"Of Tranquility and Hope: All after Tanay, and Andres Bonifacio"

"Of Tranquility and Hope: 
All after Tanay, and Andres Bonifacio"

It's been a long while that this page hasn't have any poems.

All due to work and perhaps focusing on making notes, this writer hath again posted some poems which are based from both a writer's stay in a town, as well as reaffirming a country's love in a time of struggle.

Initially, this piece is meant to be like any other writeup, tackling about the tranquility of the town this writer visited few times out of work; yet from those work-related visits comes thoughts of making a piece, which not just dealt with the place itself, but also a yearning for hope. For in fact, in observing that tranquil setting such as Rizal's Tanay, one would say that it is a place suitable for a respite from the bustling, noisy nature of the metropolis; and from there one feels the towns relaxing atmosphere, seeing or even savouring the lush greenery till enough to unwind and enjoy nature's pleasantry.

However, for a concerned such as this person's, behind that tranquil setting lies poverty. For Tanay, as any other rural area within CALABARZON, there are poor peasants who still depend on sustenance agriculture; and most of which are victimised by usury, lack of education and various forms of opportunities, if not easily to be pinpointed by the state's agents especially those who are critical in the latter's policies.
Oftentimes, some portions of the town especially the mountainous ones, hath been a battlefield between the insurgents and the state, mostly consists of ambushes led by insurgents targeting convoys of policemen or soldiers, if not soldiers or policemen passing by only to fell into a trap of awaiting foe;  from these, one would say that it is truly an example of a "class struggle".

But despite all those truths, of battlefields and neglected hopes, the place remains beautiful, idyllic. And from it somehow comes the poems he took time to write- and eventually posted in this page. As saidth earlier, it expresses hope, a yearning for love, and even the desire to break the bonds that maketh a man subservient as well as those of its own homeland. Sorry for being political tho but for a concerned, there are views that may end "culturally political" especially after seeking truths from facts.

Coincidentally, these works are also made in celebration of Andres Bonifacio's birth, and he, known as a "great plebeian", was also into literature, and did expressed some of his sentiment through poetry such as his exemplar work "Pagibig sa Tinubuang Bayan" (Love of one's birthland), which emphasises the country not just as one's place of birth, but a land meant to cherish, fight, and give love even at the expense of one's life.

All in all, hope that from these works, no matter how few it is, also finds a reflection.

"From the fields of Tanay"

It's good to see you again thy quiet town
Whose same old marigold flowers blooming in the roadside
Of Mango groves and Coconut Trees
Anything tropical stood the countless winds of time
From the bustling, noisy metropolis
Comes a place enough to call retreat
Whose mountains green entice the urban dweller
To leave  and enjoy with her eve for a bit

There you saw the stream whose flowing waters
All coming from the swampy hills
Of muddy roads where farmers and owners
Of Bandits and Fighters traverse
I remember when I once went to the hill top sought the lush green glen
If not the mountains as far eye seen
And felt the breeze that satisfies
Whispering the love as it seems

Of papaya trees whose ripened fruits
Ready to be picked by the farmworker's calloused hands
Of ripened chilies and tomatoes
Whose red glows signify its harvest
The nursery where the lettuce seedlings
Ready to be planted in its patches prepared
All tended with love and care
Whilst the market awaits for it's fruits to share

If not well served for lunch or dinner
Or even a snack by another
Trying to stave the hunger if not the thirst
Brought by the long trip from the bustling town
"Delicious" as one would say as to see the mouth watering fruits
All tended, picked, with selfless love and care
Then prepared at the kitchens, becoming snacks, viands
And served enough to slake off desire

With these I wonder why love truly wins
Even in this era of wretched hate
That love has to be liberating
Far from what the order says for it's sake
But the question is, what kind of love it could be?
Will it be as peaceful as the grave or as bloody as the the trenches?

How quiet that town is, but its surroundings be disrupted
As the struggle been erupted like others in a land that is neglected
Muddy, grassy paths, mostly stained with blood,
Fertilises the fields, brings life the barren sod
Perhaps reality says the latter: that if love is to win it is to be fought
That fight can be bloodier and can't be forgot.

Pardon for the words if my note speaks of peace

Yes the place is peaceful for how quiet it seems

But behind the tranquility is a struggling truth 

In a way news reports often heard throughout 

Let the fruits be ripened on the day hope springs
As the sun, with all its bright red shining
As the ones who till will ever enjoy its work
Enjoying the place in the sun, and for years to come.

"Loving again by fighting back"

Apologies to the supremo, for his message remains

As seen, heard in various mediums, reminding if not for sake

For his time is a holiday, expect no one cares for him

Except for a concerned whose homeland meant to redeem

For as time goes by and still hearing those words

Of he, a beloved warrior poet whose undying love resounds

A love of one's home that's akin to a one's cherished

So pure and greater, otherwise none.

In a time of moving on as if nothing happened

Of edifices ruined, deteriorated

Of works gone auctioned left to the highest bidder

And those who cling to a legacy saddened

I tried to understand with all these things

Of events which one chose not to heed

They would scorn sometime, such as after a plebeian's plea

Whose hunger driven word be respond by a sarcastic sneer

From there sometimes I ask when was the time we express love

Or did we hear the country, people weep?

For sure the answer would be a "plastic" kind of yes

For the truth lies in apathy, of minds intentionally in sleep

Of endless parties assuming endless summer nights

Trying to hid the poverty even few dare to sight

Of shantytowns covered by walls, of festivals hiding hunger

Of paintings featuring countryside's beauty, dispelling bloodshed in its sod

From this when was the time the homeland given boundless honour?

Is it from those who win in numerous feats, orders of glories?

No honour comes from those who forge and till, made the foundations

Desires trying to come true, invoking the greatness as it looks

But hoping that those who are born from humility be honoured

For theirs who forge and till has brought a realm

The heart of a crooked is that of the sewer

Whose excesses oughtweighs the "contributions", of blood debts over monuments

Greed and hatred continues to tremble
Even in this era where freedom and justice matters
Delusions of grandeur trying to outshine the facts
Yet failing to undermine the hearts and minds of the concerned

From  all these contradictions the truth outweighs the impression

For the people, as in the past seeks liberation

No matter how silence be imposed few will stubbornly raise voice

Raging 'gainst the dying of light, one after another comes the noise

For thy land, like a mother, is that gave us life
Provided the warmth, the nourishment, and even inspiration
To her we owe the things that brought us joys
Enough to keep us youthful in a times of sorrow

From the metropolitan skylines to the tranquility of the countryside
Brings back to the mind the memory of one's joy and labor
Of abandoned warehouses to the sugarcanes of azucareras
Reminds of struggle, if not sad recollections, longing for redeemer

And now to see a land bereft of heritage, a soulless entity
Time and again exploited by the order, even in this so-called "liberty"
Her dignity dragged by impostors, pimped and raped by entrenched entities
Local and foreign impostors alike, is this also modernity?

From this, when will come the vengeance that boils our hearts
That will break the delusions of an imposed peace?
We are willing to sacrifice our lives just to end this bondage
As we have enough of silence, of mourning, of sorrow!

Again dedicate all our love that's selfless

Every brain, every brawn, every sweat and blood

Unto her if that's to free the way we break our hidden chains

From this we'll have a home to redeem, if not a world to win

God be with us thy land,
For through him we dedicate thy home we stand,
Cherished for decades and still fighting it,
For even at the expense of lives our land we'll still give value.

May the hills and mountains cherish,
With all its trees and fruits,
May the plains bear glittering grains,
That sustain us for all these years.

May the factories continue to churn,
The needs that most demand,
Let the cities bring enlightenment,
To the countryside still in fright.

May he elevate the lowly and the none,
For they till and forge undone,
Give them comfort as they help us,
And as they fought for us give them hope.

So are the well-enough but enlightened
For they are aware in its surrounding thus willing
To serve and guide thy unfortunates
To their hopes left unrealised and in their dreams

And may those from the order bring light unto their hearts
And in their minds bring clarity in their thoughts
May their consciences take to the side of the just
For if not how useless their service as it is public trust

For there is a fight to fight and thus we shan't afraid,
The order, for decades past oppresses and still remain;
O Lord! My people! take us thee in a just direction,
That even in the expense of thy lives,
for a land of hope and just peace to come.

Another lord for a vassal, A new-found peon for a master, And still, a renewed struggle for an enslaved

Another lord for a vassal, 

A new-found peon for a master, 

And still, a renewed struggle for an enslaved

(Notes on Xi Jinping's visit, 

of Duterte looking at China "positively" despite seeing Philippines falling on China's "Debt Trap", and the people's struggle for genuine domestic development and non-alignement)

Since 1946, the Philippines has been a vassal country of the "free world" despite its bitter memories. 

With its existing agreements such as those from the United States, Japan, Australia, and other developed countries, the Philippines, still snared by the illusion of development, end rather encountered massive debts to be paid, if not willing to offer concessions most of which as controversial in character like mining, logging, and in utilities which benefit the foreigner and its domestic "partner" such as the oligarch and the bureaucrat; if not getting contented on secondhand defence materiel as a form of military assistance also based on the existing agreements signed especially those from the United States.

But with the continuous rise of China as an a contender of the United States, it uses both its economy as well as its military might as a showcase of their brand of "socialism" which is based on "Chinese characteristics."

This "socialism", as today's Chinese taketh pride of, was actually driven by Deng Xiaoping's pragmatic statement "seeking truth from facts", as it adopts elements of market economics as a means to foster growth, of political reforms in an attempt to curb corruption, while retaining the power of the communist party as it's consolidator; from this, Chinese development steered in an "attempt to reach socialism's advanced stage after 100 years" (citing Zhao Ziyang's statement) through accommodating foreign investments, streamlining the bureaucracy, modernising the industry and the military, all in accordance to "developing the primary stage of socialism" (citing Jiang Zemin's statement).

Quite "amazing" isn't it? In observing Chinese domestic development, it's dirigism, and its willingness to offer economic aid to underdeveloped countries, That since the past decades China's statement has been dealt with development than revolution, of economic reform than class struggle, of  seeing businessmen as communist party members, making Yasheng Huang describing it as "Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics." 

And now with the visit of Xi Jinping in the Philippines, China attempts to offer sweet deals with it's potential vassal, whose leader, assuming to be as "anti-western", looks for an alternative different from his predecessors.

Pragmatism gone wrong?

As expected, Duterte is seen by his supporters as a pragmatic kind of leader. Known for his statements and gestures, supporters would say that it is a "necessary" move as he tries to woo the people with things unlikely or controversially to happen such as desiring for order even it requires immense bloodshed; it is not surprising tho, for knowing that with words like development, inclusion, and stability be it's words, Duterte, like those of his predecessors tries to accommodate each and every sector although it end preferring a particular sector aligned with his "vision".
And  when it comes to foreign relations, he doesn't care the controversy thinking that his independent foreign policy as rather driven by his indifference if not assuming to be "anti-American" like those of his past statements assailing former president Obama and therefore looking at China's Xi or Russia's Putin as ideal examples of leaders and its countries as potential sources of aid. Otherwise, he's just looking what he thinks as necessary even it is controversial such as cultivating relations with a growing and developing China.

However, in actuality, it seems that his pragmatism turns out to be just plain capitulation. By using the alibi of independent foreign policy, it turns out to be a hollow rhetoric as he favors interests if not being indifferent as Duterte himself obviously has no interest in foreign relations, let alone some trade agreements and non-intervention in international affairs.

But come to think that with of Xi Jinping trying to woo it's new vassal, and  Duterte, in aligned with his pseudo-"independent" foreign policy looks at China thinking as an alternate partner, regardless of the latter's desire to impose its dominance, beauteous words like "All-Round Cooperation", "Enhancing Dialouge", or even "Peace and Amity" between two nations been heard throughout, no matter how obvious China's desire for hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region, with all its trade wars, saber rattling, and war preparations.

And just like the United States, China appears itself as a "better" trade and investment partner. It seeks to provide the Philippines with its excess capital, and thus trying to pressure the country with agreements which favourable to them- provided with loan grants, investments, and various forms of concessions that obviously making the country dependent on their mercy. Obviously, Duterte and his camarilla wanted to see his "Build Build Build" into it's complete fruition, and therefore China will provide that "developmentalist" regime some of its surplus steel and cement, or even it's workers to support every infrastructure project such as bridges, roads, flyovers, airports, anything enough to appear the government as "promoting development" even it is in fact debt-driven.

Remember, over the past two years, China has moved more quickly to further strengthen its economic presence in the country. Its official development assistance has shot up to $63.5 million last year from $1.5 million in 2016. Foreign direct investments from China grew at a faster rate reaching $1.043 billion in the first two years under Duterte, close to 85% of its total FDI over six years under the previous Aquino regime ($1.231 billion) and more than that ($825 million) under Arroyo’s nine-year reign.

From this, Duterte's "pragmatic" moves is as same as his predecessors trying to accommodate both the Americans and the Chinese. The two been offering sweet deals while the one being offered kept on choosing which as sweeter; but behind these sweet or sweeter deals lies a bitter truth. For again like the Americans, China's quest for hegemony involves both hard and soft moves such as economic manouvering to those of military action- and from a leader who once said about planting his flag while riding a Jetski over the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, end rather "cowed" with himself as being excessively servile, playing the vassal to the Chinese overlord. 

Illusion-filled papers over shoals, rocks, and beaches

And in speaking of the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, the Chinese, as it entices Duterte and his camarilla with sweet deals, is busy reclaiming every isle, every rock, every shallow seabed, enough to create their own base for their naval operations and even to justify further their expansionist agenda in the southeast. 

Just like many years ago, the Chinese quest for controlling the seas meant a threat to its neighbors be it the Viets, Malaysians, even the "other Chinese" themselves for by using both its naval power and its engineering feats, reclaiming the disputed seas, what more of possibly turning into land hath made the Chinese quest for hegemony in Asia really possible.

But for the regime, its pseudo-pragmatism obviously meant indifference in regards to the issue. As said earlier, Chinese investments and assistance grew till enough impossible for a vassal to pay those debts and loans; 

If they truly recognise the matter why not insist the Chinese the limitations of every agreement, or is the regime assuming to be "busy" in its domestic issues and choosing not to assert its claim for the sake of hot flow of cash and various forms of aid in its economic projects? Where is the armed forces on the time Chinese naval patrols harass fisherfolks in the once pacific seas, or are they prefering internal security such as fighting rebels whose patriotism is far greater than theirs? No offense but in a regime choosing to be subservient using the words peace and friendship, no matter how it appear wrong in the eyes of its subjects those unequal agreements it tries to appear "just" and "right" given its "economic possibilities"- even at the expense of inch of a country's property, its sovereignty.

For sure expect debates and continuous protests in the streets and in the legislative halls because of this, of comments and countercomments in social media, what more of shallow responses and harassments from diehard fanatics whose love of their leader is as if love to the nation. 

If most protest out of patriotism,
Then how about the other 'anti-Chinese'?

(Or again, the hysteria remains at-large)

On the other side of the anti-Chinese opposition, there are those whose reason be something as more than just fighting for their country but rather driven by their favorite cold war nostalgia.

For groups like those of Ely Pamatong, as well as some of the "conservatives" and even "liberals" alike, their statement against the Chinese would be something more than just defending sovereignty: for them it is plain anticommunist sentiment the way they romanticise both Korean and Vietnam war as battle between good and evil, of Taiwan as the "Free" China, of "Tiananmen Square Massacre", and clinging to the idea that the mainland, whether it appears to be as capitalist, still as "communist".

Subjective isn't it? However, very few of them, if not none at all of these are "patriotic" despite expressing dissent on the issue. They would rather still clinging to the idea that the United States will always be the best partner in defence and in economic affairs, no matter how unequal the agreements it may be but still closer to their view throughout decades of being its neocolony. Thus, to use Dugin's terms, it made the Philippines an "Atlanticist" in the Far East, stubbornly trying to upheld American and other "free world" interests in the face of the "Chinese meance", "yellow peril", or anything referring to "communist" China even in this modern-day setting. But did one hear about self reliance? Again, very few would dare to.

But in fairness to them, they heed the statement of U.S. Vice President Mike Pence that they should be careful in dealing with the Chinese in order to prevent getting trapped by debts if not looking at much better economic partner like the Koreans or the Japanese. Pence is somehow quite concerned about countries such as the Philippines be likely to be fallen into that debt trap China hath preparing, but to think that the United States as trying to flex its muscle in pursuit of maintaining interests in the disputed region, it is obvious that its domestic allies such as these people, will insist the importance of every treaty, every agreement, every piece of paper signed by both U.S. and Philippine representatives; if not exploiting the hysteria such as what is presently encountered.

Same old peonage, hypocrisy, nonsense

At present, the Philippines continues to embark in its one-sided, oligarch-bureaucrat oriented "development", and insists that "it needs all the help it can get" no matter most of its funds rather end going to ones pocket. Whether it comes from the Americans or the Chinese, the ones who benefit aren't the people as what the system spoke throughout in Malacanang or in the Congress, but themselves as every agreement meant concessions even meant to bleed the country dry, if not deprive the people it's will to development on it's own- let alone cultivating land, but for the needs of the market.  

By applying the same method of economic colonialism, China, like the United States, will keep the country backward, agrarian, and dependent to entrenched interests. With the agreements no matter how controversial or developmentalist it could be, every loan offered makes a country it's debt slave like those from its creditors like the IMF-WB, the Asian Development Bank, and others.

And to think that the Philippines remains a semicolony and military stronghold of the United States, the Americans continues to view China as its rival, especially in it's intensified trade war and challenging its political and military domination- and the Philippines, whose agreements with the United States continues to be "in force", diminishes it's own attempt for an independent foreign policy.

But come to think of this, in seeing Duterte, a frustrated "pragmatic" willing to sell its country out to China while being subservient to the United States, this meant a double-sided betrayal of Philippine national sovereignty. For sure everyone heard about his "jetski" statement, but then the regime has kept silent as the Chinese built its military bases over the disputed isles and by accepting the agreements regardless of its consequences; while on the other hand, he has allowed the Philippines to be used as a springboard by the U.S. for building up their military presence in the South China Sea through its Operation Pacific Eagle- with Washington seeking to "defeat the continuing insurgency" and to secure the interests of multinational corporations. Speaking of that "insurgency", Duterte’s failure to uphold Philippine sovereignty has raised the possibility of armed hostilities within Philippine territorial seas and is now leading the country right into the middle of an inter-imperialist conflict to the detriment of the Filipino people.

At present, what the Filipinos should realise is that the county should stand on its own. In fact, this criticism isn't limited to those of defending one's sovereignty, but also to oppose China being a social fascist pretending itself as communist. By selling-out to China while still being subservient to the U.S., the Duterte regime is committing a double-sided betrayal of Philippine national sovereignty. 

By seeking truth from facts, every Filipino can afford to expose and oppose the inaccuracies brought by an unjust regime; and by serving the people and the need for cooperation amongst sectors, it will secure its country's national sovereignty, genuine democracy, and building a progressive and just society.

And from this, the Filipino people, especially those truly driven by patriotism, must resist China’s efforts to impose its imperialist power on the Philippines, be it economic, political, and even in military affairs. By opposing the unequal agreements and its offerings of onerous and high-interest loans, this kind of opposition means to oppose which are set to railroad on the people’s livelihood, taking away ancestral lands and despoil the environment, fatten the bureaucrats as it favors Duterte’s cronies, and give China control of key resources, public utilities, and services.

Besides that, the Filipino people must also actively demand the immediate dismantling of Chinese military bases in the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, an end to the interdiction of Filipino fishermen, recognise Philippine territories under the UNCLOS, and to assert a policy of active peace and non-alignment through a genuine independent foreign policy, and to urge fellow Asiatics to declare the disputed seas as a zone of peace and neutrality.

But despite all these actions, of appeals and mobilisations, hope this patriotic call doesn't end to anti-Chinese interventionism, but also to demand an end to American interventionism. If one wishes a country that is peaceful, then a call for unity to demand an end to Sino-American saber rattling should be; after all, of what is an independent foreign policy if the regime is kowtowing both to Uncle Sam and Fu Manchu? Of keeping the country weak and mendicant in exchange for those papers? The United States's existing agreements with the Republic of the Philippines continues to enact and even reinforced with new amendments; if not seeing pro-Yankee secretaries and military officers clinging to the delusion that the regime, be it Republican or Democrat-led, will continue to keep firm in its interest in the Philippines no matter how its sleeping dragon neighbour offers sweeter deals such as what Duterte and Xi signed in every piece of paper.

Thus, alongside scrapping those from the Chinese such unequal economic and military treaties such as the Mutual Defense Treaty, the Visiting Forces Agreement, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), and other forms of economic deals which actually meant more debts and unjust concessions are meant to be abrogated. From there, will make a once-neocolony be actively pursue in its independent direction, of active self-reliance, of will to take just agreements with neighboring countries, and to build a better, resilient society.

"When Duterte's 'reforms' as actually 'intensified continuations'"

"When Duterte's 'reforms' as actually 'intensified continuations'"

(Or "How Duterte still continuing an unlikely past with new names and fresh terms")

For all people who still aspire for a genuine, free and independent Philippines, the recent events has created fools out of promising, of disillusioned out of For as people hath sought the rise of right-wing populism, most ended in elation.
For the populist, the feeling of anxiety, joy, and excitement been shared by people around the world as populism shook the existing liberal order they despised. They desired a strong order and thus elected personages ought to fulfill it- although in fact turned out to be half-hearted especially if the promise happens to be controversial particularly those that affects stability, peace, and order.

Unfortunately, the tide of change such as under Duterte end rather a reversal of its promise: for having a camarilla of past administrations, a continuity of past policies with new terms, the regime is all but "was", a continuing past whose leader truly swore to upheld it. If there are reforms made, these meant to appease the people while maintaining the order- just what past leaders do.

This gesture may meant to ease the consciences of those governments and businessmen who have itching to resume business with the Philippines.  Like any other administrations, the regime promised a lax controls in foreign investment, or keeping wages low so as to maintain a cheap labor policy. However, for the people (except of course for the fanatic), these reforms is simply a change of terms- from that of a neoliberal 'intellectual'-like to a populist-style 'frankness'. Yet to think that many people, some of which even voted Duterte in the last elections, are still opposed these measures such as the recent tax reforms, the national identification system, the continuity of martial rule in Mindanao; so as demanding a genuine land distribution program and the need to resolve the housing crisis, these and more issues concerning meant brewing opposition by the ruling order- and these people, no matter how just their grievances are, rather end jailed, if not killed and their deaths be reinterpreted by various reasons.

If the government sees fit, it can arrest those who oppose the administration and be given trumped-up charges as in the past; if the government sees necessary, it has to sideline or even booting out those who are truly concerned simply because of being critical. These and more forms of "maverick" stances that's typically attributed to Duterte administration is a reflection of his means to retain the present order enjoyed by oligarchs and despotic landlords. From this, he appears to be like the late Ferdinand Marcos, whose some if not most of his policies enact even after his ouster- again, with new names, terms, and amendments trying to be adapted in this present setting.

"reform" as a form of "reaction"

Initially, Duterte assumed himself as a socialist, a leftist whose rallying call was change in this still-existing semifeudal, semicolonial order. From there he courted support with the underground left, even it is controversial, knowing that their aspirations been considered legit and therefore be resolved peacefully through negotiations and to some extent, concessions. 

Quite optimistic actually for knowing that he used to deal with the underground left especially in regards to the release of military personnel being prisoners of war. He did also promised to take agrarian reform seriously, to return displaced tribespeople safely to their homelands, and even not to demolish communities without proper relocation and negotiation with affected communities. He did also appointed left-wingers in departments suitable for them: in Agrarian Reform, Social Welfare and Development, in the National Anti Poverty Commission, Commission on Urban Poor, and in the Labour department. 

However, this cooperation doesn't last long. Being sworn first to uphold the order, and surrounded by interests whom funded his electoral campaigns, the regime put half-heartedly, if not failed to realise the promises offered to the people. True that it is the same regime that prosecuted Palparan, but it is the same regime that implicated in the actions toward farmers demanding agrarian justice in lands like Lapanday; it is the same regime that appointed Mariano, Taguiwalo, Ridon, and Maglungsod, but, it is also the same regime that appointed Esperon, Año, and Lorenzana; "inclusive unity" is what Duterte said- only to find the former sidelined in favor of the former military men. 

With this sidelining especially those of the concerned, of subservient to interests that aggravates poverty, is this the orderism what people desired of? That with all the welfare packages, infrastructure programs, and the like, how come these turned to be like a hollow rhetoric meant to snare people through the ears? True that the left did appreciate his populist agenda at first as he promised peace and inclusive development, but to have a camarilla mostly refuse of past administrations- some of them even proteges of murderers, then what kind of peace, inclusive development this Duterte stated of? True that he detested Palparan, the narcopoliticians, and threatened profiteers such as Lucio Tan; yet the actually-existing repression on the guise of change meant a continuity of opposition knowing that his camarilla of past refuses and its policies diminishes what the regime babbled through and through! After all, who's to benefit that inclusive development as what being expressed in state media and those of its apologists in social media sites- is it the oligarchs who at some time put their money in it and waiting for paybacks? Or the bureaucrats who cautiously doing moves as the regime "seriously" taketh its anticorruption campaigns?

Well, sorry for the fanatic, but as time goes by, of imitating the late dictator in its vulgar form, Duterte exploited populist aspirations, even the rusticated views of the folk be it in creating numerous projects or its dispensation of justice. Time and again the administration's vulgarity thrives all due to the proliferation of false reports featuring the administration's programs and projects as well as how his supporters fanatically supporting the president and his administration. Time and again they will popularise that is opposing, justifying what is unjust, or worse, putting people in a bad light just because of a belief contrary to their views and agendas like how their idol expressed madly towards them.
What more that it hath brought repression to new heights as it faces the people’s mounting resistance. As both the Military and the Police as having their hands itchy in its yearning to bear down hard particularly on the resurgent labor and student movements, which according to them as "wellsprings" of recruits for the armed revolution.

But still, these thugs failed to diminish the popular struggle as it still carries on unabated in both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary arenas. Apologists would cry aloud as grafittis on the wall and protest actions shaken the regime despite repressions usually described ‘rule of law’, just as robber baron-style land confiscations, poor pay and working conditions, and a retrogressive straitjacket of an education system prevailing.

A country treated as a fief, 

if not a Government treated as a syndicate

If to paraphrase Adam Müller's 'Die Elemente der Staatskunst', this person is ought to say that the state and by extension the community, hath to be not a mere factory, farm, insurance agency or a commercial company. It is not even like a device or a tool meant to out things in order as one would wish, but rather it is the inner union of all physical and moral needs, of all physical and spiritual wealth, of the inner and outer life of a folk community, all in a great, energetic, eternally active and living whole.
It may sound illusory if not fictional, but man's quest for an ideal community hath been since time immemorial, that in every interaction be it right or wrong lies the totality of human affairs if not a union of many successive generations. But reality failed to realise as such and turned the state into a tool of consolidation than a spearheader of change. Duterte did sneered people through the ears by telling his administration as socialistic, that his rule as just if not enlightened, but given the bloodshed and the interest prevailing, is his change be considered a vulgar form of Marcos's 'constitutional authoritarianism'? Vulgar in a sense that it is divorced from the law by making the law less lawful if not amoral?

In fairness for the late dictator that he himself recognise the state as consolidatory while trying to appear itself a spearheader of change in order to address issues like poverty. Like Müller as well as Fichte, he sees the state as a factor to unite physical, moral, and spiritual wealth to revive the lost consciousness and drivel to achieve progress and stability. From his book 'Notes in the New Society', he, assuming to be progressive, speaks on why the rebellion of the poor may take various forms, if not a search for an ideology which makes that rebellion be the basis of the new society:

"Moral realism requires this ideological basis: the consciousness of the poor permeates them with a profound sense of being oppressed, and not simply because the rich oppresses then brazenly but it is poverty itself that oppresses them.
To be poor is to be without, and, therefore, to be an outsider in the vibrant and meaningful political, economic, and social life of modern human community. Above all, being poor is being invisible; violence makes them visible."

But despite the order's means to let's just say "achieve development", dissident agitation for social change has comparatively more success given the structure's half-hearted action for social amelioration. After all, it was the same Marcos who opted to leave his predecessor's decontrol untouched thinking it is inseparable to free enterprise. So was the floating rate in Peso, the junking of the Magna Carta of Social Justice and Economic Freedom, and the membership in the "General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade"'(GATT).

And Duterte opted to emulate it: continuing VAT with additional enabling law like TRAIN, the policy of borrowing from neighbouring countries and multinational moneylending institutions, obeisance to existing economic agreements, and others that made Duterte's change more like a continuity with new terms and paraphrased statements, of a liberal view guised as a populist outlook.

From this, expect apologists to assail this note out of sheer defence of their idol if not accept critically this note, for their Marcos and Duterte tried their "best" to save the republic, maintain order, and bring some "reforms" whose goal is to upheld cohesion amidst popular criticism. But how come it failed to suffice the problem but instead aggravate the tension?  Perhaps to cite George Magnus:

"Policy makers struggling to understand the barrage of financial panics, protests, and other ills afflicting the world would do well to study the works of a long-dead economist: Karl Marx. The sooner they recognise we're facing a once-in-a-lifetime crisis of capitalism, the better equipped they will be to manage a way out of it..."

Citing Magnus's statement, one would say that those from the order did afford to study Marx for the sake of anticipating the situation such as a revolutionary scenario. Duterte, like those of his predecessors, tried their "best" to stem these scenarios yet given their preferential option for the rich, it end failed those "efforts" to mitigate poverty, of bringing reforms, of putting justice on the side of the poor- thus, the revolutionary situation will always kept brewing, no matter how the system tries to patch it off with piecemeal, forchrissake "reforms" and "measures".

Looking back (and fight again)

Anyway, Duterte and his fanatics will still cling to their view that their brand of authoritarianism as democratic if not revolutionary. But the revolution can only be made with revolutionaries and not structuralists. Theirs, be cold and calculating, are rather like melancholic ghosts wandering around Malacañang trying to reclaim the past in a guise of creating a future. Someone by temperament and through experience mistrustful of others, whom they see only motivated in their turn when induced by base interests; skeptical about their views despite parroting it, poor Duterte for as he becoming a negation of what people desired of- and so is his camarilla.

In other words, the people who are increasingly aware of the realities realise that the one who babbled change and hope is but a tyrant who chose to upheld the order. On the first place: will one call it change when in fact his cabinet members are mostly refuse from past regimes, reusing old policies with new terms and themes? From this no wonder why people protest if not willing to sacrifice.

Of National Struggle over Neocolonial "Benevolence"

Of National Struggle over Neocolonial "Benevolence"

(or: Notes after seeing some some upsurge in those watching period films 

but still contented in neocolonial dependence)

Sometimes, it is hard to understand why Filipinos, unlike any other Asian, continues to insist the benevolence of the United States despite its actually-existing oppressive nature.

For in a time when movie producers, artists, and literary enthusiasts alike afforded to cultivate again Nationalism such as "Heneral Luna" and "Goyo: Ang Batang Heneral", Filipinos, despite recognising the patriotism brought about by these fallen people and its struggles, still insisting, if not clinging to the idea that these are already past and therefore be disregarded in favor of a "present" where the United States, like any other coloniser, did left a semblance of hope in a form of development, if not modernity.

But as to recall the outbreak of the Philippine-American War and subsequent struggles against the Americans during the occupation, it is ought to say that one must drew inspiration from its revolutionary forebears, honor those who persevere in the struggle, learn lessons from the past and present circumstances, and define the tasks for realising the unfinished tasks for national liberation and democracy.

Sounds radical isn't it? Knowing that as today's Filipino enjoys the modernity left by its colonisers, it appears to be "natural" that the colonisers "did made good" to its subjects, regardless of its oppressive, interest-seeking acts that made some, if not most express its angst even in this present-day setting. True that the United States brought modernity such as education, health, even governance and a series of reinforced concrete-made public works; but, what made Filipinos be indebted to the Americans was and is the materialism the latter showered upon to its subjects like appliances to automobiles, instant food to electronic gadgets, even the culture itself hath becoming more American than the Americans themselves; after all, these Yankees wanted a market if not a place to dump their products and a source of materials for it's mainland needs.

That until today this legacy continues to "creep" in everyone's thought that these once foreigners made the Philippines progressive no matter how they exploit resources and people. Americans did create a positive impression such as automobiles or liberal democracy the way Spain brought Catholicism and the rudiments of classical civilisation; that the Japanese occupier did afford to provide "independence" even for the sake of realising, or the Chinese merchant who provides cheap goods even it puts down local enterprises. 

Yet to think that Filipinos benefited greatly from its coloniser be it the uprightness of democracy or the wonders of electricity, or the system's alleged role as a nation builder, it forgotten its other nature such as an exploiter, an oppressor, a disenfranchiser whom stunted a country's growth for their own interest.

But come to think of this: Movies like what this post stated showed that there are heroes, driven by concern showed its best to have a nation despite those preferring to look after their interests, that men like Antonio Luna and Apolinario Mabini showed to the world that the country as capable of being independent given its struggle and therefore it hath to protect its independence by any means. Even during the American and Japanese occupation wherein men like Macario Sakay, Lucio San Miguel, the Pulahanes, to those of Isabelo de los Reyes, Crisanto Evangelista, Pedro Abad Santos, and the Hukbalahaps, these people asserted independence by any means necessary: be it by the ballot box, by the protest march, or even by the gun.

Nowadays, people from all walks of life rather forgot that significant part of history altogether, let alone it is being learnt in school about these Spanish, American, and Japanese occupations. True that there are legacies that mold the modern-day Filipino be it the ideal studious and hardworking being being appreciated by many or the actually-existing materialistic whose drivel for work is to buy something to brag on.
And to think that this post deals with the need to revisit its history and reclaim patriotism, then for sure apologists would even ask this post that if people have to have to disagree on American interests towards the Philippines, then how about the Chinese? The latter hath occupied the disputed islands near Palawan, and even trying to claim part of the Philippine Sea such as the Benham Rise; quite agreeable to oppose it so is the United States's interests particularly those of it's unjust socioeconomic affairs.

From these unlikely outcomes, whether it is American, Chinese, or even a fellow Filipino, the existing unjustness means resistance. To think that Eternal Vigilance means the Price of Freedom, defending a country's patrimony, and supporting its desire to forge its destiny meant upholding a country's survival. But in a subservient order such as this, is this freedom? Then no wonder not all are interested in History, let alone their favorite throwbacks such as their childhood memories if not how they reduce historical or period films as for the sake of watching and appreciating actors and actresses. 

But as long as the Filipino people remain under the tutelage of American and Chinese interests, then it will not cease to wage all forms of revolutionary struggle for national liberation and democracy. As the enemy never gets tired of oppressing and exploiting them, then the people can never get tired of resisting oppression and exploitation and fighting for national and social liberation. For remember: the absence of genuine national independence and the continuing reign of greed, terror, and mendicance in the country as the bitter consequence of the successful US war of aggression.

"Still, an Australian nun with a Filipino heart"

"Still, an Australian nun with a Filipino heart"

(Notes after Sister Patricia Fox, the deportation order, and her recent return to Australia)

At first, this post express its heartfelt gratitude to Sis. Patricia Fox for her selfless dedication, love, and service to the Filipino nation- especially its most impoverished sectors namely: the peasantry, workers, urban poor, and the indigenous masses.

With her actions which may include steadfast support of its struggles, of disaster relief operations, organic agriculture, and factfinding missions, this lawyer-turned-nun is more Filipino than the apathetic Filipinos of today; and to think that with her actions be imbued with sense of humility, charity, and selflessness, hers is much true than what the system tries but not motivated by serving the people but of political means.

But despite her efforts, the system chose to malign madly knowing that serving the oppressed exposing and opposing the system and its actions be it union busting, displacement of communities, and extrajudicial acts eapecially those of killings against the innocent, unjustly accused, or stood on their beliefs. The system, no wonder why they chose her to be another example by "just" deporting her, by using "legal means" and worse, by making false reports enough to justify her deportation if not a demise like her comrades in faith, Favali or Tentorio.

However, despite the efforts by the system, those who truly concerned for the country stood by her side; with lawyers defending her right to stay, of colleagues supported her advocacy, even those from the congress expressed sympathy as her call for human rights is also a part of her vocation as a religious, if not practising her legal skill being a former lawyer turned missionary; all knowing that from there no wonder why the system turned their eyes on her as any other oppositionist or a concerned citizen willing to speak in regards to what's being sought in ones own surrounding- what more of being a foreigner who, for decades been part of Filipino life, and becoming as Filipino as the others.

Remember, prior to her there were foreigners who expressed concern if not sympathy in the country under struggle regardless of their citizenry: from Sun Yat Sen and Mark Twain of the Spanish and American period, Jane Fonda and Steve Psinakis of the Marcos regime, even Leila Khaled and the young Thomas Van Beerzum whose participation in a rally provoked an order madly.

Perhaps her deportation doesn't end her selfless service to the people. In fact, the Filipino community in Australia did sympathise with her and her life's work as a nun-advocator. And to think that the system stubbornly justifies their act as necessary and legal, or as what Panelo says as "foreigners have limits" and how he injected the Latin "Dura Lex Sed Lex", it is true enough that more concerned folks, be it native or foreign, sought this, like any other matter pointing against the commoner, as plain simple political harassment;

Or to cut the note short: that faith if taken into practise, particularly in response to the surroundings of this inconvenient world, is itself becoming political. To paraphrase Panelo's, if the the law of cause and effect will operate against her as it did in this particular instance- then so is the order whom initiated her deportation out of obviously political reason.

Is it to "Serve well" or to "Shut down"?

Is it to "Serve well" 

or to "Shut down"?

(Thoughts on the National Identification System and its means brought by a 'order'-hungry regime to a subjected people)

As in the past years, attempts to impose a national identification system now seems to be imminent. This time with the approval of the congress and by Duterte himself, this measure, proposed more than two decades ago is still carrying its motive: to control the movement of people. 

For according to ABS-CBN News published last October 29, it stated that the government will soon start a 6-month test run of the National ID System, as it aims to register over 100 million Filipino citizens and resident aliens by 2023.
From that trial run, National Statistician Lisa Bersales said that the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), in coordination with the Philippine Postal Corporation (PHLPost), will hold a “proof of concept” trial starting November, wherein some 1 million beneficiaries of the Unconditional Cash Transfer Program will be registered under the "Philippine Identification System (PhilSys)".

With that article, as well as other recent articles afforded to deal with the issue, its proponents, as in the past, insist that the enacted identification system can help improve the delivery of government services and to simplify public and private transactions- citing the fact that the need for a single identification system is a practical solution instead of multiple identifications, especially those issued by the government be it drivers license, social security, postal, or any other government-issued identification card.

However, this kind of system isn't unopposed by many- especially those whose primary issue deals with data privacy, amidst events passed involving digital technology be it phishing through the internet, hacking on government and private databases, even viruses that affect systems online.

But for others concerned, what's much worrisome is on how the state deals with personal information- knowing that with the present regime toying with power quite madly, the idea of a national identification system may turn out to be contrary to their statement of efficiency when it comes to its services, if not efficiency in trying to establish a totalitarian state of mass surveillance, population control with its social, political, and criminal profiling and mass murder. 

Sounds quite frank, for in an administration whose cabinet be full of ex-military officials, a supportive legislature, and an approving judiciary, it's easier to impose that kind of procedure, alongside other "important matters"  including those of changing the charter that can give Duterte greater authority, with less restrictions on his power to declare martial law, and even pave the way for perpetuating himself in power under one or another pretext.

Aside from that, that said plan meant a rehash of earlier attempts- with new terminologies perhaps, as for sure one would remember how that the planned identification system is also in conjunction with the Human Security Act (HSA) what was attempted during the Arroyo regime, and therefore will be used to intensify state terrorism and suppress people’s resistance- in the same way that the cedula system was used by the Spanish colonizers to oppress the Filipino people; 

And to think that apologists will also say that "other countries did that kind of procedure", then right was the late Gregorio rosal said, that neighbouring countries like Malaysia and Singapore, implemented a system of national identification- and these countries  are also known as "police states wherein the people do not enjoy democratic rights and their every movement is monitored and controlled by state authorities." Even China did that procedure which includes meriting or demeriting people- and in turn meant gaining or losing access to services. In this case, is this another possible attempt for the Philippines to toy upon?

But still, apologists continue to churn the "benefits" regardless of the nature of the regime as trying to curtail people's rights, parroting threats and justifying it madly.  In a time where things been done digitally, and seeing a regime wanting to utilise it for their ends, one would think if not to say that a real police state is been brewing, making chaos and all that, enough to justify a state whose regime as driven by paranoia, an indefinite state of seige; and with procedures such as the identification system, what more of a possible social reputation program, of massive use of surveillance cameras and enforcers willing to subvert the law for order, lies a perspective wherein democracy is replaced by the orderism they desired for: the view which the market likes at the expense of the people.

Pardon for the thought, for the fact that the regime toys with technology in pursuit of efficient distribution of services, it may also meant controlling people's movement or even suppressing democratic rights- given the government's will to mass monitor everyone's directions or its reputation, what more to target opposition be it those of political critics or dissenters.