Drawing a Line on the Concrete. With my blood, if necessary

Just in case I didn't make myself clear with the previous post (I guess I didn't), then let me make it clear, especially to my old comrades in the UCSC, and to its current generation if they are still inclined to listen, even for a bit, to the ranting of an old man:

First, I do not agree with violent overthrow of governments. Corollary to that is my disagreement with military juntas or any similar systems. Liberals are supposed to be process-oriented, yes? The ends can never justify the means, and if someone will tell me that they have to burn the house in order to save it from termites, then I definitely have a problem with that. The same with authoritarian regimes: so long as individual and human rights are being curtailed in any way, then I am also very much against those.

Which leads me to my second point: the rampant and brazen assault of the Macapagal-Arroyo government on the Bill of Rights. Dammit, Madame President, but one does not need to be a lawyer to understand what Sec. 18, Article VII means in its entirety. Nothing, absolutely nothing justifies the government's actions at the proclamation of 1017. In many cases, it was not only illegal but indecent, too. The best example is the way Randy David and Argee Guevarra were picked up. Or how about the way those poor people who were at Karingal with Prof. David were treated? Dammit, Madame President, but those were women and children! On the way to EDSA to celebrate People Power I! Not only did your men deny them their constitutionally-mandated right to freedom of speech and assembly, but your men also treated them- especially the children! Good God, those poor children!- harshly, as if they were hardened criminals!

Illegal? The way government has been comporting itself since Proc. 1017, it has been nothing but barbaric. Inhumane, even.

Let me level-off here: as someone who has experience and training in security matters, I can understand and even appreciate the situation that can make a President of a democracy call on the extraordinary powers granted him or her by their constitution. Until the brazen disregard for the Constitution by the Macapagal-Arroyo government, I was ready to argue to anyone that, given the possible threat posed by disgruntled members of the military, government's declaration of a State of Emergency is valid. There is - again - another attempt at a power grab, and this time seriously involving members of the AFP and the PNP, the Scout Rangers and Special Action Force no less, two of the most elite security forces in the country.

Government has a right to defend itself. That I can understand. If some soldiers and policemen get the short end of the stick (or, in this case, the very hard end of one) for actions contrary to their standing orders and the chain of command, then tough luck. The military is not a democracy, and going against the chain of command outside normal channels can really get you into a lot of heat. But even if the military is not a democracy, there should be other ways, other means, because the country they serve is (supposedly) a democracy.

I'll also argue against those who could so... carelessly endanger the Republic through actions like this. This is not Martial Law (well, at least until last Friday). This is not the Erap years. This is a country we built together, at least until 8 July 2005. I know so many are dissatisfied at GMA's governance, but if I find out that some of my Mentors, and those few elders I still respect, are part of the "plan" (if there ever was one) last Friday, then my idealism will most certainly take a fatal blow. I think what defines us in the Center from those of the radical Left and Right is that we do not subscribe to the adage, "the ends justifies the means." That is perhaps the one single thing I hate about Communism, its willingness to engage in whatever means necessary to achieve its revolution. In all my encounters with the radical Philippine Left, this has always colored my perception of them. But we are of the Center. Some of us are even proud to call ourselves "Moderates." Aren't we then supposed to be process-oriented? When we engage in warfare - whether it be on the literal, physical level, or the metaphorical, socio-political one, or both - shouldn't we comport ourselves in a way that our actions do not condemn us as well?

Yet... I cannot sit here and say I agree with what has been done to our rights in the last few days. Disagree? No: I am horrified. I am indignant. I am shocked. I am outraged.

Yes, I know what the Tribune and Malaya have been doing. Yes, I know what ABS CBN really subscribes to. But, to quote the '87 Consti, "no law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances." (Sec. 4, Article III)

As the Tribune petition to the Supreme Court said, Proc. 1017 is not even a law, so what right does government have to do what it did? Sec. 18, Article VII? Bullshit. Again I quote Par. 4, Sec. 18, Article VII: "A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus."

I don't like the Tribune. I believe it's too biased a paper for its own good, or even to be regarded as serious journalism. I believe it's just propaganda on print. The Malaya is little better, although Lito Banayo is good for a couple of politically-accented laughs.

But those two were newspapers. Legit newspapers. Members of the Press. Government has no right to even threaten media nor tell it what to do because the fundamental law of the land says so.

I don't like rallies all that much, in the context of so much democratic space. I believe they serve a purpose, and are a necessary part of civil society's toolkit, but a functioning democracy should have other, more effective avenues for addressing the issues confronting its citizenry.

But rallies are expression both of free speech and assembly. In a democracy, we, the people, should be able to gather where we choose and say what we want, observing only the natural laws of decency and reason. The people - on whom, as the Preamble to the '87 Consti states, resides all powers and emanates from them - should have a right to complain about a President they think has been failing them. Why? Because the fundamental law of the land says so.

And no one, most especially the President who swore she'd defend that Constitution, nor the military and police who said the same oaths, is above that fundamental law.

Y'know what? I helped kick Erap out in '01. But in fairness to the guy, he gave us this much: the right to assemble and speak. Even if it cost him so much after.

I wonder, if the current President could (continue to) do worse than that?

No, this is wrong. I may not agree with the way Black and White has defined the whole issue that began with the Garci tapes, but in this I will agree: there are just some things that are downright wrong. And government’s actions since Proc. 1017 have been nothing but wrong.

The Bible says that when your brother offends you, the first thing you do is point it out to him. If he still doesn’t get it, you bring a friend along who will witness to his wrongdoing. If he still thinks otherwise, then the Bible was clear on how such a person should be treated.

If the Macapagal-Arroyo administration continues to think it’s not doing anything wrong with Proc. 1017, then we have a problem here.

And then, I think, it’s time to once again draw a line on the concrete with our blood, and tell those who would trample on our hard-fought rights that enough is enough, and that we’d be damned if we let another dictator rise and put us and the Republic in chains again.

Dangerous Times

When that aborted coup last Friday happened - along with the reaction of the Palace to it - I was very little, if any, perturbed. I even had a bit of stress from my own father because he was so worried and wanted me back at the house. I guess his statements - if I didn't want to listen, that was my problem, or something like that - rankled me because of his four children I was the one who was part of one revolution and helped stop another. I've seen my share of conflict and recieved training to handle it and myself. I wanted to tell him that, if I wasn't worried about a few tanks then he shouldn't.

Yet, with tonight's news of the takeover of the Daily Tribune, my anxiety over the state of emergency has heightened.

Part of me understands the action: the Daily Tribune has done nothing but castigate the Arroyo administration since 2001. The Tribune, after all, is an Erap paper, in much the same way Malaya is an Angara or Lacson paper. I don't know to whom Abante belongs to. These three were supposedly some of the first... "institutional" casualties of Proclamation 1017. Oh, wait, I'm wrong there: uber-pundit Randy David was picked off during the EDSA rally last Friday, along with lawyer Argee Guevara. Rhealeth told me that former UP President Francisco Nemenzo has also been picked up, but that guy also kind of had it coming, being one of the most vocal of critics calling for Gloria's overthrow.

Of all the classes I had with journalism institution Doreen Fernandez, one has remained etched in memory. We had her as our prof during soph year Intro to Journ. We weren't freshies anymore, wide-eyed and in awe of our status as Atenean college students, but I think we still had a bit of the naivete of our age. Doreen's class would show us a little bit more of the world we were going to confront and hopefully change. That day, she posed us a question: why did we think some newspapers still operate eventhough they are losing money for their publishers? No answers from the class, so she answered her own question for us: because it gives one power. Having one's own media gives one the power of a Gatekeeper of Information, the ability to influence the thinking of large segments of the population. And in a society that trusts media more than government, that can be quite the power indeed.

As a longtime media operator, and for a major political party no less, this lesson given to naive little soph me is something I can fully appreciate. I've seen it in action. In fact, it's one of the beginning exercises I give my trainees in KALIPI's media directorate, that of identifying which media is with which faction or interest group. There is no objective media. The first rule of media ops brings home the point: do not piss off media. If media were objective, they wouldn't mind being dissed by media ops like me if they can get the Truth, whatever the hell that is in a post-July 8 Philippines.

But, if the press is such a pain and does take sides in a political contest, is that any reason to take such radical, punitive action against a segment of it?

I'm looking at the 1987 Consti right now (thank you, Chan Robles). First, let's look at the provision that Gloria invoked:


Section 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call.

The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.

During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.

Gloria quoted the first sentence of Section 18, Article 7 as justification for Proc. 1017, and is presumably the operating “law” for any and all actions being taken in accordance with the State of Emergency. But as one person pointed out before, and from what I can see up there, (a) State of Emergency was never mentioned in Sec. 18, Article 7, and (b) paragraph four is very, very, clear about what remains “in operation” and not.

This is because of certain provisions that come before Article 7, some of the most important provisions of the ’87 Consti:

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited.

(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.

Section 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.

Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.

Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.

Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.

Section 19. (2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.

Those provisions are from Article III, more commonly called the Bill of Rights. And if Gloria wants to use the Consti as justification for Proc. 1017, then she'd better read it again. Because even with Proc. 1017, she can't have opposition papers closed, or highly critical media organizations like, say, ANC, because Sec. 4, Article III says so. And she can't have... "inconvenient" people like Nemenzo and Randy David, nor Anakpawis congressman Crispin Beltran picked up because so many Sections in Article III says so. She can't do what she wants because the very same Sec. 18, Article VII that she quotes says so. And it holds even if she had the gall to declare Martial Law.

I read somewhere - I think it was a column in the PDI about freedom of the press - that any opinion or statement that elicits strong reactions (or something like that) is precisely what the right to freedom of the press and speech protects. Because it is precisely strong words that create debates that should be the basis of a functioning democracy. A true, strong and vibrant democracy must not be scared of high-handed criticism; in fact it should encourage it. Because the essence of a democracy is about people having their own opinion and not being afraid of it being heard, especially if it concerns the powers-that-be. Yes, there is a fine line between freedom of speech and sedition but wouldn't it be better to err on the side of democracy?

Gloria's people should have seen from last year that what we have now is a people that thinks. Otherwise, the little lady would've been out since, say, July 8. But because the Filipino people refuse to be so easily hoodwinked to any faction, we all still sit and wait for more proof to come out.

But what is going to happen now, that Gloria is appearing like some dictator in all but name with her recent actions?

This a very, very dangerous time. People probably would have understood some of the measures taken to secure the Republic last Friday. Some probably didn't do more than shrug when they heard the President read Proc. 1017. But a lot of people will look with growing alarm at her recent actions. And coming as it is during the celebration of the First People Power... Gloria and her people couldn't have chosen a worst time to act the dictator.

Dangerous times indeed. Marcos was able to put the country under Martial Law because he moved fast, and the people initially thought it was for the best. I think the Filipino is wiser now, despite all those surveys that say people wouldn't mind another dictatorship if it'd clean everything up. And Gloria's people have not moved with the speed and efficiency that Marcos did.

How absurd. As Tin said in a text a while ago, she's just comitting political suicide.

We'll see. The Filipino people are very patient and forgiving, but a lot of dictators and corrupt leaders found out the hard way not to tempt fate when it comes to trampling the Filipino's rights and sense of right and wrong.

People Power at Twenty

Bandwagoning again, goodness... But, then...

It’s funny how I reacted to the articles on the First People Power that have been coming out of PDI. Ha, ha: they actually bring a tear or more to my eyes.

I belong to the generation who fought on the Second People Power. And before. I can still remember those days of the Resign-Impeach-Oust (RIO) Initiatives against Erap. All those meetings. All those street actions and forums. More meetings. More actions, some of them really big ones like the Impeachain, the Jericho March (and its near-disastrous security lapse by yours truly that allowed those damned NDs to overrun the K2Y positions, grr), and the first gathering at EDSA on November.

Even those of us who were at the forefront of the RIO and the Second People Power still stand in awe of those who made the First possible. Men and women like Dinky Soliman, Butch Abad and Jovy Salonga were our idols, men and women who literally faced the guns and goons of a dictatorship and won.

Yet, I think we who stood against Erap, and tried to maintain what little sanity (and security) could be maintained in a crowd of up to a million in those days of the PP2, can appreciate what went on in the First. In fact, I think it was also the answer of my generation to our elders', that, yes, we can make a difference, too.

Still, PP1 awes me. True, I had a cannon barrel facing me squarely during the Second, but I knew there was little to no intent of its use, at least immediately. So when I see pix or vidcaps of those people who literally stood against those tanks in the First... awe is the least thing I would feel. These were ordinary people. These were the kind of people you meet everyday on the streets or at work. These were people who didn't have an ounce of training for operations in the public sphere, not the people who usually waved flags or shouted slogans. How many of those standing on EDSA in 1986 were part of the First Quarter Storm? How many of them, at least before 1983, participated in rallies and other actions against the dictator?

Yet they were there. For four glorious days the people we call "ordinary" flocked to EDSA and stopped the tanks and heavily-armed troops. They came there not with red-colored flags but with rosaries and packets of food and drinks that they eagerly shared with the soldiers they came to stop and could have rolled over them anytime. They came not to shout slogans but to pray and talk with the soldiers, and to peacefully demand a change in government.

Now, People Power is twenty years. All I can remember of that date was my parents debating on whether they would get my grandparents from Manila and bring them to us at Muntinlupa. I was too young then, to appreciate what was happening, and I can't recall my parents telling me things like "malaya na tayo, anak," after Marcos left. And growing up with a grandmother who's a Blue Lady can really screw up your appreciation for the Martial Law years and People Power. Add to that one's distressing memories of the Blackout Years (imagine being one of the first families in your community with a PC - this was 1990, okay? - and not being to use it with impunity because there's no electricity for, say, half the day), and things really get kind of muddled.

But, yes, I can appreciate it now; after all, I've been serving as part of Civil Society since the formation of the UCSC in 1998. And I wish that the government could've done a better celebration of this landmark date. Or if government won't, maybe CivSoc should. Proper remembrances of dates like this are important to the rebuilding of a nation. People need to properly remember what happened and why it happened. We need these stories to remind us of a time when we were better. Or rather a time when the Filipino acted the way the should. Filipinos need to remember how and why the First People Power happened, because we just might find in the experiences of those four days the answers for many of the questions we've been asking since the Second.

Faith in the People

Mass, at least where I regularly go to, has been quite... routine for me, most days. I rarely hear one at the Gesu, since the ones there are usually held at 10:30 in the morning, and I oversleep a lot during weekends, and I also rarely hear Mass at Greenbelt.

This Sunday's Mass, though, was rather different. You see, at Pandacan's Sto. Niño Church, there's this elderly beggar who attends the 3:30 p.m. Mass. Not always, but regularly enough. He has this kid he lugs around, a big kid, obviously unable to move on his (her?) own.

Even in a Parish Church for a community that's essentially "middile-Middle," the pair are, well, a sight to behold. 3:30 in the afternoon is the Children's Mass, but the priest who used to celebrate it, Fr. Romy de Castro, has quite a bit of a following from the parishoners that many of the attendees to the Mass are adults, or young people.

One time, the old man sat on the center-left aisle area. You could see the way people... moved away from the pair. It wasn't even that subtle. And the looks they gave...

This afternoon was different. I arrived late, and the new, young priest was already well into his sermon; it would seem the Gospel for this Sunday was about the leper (lepers?) that Jesus cured, and the young priest was telling his flock about how we would feel if we were lepers - whether physical or something else - and people would shy away from us, ostracize us even. Because that's what Jesus thought and felt, and which was why he acted as He did and cured the leper(s). The young priest said that with that single act, Jesus changed the way society viewed its outcasts, calling on the people to shun the practice of shunning, that we should bring everyone into the community especially those that most need our love and care.

The pair of beggars at that time were sitting in the third-to-the-last pew of the rightmost aisle of the Church. There was the... expected space around them, and I was observing how the people around the pair would react. To tell the truth, I was expecting more of the shunning of this pair, and was quite ready to feel bad throughout the whole Mass.

Then, one of the people nearest them stood and gave a small amount of money to the old man. Then another. The next thing I knew, nearly everyone beside them gave them money. Even in farther pews. There was even this young woman in front of me who chased after them just to give a few pesos. If i remember correctly, the first to give was this young couple, who had their baby with them.

To say my heart was touched is to give an understatement. This was totally unexpected. But maybe I should have. As a Guardian, I have seen the worst and the best in the Filipino. And this is but a simple expression of the best in the Filipino soul: that, regardless of all the things that has bowed down this once-noble race, we have not forgotten what we are. And what we are is a people whose hearts are so big that, no matter how small, we will extend help to our fellowman.

I said in an earlier post that this country has stood countless trials not because of its leaders or heroes or martyrs, but because of its people. This magnificent, brilliant, beautiful and deeply-spiritual people. When disaster strikes, we don't abandon each other but pick one another up, and the rule always is women and children first. We give so much to charities and to worthy causes, not out of a sense of noblesse oblige - how can that be the case when many of those who give are not of the "noblity" of this country? - but out of a genuine desire to help others. This charitable and helpful aspect of the Filipino spirit is I think part of the reason why the NGO culture is so much alive here, why volunteerism is a living, changing force in this country.

Perhaps we are apathetic, young and old alike. Perhaps that new, ugly word of sociopolitics - pragmatism - has buried the Filipino soul under so much muck. But the FIlipino soul is a resilient and powerful force that cannot be broken nor buried for so long. It cannot forget nor deny for long what it truly is. It yearns to shine forth. That was what both People Powers were all about: the Filipino soul blazing forth in all its majesty and glory to show the world that, yes, there is another, better way. That the world need not be about darkness and pragmatism, that reality can be soo much better and sweeter.

And, yes, that's why you fight on, even as your idealism flutters in tatters in the cruel winds of Philippine politics. Because you have faith in the Filipino, and that its true worth will once again shine true.

The End of the Reform Age

Okay, before people react too adversely to the title, let's level-off here: yes, this is not based on any "scientific" proof, like demographics or even statements from the people involved. But, I do speak from my long experience and association with the civil society movement, especially with its more younger generation, who are essentially my comrades-in-arms if not close friends.

I think it all started sometime in the early nineties. There's this local band that has a song entitled, "para sa mga namulat sa dekada sitenta," or "for those who became aware in the '90s." For, truly, the call for deep-seated reform had its beginnings with the awakening of the Filipino youth in the administration following Cory Aquino's. We were the last children of Martial Law and the youth of the new democractic era that was ushered by the First People Power. We were the young who saw the Wall fell, who witnessed despotic governments - whether Right or Left - fall one by one as a wave of democracy swept the globe. Many older people regard my generation with a certain level of approbation, muttering beneath their breaths that we who came of age after 1986 never had it so good and that we never had to fight for anything more than parking space, a table during lunch and dinner at some snazzy resto or cafe, or for a place up front in some concert.

Of course, we proved the damned elders wrong when the student movement picked up in the mid-90s. I still remember my first mass action: it was over the Ramos initiative to amend the consti, and the usually Ivory-towerish Ateneans joined their rivals from UP Diliman and the also-resurgent ladies of Miriam College to form a chain protesting the thinely vield attempt by Fidel Ramos to extend his term via concon. I don't know about the others who were there that day, but it felt... good to do something like that, to shake a fist at Authority that thinks it can get away with abuses to power. We were young, we were Aware, and we were Active, and we were going to shake the corridors of power! And shake them we did in 2000 and 2001, as everyone whose opinion is worth something agrees that the success of the Second People Power was due to the millions of young Filipinos who turned out to protest the blatant display of trapo politics at the Senate's refusal to open the Second Envelope. It was the young who started it all by showing their indignation with the flash street protests that followed the refusal. And it was the young who, in the words of my generation, "put paid" to a regime of corruption and immorality by coming out in the millions to show the powers-that-be that they may hold the levers of power in society, but if nothing then through sheer numbers the young will trample their sorry trapo ass.

It was a good time, wasn't it? And a good time to be good. Despite everything our elders would like us to believe and accept, we showed them all that idealism, especially when backed by determination, dedication, defiance - three Ds to combat the three Gs? Hmm... - and a lot of creativity - the celfone as a weapon for a revolution; who'd have thunk? - can move more than one mountain. We dreamt, we acted on that dream, and we made that dream a reality.

Yet...

Has it really been just six years since PP2? But so many things seem to have changed, and many for the bad. What better way to... destroy the forces of reform than to drain them out of the country or co-op even their best and brightest? How many young people took up nursing even if their skills and talents are better served for other fieldds? How many even of the young leaders who fought on the Second People Power now work for the call centers? Heck, even my contemporaries who went to "traditional" corporate jobs have been eaten by their work. Back then, when there was a cause to fight for you didn't need to call twice; sometimes, we even went around looking for causes to espouse. Now, it seems so hard to gather people even for a simple get-together because of work. Hah, even those in civil society and government are eaten by work.

I don't know. Who's to blame? Gloria? C'mon: like what I've always said since the Garci tapes surfaced, she only acted the way we expected her to act so what's to be disillusioned about Gloria? To blame Gloria for all the ills of the Philippines is a gross reduction of the problem. Yes, she is part of the problem, but not the only factor in the equation. No: like the stuff you see in some astrophysicist's whiteboard, the equation is far more complex than adding one to one and getting two.

In the National Youth Commission, there is a changing of the guard that I think is significant, regardless of other opinions. Bam, despite a good chance of being retained for another term as Chairperson, has decided not to. In his own words - we got to chat today at his soon-to-be-former office, after a long while - "it's time to move on to other things." And he was saying the same thing to his longtime EA, Saira (also a good friend and adviser of mine, one of only two women who can give me a scolding and get away with it), and he was telling me the same thing. Cel Aves and Cris Arnuco have also moved on from the Commission. It's hard to find a team in the premier youth institution of government that is more reform-oriented than the one Bam led and had the likes of Cel and Cris.

This to me hammered the point that, perhaps, the "Age of Reform" that started with the Awakening of my generation in the 1990s has, at least for now, come to an end. The grand experiment of Generation X with trying to change society before we're 40 is over, and... we've lost. In one sense I can understand the Ostrich-like actions of many of even my colleagues in the old UCSC because the last few years have been a trauma bordering on fatal for our idealism. Our elder leaders have not only betrayed our confidence in them but also in many cases abused us, seeing us as no more than pawns in their power games. Our icons have failed us, whether to serve as a continuing inspiration or to reach the lofty goals and image they portrayed when they came out to challenge with us the demons plaguing this country and its people. And the values that we held dear have not only been broken by our elders - so blatantly in many cases! - but what's left has been dragged through muck and mud that we can't recognize what's left of our hearts and souls anymore.

Given the context following the mad clash for power unleashed by the May 1 Mayhem - civility between the contending political forces died on the bloodied streets of Mendiola that day, alongside propriety and a modicum of pakitang-tao among the trapos - how can we bring about change? Whatever little hold we had on the levers of power and influence now fade with the exit of Bam, Cel, Cris and the others in the NYC. The national-level youth organizations are either compromised, marginalized, or engaged in inter-org and inter-ideology rivalries to become as effective as we were in 2001 (but then, given the propensity of the NDs to stick to their overarching goal - the success of their Revolution and the installation of a communist government in the Philippines - who can blame the others for becoming so paranoid and going on the defensive?). The leaders who rose during the Second People Power are lost in the corridors of career and corporation.

Gawad Kalinga shows that hope still exists and that there still is something we can do. And there is Rock Ed. But unless GK and Rock Ed have a strategy in mind - I'm actually hoping the two are some part of one big strategy, a last attempt by the remaining reformist forces to bring about positive change, but maybe I hope too much - then all these "tactical" moves can do little the way they are now to effect change. It's like standing on some beach and trying to send the ocean back using only a pail, when you need a dike to hold back the stormy seas. And lots of people. But the strategy appears not there, and the people scattered.

I have a fear. Sometime when I'm ten years older, someone who is a kid now will be in their late teens or early twenties, old enough to understand the world he or she is moving in. And then that young person will ask me, why is the world a darker, crueler, messed up place? What did you and your fellows did to prevent this?

I could probably give a dozen excuses, but perhaps there isn't. Because we who will succeed those in power faltered sometime in the first decade of the 21st century. Because we were swept under by the forces of reality and pragmatism - the newest ugly word of Philippine politics, a convenient replacement for Trapo, since it sounds far more real and palatable than the latter but actually connotates the same - and were unable to put up a unified enough stand.

So there ends the Age of Reform.

Well, who knows? In Tolkien's Silmarillion, the forces of Good, represented by the Eldar and the Edain, were decimated. Yet one couple won over to the Powers and got them to rescind their Ban and thus Evil was defeated. I love that book, Silmarillion. It's one of my all time favorites. Who knows, someone or someones will be our Earendil and Elwing, find the way to our Aman the Blessed for us, and bring us the necessary reinforcements to end this age of darkness that has swept the country once again.

Ruminations on some rather... inconvenient events

Where was I when I heard that?

Okay, I know: I have not posted anything on this blog for quite a while not. Part of me says, "ha, like anybody cares?" But then, the intent wasn't to be an ace blogger like, say, MLQ3 (an aside: the man is good. I've had the honor of working with him a couple of times in the course of my duties with the LP, and his mind works wonderfully. Basta. I will probably write something about some of the things he discussed some other time). No, no. This a place online where I can stuff these... thoughts. Mentats have problems staying silent. If for no other reason, my blogs are my sounding boards, so there.

Anyway:

Hearing about Ariel Sharon's stroke should have a cause, more or less, for minor concern for me. I'm not one of his fans; ha, ha, I am part of the legions of people who, though understanding the need of the people of Israel for a measure of peace and security, think that the late, great Yitzhak Rabin and maybe his chosen successor Shimon Peres had the best idea in securing an end to the decades-old Palestinian conflict.

That was until I realized something: Sharon was the one who called - and managed to pull off - the Gaza Withdrawal. Its pros and cons are not the issue here; that an Israeli leader would do so is an act that can be called... courageous. The IDF withdrawing from Gaza and allowing the Palestinians to govern it. The sheer... audacity of the move was so unlike the conservatives of Likud, much less its leader.

I am not a pacifist. I fervently believe that a people who destory their weapons simply to make a point about peace will be the first ones to die - if they're so lucky - under the bootheels of people who think in socially-darwinian terms. I am a firm believer of the concept that people have a right to defend their way of life if that way does not necessarily impinge on the ways of their neighbors, and that being sheep is nice, but there are always wolves on the prowl outside of the fence.

But I do believe that Men of Peace are the ones who truly make a difference when it comes to bringing solid results in the realm of conflict resolution. We Guardians are just there to allow them the opportunity to tame the lions. Peacemakers are effective because they change people in the place that matters: in their thinking, in their outlook.

How badly has the cause of peace suffered because of the untimely deaths of its leading lights? Yitzhak Rabin was killed by a delusional conservative fellowman of his at a crucial moment in the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. John Paul II and Mother Theresa were given their rest at a time when the world needed men and women like them the most.

I think few people would call Ariel Sharon a man of peace. The man was from Likud, after all. But he was perhaps the only one with political will enough to enforce measures that would push the peace in Palestine, regardless of the cost to Israel. And given that Gaza, because of so many factors, is fast becoming a balkanized mess where the Palestinian Authority has no authority at all and the radicals hold sway, would the people of Israel follow another man who calls for a peaceful resolution to their ages-old problem? It is a mess there: hate feeds on hate.

And the people who have the capability to break that cycle of hate... are falling one after the other...

*sigh* Sometimes, it really is a weird world, isn't it?

Marriage in the Season of (Filipino) Discontent

This incident happened about... a week or so? Sorry, bu tmy PC at the house crashed and I don't like making blog posts in public.

Anyway, I was on my way back from Makati. There were three girls behind my seat and I couldn't help overhearing their conversation because they were so loud about it. I was tuning them out, of course, but the Mentat Protocols works on trigger-terms, so when a set of triggers related to immigration cropped up in their conversation, my Mind simply refused to tune them out.

It would seem that one of the three was leaving for a European country, ostensibly to immigrate. All along, I thought she was doing it either as a nurse (and I will have an entry on that later on) or under petition from relatives. Then I heard she was marrying a national of that country she was going to.

Nothing unusual with that. Many Filipinos have tried the marriage route to get a "Green Card" or citizenship in another country. But what really caught my attention was the way this marriage was to be brought about: it would appear that relatives of that woman paid another cousin 70k euros to make it look like he was marrying her. Legally, there would appear to be nothing wrong; the "husband" would be picking up his "wife" here on January and then she'll be a naturalized citizen of that country by virtue of marriage. When she gets there, she told her friends they wouldn't even be living in the same house.

If I was a tad bit more conservative. I'd be scandalized. As it was, Liberal Catholic that I am, it still shocked me, especially with the casual, almost nonchalant way the woman viewed marriage, even more so with a cousin of hers, if only to ease the entry into a new country.

This is not to judge the woman; I don't intend to, scandalized as I am at the way something I was brought up to regard as sacred could be treated so casually. In a very real sense, who can blame people like her for acting the way she did?

But my Soul is... "profoundly disturbed" by this little incident. I brought it up with my Dad about a few days after, and I was surprised to find out that not only was this "practice" more prevalent than I thought, but is quite an old phenomenon! It's been going on since at least the mid-80s so it's not as if it's a product of our globalized world.

I was just wondering... what the hell has this world come to that marriage could be reduced into something so... simple as a means to an end? That people could be so... cavalier in their attitudes towards this most sacred of sacraments?

Martial Rule and the Law

According to the 1987 Constitution, the President can declare Martial Law, but (a) several things remain in effect, like the Consti, the civil courts, nor is the writ of habeas corpus necessarily revoked, and (b) it needs Congressional approval to extend it beyond one month.

When I was born, Martial Law was only just about five years old, so my first-hand recollections of the event are rather nebulous, to say the least. Like most of my generation, all we know of the... horror when Proclamation 1081 was announced is through history books, teachers and professors, tales from our elders in CivSoc, and the occassional docu. Heck, we all thought Erap was going to do something to that effect - I mean, with Lacson and all - but it seemed the guy, in fairness to him, was a lot nicer than we gave him credit for. In fact, as one pundit described him, Erap was, despite everything, in awe of the law.

But from what has been handed down to us, a grim picture emerges. If the docu they showed us at the Ninoy Aquino Center is true, and so goes with history taught to us, Marcos actually acted even before 1081 was proclaimed. That while Tatad was reading 1081 the opposition and activists were being arrested. And there was also a ConCon going on at that time whose provisions would have severly limited Marcos' powers, and that of his cronies.

A lot has been said about the 1987 Consti as a reaction to Martial Law; in fact, many of its provisions that either enshrine civil liberties or prevent the concentration of power on any branch of government, is a clear indication of where the framers of the '87 were coming from.

Before Gloriagate was even on the radar, there were already talks about the charter being changed, especially during the (first) Philippine Political Parties Conference in 2002. As I've recounted before, I had this memorable conversation with Dr. Jose Abueva over Federalism. I wasn't sold on the idea, being a student of history myself, and nothing I've heard from the presentors - including Dr. Abueva - allayed my fears that the inherent extreme parochialism among some Filipinos, alongside political greed, could lead to the dismemberment of a Federal Republic of the Philippines.

So I asked Dr. Abueva: sir, what would prevent ethnic tensions (or something like that) from escalating to the point that States within a Philippine Federal Republic would secede, ala-Confederacy or Yugoslavia?

Dr. Abueva looked at me as if I was such a slow-witted student and said: that's impossible; it will be illegal.

I just sat there and said, "ah, ok." I wanted to pursue the matter, because I knew for a fact that there are some people - and some can be found here in the Philippines - will care less for the law, much less one drafted by academics in Imperial Manila, if it suited their purposes - whether personal or parochial - to leave the Philippines. I wanted to tell Dr. Abueva, "that's well and good, sir, but isn't there more? Because I'll be one of the persons who'll have to lead the charge to restore such 'rebellious' States to the Federation, and I'd like to know if, pretty soon, I'll have to risk my life because of you and your federalista cohorts who seem to be dominating the discussion on ChaCha."

The same line of thinking struck me as the idea of Martial Rule being reinstated by La Gloria went through one avenue of my Mind. Sure, '87 says she can't just declare Martial Law because Congress can nullify it anytime and impeach her for sure. Sure, the '87 has so many legal impediments to Martial Law...

... but the law could never really stop people who are determined not to follow it.

Nor could the law, as shown during the opening hours of Martial Rule, stop a person or the forces at the command of that person, if said entity cares nothing about the law.

Let's assume certain members of the military remain loyal to their Commander-in-Chief. Part of the thinking here is over the fact that (a) many senior officers remain loyal to Gloria, and (b) the military culture of not questioning orders. Of course, many soldiers have shown that this isn't entirely the rule in the AFP, but it still has to be disproven if men like the Oakwood Mutineers (bad example, but i hope you get the point) are the exception rather then the rule, troops who do question certain of the decisions and commands of the higher-ups.

What's to stop Gloria from using the immense powers of her position to tear down Congress, make the Supreme Court dance to her tune at gunpoint ("dance, judges, *bang* *bang*!"), and to haul off ala-1972 all of her opponents?

One of the things I try to teach my proteges is the necessity of taking things into context. And one of the comparisons I use to illustrate my point is that of EDSA I and Tiannemen Square. Ver wanted to bomb EDSA, but Marcos said no. Believe me when I tell you that no amount of heroism will prevent civilians from runninig away when really big explosions surround them and body parts and blood are flying around. Persons not trained for war or for killing follow the most basic of preservation instincts to run from a threat, and people would have run if Marcos had agreed with Ver and unleashed the power of the military on EDSA. Then maybe things would be different.

Maybe it would've been like Tiannemen. Why did the tanks roll over the students and troops gunned them in the hundreds? Because of differences. Because the people who won the power struggle within the Communist Party of China decided there was nothing wrong in killing the dissidents if it would preserve their power. A gamble, sure, because if the Chinese people had been outraged over what happened to their young who were spearheading the call for democracy, no military might or political creed would have prevented the collapse of the Chinese Communists. But nothing of the sort happened.

There was also this alternate story about a world where Britain lost to Germany in the Second World War, and instead of the liberal, democratic British being rulers of India, it was the Nazis that Ghandi faced. In the end, as the author resolved the story, Ghandi was bodily brought to the firing squad for even thinking of going against the Nazis, even if the protest was peaceful. Because the British were different from the Nazis. In fact, it is even said that what made Ghandi so successful in his resistance to British rule was the culture of the British themselves.

How does La Gloria think? How do her advisers think?

Perhaps, as Civil society and the other members of the opposition go about their campaign to take the little girl down, they should be asking those questions. One cannot simply bat against the wind, thinking one's righteousness will make all the difference. This isn't about morals and values anymore, or what's right or wrong because we who have been engaged in this since 2000 are now in the midst of a war.

And in war, some people play only by one rule: to win it all. And nothing, nothing, will stop people like that from doing anything to come out on top. Nothing will stop them. Not morals, not ethics, not "fair play," not deceny. And most certainly not some piece of paper with a lot of legal gobbledygook in it.

A Distrubing Development

Martial Law is a term commonly heard (at least) among the punditocracy of late. I suppose one cannot fault the Philippine's columnists, writers and bloggers about this: many of them come from the freedom movement of the last Martial Law, and many of La Gloria's recent actions look as if we're headed that way.

I suppose I'm getting worried too. Ever since the Palace came out with its pronouncement of the "calibrated preemptive response," the action on the streets following the defeat of the impeachment has gotten... ugly. As in really ugly. Good Lord, what was Gloria thinking? Saying her government would use "the full force of the law" to prevent "illegal" rallies was like trying to put out a small brush fire with A1 jet fuel. One thinks whether that crazy little girl is asking for it from the Left. Or maybe she really has thrown all the "conventions" and considerations for civil liberties in an effort to silence her opponents: goad the (admittedly gullible) radicals to more street actions and then take them all down.

From what the news have reported, the Left have, indeed, called Gloria's bluff, staging one protest action after another. Two headed for Mendiola have already met with "CPR" anti-riot forces, netting for the government the secretary general of Gabriella and the president of Sanlakas. For the Left, these rather violent dispersals and arrest of several of their leaders and members have netted for them more airtime.

You know, sometimes her strategists and operators really confound me.

But this is, indeed, disturbing. Someone wrote that Gloria, being a Hahvahd-trained economist, would not go the ML route; such an action goes against her training. Yet her government's actions have tested the boundaries of securing the saftey of the state and its people over individual rights and liberties. This is a cause for concern, and I wonder if any of my old comrades in the Union are aware of this. Because we should. We or our succesors in the UCSC should be asking some very hard questions right now about where the country is going, while we still can ask those questions.

The Good Within Us

I guess it's time for a balancing. Too much negativity here.

One of my favorite columns of uber-pundit Randy David was that one about his plane ride experience from Davao. Although hearing the sorry state of both PAL's fleet and its management makes me more nervous to fly with them (more than, say, the latest horror flick from NatioGeo's Air Crash Investigations), it was what he said about that inherently Filipino trait to be such an exemplar of humanity when crises come that really mattered in the column. Prof. David must surely have given many of his readers a "warm, fuzzy feeling" moment when he related how several passengers in that ill-starred flight helped each other cope with the stress. Something so simple as a person sharing excess food in such a situation can be such a wonderful occurence in this all-too-Darkened world.

(Dammit, did we fail that badly, that something like the aforementioned can be like a ray of light after a storm? Wasn't this what we were precisely trying to avoid, a near-Gibsonesque future?)

For about two or three days now, PDI has been coming out with news on the Vietnamese Boat People who've been in asylum here for the last 16 years. Perhaps as a break from the huge, stinking crap that is Gloriagate, the PDI editorial for today was precisely on this topic, and yesterday Ma. Ceres Doyo talked about "The Philippines' Non-Discriminatory Embrace."

Sometimes, the Filipino can be really... taxing. Everything from as "simple" as chronic jaywalking or people throwing their trash out of a jeepney window, to corruption and selfishness at the highest levels of government can really be a trial for a young person who genuinely loves his country and badly wants to help not only make it better but return it to the pre-eminent position in the international comunity it once played.

But there are really moments when what I consider the true soul of the Filipino shines through. You don't need to look at People Power, or the many battles we fought for freedom against powerful tyrants, or even in the many innovations this noblest of races made. No. All you have to do is look at that smile - warm, welcoming and true - at the hospitality to even the strangest of strangers. Warrior race we may be, but the Filipino can sometimes be too damned nice that we don't think our guests can do us harm (I mean, look at those who recieved Magellan and de Legaspi...). Our doors are barely locked, if at all, outside of the Metro. During fiestas everyone is welcome to partake even to the most modest of feasts (which is usually quite the gastronomical experience; province food is truly quite wonderful, no matter if it was made in the "lowliest" bahay kubo, especially to a palette that grew up on McDonald's).

But most of all, Filipinos would not think twice to extend his or her assistance to those in need, especially to times of crisis. We can't say no; heck, we don't even think of saying no. Yes, yes, I fully am aware that victims of accidents or crimes sometimes lose their valuables even before they get medical treatment, but I think that's something that's chronic only here in the ratrace of a much-Westernized Metro. Out there, where winds are purer, the grass greener, and the river sparkles with light and life, the moment you fall, people will pick you up and help you get back on your feet with nothing asked in return. People are even thankful they were there to help you when you needed the assistance.

New Orleans comes to mind. Perhaps that's why it was so shocking to my Filipino psyche: at the end of it all, what was boggling my Mind and profoundly disturbing my Soul was not the destruction of a major American city in the age of the Internet, but how... horrible was the reaction by people in the face of the crisis. The looting I can reconcile, it happens. Heck, it happens after a World Series or Super Bowl, so what's new, right? But for rape and murder? For a civil defense officer telling someone in distress to go to hell and it's every man for himself? One statement captured it all: "I don't treat my dog that way." Consider how many disasters we have gone through in this country. Now tell me how many degenerated into what New Orleans experienced? Isn't it a convention of sorts that when crap hits the fan, we humans band together to live through the experience?

When the Philippines goes through major disasters like what hit New Orleans, you'll find relief goods and volunteers by the truckloads and they just keep coming. You'll find the people hit by that disaster helping each other; it's rare to see Filipino communities turning on each other in the name of survival during crisis situations. No: something in the Filipino soul finds it anathema to leave others in need to their own devices when the Filipino can help even in the least bit. Like offering pastries to fellow passengers in a very unlucky flight. Or offering a home to displaced people from a foreign land.

In his Republic, Plato (through Socrates), said that people's souls can be likened to Metals. The better the person's soul, the better the metal that serves its analogy. It wasn't that Plato was being discriminatory; he was simply pointing out that, though all metals are important and have uses, not all metals are the same. The Guardians, the ideal humans of his ideal society, were of Silver and Gold.

I can't recall if it was Prof. David or MLQ3 who said it. Maybe both did. In fact, I see it a lot these days in columns: if something will save us from insanities like Gloriagate, if something will explain to the world why this country hasn't become a "Failed State" despite all the crap that has hit it... it's the quality of the "metal" of the Filipino's soul.

Despite our leaders and the world they've brought us into, we will prevail. Because if the good within the Filipino cannot be cowed by the howling wind and driving rain of a super typhoon, or the devastating force of a volcano, or the many guns, goons and gold of a dictator, what can prevent it from shinging forth once again?

This is why you gave up a bright future with the corporations. This was why you wanted to serve the Filipino, why you earnestly believe what Ninoy said, that the Filipino is worth dying for.

Senseless Death

Last Tuesday, there was a reported case of an 18-year old freshie from FEU figuring in a horrible accident at Pureza, which is the street before Nagtahan here in Manila. The victim was dead on the spot, having been dragged and perhaps - considering the damage done to her - ran over by the 10-wheeler truck that killed her.

When one's job involves dealing with war, famine and all sorts of political chaos, one would think that there is a certain... distance to death. Because death is part and parcel of your job, and your duty to the Republic can call for your taking the life of someone to protect it, you think that there might be a certain level of... insulation to the psychological impact of the loss of a life.

But there isn't. At least so long as one claims to be human. Those who absorb the deeper aspects of the Sword's philosophy know that to draw the blade from its sheath is in itself a failure in the part of the swordsman; all life is sacred, even your enemy's, and if a situation demands that you unleash steel and draw blood, that you end a life, then it only means all avenues to a peaceful solution did not suffice. There must always be sadness at the ending of a life because life is about potential, and when a life ends before its time, it would seem as if a story had been cut in the middle without there being any resolution.

I remember being on the PUJ that evening it happened. Actually, I overheard about it already at the LPHQ; Erick Mante, our sysop, mentioned that his cousin figured in an accident. But it only dawned on me much later, on the jeep on the way to Nagtahan, when two manangs were talking about it.

What is really depressing in this incident is the senselessness of the death. Although it is necessarily the negation of physical life, death need not remove from the human his or her dignity, nor must it be entirely shorn of purpose. Perhaps one eloquent testimony to purpose in one's death is that of John Paul II; in the days leading to his coming to eternal rest and the grand wake and burial that followed, it seemed as if the world had found both a moment of peace and a reminder of the unity in us all, of the good within us. It was a loss that somehow filled you, paradoxical as the statement may be.

Yet even with 15 units in Jesuit theology, and 16 units in Atenean philosophy, incidents like this seem to challenge your ready-made answers to the "why" questions. Why did that girl have to die, and in such a violent manner? Perverse as it may sound, but a Mentat can more readily "understand" the why in a person who died as a result of war, even if that person suffered much first before expiring. C'est la guerre. But for a recently-turned 18 year old who just went to the corner 7-11 to buy something before meeting her boyfriend at school (who even texted her, as her cel showed, "ingat ka") to die, and die like so... it not only boggles the mind but profoundly disturbs the Soul.

Is not the world, even on a quantum mechanical level, a place of causality? Except for the philosophical "Uncaused Cause," is there not supposed to be a reason for everything?

Disturbing. And for a measure of comfort - and I dearly hope the family of that girl finds more than a simple measure, and that her soul rests in peace in God's embrace - I turn to Kant: beyond this small circle of reason, is the realm of faith.

That should suffice, I suppose. Even though your Soul still sits uneasily in the seat of your Being.

Idealism on a Slow Dive (or is it slow...?)

Answering a simple query from old comrades in the Union showed that this topic definitely is what's occupying large parts of my consciousness, to the point that my typos and miss-spells are becoming more and more frequent and I seem to be having a hard time expressing myself, and despite my demeanor I am actually a rather irritated person right now.

And wasn't I at the Gesu not two nights ago? No Questions were answered that night; God refused to take any and told me to sit there and not think for a while. Before I left, I saw the inscription on the statue of Jesus in front of the Church. It was the passage for those who labor on coming to God and laying down one's burden. It was the first time I deigned to read the inscription in all the time I went to the Gesu, and it was somehow kind of apt to what I was feeling.

Idealism. From the word "ideal," a situation where the grand majority of the elements, if not all, are right or at their best. If the young of this world subscribe to any ideology, if one were to interpret that term at its broadest, then this is probably it. Idealism marks the young, is commonly found with them, what fuels their activism and even their rebellion, their desire to bring about change - mostly positive - to the staid order of their parents' generation.

It's also an "age-dependent" worldview. In a world where the term "naive" is a pejorative, idealism is often viewed by the "elders" as something of a phase. Like pimples, hormonal surges and rebellions against the established order. From personal observations, this would seem to start even while the young person is in college; the demands of graduation during senior year - the thesis, job fairs, a foreshortened school year, senior syndrome, etc. - begins the long road for the idealist to a life of pragmatism and, yes, compromises. Although there will always be exceptions to the rule, the minute a young person tightens that necktie or straightens that power blouse and skirt spells the beginning of the end for idealism. Heck, how many student council officers have I seen shine brilliantly during their first three years of service as young leaders only to fade to near-obscurity at their senior year because of the demands of their "other life" as students? And unless these selfsame SC officers join an NGO or major service department upon graduation, many would be eaten up by the demands of their corporations, relegating their advocacies and ideals to little more than weekend jaunts, if ever.

Such a negative view from me. In truth, I understand where they're coming from. And at the same time I don't. Actually, in moments like this, I really don't. In really horrible moments I ask, rather loudly, how can they so easily give up the fight when (a) they're much, much, richer than I am (and thus should be able to weather the low salaries of most NGOs and government agencies), and (b) given the context of what we all fought for during our time in college. Mine was the generation that stood on the Second People Power. I and my contemporaries were the field officers for civil society, their generals and shock troops. Where are we now?

I am constrained both by my upbringing and Training to (further) castigate my generation. But then, I am, actually, putting the cart before the horse, in a manner of speaking. My idealism is in tatters not (solely) because I feel as if my generation "disappeared" after People Power II (or the May 1 Mayhem, at least; that incident seems to have badly injured the psyche of most young moderates), but because of the fallout from Gloriagate. The above is simply a rant that should have followed the reasons for my idealism's death and not the source of its demise.

Idealism, as with any worldview, depends on certain concepts for its foundations. There must be something you believe in that allows you to take such a contrary point of view with the rest of the established order. A word usually linked to Idealism is Disillusionment. There is a word that reeks with so much pain, bitterness and negativity. Disillusionment is the negation of idealism. It is the poison that can quickly kill not only the desire to effect change but also shatter the lens that allows you to view life from a more-or-less positive light.

Actually, Gloria herself is not the source of my... disillusion. She is merely acting the way she was expected to act; there was hope she wouldn't, but it’s hardly surprising she didn't. Too bad. It isn't the antics of the (original) opposition; that was also expected and is really nothing new. Nothing extant can be the source of the fall of one's idealism. It is always sourced from much closer, to the things, people and concepts that really matter and therefore define that idealism.

There are three things that define my Soul. These are my lenses. These define the way my Being relates to and tries to affect the world around me. I am a Catholic Christian, an Atenean, and a Liberal. These three are the pillars that support my world, and (largely) determine how I act and react to any given situation. They are also the reasons for the paths I took that led to where I am right now: at nine years, I swore an Oath of service to God; all the conceptual, ideological, philosophical and theological training of years of Jesuit education led to one fateful morning in Liberation Theology class when, in a mentally-unguarded moment, Ateneo's "Bug" decided to bite me and therefore make me strive to realize that Oath; a Question to God on how I could continue serving Him after college led to one morning when I would be recruited into the Liberal Party, and although hesitant and skeptical at the beginning, I realized that here was a good way to effect the change I wanted, for what better way is there to reform society than through the power and resources of a fully-fledged political party that was not only far-less trapo than the rest but has the potential to be a real political party that is the vehicle for the realization of the dreams and aspirations of those who agree to its philosophy?

One of those pillars is badly undermined right now. I am not alone in the disillusionment with that one; indeed, it is the death of the idealism of my comrades there that weighs heavily on my own moribund belief that we can still make a difference in this country. For the first time in my life I contemplate leaving this country, not only to find better opportunities abroad but simply because, in my worst moments, I can't seem to stand it here anymore and neither do I feel welcome and at home.

I remember a talk Dr. July Teehankee gave us. He said that the reason why a new People Power hasn't happened is the fact that no single institution retains the necessary clout to call the people to the streets. My thinking during PP2 was this should be the last time this would be done. People Power leaves you with a warm, fuzzy feeling after, but it isn't the solution to the ills of society: indeed, it is merely the beginning of its rehabilitation, and it is a long and often painful way to go. People Powers are enemas at the very least, and usually they are akin to subjecting your country to chemotherapy since the "disease" has become so malignant the normal mechanisms for check and balances in a society are already ineffective.

And where are the people who can command one's respect, the men and women who stoke the fires of idealism in the young? Brilliant as we are, the young, by virtue of age and (as many elders will look at you) "inexperience", do not hold the levers of power in society. Powerful as our voices are, these are oftentimes not enough to bring about the change that we want. The Philippines is lucky to have leaders nominally scared of the public; in other countries, the powers-that-be will not bat an eyelash to ask their soldiers to fire on you or their tanks to roll over you if you disagree with them. Yet, our elders are prepared to go only as far as lip service to the demands for reform. True, substantive change has barely seen the light of the liberating sun in the 19 years since the end of martial rule. Even those who appear as paragons for the young oftentimes fall short of the image they wish to project.

In warfare, one of the worst things that can hit an army is demoralization. In fact, the school of thought that does not subscribe to the idea of victory-through-annihilation revolves around the ways in reducing the enemy's morale. Even the largest or most advanced technologically of armies will wither in the face of determined opposition if the morale of that army is low. If you are going to ask people to die for a cause, then they should believe in that cause, enough that they would be willing to sacrifice their very lives for it.

Idealism is a lot like that. It has to be sourced from a strong belief that what you are doing is both effective and worth the sacrifices you give. It is not that you ask for something in return for your efforts, no: it is simply having something that you can tell that natural, pragmatic aspect of humanity that all this is worth it even if your life is a wreck. Or that the cause is worth your life.

But when things happen that undermine the foundations of your idealism, where do you find the reasons, the rationale, for continuing the struggle?

When the ideology and principles you were made to love and respect are paid lip service by those "above" you, by the ones who taught you those beliefs, what can you believe in?

When your leaders and elders not only fail you but even force you to subsume your principles for personal gain or even for their intramurals, who can you look to for inspiration and guidance?

When your colleagues leave you alone to stop the rush of your country to oblivion for their careers and personal lives, can you still hang on? Especially when you are made painfully aware that your own life and future is a shambles because of this struggle, while theirs is so much brighter in the corporations?

Even worse: when the people and organization(s?) you have served for so long abandons you without any explanation, how are you expected to feel then? Especially when they are making hash of everything you've built and paid blood for?

I was old enough to remember how the world felt when the Wall fell. It was even nicer because it happened on my birthday. That was a time of much hope, when despotic regimes - whether of the Left or Right - fell one by one, the nuclear threat was ebbing, and prosperity seemed like the name of the game. It was a brave new world. Somewhere along the way, something happened to bring us all to this world of darkness, despair and disillusionment.

And with your idealism in bloody tatters and twisting in the gale force winds of pragmatism and personal agendas, how can you still lift your sword and slay that dragon that is before you?

To tell you the truth, Death looks much more inviting...

Blah, Blah, Blah (or the prelude to the more serious posting that SHOULD follow this one)

Pardon me for this post. I just spent the just-concluded workday either re-compiling data for the new LP website or transcribing the proceedings of our last Democracy Forum. In short, my brain is a rather mashed mass of material that might be in very little if any condition to discuss the serious stuff that's been percolating in my consciousness for the last few days.

So, to give myself a mental break, I shall skim through a lot of "light" topics.

A note to my proteges: yes, we MUST have such mental breaks. Yes, even the most formidable of Mentats must take these mental equivalents of pausing and taking a breath, otherwise the sheer load of processes our minds take on as Analysts might crash those same minds.

Okay, first off: Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children. It rocks. Big time. This isn't Spirts Within, people, but the real thing. Squaresoft - er, Square Enix - has always been known for its cutting edge tech and excellently-crafted role-playing games for the console games. Final Fantasy VII still stands as the RPG for consoles, even though its successors generally have better tech. Like I've said a dozen or more times before, no RPG has involved me so much, has taken me into its world as much, as FF7. I kept playing the game over and over again, whereas I didn't even finish FF8, FF10 and X-2. I didn't even play FF9. The only other console RPG I finished was Xenosaga I, I think.

When Square came out with FF: Spirits Within a couple of years ago, many of us otaku and RPG fans eagerly awaited it. For some, it was okay. For some, it was a disappointment, much like the Star Wars prequel was to fans of the franchise like me who've read the books in between (or the Lord of the Rings fanatics - like me - who've read the books, plus Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales, who screamed at some of the things done in the movie, like what they did with Arwen. Aragorn was cool, though). So when news of this "continuation" of the FF7 storyline came out, fans were understandably on edge. But expectant. The demos were cool, but will Square deliver?

Very much so, in my opinion. The CG was smooth; in fact, I think Square was bragging a bit on what they can do now when you see the end credits. But not just the CG, the story was right on the money for the FF7 franchise. It was just as epic and as engaging as the game. And the fight scenes... You just have to see it.

And if for nothing else, their treatment of Tifa Lockheart in FF7: AC made it all worth it, especially her "pa-cute" scene at the end. Good Lord, but that is one beautiful virtual lady... And, yes, she kicks butt. I've always had a weakness for those strong-yet-caring types...

*sigh*

(I told you this was light stuff...)

I also purchased this book titled "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius." I've barely started, but the way the author crafts words and sentences has caught my attention, aside from the humor.

I've also designed this character in White Wolf's Exalted in the pattern of a Jedi. Ewan ko ba. I really have this fascination with the Jedi, more than the psychokinetic push that people kept doing after watching Episode I.

I've also not set foot in pROSE since Sunday.

And I've been trying to get a date since Saturday, too (",)

Oh, well.

Listening to Stonefree. Listen is playing, my new fave song. I don't like the fact that it's so similar in theme to "Would you be my number 2?" - I've always been of the opinion that, if you can't give a lady your Heart's full attention, you shouldn't because that lady deserves nothing less and so much more - but it captures my mood.

Basta.

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...

(bear with me. My Mind is currently doing the biological equivalent of a memory dump)

Funny, but Apt

I'm actually having a bad day, mitigated only by texts to my "princess" and a nice chat session with my Little Sister, Rhea.

When all that's horrible today got through my psyche's defenses, I decided to wallow a bit, since it was definitely impinging on my work. I have something I wish to discuss over this blog, but maybe later.

Meanwhile, I kept scanning news sites and blogs for anything on the Party; despite what I feel right now, I am an officer of the LP and I love this Party and I will defend it as much as I am able given the circumstances. While browsing through MLQ3's blog, he mentioned something Newsboy posted. So I checked it out.

I still feel bad, but I got a good laugh out of the post. Since I am in no condition to tackle that big question on why I am not an active participant in the anti-Gloria movement (despite my earlier participation in PP2 and my admitted dislike for her), and since Newsboy did a much nicer job of explaining, more or less, what I feel and think about this whole sordid mess that is Gloriagate, then I suggest you check it. Click the link above. It's soooooo similar to my sentiments...

And I got to admire MLQ3's... courage to say what he did over ANC to the anti-Gloria people. check his blog out, to see what I mean.

Marriage and the Paradox of Commitment

Ha, ha: Blooey can really come up with the nicest-yet-deepest things. Must be all of those people who taught her at Ateneo; I've always admired Bloo's set of Mentors, who are some of the best and (coolest!) professors of our school. We're not just talking about those who were her in-class teachers, but also those profs she had a friendship with (and, yes, that is very much possible and common in the Ateneo, to forge lasting friendships with our professors, even if they're not your in-class teacher or they gave you a grade below B).

One of those is the legendary Eddie Boy Calasanz, philo prof and heir apparent to Fr. Roque "Padre" Ferriols. Both professors always, always, have long waiting lists of students wanting to get into their classes, and this is considering they're not known for giving really high grades, especially the good Padre. Prof. Calasanz is the only person ever to get an A+ from Padre Ferriols.

Bloo posted an article in her blog Prof. Calasanz wrote on Marriage. I read it through and found myself smiling. What was written was, technically, nothing new to the Atenean: one of the core concepts in Jesuit theology is the Paradox of Commitment. The Jesuits and their theologians at the Ateneo teach us Blue Eagles that, contrary to popular belief, commitment sets you free. Because, at its simplest, commitment gives one a solid foundation for Action and decision. No more is the future a confusing and ambigious mishmash of possiblities because you now have a point of reference to choose which possiblity to take. You are better able to plan your future within the context of your commitment.

Prof. Calasanz' discussion on the issue of Marriage, or what makes a good one and why it doesn't seem to go right many times is truly quite intriguing. Check it out in the link above (or post a comment if it refuses to link and I'll try to post it here), and let's see what you think about it.

Which reminds me about a little incident today. Urban Bank called to verify my intent to apply for the Ateneo Alumni Association Visa card. The caller asked, as is expected for a confirmation profile, if I was single or married. I nearly answered, "wish ko lang married na ko..." (",)

Ah-ha-ha-ha.

La lang. Just an aside. Actually, I just wanted to share that post Blooey made.

Doronilla and Monsod speaks... and I don't think CivSoc will like it...

Forgive any irrationalities and/or confusion in this post: not one hour after returning from Makati from a meeting, the 5th (!) batch of FEU students to research on the Party came around so I had to answer their (rather insightful) questions and give them the tour of the HQ. Suffice to say, I'm kinda tired and the day isn't over yet.

I'll Recharge first: check the blog of my "little sister," Rhea. Quite a sharp, observant, aware and insightful young lady. Her most recent post about her Socio 10 class is a very, very interesting read. If I was part of the "elder" population - the genealogical one - I'd be inspired to hear that a member of the youth can not only appreciate a course of hers but truly learn from it. If more of the young that followed my age group thought and feel like her, especially regarding what's happening with the country, then there truly is still a reason to hope.

And she isn't even 18 yet. Truly amazing...

On to the serious stuff. Today is Wednesday, the day after the latest protest march against GMA. So what has happened?

Data is still streaming in (and it's hard to fully use the analytical protocols of a Mentat when you're tired), but what caught my attention was the columns of Amando Doronilla and Winnie Monsod. Partly because both expressed in far better ways than I could the reasons and rationale for my actions - or rather, my inaction - since the Gloriagate began. As one of the "field officers" of K2Y during the Erap RIO, as someone who is known as a "passionate fighter" for his causes and beliefs, shouldn't I have been the first to loudly call for La Gloria's resignation?

It looks like Gloria may have survived this latest assault after all. There are no massive crowds. No outrage at the killing of the impeachment. Her foes batter at the walls of her fortress yet it seems not enough, even to make a significant dent.

As I said, the two writers above said it better than I could, especially in this condition, so just look them up. I'll just comment more later. But let me just say this: I don't think a lot of people in Civil Society will be pleased to see those columns...

Siege Warfare

As i write this, former President Aquino is at the Batasan, sitting alongside Susan Roces. As one columnist said, the image of the Republic's two most famous widows is statement enough for the war that is Gloriagate.

This morning, Madame Cory also announced that she will lead a march to the Batasan tomorrow, Tuesday, to... encourage recalcitrant congressmen to side with the Truth. This is akin to a throwing down of the gauntlet from the foremost icon of democracy this country has. This only means that Pres. Aquino has taken up the challenge of leading the pro-impeachment forces, and has joined her still-significant clout and drawing power to that of Fernando Poe's widow.

Truly, this is a very powerful force to send against the walls of Gloria's Jericho.

I can hear the Catholic schools mobilizing; I may not be involved anymore with the operations of the Union, but I have guided its strategies and policies for so long, and trained so many of the current SC officers and operators, to not know how the UCSC member-schools will react. In this they are truly our heirs, as it was our generation that provided the numbers during PP2. Although it pains me to see our successors take to the streets once again against a sitting president not four years after we did - I genuinely thought PP2 was the last time we would do such a thing - it also makes me proud to know that the Union's leaders do not balk when the clarion calls.

Gloria should be afraid...

I just spent a whole day sifting through various columnists and news reports. As usual, Fr. Bernas was informative, and Randy David sets it straight (while de Quiros never fails to raise my ire one way or another; what a cheap jab at Ateneo, Ateneans and the Jesuits in his column today. Can't he praise the La Sallians without having to throw mud at Loyola Heights?). Meanwhile, Sec. Bobby Tiglao gives an interesting piece from the point of view of the Palace.

Again, Gloria is under siege. Once more the forces seeking her ouster bring their trumpets to sound around her walls hoping to see them fall like they did with Erap and Marcos. This time, it appears they are united under the leadership of Cory and Susan, and where few from the moderates joined the earlier actions, perhaps more will this time, if Sunday at DLSU-GH is any indication.

Will she fall this time?

This would be interesting to see. This would be, what, the fifth time she has been challenged? This would also be the first time she is assaulted without a solid backing from civil society, and there seems to be a tacit, if hush-hush, support from the Church, at least from the major religious orders. Remember that the orders run the Catholic Schools, which provided much of the manpower for the moderates during the RIO and PP2.

Will she fall?

In siege warfare, there are merits and demerits for the position of both defense and offense. For the former, there is the advantage of prepared positions, of strongpoints of defense and knowledge of the terrain. For the latter, there is that undisputable fact that the defense has no way of resupply or reinforcement. The defense would either (a) try to sortie and break the invader's ranks to lift the siege, or (b) tough it out until substantial relief forces come to break the siege. The offense, meanwhile, assuming their own lines of supply and reinforcement are secure (isn't Napoleon a genius, when he emphasized that a crucial factor in warfare is the state of one's supply?), has all the time in the world to whittle down the defense through attrition and demoralization.

Gloria's ability to repel this latest assault depends on just how well her own forces are at this juncture. As Prof. David said, she has been waging a multi-front campaign but few if any deal substantially with the issues facing her. Instead, she has fallen back on politics - and the bad side of it, in fact - to save herself. Instead of "feinting" the opposition with a "breakthrough" in her "defences" from an impeachment in the House, she has decided to kill it instead, calling on her political allies and more to buttress her defenses. The opposition, meanwhile, has gotten so incensed over the admin's tactics that, to continue battlefield analogies, they've gone berserk over what happened and now lash out in anger seemingly without the benefit of strategy or tactics.

The way I see it... if Cory had not come out as strongly as she did the last two days, the opposition would have no chance left. Susan Roces alone would not have sufficed because of the people around her that alienates the grand majority of the middle class, the necessary ingredient to any successful mass action, and because of the presence of the Left. Cory's arrival unifies the forces ranged against Gloria, and gives the middle class that "excuse" they're looking for to join the protests. There are still issues that need to be threshed out among the different forces going against Gloria, but Cory provides all of them - the pro-Erap/Poe, the Left and the Moderates - with a leader who can bring them all along. The oust-Gloria movement has now found its Joan of Arc.

Will it be enough, then?

And I hear some of you asking: why will I not be there tomorrow?

I will answer that one when I am sure as to why. Right now, my reasons are my own, but I wish you all the luck in the world.

Nightmare in New Orleans

I'm taking a break from Gloriagate to dwell on a situation on the other side of the globe: the flooding of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina slammed into it. This is after reading an account of the devastation - there really is no other word to describe it - in the International Herald Tribune website.

Of course I've heard about the storm; I do watch CNN still, every now and then. Besides, it's not everyday you hear of a Category 5 storm, especially one that blew into a major city. I'm not as familiar with the Hurricane Category scale as I am with the Fujita Scale (the one for tornadoes), but knowing that Cat-5 is the highest is info enough for me.

Damage and loss of lives were to be expected. Filipinos aren't strangers to killer storms as we get really rough typhoons every year. We know that despite one's preparation there really is little that can be done against the fury of nature unleashed.

But... the way IHT described the situation at New Orleans you'd think you were watching a post-apocalypse movie. A stadium sardine-packed with refugees, with more streaming in and tempers flaring, sanitation deteriorating, food, medicine and water rapidly depleting. Bodies - thousands might have been killed, despite the early warning, according to government sources - floating in flooded streets. Massive looting. People trying to escape from a city virutally dead in stolen vehicles.

All I could think of while reading the article was, "my God..."

Perhaps it was the fact that the city being spoken of was in America. And not just any city: this was New Orleans. This is the city of cajuns and nice, spicey food. Of vodoun. It isn't New York or Las Vegas or Los Angeles but New Orleans is a city steeped in culture. Heck, it was one of the places I wanted to go to in case I found myself in North America.

But to hear a major modern city being evacuated and abandoned for months on end outside of a warzone is something... new. A city abandoned by its populace becauyse of war or plague is something that seems to still fall under my Training. Those things are nothing new. How many ruined cities stand in the former Yugoslavia, in Africa? But New Orleans...?

I feel for the survivors of this tragedy. The storm may have spent its fury, but their trials are far from over.