I on the other hand don't really agree with the points raised in the previous blog. My comment got longer and longer, so I thought that maybe my stand on the issue should merit an entry of its own. (Our group hasn't posted the summary of our discussion yet, and we got the same question, but I’ll go ahead and put my opinions here anyway.)
Should we just wait for GMA to resign or for her term to end when she is clearly feeding our country with lies instead of nourishment amidst a global food crisis? Should we allow the violation of human rights to persist considering the rising numbers of desaparasidos and victims of extra-judicial killings? Should we just stand back and wait for her to resign while under her administration, the gulf between the elite and the lower class is growing larger?
GMA will NEVER admit to the accusations held against her, ergo she will never resign. She doesn't have the delicadesa to step down from office. (Allow me to be blunt here) HELLO, have you ever listened to a SONA speech? Clearly, the things she states there are far detached from what's actually happening in our country. (Trivia: did you know that during the SONA, they actually hire a lights designer? You have a fictional script, a stage, an actor, special lights, and a few audience members who are willing to suspend their disbelief. So yes ladies and gentlemen, the SONA is a real theatrical production. It's JUST A SHOW.)
Before I move on with this next point, let me first discuss the difference between the State and the Nation. Once people start sharing in one culture and see a collective vision, only then can they be called a Nation. The Nation is not merely the masses, or just one sector of our four economic castes. The Nation is that collective in which we are all part of. To put it more poetically, the Nation, more than just a random collection of individuals sharing one territory, is actually the mind and spirit of a country. The State, on the other hand (or you can call it the Government, the Administration), is that who should be responsible for providing the people with their needs, and for upholding the rights and the laws which should protect and nurture the people it governs. But now we find that the State is deaf to the cries of its people.
The State no longer upholds even the most basic rights of the people. Many are hungry, there is a lack in education, many are dying and many more are being killed. We tolerate crimes and lies being done on such a large scale, thus we also encourage crime amongst ordinary citizens. The very corruption of the government morally corrupts the people it reigns over. Should we not, as a Nation, at the very least be outraged at this? If we are truly part of one Nation, one collective, if we as individuals can truly see a vision for our country, then it is only our right that we call for an ouster. It is OUR call, as a Nation, as a people, to oust the current administration which continues to oppress us.
I think the reason many are stuck at a paralysis when deciding on the fate of GMA’s stay in the palace is that we are so bent on finding a feasible concrete solution –an alternative, a replacement –and nothing can ever seem to suffice. We are stuck by the technical parameters that surround the issue. We stop thinking and analyzing and imagining once the issue of leaving a country without a president is brought up. No alternative ever seems to suffice because we can only see one problem being replaced by another. But I think there’s a deeper problem here that is not being talked about: the deeper issue might not be the administration in itself, or the people who are working in the administration, but the system in which our administration is operating.
The basic premise of the system on which our administration thrives is the disparity between the poor and the elite. The cruel irony of this is that the majority of our population consists of the poor who are unwittingly supporting the whims of the elite minority. The rich protect their wealth from competition and economic uncertainties by defending it against the poor, by perpetuating a system which will leave the have-nots powerless. As long as the rich ensure that the poor remain powerless, the cliché proves true: the rich become richer, and the poor become poorer. Of course, the poor being poor and powerless remain victims of the situation. It is a basic model that has existed for centuries, and it is the model on which our current administration is working.
The alliance of the government and the upper-class against the poor ensures that they who are powerful maintain their power, those who are wealthy maintain their wealth, and the influential maintain their influence.
This is why, I think, that as long as the poor are not empowered, there can never be a radical change in our country. What we really need is an ideological revolution. We need to be able to imagine possibilities outside the realm and technicalities of capitalism, consumerism, and bureaucracy.
I’ll be definitely criticized for saying this, but I think that compared to EDSA I, EDSA II was not a real revolution. Sure we were able to shoo Erap away, but what did we change? Was there even a new ideology that we were able to bring? EDSA II was instigated by an outraged middle and upper class, whose businesses were failing because of the economic damage Erap was causing. Not that I’m pro-Erap or anything, but I just think that the EDSA II was a mere perpetuation of a system that interminably oppressed and disregarded the masses. If you need proof, just look at how we regard EDSA III.
EDSA I on the other hand, was really a stirring of the masses who were stifled to slumber under a deadly nightmare of Marcos’s tyranny. What was brought about during EDSA I was an acknowledgement of two things: 1.) that our country was struggling under a perverted government and that had to change, and 2.) that the people of the nation are part of the process of history; that the creation of history is not legalistic or determined by those in power, rather, it is WE who create our country’s history and craft our country’s future. We acknowledged the power that we, as a people, had. (Kaya nga People Power.) And with that, we realized that we weren’t so helpless after all. With EDSA I, we learned to hope again.
But it seems, after twenty-two years, that hope is lost. And now instead of fighting against it, we have turned a blind eye to the structure that continues to chain us. It seems that the promise of change remains so elusive. Yet I believe that despite how temporary hope and change may be, we should never stop fighting. We should continue to be outraged at how the present system violates human dignity. We should stop telling ourselves that we are trapped in a condition of limits. Only then can we truly see that a new world is indeed possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment