"And the word made flesh (and dwellth amongst us)"

"And the word made flesh (and dwellth amongst us)"

At first, one teacher said that about the time of Jesus Christ's death to a very specific point in history: and it was around 3:00 in the afternoon, Friday, April 3, A.D. 33.

For the love of the oppressed and of the poor, the son of god hath joined if not led all faithful and revolutionary martyrs who sacrificed their lives fighting for righteousness as well as on behalf of the poor who desired for justice.

It may sound too political, but given the nature of Christ's suffering to his crucifixion, his death means a lesson to those who be trying to subvert an unjust order all because of proclaiming the good news of salvation.

And that salvation is both of the body and of the soul, of remolding character and of emancipating the community from its disorder.

And because of his commitment to bring the message he was suffered and died not to save mankind from sin and the torments of hell, but also to show people ultimately that defending, serving, fighting, sacrificing on behalf of the poor and of dispossessed means embracing humiliation, pain, and death.

For on the first place, he was the same Christ who teaches the children, healed the sick, fed the hungry, console the desperate. But he was the same Christ who expelled the moneylenders and of the vendors in the temple whom he called as his father's house.

And thus with his actions, be it good in the eyes of his people and bad in the eyes of the order, made him face and accept suffering and death. Ironically, his death, the crucifixion itself was a sacrifice with himself taking place of the lamb. But that sacrifice was less religious in the eyes of the order but rather a punishment for taking the side of the poor, for interpreting the law as different from the Pharisees and of the scribes, what more of seeing his acts as subversive in nature.

Sounds political isn't it? After all, his message of salvation was and is a political act that speaks about what humanity needs: nourishing the body as well as the soul.
And in it perhaps, it is the duty of the faithful to support what is spiritual with material especially if that is to support that is right, just, and moral. It may sound ambitiously ideal but ever since people be told that "kingdom of God is in them", then why not fulfill it? Faith, Hope, and Charity also paved way to the aspirations of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity; strange but for sure everyone wanted a virtuous life both man and his society.
For like any other scripture, be it the law or the sayings of the prophets, the desire for a better world is more than just an aspiration nor a desire: but a call for its realisation.

Come to think of this: Christ died on the cross, for he imparted the desire that is more than the redemption of the body, but of the spirit; and as for the faithful, and seeing the inconvenient reality, then it is the duty of the faithful not just to redeem the soul, but of the body from repression.

And that body is more than just the flesh, but of the community that is, to be liberated and be given hope.

And Christ, the word made flesh, has continued to dwellth amongst us. The martyrs followed what Christ did: by spreading the message of salvation and living amongst the people.

My country! My people! Why are you forsaken me?!?

My country! My people! Why are you forsaken me?!?

From "Manila Today"

This may be the words of most people nowadays. For as time goes by, and everyone has seen all the inconvenient realities of poverty, repression, and various forms of social injustices, coupled by recent news reports of extra judicial killings, corruption charge, and narcopolitics, isn't it relevant that this third world country whp yearned for hope is been forsaken for so long by a system that supposed to be uplifting?

Yes, for as everyone reads about the news or rather say see the headlines amd afforded to share its post or comment in it, they would say that the country they supposed to love and to cherish is itself forsaken all because of the inconvenient realities that hinders a nation from its supposed path.

And like Jesus Christ who was suffered and died fom the cross, these people, the long suffering average Juan, Maria, and Jose who has endured all the poverty, pain, and negligence, asks everyone especially those who swore to give concern: my country, my people, why are you forsaken me?!?

From Tudla pproductions

The message may sound aloud and even strikes through everyone's heart, but obviously, most people who afforded to listen on that christ-like message does not care about it if not treating with scorn. Some would even assuming to be moralist telling that they are disobeying the law, and others be like entirely apathetic as they "move on" as if nothing happened with all their lives. The society that supposedly as Christ-like, assuming to be as righteous as the others has gone hedonistic with a smattering of knowing for law, but less of understanding right and of justice.

Worse, they afforded to be assuming as Christian as most Christians with all the pomp with its rituals, of fame-based "charity" or anything just to appear as holy as they babble something moralistic and assuming they are just and imbued with faith, but, where were they on the times people yearn not just help but for justice? Again, their ears are shut if not afforded to listen and be replied with scorn.

In a situation such as these inconvenient realities, it is the duty of the concerned to bring the gospel of struggle to each and everyone, to open eyes and minds and join in a quest for taking back justice and bring hope in a forsaken country riddled with bullets and various forms of hopelessness. Why to remain apathetic in these kinds of truths while assuming to be as Christ-like as the others especially this lent? Perhaps a message from Bishop Socrates Villegas sounds relevant nowadays:

 "Fasting is good, but without malasakit (concern) for others, it is nothing. Prayer is good, but without remembering others and laying aside personal comfort, it is just an ego trip. Helping the poor and giving alms are good, but if you do it for show or to get a “feel good” reward later, it is just a noisy bell."

So is Gerardo Lanuza, as he said:

"Because we misunderstood Jesus as a mere spiritual leader who promised salvation in the next life, we have killed Christianity. As Nietzsche says: "the word 'Christianity' is already a misunderstanding - in reality there has only been one Christian - and he died on the cross. The evangel died on the cross."

The evangel is about loving the world, not escaping it into a spiritual world."

Yes. Loving the world, loving by helping people struggling against the tide; loving the world by going beyond the parameters to realise hopes; loving the world by putting an end to an eternal infamy.

Bringing back National pride with Class consciousness

Bringing back National pride with Class consciousness

Every nation has its own identity, and every identity must have been imbues with a unique feature that classified as its own. And that feature is National pride.

However, that pride comes from a profound sense of National consciousness, that likely to have conquered and survived in a hostile environment set upon to us by nature and fate. And though this, it survived the wave of time, though progressive means and through the acceptance of what the person is, to uplift and to reach what is supposed to. Unlike those whom accept-only to become extinct or in the verge of destruction.

National pride, in this person's view does not mean superiority as what other people used to think of but rather as consciousness as a part of a nation, a recognition since that one has uphold its tradition, faith, and honour to the land; and thus, to serve the aspirations of the people, both local or from its foreign brethren.

However, in a country wherein repression and disenfranchisement has been rampant for generations from both foreign masters and its domestic stooges, of maldevelopment and social injustice towards the labouring class, comes consciousness that is, proletarian. Proletarian in a sense that the country's majority are those coming from the ill-paid laborers, the unjustly-shared peasantry, the debt-stricken lower petitbourgeoisie, these masses, repressed by a semifeudal-semicolonial order has yearned to resolve internal as well as external class struggle, being one of the proletarian "third world" nations surrounded by the developed nations of the first world.

Sounds radical isn't it? Perhaps in this person's observation, in a reality wherein semifeudal-semicolonial repression has made National consciousness includes class consciousness, as means to liberate both as a nation and from its class.

For sure one would think “why a nation have achieve independence and yet the system remains as it is in its colonial past?” some may attained progression and perhaps even further, but third world nations be like much repressive as in its colonial days, with its once colonial masters be like indirectly ruling over. Domestic despots may have intensified further internal repression and injustice as in the past, enough to justify the need for national liberation even more.

And from these unsung masses, along with their leaders whom used to get killed for their beliefs, gave inspiration to the coming generations on why they wanted “freedom”. And contrary to an established view, that Freedom doesn’t mean “freedom as a nation” but also “freedom” from its class as they build a just society, through national consciousness, merit, and of hope towards one another.

And in it Filipinos can be classified as an example of this. After centuries of subjection by its coloniser and its domestic stooge, of their efforts to degrade and enslave the inhabitants, Filipinos, especially those of the oppressed masses in both urban and rural areas tried and failed but their heart of being a “free” man and its identity as a “Filipino” prevail (for before "Filipino" was meant to be the Spanish Insulare as well as a privileged principalia loyal to the Spanish crown), and so its class consciousness as a working class, be it a laborer or a farmer. Also to think that in spite of hardships given, their deaths or banishments, still their identity and their hope remain as they continue fighting, knowing that their desire for a just society has to realise.

And even today it continues to carry over. Knowing that in spite of being independent, or what the others called as “sham” independence, the remnants of the old system prevailed, and so are the classes. Being a semi-feudal, semi-colonial country always carries a large strain of this rotten system in which weakens the nation and makes further vulnerable to foreign and domestic oppression.

The struggle to destroy the old order remained still as in the past, for as the oppressed, imbued with hope and faith as a part of the nation, as makers of history wanted to destroy every piece in order to set a new society under them, as what Karl Marx said a “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” must have take place of the old. Also to think that a third world nation nearly lost its identity because of that rotten system prevailing, with all its occidentosis becoming the culture itself, then it is the duty of the aware to revive national consciousness that is, based from the aspirations of the people than those of the ruling order. After all, of what is independence if the ones who rule still clings to its colonial master? It makes independence "sham" than true.

For sure one would notice that National pride seemed to be but a façade, a cosmetic in a face a puppet state. Through meaningless slogans to the "fashionalistic" sentiments that carried little or no patriotism, I really think that Nationalism as of now becomes worth nothing-especially to nations wherein opened much to free trade and lessening its patriotic, working class appeal to accumulate more foreign aid and support-in other words, sacrificing its own dignity for a few bucks.

Imagine, everyone has encountered the mercenary traditions of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the curtailment of civil rights and freedom of thought especially amongst activists and other progressive leaning persons who advocate genuine national pride and class consciousness, of several scandals wherein corrupts the country and of life itself, and even the "rise" of false "patriots" who are in fact mere puppets of a foreign oppressor, who utilizes a "washed-out" patriotism and blaming the genuine patriots who supported a dignified state and a progressive community of peoples imbued with patriotic sentiment and of class consciousness as members of the working class.

Noticing about these facts, it seems that "a need for genuine national pride through working class patriotism" is encouraged as a means to counter the growing effects of wholesale westernization, of globalization also encouraged by vested western interests, as well as of bourgeois-chauvinist "nationalism" that is limited to buying goods and watching boxing matches and of the like, including those of its own contemporary culture which in fact emulates too much from the west. Sorry for the words but to see such occidentosis would say that is there any patriotism left? The so-called "Pinoy pride" of the present is a mere aesthetic as everyone has their minds embedded with those of the west and its materialistic illusions.

But in spite of all the façade of "pride", the laboring class has still demands peace, land, bread, and justice knowing that the country known for that "pride" is still backward thanks to an unjust order that makes a nation "proletarian" as any third world nation.

People somehow may ought to understand the fact in order to break off ties from it, it needs modern-day Bonifacios not Aguinaldos, of needing De Los Reyeses, of Evangelistas not those of collaborationists a la Paterno, Roxas, and others including those who bannered buying Filipino goods yet kissing the shoes of the imperialist.

Patriots of the working class type, true to its idea that they wanted a real, dignified homeland within the international community of peoples, also wanted to realize what the late Soviet leader Joseph Stalin's statement:

"In the past we had no fatherland, nor could we had one. But now that we have overthrown capitalism and power is in our hand, in the hands of the people, we have a fatherland, and we will uphold its independence. Do you want our socialist fatherland to be beaten and to lose its independence? If you don't want this, you must put an end to its backwardness in the shortest time and develop a genuine Bolshevik tempo in building up its socialist economy. There is no other way... "

And in it somehow it is true for as workers of every nations, living in a nation in fact a nation of profiteers wanted genuine national pride, but this time imbued with class consciousness to counter, destroy the age-old chauvinist "nationalistic" appeal of the profiteers and of the like, as well as to build a real homeland wherein it genuinely uphold its independence whilst cooperating with all nations in building a community of peoples: just, peaceful, prosperous.

Due to the fact that nationalism, in a proletarian sense, is more national than those from the ruling class, of the present system itself, since they (the proletariat) have showed its real contribution to the country; however they remained poor since their fruits of hard work are destined to those whom are greed in nature.

Seeing culture ruined as demolished old edifices

Seeing culture ruined as demolished old edifices

All thanks to exploiters guised as architecture and art appreciators
and an apathetic government that tolerates numerous demolitions

At first, this person is ought to say that being politically cultural makes one strange, and in making writeups covering both political and cultural matters, he sees the reality on how politics and culture are interconnected (or is it interdependent? Anyway, whatever.), especially those that affect people's lives, heritage, identity.

It may sound strange given its idealistic nature of connecting politics and the arts if not insisting that politics and culture has to be treated as separate entities; but, to think that the motive in making something as "for the people" or "for the country" with all its "nation building aspect", then why to deprive that art or any cultural act of its political significance? 

Perhaps it boils down  to the ages-old debate between art for the people vs. Art for art's sake. Of art as a political tool to enlighten vs. Art as a commercial product meant to sell. Such debates makes one notice what is the standard in which every art has to be observed: Is it its meaning? Its appeal to the people? Its saleability? Its profitability?
Ideally they would say all of it are standards that has to be observed, but reality shows that the debate continues if not trying to be mellowed by the current setting such as the present system taking advantage of art for their interests- of depoliticising art in order for marketability to take its place in spite of its political appeal as the picture of Ernesto Guevara in a T-shirt.

But still, that depoliticisation and marketisation of lives, communities, and cultures requires politics. In a reality wherein the market replaced the civic space, and government officials disregard order in favour of unbridled capitalism to take over community life, the process of depolitisation and marketisation involves state approval, all in the pretense of "economic" or even "cultural development" as the billboards hanging on walls and rooftops.

And one classical example is the typical building of a shopping mall that shaped the lives of those within the community. There it replaced the park, it even replaced the public market, almost even the church and the school as the shopping mall provided them the "needs" ranging from clothes to gadgets. See nothing strange though but as time goes by it turns out madly as more malls replacing what makes a community having its identity, again all thanks to a system that caters to interests, and frankly speaking, having a politicised and empowered populace means hindrance to their conception of development; hence, it has to destroy heritage ranging from equating keeping heritage to spending to those of describing old houses to ugliness so as to favour the consumerist kind of future.

Therefore, it is deemed "culturally political" if not "politically cultural". The demolishing a cultural edifice is a political act, so is building a mall in to take place of that antiquated edifice that has been fallen through the wrecking ball. Old communities has to be replaced with new ones with the blessing of the state, whose systemisation of sorts, whose perspective is commercialism has affected districts whose history is as embedded in its timeless edifices and well crafted structures.

And now in seeing demolished edifices like the old Philippine National bank at Escolta, and still facing demolition threats in case of PhilBanking and Veterans Bank buildings in Bonifacio Drive, this person sees that all after seeing Santa Ana Park or San Lazaro Hippodrome reduced into mere memories, will they demolish more out of commercial interests in the guise of "consumer taste" while ironically seeing the other setting up art fairs brought about by commercialists? Ayala is known for their "heritage" yet they demolish Santa Ana Park; Henry Sy's "Shoe Mart" has its own "Kultura Filipino" yet it had demolished decades-old San Lazaro Hippodrome for his mall. The irony is this: these people even yearn to imitate London or Paris whose heritage remains as rooted for years, while  in this goddamn Metro Manila and the Philippines has care little to nothing about its surrounding, unless it is worth profitable as any other expensively-priced project.

But in spite of all these ruins and threats over old yet culturally sound edifices, there are still concerned architects and other heritage experts still expressed condemnation such as after the demolition of the iconic Philippine National Bank (PNB) building on Escolta street, dismissing Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada’s claim that it had to be torn down for being structurally "unsound";
Worse, to see those who "afforded to appreciate art" are the ones who use art as means to deflect from the truth such as poverty, the same entity who miseducate the common man with illusions, of canned "culture" devoid of substance, of value. When was the time they truly encourage artistry? No wonder Alcazaren stated that there will be new developments, as in commcercialised developments meant to replace a remarkable building; and in it might compromise the functional capacity of Manila’s Binondo district:

“The city, which owns the building and the lot, will probably sell it to the highest bidder; most probably a condo developer...This company would then maximize the opportunity by building a tower much taller than the PNB.”

Furthermore, Alcazaren said: “This will add yet another skyscraper in a district already unable to support such a high density [of tall buildings] because of inadequate transport, power, drainage, and sewage-treatment infrastructure,”.

But all in all, it's about commercialism versus culture, of profit versus heritage. Ironically, even capitalists themselves afforded to have a "joyride" on the idea of heritage only to distort it. Remember the Pre-War Admiral Apartments that end demolished and created an architectural kitsch in place of it? Remember the attempts to demolish El Hogar Filipino and creating an alibi such as building a tower to take place of it using the same feature? Or the Ayalas who, again afforded to claim themselves as preservers of heritage hath demolished an Art Deco like Sta. Ana Park in order for their Circuit Makati to take place?

It's easier to say "move on" after all these nonsense, be it it will always be culturally political knowing that with these truths why should it be deprived of its political value? Perhaps as sense of history and heritage has been replaced with whining and ceaseless wandering, the nuch obviously laid bullshits like having a country replacing the agora with the shopping centre makes one say that the current state of things, in spite of parroting various messages people easily to believe, seriously believes in nothing except interests, worse, not even in itself.

"Poems from the Trenches"

"Poems from the Trenches"

"In pursuit of future: Memories of Barrio Ugong"

Each day I see the silos

Remembering an Idealistic past

With the scent of wheat

Recalls the productive fervour

Each time I see the laborers

The machinery, the concrete edifice

That once towering over Pasig river

A legacy of an almost abandoned splendour

All because of a failed order

They hated to be competed

By those whose ideal is worth remembered

Whose concern is rooted in truth

A fertile land yet a poor mass

Prosperity allegedly "trickled down" 

Yet benefited the corrupted

Imagine all the edifices of glass and steel

Of malls thriving with the well paid

All these made by the ones in the shanties

All coming from the mismanaged estates

Of unfair wages and widespread maltreatments

Of strikes end up in bloodsheds and disappearances

Is this the prosperity proclaimed by the papers?

What a bullshit those articles then

All contrary to the truth 

How poor the supposed prosperous country is

How backward the supposed progressive nation is

Or perhaps a continuing "was"

All because of its continuing past

Again all thanks to a failed order

And its rulers thereof

And in it no wonder why strikes happen

Be it in the street or in the countryside

Be it with a burning effigy or a bloody ambuscade.

"My Father's house"

Inspired by Gabriel Aresti's poem of the same name

I will defend the house of my father.

I will defend it against wolves,

Thieves,

Usurers,

And various forms of Injustices;

I will defend the house of my father.

Thinking that they're all coming to exploit

Yet still I trying to resist

Time to time,

day after day

I will defend his house as much I can stay

I may lose all the cattle,

Orchards,

The produce I tilled and sown;

I may lose all my remains,

The goods,

Possessions,

But I will still defend his house.

They will take off my gun

But with my hand I will still defend it;

They will cut off my hand

Yet with my arm I will still defend it;

They will leave me without arm nor shoulder,

Even the soul that makes me defend

The house of my father.

In spite of pain enduring,

I will still die fighting,

But even without me still,

His house-my house, will remain standing.

And one will soon take over mine

Out of what I am struggling.

"Change is Coming"

Change is indeed coming said by the papers, and

Hope is bringing says by the reports

Amidst the existing inconvenient truths

Not one admitted by the apologists as they proclaimed:

"Gone is the corrupted and the oppressive, for

Everything will be given justice!"

"Impossible!" says the skeptic, knowing that the reality is contrary

Such as widespread hunger, poverty, murder, a series of idiosyncrasy

Coming from a corrupted order

Outsmarting the struggling commoner

Making hell to a country

Its people, even its history, until

Nothing, for they made it all

Gone.

"Nighttime offensive"

I swore to the blood red banner

And to the graves of my comrades

And take the gun to me given

As I take the road less taken

Tonight the offensives been set

As the campfires been set off

Tonight will traverse the forests

As the foes sleeping in their encampments

The bells of struggle continues to chime

In spite of numerous deaths

If not survivors end captured

Tortured, imprisoned, or disappeared

For their "heavens" be shaken with fear

As the action begins in the waxing moon

With the barrage of bullets

Surprising the sleeping attack dogs

One screams in pain

Another felt its untimely fear

As the partisans vent their wrath

On a plantation that blocks the path

Of peasant folks desired for land

Of farmworkers desired for decent wage

Of people sick and tired of hell

Brought upon by a state sponsored brigandage?

As storms continue, seeing blood and death

Comrade and foe alike felt the pain

Bright red blood will water all the trees

Staining the flags whose word is liberty

And end cleared all the noises

And comrades taken all the enemy guns

Foes end becoming captives

Criminals waiting their untimely fates.

Enough to be part of an epic

"The people's war" as what they proclaim.

"Still, taking time struggling for decent housing"

"Still, taking time struggling for decent housing"

(Or all after revoking the eviction order against the urban poor

Over the disputed Pandi housing project)

Amidst criticism pointing against the urban poor "occupying" an abandoned yet still disputed housing project at Bulacan, it seems that the government had no choice but to question the program that involves one of the basic calls of these neglected masses: housing.

As Cabinet Secretary and Housing Czar Leoncio Evasco revoked Malacañang’s forced eviction order against Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap (KADAMAY) members who have occupied thousands of idle government housing units in Bulacan.

Evasco, through an interview over DZMM last saturday, announced that Malacañang will not forcibly evict occupants of idle government housing projects in Bulacan, but instead promised to provide housing projects to KADAMAY members.

Sounds promising isn't it? Thinking that as the administration initially calling the occupiers as anarchists if not provoking chaos, of apologists describing them as not undergoing due processes, rather end admitting that there is a problem regarding housing: that no one lives in a housing project that is, costly if not unlikely to be habitable.

But as for KADAMAY and its supporters, the said occupation is just enough, thinking that these houses are long unoccupied, with foliage almost overgrown its walls. 

Is it really for the Police, Military,
Or for the evictee?

According to Katrina Stuart Santiago in her Manila Times article, The long abandoned project was started last 2011 when former President Noynoy Aquino signed Administrative Order No. 9, which directed the National Housing Authority (NHA) to implement and manage a housing program for military and police personnel.

The project, which was called the AFP/PNP Housing Program,nreceived an allotment of P4.2 billion, and its goal was 21,800 housing units to be distributed in 2011 alone, across 12 different locations (Interaksyon, July 14, 2011).

But no press release mentions Pandi. Only last 2016 when a press release from the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council then under Vice President Leni Robredo, lists down the said town as part of 65 sites where houses for the military and police have been built.

However, according to the Housing Board of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, “many soldiers were not satisfied with the design of the houses” while Philippine National Police Senior Superintendent Wilfredo Cayat said that “there was a mismatch in the location of the housing sites and the needs of the police.” The same 2016 press release from HUDCC also states that the “AFP, PNP and NHA” had concerns about the size of the units.

Even militarymen turned lawmakers expressed critcism over that project, for last October 2015, Magdalo party-list lawmaker Gary Alejano talked about how less than 10 percent of government housing for military and police (such as the one in Pandi) were occupied, because these “were poorly designed, built with substandard materials, and lacked utilities and basic services” (Inquirer.net, October 2, 2015).
In March 2016, he would also say: “The reason for the very low occupancy rate … is because the units are not livable. It is hellish to live there. The government would only make their lives miserable and our soldiers and policemen would not be able to carry out their jobs if they would worry about the families they leave behind. There is no drainage, no water, no power, not even a playground for children” (The Standard, March 27, 2016).

But in spite of the dissatisfaction coming from the supposed recipients, the previous administration pushed through with the million-peso project.

On the other hand, Pandi used to appear in government press releases last 2013, in relation to the relocation of informal settlers that live in danger zones in Metro Manila. Then HUDCC Chair Vice President Jejomar Binay announced the availability of 4,800 housing units in Trece Martires, Cavite, and San Jose del Monte, Bocaue, Norzagaray and Pandi, Bulacan, to which illegal settlers in danger zones would be relocated.
However, last 2015, on Aquino's last year in office, an urban poor protest told that the Pandi housing project was also where victims of demolitions of informal settlements in Metro Manila were relocated. For around April of that year, 700 members of the urban poor from Navotas who were to be displaced by a road-widening project, talked about how the National Housing Authority and the local government were forcing residents to transfer to Pandi.

This was unacceptable because according to Elgar Cornista, president of the Nagkakaisang Lakas ng Navoteno Federation: “There is no livelihood there. In fact, those who have already agreed to be relocated came back, and just erected shanties again here near the fishport. In the relocation site there is no livelihood, no water, no electricity.” (PinoyWeekly, April 19, 2015)

That same month, 378 Bureau of Fire Protection firemen were awarded houses in Pandi (Inquirer.net, April 20, 2015).

It seems that the project is really long stalled yet insisted that the project was for the policeman and the soldier (and for awhile the evictee). However, coming from the statements it showed that the project was overpriced yet the materials used were substandard, of having lack of water nor electricity, as well as far from the needs every supposed resident has to insist.

But knowing that these houses were long stood and enduring its deterioration (thanks to those government officials), and at the same time there are homeless who had enough of unjust "due processes" that requires unjust queues and overpriced amounts to pay, isn't it just to take it over?

After all, according to the constitution,

"The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the public sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available at affordable cost decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate employment opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State shall respect the rights of small property owners.

Urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane manner. No resettlement of urban and rural dwellers shall be undertaken without adequate consultation with them and the communities where they are to be relocated."


How a government official
Rather takes the side of the urban poor

In spite of administration wanting to evict the so-called "lawless anarchists", one of them rather took the side of these less fortunate "occupiers". It may sound ironic, but the action taken by that person showed how public service transcends sectors.

As Judy Taguiwalo, secretary of Social Welfare and Development, was questioned by journalists during a press conference last Friday on the issue regarding the agency’s distribution of food packs in Pandi, Bulacan last week and on accusations that the agency is giving special treatment to the “occupiers.”

There were accusations that the Department of Social Welfare and Development, who happened to be an activist, is “tolerating” KADAMAY members who occupied vacant housing units in Bulacan province by providing them assistance like food packs.

However, in spite of accusations, the secretary tried presenting and discussing other DSWD programs as well as stated that all of department's programs are for the poor. She also said that the agency is always ready to give help to those who ask, especially the poor.

Obviously, her actions showed public service as a public trust if not emphasising administration than those of politics her predecessors did. The immediate action such as providing support including those from KADAMAY shows that in the end these people are poor and in need of help, regardless of its politics.


Still, taking time struggling for decent housing

It may sound "Victorious" for KADAMAY in seeing NHA having its withdrawal, however, that withdrawal from that disputed site is not yet final knowing that there are still negotiations ongoing between two groups, especially after reports regarding its supposed recipient's dissatisfaction over the site and the occupier's desire for a decent housing.

And inspite of the just intent of the "Urban Development and Housing Law" there are still loopholes that may use for corruption. There are reports about "providing houses up to ten units to those who are able to pay" only to be rented; there are instances of overpriced housing that somehow contradicts the idea of affordable housing for least paying families.
Strange isn't it? Of what is that law or the agency that abides from it if it end treated as a goddamn enterprise motivated by profit than of service? Not all of these urban poor folks having a high paying job as well as wages or earnings insufficient to meet demands ranging from basic needs to paying rents.

But to call them lumpens or lawless elements seemed to be too much.

Currently, the occupiers continue to reside in those disputed units, struggling to have a decent housing as they're trying to clean every wall from its initial abandonment and making it habitable enough for a home. Supporting groups and individuals continue to provide them any help as possible, and in case of DSWD, it is their duty to serve these folks all according to its law.

And perhaps within these poor folk's eyes they all hope that from the place they have occupied for days means the community they desired according to their aspirations, far from their existence in the shantytowns and in the streets.

NARROWING DOWN THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES DILIMAN AS A DISSERVICE TO THE NATION

NARROWING DOWN THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES DILIMAN

AS A DISSERVICE TO THE NATION

By Dr. Gerardo Lanuza Ph.D

Sociology Professor, University of the Philippines

I have been teaching general education courses for twenty-two years. And as a young Instructor at UP Diliman in 1995 all the first subjects I handled were under the general education program. I taught Social Science 1 (Foundations of Behavioral Sciences), Social Science 2 (Social, Political and Economic Thought), Social Science 10 (Gender and Society), and Sociology 10 (Being a Filipino: A Sociological Exploration).

Honestly, I found it difficult, as a young University Instructor, to teach GE subjects. It demanded mastery, if not, at least, sufficient grasp of all the disciplines and perspectives from social sciences that are necessary to come up with an integrated view of a certain topic or a theme. That is why senior faculty are better equipped to teach GE. But I survived. And I found myself loving GE subjects more than teaching the major subjects in Sociology. The reason being that GE subjects gather together students from different disciplines, with different backgrounds and year levels, who have to undergo a common and shared knowledge before they specialize.
As the UP GE Task Force (2015) puts it, “The GE program is the embodiment of the UP tradition of liberal education which “aims to provide... students with a broad perspective that would enable them, outside their own field of specialization, to engage with issues and realities of their own times as citizens with sturdy moral and intellectual integrity.”

UP GE program has underwent several revision specially in 2001 when the GE curriculum shifted from all-prescribed courses to “cafeteria-style” approach that allowed students to choose their GE subjects. Then came the hybrid program that was implemented in 2012 because of the failings of the “cafeteria-style” curriculum. Recently, last March 20, the UP Diliman University Council voted to further revise the Hybrid GE program so that each college will have the leeway to choose the number of units from 21 to 45. These shifts are not only internally generated by the UP Diliman system. These changes are mostly shaped by the forces operating outside the University especially neoliberal globalization, the internationalization of education, and the currently implemented K to 12 program. In all these epochal shifts, the University has always maintained its vision to define its general education as preparing students to become good leaders with moral integrity and critical minds.

We have now come full circle. The University has revised the GE program from a tightly prescribed curriculum to a market model (free reign of electives), then to a hybrid system (electives and required core units combined), and finally, the reduction of GE units. And if this is the way the University defines GE program as any other accessory that can be retrofitted as the needs arise, we can expect further reduction, if not, the total elimination of GE from University education in the not so distant future. The reduction of GE units from 21 to 45 means that some colleges can opt for 45, some colleges are also given the leeway to reduce their GE to 21 units. Two major problems arise: will 21 units of GE be enough to provide holistic university education for professionals? Absolutely no! This goes against the global trends in higher learning institutions that are now strengthening their GE program to combat over-specialization. Next, does allowing each college to adopt different number of GE units a healthy sign of an academic community that is supposed to foster a common and shared learning culture for all the students regardless of specialization? Again, no!

The existing 45 units GE, the hybrid system, requires students to take 24 core courses while having freedom to choose subjects to further enrich their University education. Admittedly, we don’t love all our GE subjects. Sometimes it has to do with our teachers and the course itself. But who says that you have to like the subject matter to learn? Most of us hate Math. But without Math our computational and analytical skills will be rudimentary, if not primitive. That is why there can never be complete freedom for choosing GE subjects. Otherwise no one will choose freely a much hated, but necessary subject. Who ever said that there is a royal road to humanistic education?

Definitely the new 21 units of GE is not a good number to fulfill the mandate of the University to produce good citizens who are connected to the collective wisdom of the past (notwithstanding the fact that UP Diliman now has the lowest number of GE units in the country beating UP Manila by 3 units and UP Los Banos by 6!). Some may argue that the skills of GE can also be learnt along the way as students take major subjects. But that would be defeating the very nature of GE which is different from the purpose of the major subjects. It is undeniably true that skills like mathematical and artistic reasoning can be acquired from various major courses. But the substance of these skills can only be honed and deeply explored in GE subjects. Why sacrifice GE subjects for the sake of specialization, when GE program can enhance the learning capacity of students to specialize? Why be so spendthrift to invest in shaping the minds of future generations?

Some argue that the K to12 program that contains subjects that were lowered from the college curriculum should compensate for the reduction of GE units. But with the rudimentary situation of our K to12 program, coupled with the ill-equipped training of the teachers handling these courses, and the logistical problems, the University cannot just close its eyes and hope that all is well with K to 12 program. Even if we improve the K to 12 program, it cannot be a substitute to college GE program. In fact, the University is challenged to come up with better GE program that can enhance further what is learned in K to 12.

It is quite sad for me as faculty who have been teaching GE subjects that my University suddenly decided to reduce GE from 45 to 21. I can afford not to teach GE subjects (who would not want to be liberated from having large classes?). But I cannot imagine our majors undergoing an impoverished GE program. This is beyond quantifying what an emancipated mind is. This is about the quality of minds of future leaders we will be producing as a University. Today we complain about our educated politicians as susceptible to corruption, our legal luminaries as having narrow view of legal system, of top-notch engineers and scientists who are inattentive to indigenous culture, of top-class doctors who treat their patients as milking cows, of excellent graduates who are not even aware of our territorial claims in south China Sea, of students bereft of any knowledge of our colonial past. We cannot solve these problems by further reducing our GE subjects.

University education is more than specialization. It is more than filling up the minds of facts. It is about equipping those young minds with the necessary skills (logical, communicative, aesthetic, etc.) and knowledge that they can use to assess “fake news”, evaluate complex local and global issues, gauge moral dilemmas, and be at home with comparative analysis of issues that cut across knowledge systems. We don’t wait for our students to graduate and work with a team composed of specialists from other disciplines to have a well-rounded education. It is the duty and responsibility of the University to train them to be specialists yet firmly grounded in general knowledge of the world, society, history, and humanity.

March 20 was a sad day for the University. It was the twilight of general education and the narrowing down of our university education to mere specialization and employability. Being employed is not a bad thing. But definitely it is not the end of general education as the proponents claim. Surprisingly, studies have shown that employers do not emphasize the majors of graduates (2013 National Survey of Business and Non Profit Leaders). They are looking for the attitudes and critical skills of the applicants.

Unless the exultant voices of those who succeeded in narrowing down our GE can come up with a better vision and perennial philosophy for general education, I will mourn the twilight of GE in UP. And for the coming days, I will join other faculty, students, alumni and concerned sectors with the future of the University to do something to this plummeting down of our University general education to mere narrow specialization and employability. If there is something I learned from my GE subjects it is that I should be able to question a consensus reached by a majority that has no scientific basis or any probative value to an academic community.

***

Originally posted in his Facebook page, Prof. Lanuza criticises the downsising of the general education program and its subsequent vocationalisation in tertiary educarion as neoliberal in orientation. One of its followers also stated that the downsising of the program as an attempt to disbar people's right to question unjust policies, particularly those of labor, economic or even social policies affecting the community.

Admittingly speaking, this person favours the Professor's statement as part of a struggle, not just to upheld the original 45-unit General Education program of tue university, but also to assert the need for a patriotic, scientific, and mass oriented education as an alternative to the present education system that caters to the dilapidated, unjust social order.