Welfare and Development under Dutertism:
Is there really "Development"?
Is there really "Development"?
The recent protests has again brought the idea on patriotism and the need for social change. Ranging from the rise of costs of living to those of bloodied exploits, unjust decrees and actions justified by rants and ramblings, it seems that the administration is like his predecessors whom at first kowtowing to vested interests and entrenched entities no matter how he and his ilk "tried its best" to appear itself as benevolent if not appealing to patriotism.
For as Duterte and his apologists tried its "best" to consolidate by means of their "carrot and stick"-kind of "reforms", what more of continuing its usual paeans and heckles, it seems that they are increasingly desperate as they churn their distortions time and again, trying to keep away its followers from seeking further the truth in which the concerned dealt for- as well as to think that it is worth affirming that only through an organised and collective assertion of people's democratic rights and welfare can give a country a fighting chance against repression and a hope to find solutions to its ever-prevailing problems.
Usual isn't it? For as in the past and its still-continuing setting of repression and injustice, the ever growing mass of concerned citizens has becoming a fighting one, knowing that they end firmly believing that "rights are to be fought for and asserted, rather than granted"; and to think that in a regime assuming to be they for the people and by the people, of babbling words such as change and development, yet actually uphelding a corruption-and-repression prevailing status quo, then sadly for those apologists and apostates alike that their brand of change isn't really change but of consolidation of interest- with some minimal sacrifices enough to appease the people and win its trust.
Ideally, the programs, projects, anything "developmental" that's brought about by the regime's view on "change" and "reform" reminds this post of what the late Diosdado Macapagal, from his preface "on the Welfare State" by Adolfo Borromeo in 1970, wherein he urges the adoption of the welfare state in the proposed constitution, through incorporating in its declaration of principles and state policies- which somehow its essence been trying to realise both by concerned and some "despotic" legislators including those of the present president himself:
"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".
And in speaking of that "welfare", Duterte's apologists, as any other jesters and blabbermouths, will numerate the wonders from how that today's administration shows to the people, be it "BUILD BUILD BUILD", "free Irrigation", or the "TRAIN Law" that according to them "will fund various welfare and developmental programs brought about by the administration", even those of "Free Education", "Free Medicines", everything that makes the administration appears to be "socialistic"- coming from from a president that self-proclaiming as "socialist".
But in spite of its idealistic goals, the system, through the administration itself, clings to the idea that the "reforms" that can brought "changes" are rather "carrot and stick" measures with the intent to silence down dissent, knowing that people remained discontented in some if not most state policies, what more that in seeing a state still half-heartedly committed in ensuring the welfare of the people, save those for pictorials and piecemeal kind of "social actions", as said earlier it focuses on appeasing than uplifting the people, if not dismissing altogether the idea of ensuring people's welfare in favour of uphelding interests be it in the name of the market or anything that is based from the views of the vested few.
And to cite again Borromeo's book, Diosdado Macapagal even said that the well-known columnist turned ambassador to West Germany J.V Cruz indicated how Marcos dismissed the concept:
"Why doesn't Congress open earnest hearings on the feasibility of introducing the welfare state into this country, perhaps the only viable alternative to communism now left to Filipinos?"
Sounds reasonable at first knowing that the Philippines was at turmoil. The concept of the welfare state was both interesting and at the same time ridiculous knowing that the country's postwar views were (and still are) patterned those from its former coloniser, and socioeconomic policies been private-sector driven; the latter, of course, benefits the ruling few as well as the state whose also priority was (and is) to keep their interests.
For as Duterte and his apologists tried its "best" to consolidate by means of their "carrot and stick"-kind of "reforms", what more of continuing its usual paeans and heckles, it seems that they are increasingly desperate as they churn their distortions time and again, trying to keep away its followers from seeking further the truth in which the concerned dealt for- as well as to think that it is worth affirming that only through an organised and collective assertion of people's democratic rights and welfare can give a country a fighting chance against repression and a hope to find solutions to its ever-prevailing problems.
Usual isn't it? For as in the past and its still-continuing setting of repression and injustice, the ever growing mass of concerned citizens has becoming a fighting one, knowing that they end firmly believing that "rights are to be fought for and asserted, rather than granted"; and to think that in a regime assuming to be they for the people and by the people, of babbling words such as change and development, yet actually uphelding a corruption-and-repression prevailing status quo, then sadly for those apologists and apostates alike that their brand of change isn't really change but of consolidation of interest- with some minimal sacrifices enough to appease the people and win its trust.
Ideally, the programs, projects, anything "developmental" that's brought about by the regime's view on "change" and "reform" reminds this post of what the late Diosdado Macapagal, from his preface "on the Welfare State" by Adolfo Borromeo in 1970, wherein he urges the adoption of the welfare state in the proposed constitution, through incorporating in its declaration of principles and state policies- which somehow its essence been trying to realise both by concerned and some "despotic" legislators including those of the present president himself:
"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".
And in speaking of that "welfare", Duterte's apologists, as any other jesters and blabbermouths, will numerate the wonders from how that today's administration shows to the people, be it "BUILD BUILD BUILD", "free Irrigation", or the "TRAIN Law" that according to them "will fund various welfare and developmental programs brought about by the administration", even those of "Free Education", "Free Medicines", everything that makes the administration appears to be "socialistic"- coming from from a president that self-proclaiming as "socialist".
But in spite of its idealistic goals, the system, through the administration itself, clings to the idea that the "reforms" that can brought "changes" are rather "carrot and stick" measures with the intent to silence down dissent, knowing that people remained discontented in some if not most state policies, what more that in seeing a state still half-heartedly committed in ensuring the welfare of the people, save those for pictorials and piecemeal kind of "social actions", as said earlier it focuses on appeasing than uplifting the people, if not dismissing altogether the idea of ensuring people's welfare in favour of uphelding interests be it in the name of the market or anything that is based from the views of the vested few.
And to cite again Borromeo's book, Diosdado Macapagal even said that the well-known columnist turned ambassador to West Germany J.V Cruz indicated how Marcos dismissed the concept:
"Why doesn't Congress open earnest hearings on the feasibility of introducing the welfare state into this country, perhaps the only viable alternative to communism now left to Filipinos?"
Sounds reasonable at first knowing that the Philippines was at turmoil. The concept of the welfare state was both interesting and at the same time ridiculous knowing that the country's postwar views were (and still are) patterned those from its former coloniser, and socioeconomic policies been private-sector driven; the latter, of course, benefits the ruling few as well as the state whose also priority was (and is) to keep their interests.
Furthermore, Cruz even criticised the late dictator for dismissing the idea as unlikely, if not still trying to upheld the American way amidst the unjustness that brought to protests.
"President Marcos, unfortunately, once sneeringly dismissed the welfare state when it was proposed by ex-president Macapagal on the ground it could not be implemented within the nation's resources and capabilities. It is to be hoped the president will reconsider his stand. 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..."
Ironically, the late dictator end babbling about welfare and preaching about domestic-based development during Martial Rule. Even the first lady who once opposed the idea of mass housing as "creating mendicants" end espousing it with the building of BLISS housing projects in Metro Manila and other related programs and projects in the suburbs- but these aren't driven by ensuring welfare and empowerment but to create an impression of it amidst growing chaos.
"President Marcos, unfortunately, once sneeringly dismissed the welfare state when it was proposed by ex-president Macapagal on the ground it could not be implemented within the nation's resources and capabilities. It is to be hoped the president will reconsider his stand. 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..."
Ironically, the late dictator end babbling about welfare and preaching about domestic-based development during Martial Rule. Even the first lady who once opposed the idea of mass housing as "creating mendicants" end espousing it with the building of BLISS housing projects in Metro Manila and other related programs and projects in the suburbs- but these aren't driven by ensuring welfare and empowerment but to create an impression of it amidst growing chaos.
And regardless of their intent, what more of seeing bloodied truths in a form of extrajudicial acts by the state, it failed to silence the assertion of many especially after how that same administration treats its people as target practises and scapegoats. Those same programs stated above are even benefiting the few with kickbacks and other corrupt practises if not failed to resolve issues like Housing, Agrarian Reform, Health, Education, and other phases of a full life worthy as dignified human beings.
That until present it continues to haunt as such. Duterte, like his idol, may insist that his policies are developmentalist in character regardless of some of its policies as harming than benefiting. The TRAIN law, which describes as means to provide projects (like BUILD BUILD BUILD) with necessary funds resulted to people bearing the burnt of price increases. There, prices of oil products, food, grocery items, sugar-sweetened beverages, electric charges, and other goods and services been affected by that so-called reform leading to workers demanding for a wage increase and an end to price hikes. But despite popular disapproval, The Department of Finance (DOF) continues to downplay the effects of TRAIN, pointing to ‘bigger culprits’ such as peso depreciation, rising global prices of petroleum products, profiteering, seasonality, and the alleged artificial rice shortage created by the National Food Authority (NFA).
Yet still, despite all the downplayings and justifications, TRAIN's indirect taxes are rather pass-on impositions, which translate into goods manufacturers and service providers imposing tax obligations on customers in a form of price increases. This person, like all others concerned, finds it unjust than beneficial to the community no matter how the system babbles terms like welfare and development; true indeed that TRAIN may help in funding major projects, but patronage politics and political manouvering hampers most if not all projects.
From this no wonder why people oppose than agree on the government's tax reform knowing that it benefits the elites than those of the common people. Apologists may still cling to the idea that the program will fund various welfare and infrastructure-building activities, but, knowing that the commoners hear the burnt, is this the "socialism" Duterte expressed prior to his presidency? Socialism for the elites maybe, or even "social democracy" as what Duterte's political party supposedly adheres to; while for the masses- same old fusion of feudalism and fascism seems to be the fitting description thanks to the use of force and patronage.
And like the late dictator, "development" may continue still, but in its usual aggressive-exploitative form, affecting negatively both man and its environment, as it profits the still prevailing social order that ironically, banners the message of "change". Whatever efforts at false reports, fake approval ratings, untrue economic progress, and pseudo- benefits from TRAIN and other so-called "welfare packages", Duterte’s paid sycophants do these nonsense all in order to buffer his growing unpopularity and isolation if not evading people's minds from an unsound reality ranging from killing innocents to those of developmental aggression; but it is clear and plain that with the people’s tide of discontent, disdain, and countless resistance against tyranny and demagoguery, all these as rising day by day until it culminates enough into the tyrant’s downfall.
Yet still, despite all the downplayings and justifications, TRAIN's indirect taxes are rather pass-on impositions, which translate into goods manufacturers and service providers imposing tax obligations on customers in a form of price increases. This person, like all others concerned, finds it unjust than beneficial to the community no matter how the system babbles terms like welfare and development; true indeed that TRAIN may help in funding major projects, but patronage politics and political manouvering hampers most if not all projects.
From this no wonder why people oppose than agree on the government's tax reform knowing that it benefits the elites than those of the common people. Apologists may still cling to the idea that the program will fund various welfare and infrastructure-building activities, but, knowing that the commoners hear the burnt, is this the "socialism" Duterte expressed prior to his presidency? Socialism for the elites maybe, or even "social democracy" as what Duterte's political party supposedly adheres to; while for the masses- same old fusion of feudalism and fascism seems to be the fitting description thanks to the use of force and patronage.
And like the late dictator, "development" may continue still, but in its usual aggressive-exploitative form, affecting negatively both man and its environment, as it profits the still prevailing social order that ironically, banners the message of "change". Whatever efforts at false reports, fake approval ratings, untrue economic progress, and pseudo- benefits from TRAIN and other so-called "welfare packages", Duterte’s paid sycophants do these nonsense all in order to buffer his growing unpopularity and isolation if not evading people's minds from an unsound reality ranging from killing innocents to those of developmental aggression; but it is clear and plain that with the people’s tide of discontent, disdain, and countless resistance against tyranny and demagoguery, all these as rising day by day until it culminates enough into the tyrant’s downfall.