Alleba Politics

The issue of population control has been silent. Most recently, there have been talks of “limiting” the number of children per family to two. The main proponent of this being Rep. Lagman. The bill does not specifically illegalize siring more than two children but rather offers incentives to 1- or 2-children families.

This, I believe, in theory, is a good proposal. However, considering the already burgeoning budget deficit, it probably be either not implementd fully or properly. Not to be a cynic but it would also provide a new avenue for corruption in our already overly-corrupted government. It would also be difficult to reward those with one or two children oly unless you oblige them to have theirselves ligated (female or male) to ensure that they will not be having any more children. And that would, I believe, constitute a violation of human rights. Maybe a better approach would be to penalize or impose taxes on those with more children, but that would also be inhumane. There is just no probable way of imposing a policy like this without taking away some liberties. Knowing the psyche of the paranoid Filipinos (me included), this would lead to a good deal of dissention (with the claim that it is pre-cursor to Martial Law).

The Catholic Church lately, has been silent on the issue. Personally, I can understand why Catholics (those who adhere to the Church strictly anyway), would advocate and follow only the natural method. The natural method, moral righteousness aside, is not only effective, and has almost zilch side effects, it also requires discipline and commitment.

On the other hand, it can be argued that in the reality we live in, it is impractical to use only the natural birth control methods. Not to say that ths generation is promiscuous, this generation is admittedly more sexually active, and more aware or their sexuality. Nowadays, sexuality can be found everywhere, primarily abundant through the media. And adhering to natural birth control, more often than not, only leads to unwanted consequences. Although the argument that it is better to use “protection” rather than contract disease or be stuck with unwanted pregnancy only promotes promiscuity. The reality is that people, now more than ever, are more aware of their sexuality and are more sexually active. However, there are less and less sources of proper and correct information regarding reproductive health and birth control.

Making artificial birth control more accessible may promote promiscuity. However, coupled with the proper understanding and knowledge of sexuality and reproductive health, artificial birth control do not merely become excuses for being promiscuous. The power of proper information dissemination and education should not be underestimated. An informed person, will make an informed choice no matter how easy it is to choose otherwise.

MY TWO CENTS:

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has repeatedly claimed that the Philippines and Spain has emboldened the terrorists in Iraq by negotiating with them. How about thinking abut how this all began anyway? If George W. Bush, Tony Blair and their very own PM Howard had not acted harshly by defying UN and started a war in Iraq, all this finger-pointing would not have happened. Instead of blaming the Philippines and Spain for allegedly emboldening these so-called terrorists, how about facing the problem head on? Evaluating the occupation in Iraq and how it is being handled would be a good place to start at.

And to the Philippines, especially President Arroyo, did we really think the pull-out would not have this kind of backlash?

The fact that more than 50% of all public grade school graduates nationwide failed miserably in the high school readiness test points to a very big problem in the pulic grade school system. To note, the passing score was lowered to accomodate the overwhelming number of studetns who failed. Another year level in the grade school or high school system is not the solution to this problem. The problem is far bigger that just a lack of a school year spent in high school or grade school.

The failure of the graduates in the readiness test is symptomatic of the avalanche of problems ailing the system. First of all is the lack of resources: effective educators, good books, conducive classrooms, etc, etc, etc… Then, there the alleged politicization of the hiring process of teachers and the corruption witin the system. I can point out a lot of problems in our public eduation system and not one of it would be solved by forcing the stuents to study for one more year.

It would be unfair to penalize the students who are actually the victims of a faulty and inadequate public grade school system. Forcing them ans their families to cough up money for an extar yuear in school is not the right solution, it only compounds the problem. Delaying their graduation consequently leads to the delay of their ability to earn money. Wrong it may be, most Filipinos think of education as nothing but a means to escape poverty and desolution. It is not uncommon for graduates from the lower socio-political classes to work not for themselves but for their families and to pay for the education of their younger siblings.

The solutions to glaring reality of inadequacies in the public grade school system should start with the evaluation of the system and the proper management of the system. If indeed Jose Rizal’s words are true that “The youth is the future of the motherland,” then based on the results of the high school readiness test, we should either lower our hopes or get ready for 50% chance of failure.

LAND REFORM(?)
In the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s (PDI) article (”After Angelo, deficit next“, July 27, 2004, p. A8) on President Arroyo’s State of the Nation Address (SONA), they cited Pres. Arroyo’s plan of “implementing land reform which would allow farmers to use their land and squatters their lots as collateral.” This idea/plan is unfair to the actual owners of the lots that would be used by the squatters as collateral. If, in case, the squatter will not pay for his loan, it would not actually be him who would be losing something but the actual owner of the lot. This is would only encourage the squatters to squat somewhere else and lend some more. If a person borrows money using another person’s property as collateral, there is a great possibility that that person would not be motivated to pay for that money. Although I am all for social justice, I do not think that land owners’ rights should be stripped away from them to compensate for the government’s lack of capability to provide ample land to those who need it.

MINDANAO
Another thing that bothered me in the President’s SONA is her intentional or unintentional ommission of Mindanao. Admittedly, I think that the President has over-used and abused enough her “war on terror” stance, but I am one with Senator Pimintel in being disappointed that nothing was said about working for peace in Mindanao. More perplexing is the fact that there was nothing about the economic progress and development of Mindanao, which, if I might say, was hampered by the negative publicity brought about by her “war on terrorism.” Mindanao, I dare say, has been the unwilling “ghetto” of the Philippines. We are known for nothing but the war, kidnappings, lack of progress. HELL! Some poeple think there’s no electricity in Mindanao.

ENVIRONMENT
The most disappointing thing about the SONA was that it ignored environmental issues and concerns. Am I suppossed to dance in glee and jump for joy that she at least mentioned the pending passage of the Clean Water Act in the Congress an the approval of the Solid Waste Management Act??? The keyword here is “mentioned.” She did not even elaborate, did not explain, did not commit to see that the afore-mentioned bills/laws are properly enforced. What about biodiversity conservation, corporate responsibility, the implementation of the Clean Air Act (or lack thereof)?

The President focused on the fiscal deficit, budget, taxes, money, money, money!!! It seemed like money is the only thing that can save this country. What about national pride? What about moral reformation? What about changing the political values and attitudes?

And, oh, of course there was the pabida of the “Angelo dela Cruz” situation. Which she used to say that the Philippines has no policy of sacrificing lives. Why did we join in the war, then???

If there was one thing about the SONA that I liked, it is that it was short enough to be boring.

The recently-formed coalition between the Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (KAMPI) and the Liberal Party (LP) has vowed to remain loyal to nobody but President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. I find this a very disturbing political manuever. A decleration like this assumes that loyalty to the president is the highest form of loyalty of any politician. It connotes that these people are willing to do anything so long as it pleases the president. These people have just appointed themselves as the lap dogs of the administration.

What about the Filipino people? Who remains loyal to the people who has given mandate to every politician to lead this country and serve its people? Who will push for their causes and interests? Who will provide them their needs? A democracy assumes a government that is of the people, by the people and FOR THE PEOPLE. With the declaration that KAMPI and LP has made, is our government still trully a democratic one? Or a monarchy with the loyaltly of the politicians remain on the state leader?

My Introduction Political Science book in college, states that a statesman differs from a politician in that a statesman puts the interest of the nation above anything else. Are there no statesmen left in KAMPI and LP? Are there not statesmen left who will fight and remain loyal only to the country and its people?

It is a sad day indeed when people can not anymore trust on their leaders to remain steadfast and loyal to the people they are serving.

The fact that the sacrifice of a life is not acceptable to President Arroyo and the rest of the Filipino nation is proof that the Philippines has a culture that is unprepared and unwilling to go to war. The values of the Filipino people do not and has never been reflected in President Arroyo’s policy to support the US-led war in Iraq.

That we pulled out of Iraq as soon as a head was about to roll, literally, confirms that Arroyo’s decision to support the war is nothing but an attempt by Pres. Arroyo to please Goerge W. Bush. If her conviction and belief that the war the occupation are justified, would she be as willing to pull out the troops? I would like to think that the pull out of the troops is not mere cowardice of the repercussions of the then possible execution of dela Cruz, but enlightenment that the “humanitarian” missions are nothing but an attempt to boost the Philippines’ image.

Our foreign policies should always be reflective of our identity as a nation, our culture, our values and our morals. Otherwise, we would be easily bullied into anything, short of protituting ourselves in exchange for foreign funding. Our values dictate that the life of each Filipino is more impaortant than anything else. I think it is this value, more than anything else, that made us pull out our troops.

In a Third World or developing (to be politically-correct) country like ours, the environment oftentimes take the back seat. There is an assumed, albeit imaginary, friction between poverty alleviation and sustainable development. Most people perceive sustainable development as out and out preservation of the environment, thereby minimizing the resources which can be used for poverty alleviation and development.

On the contrary, the ideal but utopic concept of sustainable development, pushes for inter- and intra-generation EQUALITY. Sustainable development aims for inter-generation equality through the prudent use of resources and preserving the environment. This scares a lot of people since they assume that this means scrimping on everything and depriving people of resources. What people fail to see is that sustainable development also advocates and ensures equality of access to and usage of resources among all socio-economic classes within a generation or what is called as intra-generation equality. This is not so different from poverty alleviation. Intra-generational equality dictates that every person of all socio-economic classes should have equal access to resources.

Although the concept of sustainable development is admittedly utopic and therefore, most probably unattainable, we have nothing to lose but everything to gain by aiming for it. What the poor or the economically-challenged or even the middle- and upper-classes fail to see is that there are more than enough economic gains to environmental protection. Recycling of materials in production is definitely less expensive. Cleaner production methods are generally, more cost-effective if done properly. Materials recovery of product containers are also cheaper than continually producing products pakaging. Eco-tourism has been proven to be a profitable bussiness. Environmental causes such as the much-overdone tree-planting can also lead to tax cuts.

Even when done in small-scales, people can earn money through environmental preservation and protection. Proper segregation of wastes, materials recovery and selling of recyclables, are simple but profitable environmental actions. Lessing electricity and water usage also cost less. Regularly having vehicles tuned-up lessen air pollution. There are a thousand ways an indicidual can help the environment, if only he thinks he can do it.

If only people are aware of how their small and big choices and decisions can help the environment and lead to economic gain, sustainable development would be easier to attain.

“As an american filipino I am disgusted at the Filipino Governments actions in Iraq by pulling its troops out at the drop of a hat. I am ashamed to be Filipino at this moment. They should have sent in more troops. Now when the terrorists know how weak they are they will never stop kiddnapping and terrorizing Filipinos because now they know that they can get away with it. Just wait and see. I remember Filipinos sacrificing themselves for freedom, now I see them sacrificing freedom for the will of tyrants,
why did they go there in the first place if they would topple over when the wind blew?” -Steve, a Fil-Am

A life is definitely not what I would call a drop of a hat. This crisis is not some form of chess, where sacrificing a pawn is forgivable. To start with, the US-led war in Iraq is illegal and sending troops there, including the Filipinos was and still is an illegal occupation. The so-called tyrants in this war are not only the extremists who kidnap but more so the Americans and their allies who initiated an unjustified war based on the supposed existence of “weapons of mass destruction” which until now haven’t been found.

Do people honestly believe that this war was started, fought and supported with the aim to liberate Iraq? I believe that it was, more than anything else, a desperate attempt by USA, with its short-sighted leader, to assert itself as a world power. If the intention is really to liberate Iraq from the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein, it should have been done years ago. The fact that USA started this war due to the “existence” of “WMDs” only emphasizes the fact that the war is nothing but a pre-emptive strike aimed at thwarting an attack, the possibility of which still remains unsubstantiated. That Iraq is now liberated was not and is still not the primary aim of USA but only a favorable offshoot of USA’s arrogance.

In America, a hostage situation like this might be seen as nothing more than a powerplay, a ploy to cower a nation into submission. But in the Philippines, this situation is something personal. In a country where just about every household has a member working overseas, the hostage of Angelo dela Cruz is not seen as a simple political exercise, but as a personal attack. Angelo dela Cruz represents each and every Filipino working abroad and his kidnapping represents the peril that each of them faces. That’s why it is not surprising that each Filipino feels for him and his family.

Sacrificing a life in exchange for an alliance that was never mutual, in the first place, is not something that I hope would happen. Philippines’ “support” for the war is nothing but GMA kissing up to USA. I don’t think and believe that Philippines needs to be an ally of USA. That we are a Third World country or a “developing country” to be politically-correct, and we need the support and aide of USA is nothing but a falsehood. The USA doesn’t give a damn about our country. What we get from them are no more than surpluses and used up (pinaglumaan) armaments. This country is sovereign and we don’t need any pompous world power dictating our policies in exchange for second-hand dole outs. It’s time that the Philippines start stnading up for itself and its people.

Last Friday, GMA 7 staged a Bagyo sa Hulyo show with all its comedy sitcom actors doing one big show. One very unsettling part of the show was Joey Marquez, Richard Gomez, Benjie Paras and Raymart Santiago singing the novelty song “Sasakyan Kita” with a different set of lyrics. It went “Sasaktan kita, pag lahat ay gusto mo, sasaktan kita pag nasaksaktan ang wallet ko…” Those singing even had dance “moves” prentending to be slapping each other.

I was disturbed by this and I hope I am not the only one. Although it can be said that it was done in jest, it was also done in very poor taste. It seemed to make domestic violence a trivial, if not funny, matter. I was certainly not laughing after I watched that bit of the show and was in a bit of outrage.

I do hope that I am not the only who thinks that it wasn’t funny at all.

“They took away justice, freedom, democracy. Now they take away dignity and most of all, character.”
-on the movie “Imelda” and how her family has been “marginalized”

“Ang aming ginawa ay pagmamahal sa kapwa, lalo na sa mahirap at dukha…”
-on Martial Law

The two quotes above were recently uttered by Imelda Marcos. I can’t even begin to describe how I felt when she said those things. I want to hurl everything within reach towards the television. I wanted to strangle and then I wanted to skin her alive and display her skinless (and hopefully still alive body) for the public to pillage and throw stones at. But I realized there is simply no dignity in stooping down to her level.

There is not a day when I wonder how come she remains to pompously show off her freedom every chance she gets. What kind of person would actually think that the Marcos family was a victim of injustice? Why hasn’t she been prosecuted for all the millions she plundered, for all the deaths, for all the deseparacidos still missing, for all those who were violently and unjustly tortured, for the entire Philippine nation who continues to swim in a ridiculously big amount of foreign debt???

How dare she cry injustice after all they have done to our country and to our people? I can understand and even forgive Spaniards, Americans and even the Japanese who colonized and enslaved our nation, but I cannot fathom and forgive the kind of evil which enslaved, tortured and savaged his own nation for his own sake and continues to deny the deeds.

Until I see Imelda Marcos and the Marcos cronies prosecuted, rebuked and imprisoned, I will not be in peace. If there is anybody more dangerous than a criminal, it’s a criminal who denies the crimes he has committed and continues to enjoy his liberties.