tried to comply (as what Ninoy Aquino said in an Asiaweek article, societies in the far east such as China and Japan are command societies unlike the Philippines) unlike the self-centred Filipino  compradore trying to keep firm in its existing and new share of property, much more being corrupt due to letting government funds ended in their pockets. And Marcos, despite assuming to be anti-corrupt and patriot, rather failed his task on punishing them for being , unlike Stalin whom had afforded to immediately stop the NEP (which was actually temporary and transitional), punished the corrupt NEPmen (most were imprisoned or executed due to "wrecking" and "economic sabotage"), and instead pave way for the series of 5 year economic plans in the former Soviet Union (that includes strict regulation of the private sector, emphasis on production, and a series of major infrastructure projects trying to steer development further than during the earlier policy). 

That fact that bureaucrats amd compradores are thriving in their interests, it seemed obvious for them to disregard most, if not altogether policies even the charter itself designating an institution as for service than for profit. That once, this writer's grandfather, who once worked as a manager in the Land Bank of the Philippines, abhorred the nature of some bureaucrats (particularly the administrators) in treating the bank as like any other enterprise rather than financing the Agrarian Reform according to its charter.  The bank did somehow trying to appear as populistic with low interest rates and a series of "improvements" to be boasted, yet it did not satisfy most but instead seeing its contraries. Thus, not even wonder why there are farmers complaining about less developments in the countryside and more scams pretending to be supportive of the said project, that took decades and additional years with various bills like the Extended and Reformed version of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.  If they afforded to say Agrarian Reforms as successful, then how come Hacienda Luisita remained undistributed, Looc remained controlled by its landlords, and Canlubang Sugar Estate gone developed from agricultural to commercio-residential? Did Landbank really succeed in financing the Agrarian Reform Program of the state? Or just letting compradores take over in the name of "development"? 

Well, despite agreeing to the statement coming from the so-called "centrist", what Marcos did was to create a façade of nationalism that benefits himself ranging from brutalist architectures at Pasay to the almost use of the Bayabayin "Ka", but substituting both the old rich and the foreign companies with his handpicked men with the same foreign companies seems to be a mockery of his statements. Yes, the Parity Rights had been expired, but did it provide a transition that requires capable Filipinos to take over American-owned ones? Nope, instead were the old rich landlord-compradores in the provinces loyal to the regime, if not familiar names trying to take a chunk for their new venture and be rebranded as nationalism by the propaganda department.  Worse, an aggravation of feudal and compradore problems as the regime and its successors failed to make their "reforms" succeed in its course. 

And although knowing that both "protectionism" and "liberalisation" have enough positive points to consider, in the end it rather benefits the compradore oligarchs, both local and international as seen in its actuality: that "protectionism" did benefit both Chinese and European sounding Filipino names, yet "liberalisation" did also benefit both Chinese and European sounding Filipino names; these profiteering compradores rather benefited much in these two schools of economic thought by diluting if not distorting to appear applicable as theirs being stubborn profiteers and exploiters. How come there will be competition in an actually existing cartelisation? How come there will be fair prices in an actually invented crisis brought by compradores and supported by the corrupt? Yes, these ideas this person stated benefited the exploiter in the name of their interests just like what Marcos and his like did for an example. 

And if that's the case, then how about the people who did the entire work long hours for these profiteers and exploiters? Whether they are working in a Japanese-controlled car assembly line in Laguna, an American-owned textile works at Bataan, British-owned Oil company, or a Chinese-owned flour mill at Pasig, besides those of oligarch-owned sugarcane centrals like Hacienda Luisita, and food manufacturing giants like San Miguel, these people who are directly participating in the working process obviously knew that these people on high, controlling the economy as well as politics, are all profiteers scrambling for profit and disregarding the welfare of its workers, as well as communities. 
Or in a Marxist terms, they are stubborn, hard headed capitalists. The oligarchs did babble "protectionism" especially during Marcos, yet they can't protect small and medium enterprises nor seriously adhere to industrialisation given their compradore nature, at the same time they also babble "liberalisation" given that they do tie ups with foreign capital with the latter trying to expand their interests and the former trying to keep their prestige; but still both ideas these oligarchs taken interest rather limit industrialisation to those of medium scale and describing assembly line manufacturing as enough for a so-called "heavy industry",  for the fact that these compradores are also stooges of international finance capital, with its very own agreements, that obviously limiting development to those of small and almost medium scale, a façade that tries to lessen the appearance of an actually exiting feudal, backward agricultural society assuming to be a developing one in par with its developed neighbours.

That somehow made this person and others concerned think that scheme as all but a mockery. Of what is economic independence if most economic plans require approval from people outside such as the international moneylending agencies assuming to be for "reconstruction" and "development" as well as oligarchs trying to stunt, if not block altogether attempts suggested by the people? Is it because of their funds? Of hindering their profits from outside trade and commerce in favour of production despite assuming to be "industrialists" with their façade called "industry"? Then how about call for massive long term economic plans (involving new infrastructure, exceeding production quotas), protecting small and medium scale producers while accomodating foreign investments under "fair" agreements, investing in science and technology (especially in education, research, and development), a serious implementation of agrarian reform (and agricultural modernisation), and a revisit in attempts for industrialisation, with rehabilitation of major industries (steel, chemical) as its focus? 

Such "idealistic" concepts and attempts were being scrapped altogether if not unjustly watered down for its planners are actually being scared of turning it down by the system due to its reluctance and favouring the agreements international moneylending agencies offered much. And also to think that the system and its apologetics afford to babble much of Friedman and Mises to the Third World, and limit the words of Recto and Lichauco to those of whining crackpots, these people who supposedly thinking about domestic-based development and the desire to have lower prices of goods, self sufficiency, and full employment, ignorantly notice that despite its sugarcoated statements given from existing and future agreements, international moneylending agencies, actually agents of the assuming developed countries and finance capital, actually tend to bloc attempts to steer a developing country further in a genuine course of progress, and be forced to depend on imports while squandering natural resources for export by outside capital than its supposed domestic consumption. 

And no wonder why a nation that is abundant in natural resources is rather contenting in import surpluses and less on its exports, thanks to a mismaged, unguided economy due to its existing agreements with international moneylenders and a system that chose to leave serious matters to those assuming to be for the country yet actually for their interests. 

That somehow makes poverty, crisis aggravating, with corruption, repression gone worst.

Wednesday, 6 May 2015

A poem to the "Ungrateful Mother"

A poem to the "Ungrateful Mother"

(Or a poem to Celia Veloso)

Yes, the ungrateful chose to keep its silence
Amidst the heckles surrounding
Its silence been brought after its passions
Vented out so astounding
The poor cheered and the rich jeered
In its messages pointing at the latter
Especially with the incompetent ruler
Who afford to grab credit yet anything is in paper
The ungrateful is of the repressed, walking from town to town
Crying freedom for his daughter threatened by death come
Out of a crime done yet innocently not known
The authorities did acknowledge yet in fact they turned down
If not leaving them with scraps paper trying to shout their mouths on
But for five years of shutting their mouths they can't withstand
Fearing a love one's death has to cry aloud till a concerned come
And listen to her words, to her pleas, to her calls
And be responded by assistances, pressuring the system to heed over
The same call, plea, word
That has been turned down, snubbed, or complimented by a statement.

The pleas suddenly became pressures, and the pressures became protests
Pointing against the negligent system, while calling for a reversal of sentence
Till the man from the Nusantara did heed their pleas
Taking first with concerned groups trying to change his mind at ease 
While his men trying to make spin by telling he is listening to the authorities
Who actually afforded to came late and gave up quite immediate
The pleas comes a reprieve and the almost sorrowing gave thanks
To the concerned people, groups, masses but not  the authorities instead lambasted
That made its apologetics creating messages
In various mediums, articles and comments
One did cry ingrate the rest chanted death
For not giving thanks to a system, negligent yet came hero as the papers being set
They spin the minds of those once concerned, creating monsters and venting rage
Trying to protect the corrupt patrons, and its incompetent princes 
From the forsaken people gone tired and angry willing to vent hatred
From the computer screens to the gates of hell.

Yes, the so-called ungrateful keeps its silence
Unless her heart urges her to vent words against them
Against the hypocrites whose defending the rotten order is contrary to the words 
trying to seek changes if not whining against those who does the same action 
Yet in a different name.

Read, Study, and be Inspired!

Read, Study, and be Inspired!

In an era where reading has been almost disregarded by many, there are some individuals whom rather prefering to read a book, studying it, and be inspired by its messages its writers had afforded to write on after their experiences. 

That amidst attempts to displace the cultivation of idea and favoring a society that cultivates a culture devoid of value and significance, it is necessary for those whom concerned to urge people to deal with cultivating knowledge and wonder as part of creating new achievements in their respective field. 

Whether it is political, scientific, to those of fiction and fantasy, reading a book makes a person explore many things, cultivate ideas, and creating an urge to formulate new ideas and opening possibilities in building a tomorrow different from what has seen today. 

It was reading and studying realities that had brought renewed struggles in case of the French Revolution, the Paris Commune, the May 4th Movement, Movimento Propaganda, Katipunan, and other social movements in which instilling people a desire for social change, and in every book comes a record, analysis, and facts that somehow compels a person to acknowledge the people's call for changes in its society, far from what their system tries to insist with.
So were the Industrial Revolution, Art Nouveau, Art Deco, Futuriam, Vorticism, Dada, the use of Petroleum for the engines, and the creation of gadgets that were once figments of imagination coming from science fiction writers only to be realised by those whom trying to steer a new phase in arts, culture, sciences, and Technology.

And no matter what others say in pursuit of dissuading one's desire to cultivate knowledge and a thirst for renewed talent, Reading and studying does not mean you have to give your gadgets or any tools a modern world had offered, but to tell reading and studying is nonsense makes you having devoid of a soul that drives one proving your gadgets you certainly enjoy. That the Science Fiction of Verne or H.G. Wells came Rockets and Cellular Phones, and the works of various philosophers like Marx has urging a person think and interpret the world's realities, with a note letting one on how to change it. 

Anyways, with this message, hope that people now and then acknowlege that in reading, studying, comes enough idea to make people be inspired and help in an unrealised aspiration.

Monday, 4 May 2015



By Mao Zedong 
May 1939

Comrade Mao Zedong wrote this article for newspapers in Yenan to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the May 4th Movement. Coming from The Selected Works of Mao Zedong published by the Foreign Languages Press, China and transcribed for the website Marxists.org.
This writeup is a repost in commemoration of the said event which was happened in China years ago, during the formative years of the republic. Students and people from all walks of life expressed disgust against the regime for its incompetence and corruption, of being subervient to foreign and vested interests. Also in that movement comes the blossoming of modern Chinese literature and thought, that was made in reaction to the prevailing idea and norms during that said era, which was rooted in its pasts. 
Mao Zedong was also a participant of the said movement that time. In his writeup, Mao expressed that the said event is a sequel to an unfinished struggle and a prequel to a commitment that made China known for its future generations.

The May 4th Movement twenty years ago marked a new stage in China's bourgeois-democratic revolution against imperialism and feudalism. The cultural reform movement which grew out of the May 4th Movement was only one of the manifestations of this revolution. With the growth and development of new social forces in that period, a powerful camp made its appearance in the bourgeois-democratic revolution, a camp consisting of the working class, the student masses and the new national bourgeoisie. Around the time of the May 4th Movement, hundreds of thousands of students courageously took their place in the van. In these respects the May 4th Movement went a step beyond the Revolution of 1911.
If we trace China's bourgeois-democratic revolution back to its formative period, we see that it has passed through a number of stages in its development: the Opium War, the War of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, the Sino-Japanese War of 1894,[1] the Reform Movement of 1898,[2] the Yi Ho Tuan Movement,[3] the Revolution of 1911, the May 4th Movement, the Northern Expedition, and the War of the Agrarian Revolution. The present War of Resistance Against Japan is yet another stage, and is the greatest, most vigorous and most dynamic stage of all. The bourgeois-democratic revolution can be considered accomplished only when the forces of foreign imperialism and domestic feudalism have basically been overthrown and an independent democratic state has been established. From the Opium War onwards each stage in the development of the revolution has had its own distinguishing characteristics. But the most important feature differentiating them is whether they came before or after the emergence of the Communist Party. However, taken as a whole, all the stages bear the character of a bourgeois-democratic revolution The aim of this democratic revolution is to establish a social system hitherto unknown in Chinese history, namely, a democratic social system having a feudal society (during the last hundred years a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society) as its precursor and a socialist society as its successor. If anyone asks why a Communist should strive to bring into being first a bourgeois-democratic society and then a socialist society, our answer is: we are following the inevitable course of history.
China's democratic revolution depends on definite social forces for its accomplishment. These social forces are the working class, the peasantry, the intelligentsia and the progressive section of the bourgeoisie, that is, the revolutionary workers, peasants, soldiers, students and intellectuals, and businessmen, with the workers and peasants as the basic revolutionary forces and the workers as the class which leads the revolution. It is impossible to accomplish the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal democratic revolution without these basic revolutionary forces and without the leadership of the working class. Today, the principal enemies of the revolution are the Japanese imperialists and the Chinese traitors, and the fundamental policy in the revolution is the policy of the Anti-Japanese National United Front, consisting of all workers, peasants, soldiers, students and intellectuals, and businessmen who are against Japanese aggression. Final victory in the War of Resistance will be won when this united front is greatly consolidated and developed.
In the Chinese democratic revolutionary movement, it was the intellectuals who were the first to awaken. This was clearly demonstrated both in the Revolution of 1911 and in the May 4th Movement, and in the days of the May 4th Movement the intellectuals were more numerous and more politically conscious than in the days of the Revolution of 1911. But the intellectuals will accomplish nothing if they fail to integrate themselves with the workers and peasants. In the final analysis, the dividing line between revolutionary intellectuals and non-revolutionary or counter-revolutionary intellectuals is whether or not they are willing to integrate themselves with the workers and peasants and actually do so. Ultimately it is this alone, and not professions of faith in the Three People's Principles or in Marxism, that distinguishes one from the other. A true revolutionary must be one who is willing to integrate himself with the workers and peasants and actually does so.
It is now twenty years since the May 4th Movement and almost two years since the outbreak of the anti-Japanese war. The young people and the cultural circles of the whole country bear a heavy responsibility in the democratic revolution and the War of Resistance. I hope they will understand the character and the motive forces of the Chinese revolution, make their work serve the workers and peasants, go into their midst and become propagandists and organizers among them. Victory will be ours when the entire people arises against Japan. Young people of the whole country, bestir yourselves!

1. The Sino-Japanese War of 1894 was started by Japanese imperialism for the purpose of invading Korea and China. Many Chinese soldiers and some patriotic generals put up a heroic fight. But China suffered defeat because of the corruption of the Ching government and its failure to prepare resistance. In 1895 the Ching government concluded the shameful Treaty of Shimonoseki with Japan.
2. For the Reform Movement of 1898 see "On Protracted War", Note 8, p. 191 of this volume.
3. The Yi Ho Tuan Movement was the anti-imperialist armed struggle which took place in northern China in 1900. The broad masses of peasants, handicraftsmen and other people took part in this movement. Getting in touch with one another through religious and other channels, they organized themselves on the basis of secret societies and waged a heroic struggle against the joint forces of aggression of the eight imperialist powers--the United States, Britain, Japan, Germany, Russia, France, Italy and Austria. The movement was put down with indescribable savagery after the joint forces of aggression occupied Tientsin and Peking.

Sunday, 3 May 2015

To be called as Ingrates, A faux- "Patronato Real" tainted by negligence, And a call for a true Noblesse Oblige

To be called as Ingrates, 
A faux- "Patronato Real" tainted by negligence,
And a call for a true Noblesse Oblige

(Or how Aquino's apologetics desperately
 trying to change the scene to suit their interests)

In reading comments from various social media sites, specifically calling for their deaths and various slurs pointing against those criticising the system's "noble acts", it's all but desperate for a system, not just the president and his stooges to show its weakness, especially after listening from a mother who, after five years of being silenced yet not given enough support (except alibis) made her expressed badly enough to harm one's pride such as the system's.

With words such as "ungrateful", "ingrate", or even "foolish", "stupid", and "wrong move", both the paid and unpaid hirelings of the system tried its best to change the setting from calling for justice to calling for demise simply because of not acknowleging but instead criticising the system for its gross negligence in saving one's life, such as a convicted daughter, from the execution hall. Sorry to say this, but why should a mother who is been neglected by a system that suddenly became a "hero too late" give thanks to the latter? It even shows how feudal-like the assuming democratic country is compared to its neighbours, not to mention that the system did less, if not none at all in ensuring people's well being, leaving it in favour of private interests as if it promotes development, yet actually not. 

And since they chose not to, then it shows that they really don't like the system's own brand of Patronato Real be shoved in their throats as they assert the fact how negligent and too late the hero the government is. If this person may ask, why should people, particularly the victims oblige to give thanks to the government, specifically to a particular person instead of the taxpayers for the infrastructures and a series of projects amidst its corruption if not incompetence? How feudal-like! And apologetics would even cry "Filipino values" that has been raped too much just to suit in their interests, while at the same time would cry terms such as "credit grabbers", "scene stealers", "epal", to other politicians especially those from the opposition simply because of their intention to curry favor with the people such as this coming elections. Well, no matter how corrupt they are and trying to keep firm in its power, the traditional opposition also did something to prove in which constituents likely afford to appreciate, different from the incompetences and much shortcomings the government did and brought criticism by these same constituents.

But again, opposition or administration, what they did is a modern day patronato real waiting for an exchange, a trying hard noblesse oblige waiting for a sweet reply, and if its subjects can't appreciate, of not giving thanks, especially because of the system's serious lack of attention and shortcomings over promised expectations a patron obliged to focus, leading to half-baked actualisations or mere rhetorics without actions, are being called as ingrates and hence bereft of gifts that are meant to be services. 

Anyways, no matter what the apologetics says, they are still defending an haciendero president, much more a rotten system that is two faced in its character. While they wanted to eradicate patronage politics as shown by Binay and his clique doing just to curry favor especially for the coming election such as an actually existing pseudo-welfare statism in Makati or in Navotas, they can't accept the fact that the administration did less or none in calling for Veloso's justice besides press releases and talks Indonesian President Jokowi likely to treat as complimentary gestures, far from the actual popular pressure, gathering updates, anything from concerned Migrants and Lawyers groups just to change the Indonesian court's decision regarding Mary Jane Veloso's case.

And speaking of Ingrates and being Ungrateful to the head of state, is the families of the 44 fallen men of the Special Action Force are also called ingrates, of not being grateful for not accepting Aquino's statements and gestures? Fact that the Haciendero head of state is much Ingrate than the protestors and Mrs. Veloso for not admitting his accountability, much more in making stupid comments such as "quits", while his apologetics telling everyone that "better focus in progress than tragedy" in a form of Aquino's visit in Mitsubishi plant at Laguna.
So are the victims of typhoon Yolanda, whom are also likely to be called ingrates for not acknowledging the efforts that is rigged by the corrupted agencies such as Soliman's Social Welfare Department, whom had provided them with rotten rice, expired canned goods, while a head of state, as if disturbed from his fantasies, afforded to say "you didn't die right?" In front of these people yearning for an immediate help. 

Well, the arrogance of today's administration, coupled by the stupidities made by its apologetics, rather unveiled hypocrisies and opportunism, or even be described as counterreaction given their messages consists of a "fluid, twisted justice", "rule of law", "patronage politics", and "salvation by a king's grace" while at the same time crying for that same old "change" that requires no confrontation according to their fantasies. To summarise it all, first they babble rule of law and favouring a "just" death penalty without any idea of a due process; then suddenly a change of mood calling for Veloso's salvation with all the hashtags, pictures of Mary Jane, and reports favoring the latter's support for justice; and nowadays back to their supposed moods favoring death and the firing squad, coupled with the words such as ingrate or ungrateful for not acknowledging the president's "action" but instead expressing hatred towards the president out of its own negligence. 

And as for these paid and unpaid apologetics, sorry to say this, that despite arrogance left by the present administration, or actually the ruling system itself, it failed to do its noblesse oblige compared to the ones pressuring for justice and criticizing the former's negligence. A noble duty does not require any specified patron to acknowlege and be given praise, but the important is that one does make a really serious effort to uphold justice and never gives up in its commitment, of acknowleging its shortcomings yet trying to make measures enough to uphold a true sense of justice in its constituents, both within its boundaries and the diaspora outside. The Philippines own experience is indeed feudal like with all its values trying to preserve as such, but devoid of its knightly character and instead substituted by a tyrant who rapes every idea to suit its own goals. No wonder why Aguinaldo's been abhorred for killing Bonifacio and negating the popular-revolutionary character despite his actions during the war of independence (he would have called the Katipuneros as Ingrates for calling him a tyrant); so is Aquino and his antics despite alleged growth rates media loves to show about. 

Anyways, no wonder why back then the Philippines is known to be a country of a million cowards led by one son of a bitch due to its "raped traditions", while those who opposing, be it from the Velosos, from the fallen 44, to the survivors of typhoons Yolanda, are being called as Ingrates, Ungrateful, simply because of disacknowledging the patronato real the rotting semifeudal system continues to cultivate as of these days. 

Friday, 1 May 2015

May Day Greetings

May Day Greetings

Amidst the façade of progress the present system afforded to brag about, most people still notice the same old tensions continue to prevail. 

That despite claiming about decent wages, wider health coverages, greater collective bargaining rights, and less discriminatory mesaures, the tensions between the rich and the poor continues with the latter heavily affected by the former's invented crisis. 
And these involves increasing prices of goods and services, less wages, inadequate services, unfair collective bargaining, harassments towards unions, and illegal profit-seeking motives like sweatshop labour with its virtual prison-like conditions. 

So where's the justice being taken pride by the system in their statements? The fact that they afforded to make laws and decrees, proclamations and letters of instructions, these can be watered down by the same system whose  motive is to appease with their own greed-driven motives. Did red tape being cut off? Nope, did Smuggling being curbed? Not as well, the unjust competition brought by unbridled neoliberalism forced domestic companies into brink of bankruptcy while the system's own continues to gain much profit from its unpopular motives. Millions continued to be unemployed if not having their jobs endangered by policies favoring the system on the pretense of modernisation and development such as contractualisation and retrenchment.

How is agriculture? Did it provide meaningful employment? Nope, not even modernisation as promised by the system's own "agrarian reform program" that actually benefits themselves and not of the farmers the said program tries to speak for. Much more that there is no actual modernisation in agriculture after seeing hundreds of machete wielding farmworkers harvesting sugar for a lowest wage of 9.50 pesos in Haceinda Luisita, as well as communities that are in need of sufficient support by the government. 
If there is, then it is not for the farmers nor the communities, but the system themselves trying to make profits in their corruption, of their cash crops at the expense of the masses' own labour. 

Well, no wonder why amidst these braggings everyone concerned sees is migration to other countries as guest workers encountering various dangers and swindles,  if not forced contentment as semiemployed workers that is, different from their respective professions. 

And not even wonder why these clear and present tensions and problems  justify protests this May Day.