A Portrait of the Philippines as a Young Nation

Every once in a while it is good to pause to try to pull together some of the varied thoughts dumped out day to day in these blogs. Rather pull chaos back into order, if you catch my drift. So let's do a little of that. If it seems deja vu, relax; it is not a mental disorder, at least, not yours. It is merely a review of what has been said before.

Maybe it is helpful to start with a long distance view and then drill down. And from our eye way up in the sky, we can see that the Philippines is a young nation. Younger than the United States. Younger than you might imagine, reflecting on 500 years of Spanish Catholic influence.

The Philippines is situated smack dab in the center of the crescent of Asia that runs from Indonesia in the southeast, westward to Malaysia, Viet Nam and neighbors, northward past China and on to the northeast where Korea and Japan complete the crescent.

No nation in the world is better situated to prosper in an integrating global world. It is at the point of parabolic focus of the most dynamic region on earth.

What is a nation? I contend that it has a time-of-birth date-stamp. A nation is the community that is formed when people reach an agreement about how to govern. Or when a few powerful people definitively impose their rule. The date stamp is whacked into history when that agreement is finalized or rule is declared.

The Philippines was established as a new nation in 1987. The agreement ended the Marcos nation. A new, democratically ordered nation was formed under President Cory Aquino who began her term on the wings of prayer and ended it wrestling mightily with the forces of favor and power.

These forces of favor and power in the Philippines, and the corruption they spawn, are like a smoldering fire in the tundra. Hard to stamp out. Burning underground. Smoke suffocating everything, including good works. Occasionally flaring up and burning bright. 

The Philippines is trying to reconstruct democratic values but old habits, old ways of conducting business, die hard.

Let's try to characterize the Philippines today. It is good to use the Edgar Lores method of enumerating ideas for ease of reference in the follow-up discussion. Call it a portrait by the numbers. Not artistic, perhaps. But maybe interesting to look at.

1. The reconstruction is the building of democratic institutions and values that allows the nation to progress from being a nation of and for the empowered - Marcos culminating the failed ideology of power - to a nation of and for the people. The public institutions have been rebuilt, perhaps of rough clapboard rather than polished mahogany, but the framework is nonetheless good. The values . . . not yet.

1. A deeply embedded dynastic, somewhat authoritarian, network of power and wealth still controls who runs things and it does not give up its grasp easily. Fortunately, these networks are under considerable pressure from a public with louder and more aggressive spokespeople demanding information and accountability. The internet is the medium of modernization. The Big Brother listening post is with the people, not the politicians.

2. Alas, the most important institutions of accountability, the police and the judiciary, are under the influence of the empowered. Justice has not yet reached the people.

3. The forces of the corrupt still today act as a brake on good governance. Given the intensity of opposition, President Aquino has done wonders to tip the playing field toward honest  governance.  It will take perhaps 20 more years of honorable leadership to put the people fully in charge.

4. A Freedom of Information (FOI) bill would be a huge step forward, sealing openness and honesty into the way government works. If the people are the "boss" of government, they need information. Lacking FOI, we know the favored and powerful, the corrupt of good will if not money, are still in charge.

2. The nation's educational system is both fundamentally amazing, yet failing on two counts.

1. It is amazing in that so many schools, so many teachers, and so many kids recognize how important education is. They are working broadly and steadily at building, teaching and studying to advance the knowledge and skills of young people, and to care for their nation's future.

2. One huge failure is the nation's inability to keep up with the flood of babies born of Catholic tradition. A poor nation is a poor nation. It can only build a poor network of schools. The solution, of course is threefold: (1) make the nation richer, (2) allocate education as a higher priority than other expense choices, and (3) slow the birth rate. You can do one of these three things and not realize much progress over the long term. You can do two and make some headway. You can do all three and build an excellent school system. It would help to apply the power of the internet to reduce the overwhelming burden of textbook purchases, school construction and need for teachers.

3. The second failure is the apparent inability of the Educational leadership to comprehend that memorizing information is not a kind of knowledge that goes very far. The Philippine school system teaches mandated obedience, and from that subservience. It does not teach the values that allow obedience to emerge VOLUNTARILY from a deep desire to compete for honest opportunity. If young people today develop ambition for self-improvement, it is in spite of the school system, not because of it. Democracy is a beautiful institution because it is a loud, open, ever-brainstorming collective of competitive problem-solvers. It assures both security and opportunity. It requires an educated citizenry to operate well, and when it operates well, it is an unmatched system for motivating its people with the promise of opportunity, growth and wealth.

3. Philippine culture is much like the educational system, both good and bad. It is tremendously rich. Unique. Precious. And it is dysfunctional.

1. The bonds of faith and family are profound in the Philippines. So is historical appreciation of the many separate islands and regions, and the native traditions, the land and sea-based traditions, the family traditions, which remain strong even today.

2. It is unfortunate that the nation's moral anchor, the Catholic Church, chooses to condemn knowledge-based progress, provoking a raw political clash, rather than relish the part it could play as the anchor to good values within a culture that is modern and working hard and earnestly to solve problems. Problems like education and poor homes on the mud banks and teen pregnancies and kids dining from trash piles. The prominant moral voice has become a counter-productive, complaining voice, not a voice ministering to the nation, helping it build.

3. Filipinos are passionate people, but the passions are used poorly to denigrate and attack and tear down rather than discover and seek knowledge and build. Minds are closed quickly and defended harshly. This is a 100 percent nation. You are either 100% MY way or you are 100% my enemy. 95% is not good enough. And "if you are the President of my nation, you must be 100% right, doing it my way, or I will attack you, not just your acts or decisions, but you, personally". It's hard to have a unity, a harmony of unique individuals, a nation, if everyone insists their way is the only way. 

4. President Aquino is vastly underappreciated, even by the yellow hordes who pushed him into office. Here is a man with the courage and strength of character - his father's determination and his mother's good will - to try to move a nation out of the darkness of cheating, poverty and poor behavior and into the light of modern, honest governance, productivity and wealth.

1. Every institution or group that finds its opportunities constrained becomes a critic. The corrupt, the Catholic Church, Arroyo and her backers, the smugglers, people who live by skimming from contracts, DENR officials, corrupt generals, a wayward Sultan's teammates, and any 100 percenter who finds one of his pet oxen gored. CHINA is not the main enemy. No, China is in second place to the critics with oxen gored by the President's initiatives; their divisive cries always suggest there is a better way but they usually point to none. There is no better way. Most of the critics are simply those who cannot get outside themselves to build a patriotic community called "nation".

2. But get past the acrimony and we can see that the deeds being done by the national government are no longer being lined up to benefit the empowered. They are being lined up to build a nation that serves its people. The accomplishments are in plain daylight but obscured by all the dirt thrown by the miserly and small of pride, the envious, the bitter, the biased and the intellectually bankrupt. Look at agencies like the central bank and Finance and BIR and Justice and DOT and Tourism and DILG.  And the Ombudsman. And Foreign Affairs. These agencies are working diligently to build a better Philippines. To put in roads to airports, to jail the cheaters, to collect much-needed revenue, to modernize airports, to get airplane servicing up to par to re-open European flights. To improve the nation's debt rating and attract more capital, to get peace and prosperity into Mindanao, to solve Mindanao's electricity problem. To better prepare for storms. The amount of good works going on is flat out awesome. High rises and casinos and a real middle class and more and more tourism jewels like Palawan emerging from the corrupt fits and starts that characterized pre-Aquino Philippines.

3. In this new nation that welcomes good governance, we see the people's voices being raised again and again, louder and more purposefully. It was the people's voice that got RH passed, that got a poorly structured Cybercrime Bill halted and into the Supreme Court, that got a wayward Chief Justice thrown from office, and that will determine what quality of character emerges in the 2013 elections. We see attorneys making a reputation by defending the people. We see congressmen like Sotto who betray the values that people admire driven into silence.

There is only one course for this young nation. It is toward honesty and good works. Toward decisions that benefit the people, not the empowered. Toward problem solving and wealth.

If we focus on the broader picture, rather than the many specific acts, we can see that the anti-corruption drive is not just the jailing of bad people. It is remaking a nation's character. It is laying the foundation for good works that can, over time, ease the nation's burdensome poverty. Attention to two other master initiatives would add to this foundation, building a framework of steel and assurance of greater prosperity and a healthy, long term future: (1) building Education to ease physical demands and teach problem-solving disciplines rather than discipline, and (2) building Justice to assure fair and firm enforcement of laws feeding a forthright, efficient, law-based judiciary. 

FOI is critically, critically important to seal the nation to candor and honesty. Information is the currency that replaces favor and power as the driver of deeds. Information assures that the doing of good deeds on behalf of the people becomes this nation's cherished work ethic.

"Dear Joe"

The Greatest Living American

Dear Joe, "Who is the greatest American alive? Is it President Obama? Hugh Hefner? Donald Trump? Or Bill Gates?"  Edgar

Fascinating question, Edgar. "Greatest" is a relative term, of course. For boxers, the greatest is Mohammed Ali unless you live in the Philippines. See? Relative. President Obama is the greatest American black president, hands down. That one is absolute, the exception that proves the rule. Hugh Hefner is the greatest womanizer and peddler of women's bodies for profit. "The Donald" is the greatest stuffed shirt. Bill Gates the greatest living philanthropist.  So you have certainly mentioned some superb top-notch greats for sure.

As you might guess, JoeAm goes outside of popular names for his top pick.  His standards are as follows: intelligent, good character, and extraordinary accomplishment for the betterment of mankind. Entertainers, businessmen and stuffed shirts don't make the cut. The peddler of women's bodies doesn't either. The black president is wallowing in partisan muck, and it will take a few years for the wine of his accomplishment to age properly. Now Bill Gates is for sure in the top five, getting credit for computer operating systems, business achievement, philanthropy, plus bonus points for introducing casual attire into the whole American business scene.

But the greatest American alive is James Dewey Watson.

He's the co-inventor of the double helix structure of DNA in 1953, along with Briton's Francis Crick. He received the Nobel Prize in 1962 along with Crick and Maurice Wilkins for their groundbreaking work on human DNA.

Beyond his science genius, Watson has been an ardent activist,  a protestor against the Viet Nam War and nuclear arms, and an outspoken advocate  for women's choice. He has further argued that "stupidity is a disease" and can be cured. Boy howdy, I wish he'd do more of that work in the American legislature.

The significance of his work is astounding: (1) the framework for crop and livestock genetic enhancements giving us hope that perhaps we can indeed feed our overpopulating planet and have redder tomatoes along the way, (2) the release from jail of those shown to be innocent by DNA proof, and the jailing of thousands of very bad people with unquestionable assurance of guilt, (3) medical breakthroughs that will cure pains, prevent deaths and potentially end stupidity, not to mention rheumatism and gout, and (4) a great leap forward in the discussion of science and faith as the way to intelligent salvation.

Truly, this is a man of great intellect, character and accomplishment for the betterment of mankind.  He did nothing less than re-define life.

Dear Joe, "1. Why do Kanos hang a flag on their porch? 1.1 Do ya'all do it on Independence Day only? ?????? " Anonymous

The citizens of warrior nations such as the United States have extraordinary patriotism. They know the sacrifices people make to serve their fellow countrymen. The flag is the symbol of that patriotism, of courage, of giving to the nation absolutely all that can be given. Of cheering in victory, or  holding onto unity and determination in defeat. Of knowing that other Americans are there for support, no matter the dangers. Of knowing that the nation stands for the best principles of mankind living as a community.

So people display the flag on the porch, or in the yard, or from the roof, or in the window to say "I'm for America".

And, oddly enough, the flag is a symbol of freedom of speech for Americans who are used to loud and angry taunts. In the hands of the bitter or the jealous or those who don't understand, those who would burn the flag or defile it, it becomes just a piece of cloth, stripped of its real meaning, saying more about the defiler than about America.

The flag is flown on Independence Day, Veterans Day and Memorial Day, and in special circumstances (for example, to celebrate landing on the moon or at half mast upon the death of a president or people who served their nation with distinction, such as astronauts).

My father died when he was 91. He had served in the army in WW II from age 18 to 24. The army held a small ceremony at his funeral to express gratitude on behalf of all Americans for his service, formally presenting me with the flag that draped his coffin. I also have my uncle's flag from that war.

That's why Americans fly the flag.

Dear Honeybunch, What are your goals in blogging? Are you going to write blogs forever?" Your Darling Wife

Well, Sweetie Pie, that is a curious question, as I've been asking myself the same question. For the past year, I've been cranking out articles steadily and learning a lot along the way. I know the blogs have had some influence,  which is rewarding. Still, I think the blogging medium in the Philippines is rather scattered and only modestly influential. It is a little bizarre being an American in this conversational scene, and I know that American opinion-mongering arouses the hackles of tried and true homebound Filipino patriots. Overseas Filipinos are not so prickly, as they are also outside looking in. Yet, I look about and I don't see homebound bloggers really calling it straight and striving for new ideas in quite the same constructively provocative way that JoeAm does. Mostly people report on what they see, or pursue their own narrow interests.

The discussions at the popular news sites, Inquirer or Rappler, are discouraging. Much of the comment is posturing and insult rather than crisp, succinct debate on the issues. Everybody is trying to prove they are teachers and winners rather than being open-minded listeners and willing learners. There is little bend in discussions.

 And now we see the apparent intrusion of those who are clearly out to damage the Philippines through on-line destruction propaganda. And I think the emotional audience is likely to be susceptible to that. The Philippines has very little patriotic glue because so many people are of the opinion that any way but their way is the wrong way.

So they easily find fault.

It's a rather discouraging scene.

My goals remain the same, to learn and to advocate, to the limited extent possible, for development a modern, productive, upright democratic Philippines. I'll write as long as I can find new ideas or turn a good phrase now and then. There's an ebb and flow to it.

When it ebbs too low, I'll quit.

Dear JoeAm, Is it true that the Senate candidates will determine if President Aquino's good governance agenda will continue? If we go with UNA won't we have better "checks and balances"? Renaldo

Good of you to inquire, Renaldo.

"Kumbaya, My Lord, Kumbaya,
Kumbaya, My Lord, Kumbaya . . ."

Electioneering and the Blogging Foreigner

I have been silenced . . .

Philippine Immigration has made clear that foreigners are not to engage in Philippine elections in any way. Not even open our mouths or tap our keyboards.

Immigration has announced that it will deport foreigners who violate Section 4 of COMELEC Resolution 9615:

• Resolution 9615, SECTION 4. Prohibition against Foreign Intervention. - It is unlawful for any foreigner, whether juridical or natural person, to aid any candidate, or political party, organization or coalition, directly or indirectly, or to take part in, or influence in any manner, any election, or to contribute or make any expenditure in connection with any election campaign or partisan political activity.

I feel your pain, Joe . . .

This is very different than the Unites States, I must say. In America, freedom of speech takes precedence over one's citizenship. Foreigners have full right of free speech. The Supreme Court made this clear in a 2012 ruling that confirmed that a ban foreign political contributions did not represent a violation of free speech:

• “Notably, [the campaign finance law] as we interpret it, does not restrain foreign nationals from speaking out about issues or spending money to advocate their views about issues,” the court said. “It restrains them only from a certain form of expressive activity closely tied to the voting process – providing money for a candidate or political party or spending money in order to expressly advocate for or against the election of a candidate.”  ("Supreme Court upholds election law limiting foreign influence" by Warren Richey in The Christian Science Monitor)

In the States, a foreigner can say or write opinions all over the place, in or out of the election cycle, just like an American.

Well, almost all Americans are from immigrant families, so it is a different mindset over there.

Here in the Philippines, it is clear that we have a more protective and authoritarian form of democracy.  I rather fear Dr. Rizal would be disappointed.

Indeed, COMELEC Resolution 9615 is a minutely detailed, high-control, by-the-book directive from a powerful regulator. It is regulation by knit and grit. COMELEC refers to any information that is outside the narrow bounds of their determination of fairness to be "propaganda". Not ideas, or information, or platforms. Propaganda.

It is strange to me, the binding of expression. Open ideas are what drives honor and competence and solutions. Shutting them up is what assures abuse. And ignorance.

So I have an idea if you will allow me the courtesy of squeezing an impudent suggestion in here. Tighten the rules a bit. Don't let anybody say anything to anybody in any form at any time so the the Public is not burdened with original thought or pesky decisions requiring information and ideas. No one will be biased with any fresh insights whatsoever. They can just vote the "name".

Oh, wait. . . . Pardon me. You say that's the way it is done now?

Boy howdy, like the proposed cybercrime libel laws, this 9615 is enough to make an overbearing opinion-monger go Santiago. 

And so, dear readers, in recognition of COMELEC'S representation that you are not mature enough to read JoeAm's mighty opinions and sift them through your own cognative filter for reasonableness, it is with a huge sigh of reluctant retreat that I have withdrawn 12 blogs that have the potential of being declared in violation of COMELEC's ruling.

I'll republish one or two after they are duly sanitized for reading by lola and all the other nice ladies down at the Church bazaar.

Actually, I suspect this COMELEC ruling needs to be tested for constitutionality, but it is not gonna be done on this American's wallet. You want the kind of country that is afraid of opinions, you may have it.

You know, to some extent, I understand the hard and all-inclusive COMELEC position banning foreign campaign contributions and "influence", which includes speech. The Philippines has been abused by foreign engagement in politics in the past. Abused as in ruthlessly occupied. The U.S. has not.  Furthermore, the Philippines is a small nation. A large nation could take command of an election by funneling large dollar amounts into a campaign.

But money is money, an individual is an individual, and an opinion is an opinion.

The regulators look at an opinion as a weapon, a threat. I look at it as a seed. The germ of an idea that can be welcomed or rejected or debated. Indeed, that is what blogging is about. The dynamic of generating ideas through debate. Those who disagree with JoeAm can write their own opinion. They can debate the matter. They can strive for a sharing of enlightenments. As in think and teach and learn.

Read these discussion threads. It is not the article that is important in many cases. It is the debate.

That's what that comment box is for at the bottom of the page.

Vibrant discussion keeps a democratic nation healthy, alive and on course.

So I go back to my often-asked question, usually reserved for low-esteem blog commenters not the national government, why is an idea allowed if it is stated by a Filipino but not allowed if it is stated by a foreigner? It is the same idea.

I also think that in the modern era of the internet, enforcement of the "influence" provision by deporting violators who take partisan positions on the internet is rather strange thinking. As long as I am here, the government can put its autocratic tape over my electioneering mouth. When I'm deported, then it's balls to the wall influence in every online medium available to me.

So tossing me out would prove that it is not WHAT I WRITE that matters to the authorities. It is authority that matters to the authorities.

Furthermore, when Immigration starts deporting people for simply having an opinion, the Philippines will come across in the modern world as heavy handed and  . . . well, maybe not the best place to set up shop. Like backward. Like banana republic.

Same o same o authoritarian rot and malaise. Same o same o non-competitive Philippines.

But my parents taught me to obey, and my school taught me to respect authority, and my church taught me to exercise humility, so I will follow the rules.

And the Philippines will be one voice quieter during election time.

Candidates who represent a lousy choice for the Philippine public can sleep well.  JoeAm will not be badgering them.

My my. . . . do you suppose . . . the thought struck me . . .could it be . . . that if they can silence enough voices they will soon have everything in order. Only THEIR propaganda will be allowed?

Ship shape, as they say.

Hunky dory.

Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya 

Someone's singing Lord, kumbaya
Someone's singing Lord, kumbaya
Someone's singing Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbayah 

Someone's laughing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's laughing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's laughing, Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya 

Someone's crying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's crying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's crying, Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya 

Someone's praying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's praying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's praying, Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya 

Someone's sleeping, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's sleeping, Lord, kumbaya
Someone's sleeping, Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbaya

Psychotherapeutic Counseling for the Democratically Inclined

"Democracy is for the intelligent, because the leadership of State is placed in the hands of the People. It also works best if the People are not nuts." JoeAm
___________

Going by the Rappler mood meter, a good many Filipinos seem to be in a rather Maude-like snit about the harsh treatment being given by Malaysia to the uninvited visitors. It's like Malaysia deems the intruders to be a potential risk to security or even sovereignty in Sabah. Go figure.

This occasions several thoughts.

• First of all, it demonstrates that Sultan Kiram gave no consideration to others before striking out on his self-enhancing misadventure.  I suspect he and Pete Seeger would not get along very well.  Read on.

• Second, it confirms that Malaysia is not as advanced as the Philippines at introducing the modern democratic values of a pluralistic society; authoritarianism in Malaysia is heavier on the scale of government motivations than respect for human rights.

• I'm reminded of America jailing her own Japanese citizens during World War II because their race was given more weight in judging their motivations than their citizenship was. That has proved to be among the most embarrassing of American acts because it so conflicts with the idea of equality for all. Malaysia is insecure about her democratic institutions. And perhaps for good reason if the Sultan's attitude is common among residents of Sabah.

• Finally, when Filipinos get frustrated, many blame their President, as if he had the dictatorial or wizardly capability to stop bad things from happening. Next they will want manna from heaven.

Here's Lesson 5, today's session of Psychotherapeutic Counseling for the Democratically Inclined ("PCDI").

Ownership

5.1 Remember that other people and you are not attached by any strings whatsoever. You do not control them and they do not control you. What they do is not a reflection on you and what you do is not a reflection on them. Each operates in a separate sphere of motives and reasons.

5.2 To internationalize this and make it relevant to recent events on Sabah, please recognize that both Malaysia and the Philippines are sovereign states. The operative word is "sovereign". It  puts legal and ethical exclamation points on the separateness.

• The Philippines does not control Malaysia. Malaysia does not control the Philippines.

5.3 Hopes, wishes, dreams, hallucinations and prayers are fictions. We fall to the Humpty Dumpty New World Dictionary suitable for the custom definitions that are appropriate under PCDI instruction.

• Hope (noun): The heart's desire for good things.

• Wish (noun): The brain's desire for good things.

• Dream (noun): A subconscious hallucination.

• Hallucination (noun): A conscious dream.

• Prayer (noun): Hope that God will attend to our insignificant little lives.

5.4 "Ownership" in the PCDI context is the process where one accepts that a decision has results, and any outcomes arising from a decision go back to that decision. They do not go elsewhere.

• Example. When a Sultan chooses to intrude with guns into a society that bans such guns, President Aquino did not make that decision. Nor did any other Filipino, unless he or she was a controller and the Sultan agreed to do what that controller decided. Then accountability flows upstream to the controller. President Aquino was not the controller, either.

5.5 Pipedreams are when hopes, wishes, dreams, hallucinations and prayers come together in the form of a solution that sounds good, but is wholly irrational. Like the statement:

• Sabah belongs to the Philippines because of (cite agreement or historical reference that represents a "decision" on the matter).

• President Aquino humiliated us by not (cite the decisions he did not make, that you, in his predicament, would have made).

• President Aquino needs to fix this by (cite the steps you would take to right the Sabah ship, which is listing strongly to port and starboard at the same time . That's really bad.)

Then go back and determine what percentage of the people in Sabah agree with you.

5.6 There is a difference between land, which can be titled, and personal allegiance, which is a conscious decision by people to be governed as they see fit. Allegiance cannot be titled and transferred as if it were a box of socks inherited from grandpa.

5.7 The healthy, democratic Filipino conveys to his/her duly elected President full right and authority to act on his/her behalf. He does not deny responsibility for his vote. When the "other guy" wins, he is big enough to recognize that others are entitled to a voice, and he backs the process result. For his nation.

5.8 The takeaways from today's session that you should meditate on at least once a day for a year are:

• Accept responsibility for what you can control, and accept what you cannot. Learn to distinguish between the two.

• Don't give others the power to define your well-being. Take charge yourself. Don't whine, beg, apologize or make excuses, as that transfers power to others.

• Don't assign responsibility to others for your hopes, wishes, dreams, hallucinations and prayers. They are operating in the real world. Don't expect them to take up your fictions.

• It is lunatic to expect others, like Presidents for example, to exercise bad decisions to take care of your hallucinations. Like the Philippines taking Sabah "because it is ours". It is simply not going to happen.

• Chill. Let go of it. Get yourself free of irrational wishes, of unfulfillable hopes. It is simply not worth the energy.

• You can control who you vote for and what music to play.

WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE
words and music by Pete Seeger
performed by Pete Seeger and Tao Rodriguez-Seeger

Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the flowers gone?
Girls have picked them every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the young girls gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the young girls gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the young girls gone?
Taken husbands every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the young men gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the young men gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the young men gone?
Gone for soldiers every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the soldiers gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the soldiers gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the soldiers gone?
Gone to graveyards every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Where have all the graveyards gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the graveyards gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the graveyards gone?
Covered with flowers every one
When will we ever learn?
When will we ever learn?

©1961 (Renewed) Fall River Music Inc
All Rights Reserved.

Five Reasons Why Catholic Vote Philippines Should Be Ignored

Guest Article

By Andrew Lim

Last December 2012, several groups of Catholic laity banded together to form Catholic Vote Philippines, aiming “to advocate that Catholics vote as Catholics.” Alarmed by the passage of the RH law, and presuming that more legislation it deems inimical will be put on the agenda, they will work for the election of legislators and leaders it finds acceptable based on its own standards and criteria. But what is the group all about exactly? How will it operate?

Joe Tale, a lawyer affiliated with the movement, says, “ The Catholic Vote is not a political party. It will scan the horizon among all the parties and support candidates who carry Catholic values in their word and action, in their public as well as private life, regardless of political party, and yes, if called for, regardless of religion.”

Bishop Gabriel Reyes clarifies: “Catholics should not be single -issue voters and should consider a candidate's competence and incorruptibility.” He adds: “One could be anti-RH but he could also be a thief. It will be up to the voters to weigh a candidate's track record and decide.”

Recently, the Bacolod diocese came out with tarpaulins advocating specific names to vote, as well as who not to vote.

While there is nothing illegal with the foregoing, this author believes this will work negatively against the cause of Philippine democracy, will be problematic for most voters to apply, and do more harm than good.

Let's set aside the debate on whether the Catholic vote exists in the first place or not. Dicky Boncan, the spokesperson of the group readily admits it does not exist at the national level, but argues that “the Church can make or break an election at the local level. “ Proceeding from that presumption, I submit five reasons why Catholic Vote Phils will be problematic and ultimately harmful to democracy:

A. Catholic Vote Phils cannot be operationalized without becoming a single-issue voter.

Despite the nuanced pronouncements of its leaders, it will be impossible to “vote as a Catholic” without endorsing a specific candidate, or supporting/not supporting a candidate based solely on his vote on the RH bill, to the exclusion of other important issues like mining, taxes, gun control, etc.

Compounding this problem is the fact that Philippine politics is not really issue-based, but personality-based. Most candidates resort to platitudes.

Joe Tale again: “In the recent US elections, there was an organized Catholic Vote that came out with their own political ads and endorsed the Romney-Ryan tandem for President and Vice-President. The Romney-Ryan team lost, but at least in the US, the Catholics have served notice that they will be active participants in the electoral process.”

Does Mr Tale indicate that had Filipino Catholics been allowed to vote in the last US presidential elections, they should have chosen the Republican ticket? Then that means they would have also endorsed the entire Republican platform, which has been criticized for its inconsistency with the pro-life ideals by being pro-automatic assault rifles ownership, its regressive tax policies, its indifference to minorities, women and the gay communities.

B. Complicated decision making cannot be appreciated by the average voter.

The Catholic faith is notorious for its love of elaborate hierarchies, and this is no exception. In my research for this piece, I encountered the notion of “a hierarchy of truths”. Mentioned in the Unitatis Redintegratio of the Second Vatican Council, it says that “ when comparing doctrines with one another, they should remember that in Catholic doctrine there exists a “hierarchy" of truths, since they vary in their relation to the fundamental Christian faith. “

Ratzinger, still a Cardinal then, further enumerates the three levels of truths: 1. those that are divinely revealed; 2. those which are definitively proposed and 3. those which belong to the authentic ordinary Magisterium.

Supposedly, this is to be used in analyzing the candidates' stand on various issues and help the voter decide: will I vote for a candidate who voted no to rh bill but supports the death penalty (Zubiri and Maceda of UNA) or for foreign drug traffickers (like Rufus Rodriguez)? Should I shun a candidate who voted yes to RH bill but is very aggressive in job creation and anti-corruption legislation? How about a candidate who voted no to RH but has logging and mining interests and oppose environmental conservation efforts? Which issue now has more weight? RH? Mining? Tax policies? Job-creation? Gun control?

Is a candidate's vote on the RH bill the primary and only criteria for electing someone, to the exclusion of every issue?

Now tell me- except for Catholic apologists like Dicky Boncan or members of Defensores Fidei, how can you expect this to be understood by the average Catholic voter? Will they hand out laminated guides with decision flowcharts?

C. Catholic Vote Phils will discriminate against non-Catholic candidates.

Even without meaning to do so, following Catholic Vote Phils will inevitably result in discrimination against non-Catholic candidates. Why? Because invariably, Catholic voters will not understand or consider other religious viewpoints. The rationale of Catholic Vote Phils originates from tenets of Roman Catholicism, and it is natural that there will be divergence in beliefs with other faiths. A difference in beliefs will lead to differences in political agendas.

If Catholic Vote Phils existed years ago and managed to gain popular support, then we would not have seen the likes of FVR, Leticia Shahani, Mike Tamano, Santanina Rasul, Juan Flavier, etc in government.

D. Catholic Vote Phils will put its voters in the awkward position of supporting candidates with unsavory political histories, just because they voted no to RH and appear to support their agenda.

E. Catholic Vote Phils may create a moral hazard, by appearing to wash away the past misdeeds of its supported candidates.

Its seal of approval will look like an endorsement of such past reprehensive behavior, and encourage future candidates to engage in further chronic corruption or recklessness, since all they need is to take a stand that the Catholic Vote Phils supports.

Nothing demonstrates this better than the CBCP's praise heaped upon the 104 congressmen who voted no to the RH bill on second reading last December 2012. Included among the 104 are the following political personalities who have been associated with the most corrupt and repressive past regimes:

a. Imelda Marcos – Leyte

b. Mikee Arroyo - party list

c. JV Ejercito- San Juan

d. Dato Arroyo- Camarines Sur

When the number of anti-RH congressmen dwindled to 79 for the third reading, the list was passed around social media amongst would-be Catholic voters for their reference in the 2013 elections.

Based on the above, it is argued that it is best for the Filipino voter to disregard Catholic Vote Philippines.

SOURCES:

1. “The Catholic Vote”, Joe Tale, Catholic Vote Phils. Website. Originally published in Phil Star Opinion section.
2. “Bishop Warns Roxas Church will make him pay in 2016” Phil Daily Inquirer, Dec 19, 2012.
3. “RH and Elections: Pols knew there's no Catholic vote”, online conversation by author with Dicky Boncan in comments section, Rappler, Dec 29, 2012.
4. “Catholic Voting and the Order of Truths”, Joe Heschmeyer, Shameless Popery blog on Catholic defense blogspot.com Sept 27, 2012
5. “Theologian says one-issue voting is foreign to Catholic tradition”, by Catholic News Service, Oct 25, 2004.
6. “How Our Congressmen and Senators Voted for the RH bill” Catholic Vote Phils website.
7. “Solon bares small wrinkle on prolife stand” Inquirer Online News Nov 7, 2012.

Enacting the Whine

The other day I wrote about ambition and unity as elements of a vibrant Philippines. Today I'll address one of the barriers to unity. It is called authoritarianism.

Unity requires a joining of hearts and effort. Authoritarianism hardens hearts and diminishes effort.

From the outside looking in, one of the interesting facets of Philippine culture is the authority Filipinos grant within three hierarchies of respect that exist in civil society. Authority is allocated: (1) along the family "chain of respect" from the oldest down to the youngest, and (2) along the community chain of respect for those with any power whatsoever (mayor, barangay captain, policeman, civil registrar or LTO or other agent, banker, priest, doctor or, if you have a flat tire, the vulcanizing guy). Everything else (3) is "in play", competitive, one person or unit (family, clan, city) vying with another for supremacy based on this engagement or that. The winner has the power.

So in a very generalized way, the structure of Philippine respect follows authoritarian lines from top down:

1. Family authority, age-based respect, which is extended to include cousins, classmates and companions.
2.  Community authority, granted to people in important jobs who have the ability to either help or hurt others. This often follows class lines, from the ruling national elite down.
3. Peer competition for advantage, where such competition involves tearing opponents down, or building allies up. The competition can be seen in negotiating sales, posturing for popularity, or angling to get a job or contract.

In American society, the same general lines of authority exist, but they are weaker because individuals are expected to act for themselves rather than simply "do what I am told". In America, authority is built from the bottom up, or earned. Rather than demanded.

1. So in the American family, age warrants polite respect, but not mandated obedience. This weaker bind to the family helps promote the independence of self that Americans develop that impels them to leave the family at around age eighteen.
2. American laws promote a kind of "consumer power" that government agencies and professionals must respect. In the Philippines, consumers have no recourse, no where to go with a complaint. In America there are consumer groups and lawyers all over the place willing to advocate or sue on behalf of citizens who are cheated or abused. People are perceived as having worth or "equality" with those in power. As such, respect is conveyed upward when the individual wants to grant it (to a boss), not when it is demanded.
3. Peer competition in American has less room (less acceptance) for cheating or connivance and tends to be less acrimonious. It is like the difference between "fixed price" shopping and negotiations. One's standing in the Philippines is negotiated with each inter-personal interaction. In America, everyone walks around fixed-price. Equal, as a citizen.

Well, as in all gross generalities, there are a lot of exceptions on both sides of the Pacific. But we are striving for the general tendencies because it helps with the point I want to make.

The Philippine hierarchies of respect and power are deeply emotional. One steps outside the lines of authority at considerable risk. Try giving Lola some lip, or the priest some objection, or the doctor a question as to his diagnosis. There's hell to pay, hell to pay. Because the offended party takes the complaint or objection or rebellion personally.

In America, although rebellious dissent is recognized, it is generally not taken as a personal insult. The offending party may be considered thoughtless or brash, but not necessarily unkind or disrespectful, and the person with authority remains strong and warranting of respect. Only in the most severe of circumstances is respect lost. In the Philippines, authority and respect seem to ride on a whim, so must be protected at all cost.

In America, authority is a cat on the prowl. In the Philippines, authority is a cornered cat in a dead-end alley. American authority pushes out to embrace the underlings. Philippine authority defends itself from the underlings.

And the laws of the land reflect that.

Philippine constitutional mandates defend. They defend against foreign ownership, against the security threat of dual citizenship, and against threats to the family and established authority.

So libel laws are strict, defending the "honor" of those in power. And people in church are protected against the "Celdran Offenses". Where, in the US, the tendency is to rule in favor of freedoms for the individual, in the Philippines, the tendency is to rule in favor of the empowered.

The filing of a legal case in the Philippines has the effect of declaring someone guilty. The idea of innocent until proven guilty is not rooted in the Philippines. And an underling challenges a power-person at grave risk. The superior in the chain of respect and authority has a commanding presence. Just ask Senator Enrile, who dares the entire world to take him on.

And no one does.

Well, no one does, and gains by it. And Enrile is still in his Presidential chair.

So what does that promote, this legislation of protections for the empowered?

It legislates a shift in accountability for wrongs away from the empowered and to those of little power.

It is the legislation of authoritarianism.

And, indeed, it is the legislation of the whine. It is the casting off of responsibility for wrongdoing to the whistle blowers or the innocent or the weak. Just ask Senator Sotto what he thinks about whistle-blowers who don't like plagiarism.

The projection, to those of us who are outsiders, is that the power people in the Philippines are rather insecure.

Defensive.

Needing protection.

And with the protection comes "the great hiding", the sacrifice of candor and open expression and challenge. Even President Aquino is afraid to let the Public's eyes look at government information. Getting passage of FOI is like doing a root canal without anesthesia. The patient doth object.

Information is not seen as freeing the Philippines to produce, to work honestly and honorably. It is seen as a threat.

Authoritarianism hardens the heart and diminishes effort.

But something different is happening right now. It is dramatic. It gives us a chance to observe a profound sociological shift. Tectonic plates are on the move.

Social media are empowering the broad population to look, listen and speak.

Authoritarianism's underbelly is now upturned. The old sense of respect is being eroded.

The Catholic Church feels punished. Senator Sotto feels punished. Senator Enrile lashes out at everyone, defending his honor. President Aquino lashes out at the media for their relentless criticisms.

The Philippines is teetering.

The old authoritarian ways are no longer having the same clout. A thousand chickens have escaped from the henhouse and they are pecking at the fox's behind.

The people are relishing the ability to push for change.

People tell me to accept that Philippine culture is what it is, and not to overlay Western values onto it.

It is not me who is overlaying the values. It is Filipinos with the ability to communicate. I am simply depicting what I see. The Philippine model of authoritarian rule is under attack.

My own observation, looking at history around the planet, is that authoritarian forms of government don't perform well. Because they limit ideas. They stifle innovation and risk-taking. They hold back the power of the people in the belief that the ruling class is better at figuring things out.

I think the Philippines will progress because the cat is unleashed here, it is on the prowl. Or chickens are unleashed. I've lost track of my animals.

President Aquino will see that an FOI Bill is passed, or he will go down in history as just another failed authoritarian president in an era that values individual accomplishment. Because the individuals of Philippine society can no longer be silenced.

Authority is shifting to the people. We bear witness.

Nay, we help out.

And, yes, in the natural flow of things, the family rules of order will also start to weaken. New rules will come into play, nurturing ambition rather than undermining it.

That is not good or bad, I suspect. It is both. It simply is the evolution of freedom in an era where "the great hiding" is no longer possible.