"Counterreactionaries"
By Kat Ulrike
 |
| "Court of Comrades" by Nicholas Shneyder |
Like last few years, commentators had expressed ridicule if not rage, especially in regards to the radicals marching and confronting riot policemen during a protest action. Last Monday's action for example, aside from praise from those against the system and to the regime, there are those whom used the events, as well as other related actions to ridicule so is to insist their stances acting as an alternative to the disorder: that somehow made those whom took the revolutionary path opted to debate to realize their mistakes if not to educate to rethink their statements.
And as for yours truly, thinking of these people as Counterreactionaries knowing that they clamor for change yet at the same time keeping their privileges such as the status quo they enjoy with.
And as for yours truly, thinking of these people as Counterreactionaries knowing that they clamor for change yet at the same time keeping their privileges such as the status quo they enjoy with.
"Actions in response to an existing reaction,"
(Or being against the system
yet at the same time keeping the old order)
Based on the word that means "an action taken in response to a prior reaction", Counterreactionaries are those whom countering an existing reactionary order, whom usually tends to be on behalf of the people in general yet in fact to those whom are trying to protect their privileges by using the statements of the people; they afford to join in a band-wagon of sorts yet at the same time applauded the actions taken by the system in spite of being heavily criticized by most (hence opportunism); these people are mainly petitbourgeois 'idealists' (like any other self-proclaimed reformist or revolutionary), seeking for an alternative to mass actions and civil disobedience, especially by means of social media if not good old lobbying and negotiations, peaceful means in currying favor with the system. Only to see that Social media, or the computer as a tool actually means comfort for these "thinking people" since the latter had rather take time using the computer as a tool for social change instead of marching and chanting slogans, confronting the system itself, clamoring for reforms if not major overhaul of the society.
Quite nice though to see their effort in using social media to spearhead changes, but to content in such benefits is a two way road: one would meant enjoyment, that you are satisfied with anything you can afford, but the other side of the coin would mean a less approach to an inconvenient reality (especially in immersing ones self to the laborers and the urban poor) as it favours the tangible illusion of comfort of facing the computer if not basing much on newspaper clippings and making writeups trying to act "concerning" towards the laboring people.
As most petitbourgeois nowadays, no matter how 'idealistic' they are in seeking for an alternative, had afforded to criticize the protesters citing their repeated calls and blocking traffic, though at the same time joining the bandwagon of abolishing pork barrel if not distributing arable lands such as Hacienda Luisita. And lately, contrary to their 'opposition to mismanagement of government budget' like the Pork Barrel, they had applauded about the benefits brought by the unpopular "Disbursement Acceleration Program" (DAP) due to the infrastructure being done and scholarships being given to, not knowing that it is the same program that paid senators in exchange for making former Chief Justice Corona guilty during the impeachment trial, so is in paying landlords as 'compensation' yet still not been given to the tillers the contested lands despite payment.
And in speaking of joining in bandwagons, most of these "thinking people" whom these days trying to defend the President and his clique are also the same people whom afford to criticize the President after watching a video courtesy of sites like PinoyMonkeyPride and AntiPinoy.com, that they even afford to criticize the late Corazon Aquino for her brownouts and capitulation to foreign interests (especially debt peonage), while praising Ferdinand Marcos with his series of contributions (like infrastructure) in spite of his corrupt practises, and not knowing that his son, BongBong, had also been implicated in the PDAF scam in which he tries to deny with.
Or you even afford to say "fuck the system" yet failing to give a concrete solution other than "the self", that you insist just individual initative (and to take pride of) yet at the same time currying anyone to act as a community, how contradicting though isn't it?
So, in citing contradictions these people failed to handle, then where's their reformism and their call for major change if they fail to see clearly such as a corrupt, exploiting system in spite of clamoring for reforms and at the same time making slander towards those whom taking direct action? Of shifting support from one to another despite sharing the same corruption and misgovernance being representatives of the rotten order? Actually, it is strange so to speak the changing stances of these Counterreactionary groupuscle. That other than opportunism they used the situation in order to defend the status quo and at the same time introducing 'reforms' such as those of third way inclination. Some would dare to organize protests yet calling it as non-partisan, they tend to invoke "National Unity" all the time, yet they have no concrete program to advance their supposed goals and aspirations unlike those of their adversaries such as the Left; but in general, they have a disdain for protest as they favor "peaceful" stances again from the use of social media to "critical collaboration" with the status quo no matter how repressive the latter is just to advance specific goals of their so-called "movement."
And since some had afforded to 'march', with or without a specific program of action, a road to their causes, why most tend to limit in the comfort of their swivel chairs via social media or even commentaries through the paper without any immersion or direct dialouge with the laboring people? Much more in reducing solutions that require popular participation to those of "personal initiative"? The French Revolution, the Paris Commune, the revolution of 1896 isn't out of personal initiatives, that Georges Danton, a writer and a lawyer, had joined and even led in various marches, so was Jose Rizal whom also joined protest actions in Spain not just limiting himself in writing a novel and in papers like La Solidaridad.
Blame as you wish, heckle as you want that made radicals afford to counter you with their statements, but in the end these radicals, protesters so to speak, rather enjoy the shower of the water cannon and showed their valour in spite of the pain being inflicted by the policemen, where were you at that time on the first place? Sitting pretty? Taking pride in achievements such as your so-called talents? Medals and trophies, salaries and your so-called standard of living? Well, sorry to say, but your words about change isn't really change (individual change) but a reaction to their yearness called change (societal change). People who had marched, endured the heat and the sudden fire of the water cannons are the ones whom also cleaned their clothes, studied their lessons, worked hard for their daily bread, and yet still affected by endless crisis, these are still victims of the current rotten structure hidden beneath edifices of glass and steel and pseudo-achievements, and willing to break the cycle by changing the structure to the extent of sacrificing their lives knowing that "they're going to die fighting". Counterreactionaries fail to see inconvenient reality despite trying to observe, they yearned for change yet it contradicts with keeping their privileges hence they merely parrot the word 'change' while actually keeping the status quo "with a fresh coat of paint" called "reforms" and "compromise deals" just to lessen tensions still brewing thanks to corruption, disenfranchisement, and repression.
Personally, in reading comments coming from certain people in social media lies both consideration and disgust. Considering that they are petit bourgeois with a smattering of idealism as most had themselves chose to escape from reality and be contented in their tangible illusion that made those whom are enlightened ought to educate and understand the present, inconvenient situation; while another comes antagonism towards them knowing that their words are pointing against those whom are against the system. Yes, quite natural though to see radicals, even yours truly to express antagonism knowing that their statements opposing the protests and calls also meant supporting the status quo, especially that they offer no alternative than those of "personal initative." But how about those whom are entirely apathetic? Of disregarding the inconvenient reality altogether just for a long term comfort trying to keep with? Of spending a large chunk of salary for a party at Tomas Morato? That ain't hardship as what these truly apathetic whiners say! And these counterreactionaries, treating social issue sarcastically, justifying apathy with a smattering of reason, self-proclaiming as the silent majority that actually rallying on the side of the rotting status quo, failed to make clear their stand that somehow resorted to what they called 'unjust attacks' and their own words as 'sensible memes' by those whom defending their cause.
Or, do they need to study La Revolution Française? Their words mimic the second estate and its desire to keep the status quo while at the same time issuing 'reforms' that had actually mocked those of the third estate. Few would dare to become like Mirabeaus or Neckers, but most are rather showed disdain for the majority's call for an overhaul of the society to rid off of its rottenness not just because they are dirty like the typical Sans Culotte or too passionate like Danton or Robespierre, but also a hindrance to their privileges.
"to gain you is no profit, to lose you is no loss."
Blame as you wish, heckle as you want that made radicals afford to counter you with their statements, but in the end these radicals, protesters so to speak, rather enjoy the shower of the water cannon and showed their valour in spite of the pain being inflicted by the policemen, where were you at that time on the first place? Sitting pretty? Taking pride in achievements such as your so-called talents? Medals and trophies, salaries and your so-called standard of living? Well, sorry to say, but your words about change isn't really change (individual change) but a reaction to their yearness called change (societal change). People who had marched, endured the heat and the sudden fire of the water cannons are the ones whom also cleaned their clothes, studied their lessons, worked hard for their daily bread, and yet still affected by endless crisis, these are still victims of the current rotten structure hidden beneath edifices of glass and steel and pseudo-achievements, and willing to break the cycle by changing the structure to the extent of sacrificing their lives knowing that "they're going to die fighting". Counterreactionaries fail to see inconvenient reality despite trying to observe, they yearned for change yet it contradicts with keeping their privileges hence they merely parrot the word 'change' while actually keeping the status quo "with a fresh coat of paint" called "reforms" and "compromise deals" just to lessen tensions still brewing thanks to corruption, disenfranchisement, and repression.
Whine against the protesters, activists, radicals if you want, but Professor Marx is right that history is all consists of class struggles, or even Pol Pot in regards to your reductionism, generalization, and efforts to write your whinings, for "to gain you is no profit, to lose you is no loss."