"Beyond the Spectacle?": Debunking Popular Notions About Elections

(Foreword: this is probably the most rambling thinkpiece about electoral practice I have written. Apologies for crude rhetoric.)

With the campaign period for the 2010 Philippine elections kicking into high gear, one might be prone to the pessimistic notions which Jessica Zafra has outlined so succinctly in her Pinoy Elections: A Guide for the Dismayado. To paraphrase: "we are governed by actors and entertained by politicians." In a sense, I doubt much of our desensitised populaiton would be dissuaded of their notion that politics and artists are of different breeds: one only needs to visit any forum that would host opinions on the upcoming polls to see gems of cynicism such as the following:

Interchangebable nga lang sila; Politics at Showbiz.

Diba may MMFF parade ang mga stars, may Campaign sorties din naman ang mga Politiko. Pareho lang.

Umaakting den naman silang pareho, sa parehong manonood din.

may mga tsismis silang pareho. covered by media of course.

kung may talent fee ang mga artist at bonus kung kumita ang pelikula, sa politics, may pork barrel at kickback pag may projects.

Pabong-gahan sila ng damit, kotse at bahay.

PArehong-pareho.

Coming from the tradition of Political Science, such a sweeping statement (written in horrible grammar, no less), despite being something I believed in my childhood, nonetheless makes my blood boil. For one who is striving to understand the discipline of people's interactions with each other, together with harmonization of interests, to call politics akin to a "pabitin for the elite" is a grave insult to millenia of free thinking. Nonetheless, I cannot but admit that people cannot be blamed if they think this way simply because what we have are residual institutions devoid of their former glories.

Then again, nothing could be solved with moping and pining for "innocence lost." True, what our government and political institutions have come to are definitely not what is expected of an ideal democratic institution, but perhaps the root of problem is that we ourselves are not made to appreciate what democracy even means in the first place. It might be helpful, perhaps, if we would look at most of the time-old snippets we would here in our families and communities whenever issues of political significance arise, and then see why they are not conducive for "citizen-like" bearing:

1) "Ang iboboto ko yung nakukuha ang kiliti ko."

Most of us who speak of who our candidates will be are prone to joining the bandwagon of who is the most popular or the most "populist." This most likely explains (at face value) why Senator Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III and Sen. Manuel "Manny" Villar, Jr. are leading in the polls. Supposedly, those who embody the people's aspirations are the ones we should go into office. However, corollary to these beliefs is the notion that once these candidates are placed into power, we already have the freedom to bash them when we want to, simply by being suspicious of their "incumbency."

Some academics and pretenders to political analysis usually share the hypothesis that it is almost a sociological construct born out of almost 400 years of colonization, this tendency to "up one over our masters" as a coping mechanism of oppressive circumstances. Most believers of the class struggle hypothesis (somewhat erroneously lumped into the umbrella term "Marxists") would also claim that this is an expected by product of the continuous slow mobilization of the working class to overthrow "unjust elite domination." More often than not, these arguments sound rational enough to a generation who was not raised on critical thinking, but even a few doses of common sense can debunk them.

To actually believe that the price of a vote is simply one's projection to populism or "populist" interests is definitely dangerous, something almost bordering to totalitarian domination no better than Hitler's fascist rule or Stalin's reconfiguration of the Soviet Union. Political theorist Hannah Arendt, in her monumental work The Origins of Totalitarianism would condemn such:

The masses share with the mob only one characteristic,namely, that both stand outside all social ramifications and normal political representation. The masses do not inherit, as the mob does—albeit in a
perverted form—the standards and attitudes of the dominating class, but reflect and somehow pervert the standards and attitudes toward public affairs of all classes. The standards of the mass man were determined not only and not even primarily by the specific class to which he had once belonged, but rather by all-pervasive influences and convictions which were tacitly and inarticulately shared by all classes of society alike. (Arendt 1958, 314).

What drives people to an understanding that elections is a mere giving off of interest to the one which he can identify most is a product of a rejection of individuality, the fetish for "being as same as most people" which kills off any impetus for creativity and innovation. This is most likely the reason why despite countless public presidential forums people are not convinced that their vote is worth committing to someone. The more candidates' platforms are becoming more identical to each other is a signal that the democratic system is unhealthy and mediocre. In fact this the complaint of Senator Aquino regarding the forums he attends to. To paraphrase: "Puro naman pagpapalakihan lang ang ginagawa namin dito: hindi pinag-uusapan ang mga isyu."

This is precisely the problem: issues are not being tackled, mostly because people have been taught to be desensitized by issues. What is the most important value fetishized by candidates is the simple delivery of services: food, housing and jobs (which is what almost all, but most importantly Senator Villar, puts forward as their sole agenda). This is basically national housekeeping, which should be undertaken by a bureaucracy and not be put to question. The moment we begin thinking of washing our hands from public responsibility as mentioned in the film Network ("Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone!"), we already know citizenship is dying. And this is likely something we can blame on the egocentric elites who find it expedient that the masses remain ignorant, but we are getting ahead of ourselves.

2) "Bakit mo iboboto iyan e hindi naman iyan mananalo?"

Perhaps we are committing and error when we follow the idea of "politics of convenience." This is the rhetoric people have about OMB Chairman Edu Manzano's affiliation with Lakas-Kampi CMD, lamenting how he would top the polls if he was a Liberal senator. This even extends to the standard-bearer Gilbert Teodoro, who supposedly is an ideal candidate if not for his affiliation with the incumbent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who statistically and rhetorically is the most unpopular president than the unlamented dictator Ferdinand Marcos. (Not that we sanction the growing rhetoric that Marcos was actually a good president; that statement is outrageously stupid and is a different matter.)

If Lakas-Kampi CMD holds the ideological underpinnings and program of governance a candidate believes, then so be it: let the candidate stand for what he/she believes in. Politics is about standing up for one's principles and then moving around your limitations to push them through. If we are mad at personality-centered politics with candidates marketing only themselves and not the stands of the party, are we not making the same error of judgment by becoming personality-centered ourselves and not looking at the arguments of these parties? It is definitely true, political participation is a matter of investing oneself and convincing other people to what you believe in in the practice of elenchus, but relying on personal charisma alone is not healthy in promoting a thinking electorate.

There are values for tradition and myth-making in political participation: this is why the argument about Senator Aquino not having any original platform and simply riding on the names of his deceased forebears does not hold. As postmodernist thought will hold, why destroy the old wheel and make a new one if it is still workable? If the history of people power is still a potent weapon of democratization, why should we not hold on to it? Why believe the discredited neo-liberal dialectic of the Arroyo administration which foists the bogey of "stunted development" if another EDSA Revolution occurs? The obsession for modernization as rhetoric and sacrificing what is held dear by the people is totalitarian, if not at the very least emasculating for the demos.

3) Bakit ka pa sasali sa halalang ito, pare-pareho lang naman sila, sayang lang ang boto mo?

To immediately presume that electoral practice is a futile practice due to the inevitable fact that it will always be the "old players" who will figure in elections is, once again, a non-democratic and anti-political practice which has disastrous consequences for public participation. True, these players have interests counter to the values of the general population, but then again the value of political participation is in the strength to continuously speak out one's rights and advance one's interest in conjunction (if not effective suppression) of the aforementioned anti-people interests, achieved through the negotiation table and parameters people agree upon, if only to assert their participation in the community. To paraphrase once again Hannah Arendt in an interview with Roger Errera, departing from the relatively-modern understanding of the nation-state (which as a construct of modernity is questionable in itself), a country is united not by heritage, not by memory or shared origins, and not even by whether one is native or not: it is united by consent to the Constitution it values. In valuing this Constitution, one professes to a desire to participate in governance, in developing oneself as a person who wishes to be a figure that has contributed to the welfare of the public space while allowing for the advancement of private pursuits, but only insofar as it supports the public space.

In quoting noted Neo-Marxist academic Nicos Poulantzas, who wrote in the New Left Review Vol I No. 58, one of the contestations regarding the capitalist state is about how "the fundamental contradiction of the capitalist system, according to Marx, is not at all a contradiction between its social character and its ‘private purpose’, but a contradiction between the socialization of productive forces and their private appropriation. (Poulantzas 1969, 71). Political participation, despite its value for tradition and structures, nonetheless should be able to articulate itself in other avenues available to maximize mobilization and capturing public interest. It is, after all, not about who gets what, but who convinces everyone better in the shared language.

It would be therefore to our benefit as a population if we do understand the spectacle that unfolds before us, but nonetheless do not fully give in to our suspension of disbelief and see what occurs before our very eyes as an automatic signal to just drop our votes and leave it at that. To have a fully appreciative participation in the electoral process, one has to be willing to go out of one's comfort zone and engage every one who wishes to "serve" in the public space by asking them questions that matter, issues of justice and legitimacy, while keeping a tacit understanding that national housekeeping is important but not paramount above establishing a livable space for all.

READ.

SPEAK OUT.

GO BEYOND THE BUZZWORDS AND ADVERTISEMENTS.

Take your vote as a ticket, and leave it at that. Be exhilirated, but not intoxicated.

What matters now is HOW YOU WILL MAKE SURE THE CAPTAIN YOU CHOSE TO PILOT THE TRAIN OF STATE IS RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO NOT LET IT DISLODGE FROM THE TRACKS AND RUN PEOPLE INTO THE ABYSS.


"Beyond the Spectacle?": Debunking Popular Notions About Elections by Hansley A. Juliano is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Philippines License.
Based on a work at kalisnglawin.blogspot.com.

Siklo ng Karahasan

Pagmumuni-muni sa malamig-lamig na pagngangalit ng taumbayang Pilipino sa pamamaslang sa 57 tao sa Maguindanao sa ilalim ng mga Ampatuan
ni Hansley A. Juliano

Para sa isang tunay na pangkating subaltern, na ang pagkakakilanlan ay ang kanilang ka-Ibahan, walang di-makakatawang suhetong subaltern na makikilala’t makakapagsalita para sa kanyang sarili; ang solusyon ng intelektwal ay di ang magpigil sa pagkatawan. May suliranin pagka’t ang layon ng suheto ay di matagpuan upang maganyak ang kakatawang intelektwal.

- Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Can the Subaltern Speak?

Hindi na ako magtataka kung marami sa nakatanggap ng mga balita ukol sa mga pamamaslang sa 57 na mga tao, kabilang ang mga 13 mamamahayag sa Maguindanao ay batiin ng tila pagkasanay o kawalang-pakialam ang balitang ito. Kung magpapahayag ng pagkagitla, pagkabagabag, o pagkagalit sa usaping ito ay puwedeng-puwede nating ikahon sa tatlong uri ng tugon:

Shit.

Oh god, so sad. There's just too many evils in the world. I cry... (LOL)

Fuck these Muslim pigs! They deserve to die! Go President Arroyo!

Itong mga kaisipang ito ang siyang nagpapanatili, nagpapatibay, at siyang nagpapalaganap sa mga ganitong pamamaslang. Itong hegemonya ng kamangmangan, kawalang-kaalaman at kawalang-pakialam, kung tutuusin, ang siyang pinakamabuti't matatag na tanggulan ng mga ganitong mapangwasak at mapanupil na sistematikong karahasan hindi lamang sa Maguindanao, kundi pati na sa buong kapuluan kung tutuusin. Napakaraming mga pagkakataon nang tayo ay nakarinig ng mga usapin ukol sa mga patayan, sa mga kawalang-katarungan, sa pagtatanggol ng kulungang estado sa kanyang mga galamay na naghahari-harian sa ating lupain, at sa mga pagnanasa nating ipatimbuwal ang mga sistema’t kulturang ito na pumapatay sa ating mga walang-malay at makatarungang mga kapatid.

Hindi ko malaman kung ano nga ba ang dapat kong sabihin bilang isang aba’t mangmang na manunulat sa harap ng mga ganitong usapin, sa totoo lamang. Napakahirap, napakasakit, at nakapanginginig ng laman ang bawa’t detalyeng aking naririnig sa bawa’t balitang aking natatanggap. Sa sobrang dami na ng aking nakita’t nabasa’t narinig, akala ko naiintindihan ko na ang mga suliranin sa isyu ng separatismo at kung bakit hindi na talaga makaahon sa isteryotipo ng kaguluhan ang Muslim Mindanao. Pero sabi nga ni Socrates: “sa mga sandaling akala mo’y alam mo na ang lahat ay doon ka walang alam, at sa sandaling aminin mong wala kang alam ay doon ka makakaunawa.” Alam na nating ang mga suliranin sa Muslim Mindanao ay historikal, institusyonalisado at kaakibat na ng kultura ng represyon sa mga Moro sa loob ng mahigit 500 taon. Nguni’t ang hindi natin alam (o marahil ayaw aminin at harapin) ay ang katotohanang ang mismong pamumuhay na ating ipinagmamalaki sa ating mga kalunsuran, sa rehiyon ng kabisera, ang Metro Manila, ang siya mismong sanhi ng mga kaguluhang ito, at kung bakit hindi magiging madali kahit pa sa loob ng sampung salinlahi ang ibigkis muli ang Mindanao sa ating pagtatayo ng isang tunay na matibay na estado.


Salamat sa Imperyong Maynila

Naniniwala akong lahat tayo ay biktima ng nakaraan. Pinatunayan na ng kasaysaysan na kasalanan ng imperyalistang Estados Unidos mula pa noong panahon ng kolonisasyon na malaking pagkakamaling ipilit ang integrasyon ng Mindanao sa binubuong bansang-estado (nation-state) sa pamamagitan ng migrasyon na itinadhana ng Homestead Act. Naniniwala pa rin akong napakahirap sa mga taga-Mindanao ang sumunod sa mga patakarang itinatatag ng isang pamahalaang nakasentro lamang sa Maynila at sa mga iilang naghaharing-uri, lalo’t hawak sila sa leeg ng mga naghaharing-uring ito. Hindi madaling ituro na kasalanan lamang ng mga hari-hariang ito ang kasalukuyang kalagayan: napakahina rin naman kasi ng pagnanasa natin na piliing isatinig ang mga hinaing ng mga hindi makapagsalita. Walang ibang paglalabasan ng mga hinaing ang mga taga-Maguindanao. Kinakailangan, sa mga ganitong pagkakataon ang ating kahandaang sundin ang payo ni Karl Marx: “ang proletaryo ay sa gayon hindi maigigiit ang kanilang interés pang-uri sa kanilang sariling pangalan, maging sa parliyamento o isang pagpupulong. Hindi nila maisasakatawan ang kanilang mga sarili, kailangan silang katawanin.”

Napakasaklap na kahit galit ang mass media sa kawalang-katarungang ito, nakakayamot pa rin ang kanilang paimbabaw na pagtanaw sa naganap na mga patayan. Mayroong tila baga maalab na pagnanasa ang media na ipaalam sa mga manonood at patron ang katotohanan sa likod ng mga detalye, pero sa totoo lang may nararamdaman akong pagkakalas sa kanilang mga tinig, isang obhetibong etika na matagal nang iwinaksi ng mga progresibong pahayagan. Hindi ko alam kung sadya lamang nanlulumo si Ted Failon noong umaga ng Nobyembre 25 sa kanyang palabas sa DZMM, pero hindi maganda ang dating sa akin ng sinabi niyang “kung magpapatayan kayong mga magkakalabang pamilya puwede ba kayo na lang? Hindi may nadadamay pang iba!” Totoo, tama naman na hindi makatarungang idamay ang ibang tao sa gulo ng may gulo, lalo na kung pinili na ng mga ito na huwag makisali sa mga ganitong gulo. Pero, tandaan natin na ang usapin ng patayan sa Maguindanao ay isang usaping pampubliko. Hindi tayo basta-basta lamang pwedeng sumaisantabi at sabihing karapatan nating hindi makialam. Hindi naman sa ating ipinapalubog ang ating sarili sa blob of the We na kinokondena ni Ayn Rand, pero ang ganitong usapin ay hindi isang bagay na dapat piliin nating huwag magakaroon ng sasabihin o pananagutan.


Hindi Na Ito Usapin ng Paradigm Shift

Kababawan at kamangmangan ang sabihing ang patayan sa Maguindanao ay bunga ng relihiyosong konserbatismo o panatisismo ng Islam sa Muslim Mindanao. Sa katotohanan, ni hindi nga Muslim ang mga kamay na nagpakilos sa mga Ampatuan at kanilang mga tao upang gawin ang hindi kayang ilarawan ng mahihina ang puso. Tandaan muli natin na nananatili ang konsepto ng strong man sa ating kamalayan dahil isa ito sa mga pinanghahawakan ng ilan sa ating mga teknokrata’t burukrata na konsepto ng Asian-style democracy mula sa dating Punong Ministro ng Singapore Lee Kuan Yew, kung saan ang awtoritaryanismo ay mahalaga. Nguni’t tandaang ang Singapore ay lubog sa paggawa ng isang haka-hakang kasaysayan kahit sa katotohanan isa lamang itong kalas na lungsod ng Malaysia, kaya’t hindi nararapat na paghulmahan ng mga pananaw-Pilipino sa pamamahala.

Nguni’t higit pa roon, nariyan din ang pagnanais ng mga naghaharing-uri na bigyan ng historikal na lehitimasyon ang kanilang kapangyarihan, kahit wala na sa pinanghahawakang ideyal ng estado. Soberanyang kapangyarihan na walang-likat at mapaghiganti ang namamayani sa ating mga lalawigang hindi makontrol nang epektibo ng pambansang kapangyarihan gamit ang Sandatahang Lakas o ng Pambansang Kapulisan. Kaya may basbas ng estado ang mga strong man na kagaya ng mga Marcos at Crisologo ng Ilocos, ang mga Remulla ng Cavite, si Hagedorn ng Palawan, ang mga Lobregat ng Zamboanga, si Rodrigo Duterte ng Davao, at una pa sa mga Ampatuan, si Ali Dimaporo ng Maguindanao. Kapag nakasalalay na sa mga mersenaryo ang pagpapanatili ng “kaayusan” sa estado, hindi ka na magtataka kung bakit supot at walang pangil ang estadong hawakan at parusahan sila sa pangambang iwan sila ng mga ito, at mapunta ang mga botong kinikikil nila sa mga mamamayan sa kanilang mga kalaban.

At sino nga ba ang mga Ampatuan upang kanilang pangahasang gawin ito? Tandaang sina Andal Ampatuan Sr., at ang kanyang mga anak na sina Zaldy at Andal Jr. (na siyang itinuturong mastermind) ay itinuring ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo na kanyang pinakamatibay na kakampi sa Timog. Karugtong na nito ang mga pangalang Virgilio Garcellano at Lintang Bedol, na kung naaalala pa natin ay ang mga komisyoner ng COMELEC sa Maguindanao na naging sentro ng mga pandaraya: ang una sa halalang pampanguluhan noong 2004, at ang huli sa pinagtatalunang upuan sa Senado nina Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III at ng naluklok na si Miguel Zubiri noong 2007. Makikita ang pagkiling ng administrasyong ito sa maraming aspeto, at ang pamamaslang na ito (na iginigiit ng mga tagapagsalita sa Malacañang na nararapat paraanin muna sa due process) ay hindi na natin inaasahang ikokondena ng Malacañang. Anupaman ang sabihin, sisikapin nilang palusutin ito.


Isipan at Pagkilos

Ayokong manisi sa mga ganitong pagkakataon ng pighati sa aking mga kababayang nananatili pa rin sa kanilang mga patetiko’t walang kuwentang buhay at pinipiling maglagalag na lamang sa Facebook, Plurk (kagaya ko, alam ko) at kung ano pang mga pansariling kapakanan nila. Gusto ko pa ring maniwalang sila ay mga biktima at preso lamang ng isang kapitalista’t disiplinaryong lipunan na walang-patumanggang nililinlang sila na ayos lamang ang manatiling walang ginagawa.

Pero nais ko lamang magtanong: kailangan pa bang maipit ka sa panahon ng kagipitan para lamang makalubog sa karanasan ng mga inaapi? Bakit nga ba napakareaksyunaryo lamang ng ating mga pagkilos sa mga komunidad at hindi progresibo, na makakalimutan din pagkatapos ng ilang linggo kagaya ng ipinagmamalaki nating pagtulong sa mga nasalanta ng mga sunud-sunod na bagyong Ondoy at Pepeng? Naniniwala akong ang pagsusumikap ng ating mga kabahagi sa pagbabanyuhay ay sapat na dapat upang gawing masikhay sa pagkilos ang sampung salinlahi. Nguni’t ang nakikita natin ngayon ay isang kabataang lubog sa mga pagnanasa at unti-unting pinipiling wasakin ang kanyang sarili, habang ang mundong kanyang ginagalawan ay patungo rin sa pagkawasak sa pamamayani ng mga halimaw at ganid sa parang.

Minsang ibinahagi sa akin ng mga kasama sa Agham Politikal: ang kawalang-kapangyarihan ang bagong kawalang-pakialam (“disempowerment is the new apathy”). Hindi ako naniniwala sa anumang estadistika, dito man o sa ibang bansa, na magsasabing ang Pilipinas ay maraming demokratikong institusyon, sapagka’t kung totoo iyon hindi masasaling kahit isang buhok ng mga napaslang sa Maguindanao. Hindi ko naman maimungkahi na magtuon tayo lahat ng ating pagkilos sa mga rally, vigil at iba pang aktibidad ng civil society dahil higit sa lahat, ang usapin natin ay hindi ang mga mamamayan kundi ang pagiging kriminal ng isang administrasyon na nagkakanlong sa mga naghaharing-uri na takasan ang kanilang historikal responsibilidad sa angaw-angaw na salinlahi ng mga inapi. Kaya kung aking tatanungin ang tanong ni Vladimir Lenin at Andres Bonifacio, “ano ang dapat gawin?” hindi rin ako makapagbigay ng pangmatagalang kalutasan.

Nguni’t naririyan ang pag-asa. May magagawa kahit papaano ang sinuman para manatili sa ating kamalayan bilang bansa ang trahedyang ito at mapigilan nating huwag nating maulit ito. Sulatan niyo ang inyong mga kinatawan sa pamahalaang lokal at kahit na sa walang-silbing Kapulungan ng mga Kinatawan upang yanigin sila, at makita nila, na hindi kulong sa mga sulok ng Metro Manila ang konsepto ng pagkamamamayang Pilipino. Magsulat kayo. Magbasa ng diyaryo o ng mga balita sa internet. Harapin na natin ang pangit na katotohanan at hayaang masunog sa ating mga isipan ang mga larawan ng mga winasak na katawan at ginahasang mga pagkatao ng 57 mga biktima. Walang pagbabanyuhay na madali, pulido at malinis; lagi itong maligalig. At sa panahon ng ligalig, isang kasalanan ang manatiling nakatanga’t walang ginagawang pinag-isipan.

Pinakamabigat ang kasalanan ng mga Ampatuan. Mabigat ang irresponsibilidad ng kasalukuyang administrasyon. Nguni’t hindi natin dapat kalimutan na tayo ay may kinalaman at kasalanan, sa ating kawalang-pagkilos sa pananatili ng mga institusyong walang katarungan.

A CRITICAL ANNOTATION OF Resolution No. 20091103 of the Sanggunian

by Hansley A. Juliano

A brief review of the resolution, its totalitarian (therefore anti-democratic) nature and why it is not a just mode of action to express citizenship

The Sanggunian ng mga Mag-Aaral ng Pamantasang Ateneo de Manila has recently released Resolution No. 20091103 which purportedly calls “ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE SANGGUNIAN NG MGA MAG-AARAL TO INTROSPECT ON INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENTS FOR THE 2010 NATIONAL ELECTIONS.” At face value it would appear as a manifesto to uphold democratic participation, but a closer look would show that it is a quite problematic, even immature, statement of the Atenean’s perception regarding political participation. We quote in length from the manifesto:

3. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian as an institution, in recognizing the rightful and vital role of the Filipino youth in national efforts to advance and preserve freedom, democracy, human rights, national dignity and interest, social justice, unity, peace, and development in Philippine society, has the responsibility to raise the Ateneo student body’s critical awareness of and proactive response to issues and their root causes affecting the life of the nation and the Filipino people,

4. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian, as an institution, has the purpose of helping foster the social, political, cultural, and spiritual life of students; develop a University spirit and work for effective student participation in its activities; and to serve as the official coordinating channel of the students to democratic institutions,

5. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian, as an institution, took on the role of being at the forefront of Ateneo Task Force 2010 (ATF 2010) and upholds as one of its foremost ideals integrity, must remain committed to such,

6. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian, as part of its commitment to ATF 2010, continues to participate in the successive segments of Voters’ Registration, Voters’ Education, Voters’ Mobilization and Accountability Efforts and Engaged Citizenship.

The train of the Resolution already shows a decidedly suffrage-centric train. It appears as if the Ateneans’ collective understanding of social participation is already in its pinnacle manifestation with a focus for electoral participation. Yet the informal and the minute historical, cultural and ethical perspectives of most Ateneans, one that is not written down but seen in the text of their bodies, minds and values, shows a persistent fetish for private satisfaction, shying away from public participation. It is situated as such that any movement for social involvement, even including the programs of the Office for Social Concern and Involvement, only appears as mere apologetic moves, palliatives harking back the image of Pontius Pilates.

7. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian, as an institution, believes that to build the Filipino nation concretely includes engaging its democratic institutions by practicing the right to suffrage,

8. WHEREAS, the Sanggunian, as an institution, believes that commitments of the institution must be upheld by all units of this one body,

9. WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Sanggunian as an institution appeals to all its duly elected officials to reflect upon their commitment to the founding principles of the student council,

10. WHEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Sanggunian as an institution appeals to all its duly elected officials to recognize the greater cause enshrined in its constitution and to protect its integrity and commitment it adheres to,

These statements are pregnant with the exclusivist nature the Sanggu has been accused of possessing for a long time and what its past administration under Mr. Omar Castañar (AB DS 2009) has sought to do away with. It must remember that as per its name, and as mentioned above in paragraphs 3-4, its responsibility for formation is not only with regards to its officials but also to its constituents, the Ateneans themselves. There should be no presumptions of its leaders’ beliefs trickling down to the student body immediately, seeing how most of the Sanggunian’s movements are not at all reflective of the ideals of Ateneans themselves. In espousing a stance without exhorting Ateneans to hold them as well in a more intrusive and polarizing manner, we could not expect to make the student body affirm those they have supposedly elected to represent: a governing body who thinks making students eat canned goods is ideal to make them more receptive to public participation.

But what could be stated as, decidedly, anti-political, IS THIS:

11. WHEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Sanggunian as an institution does not in any way pass judgment on its duly elected members who have not registered in the national elections but seeks to be a co-formator to its constituents by providing an opportunity for personal discernment and personal action,

12. WHEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Sanggunian as an institution upon immersed reflection, with open, honest, transparent dialogue, calls all its duly elected officials who have not registered for the 2010 Philippine national elections to consider tending their resignation,

This statement is a fatal, totalizing statement unworthy of a call regarding a promotion of democratic participation and action. It appears as if elections are the sum total of political participation and thus it is only the salvific point of democratic responsibility. John Stuart Mill has stated it impeccably in his Representative Government: “The pure idea of democracy, according to its definition, is the government of the whole people by the whole people, equally represented. Democracy as commonly conceived and hitherto practised is the government of the whole people by a mere majority of the people, exclusively represented. The former is synonymous with the equality of all citizens; the latter, strangely confounded with it, is a government of privilege, in favour of the numerical majority, who alone possess practically any voice in the State. This is the inevitable consequence of the manner in which the votes are now taken, to the complete disfranchisement of minorities.” In thinking that elections alone would become the lifeboat which will keep the practice of citizenship afloat, we are actually disenfranchising the responsibility to citizenship altogether.

This idea is precisely what the great thinkers of antiquity have strove to prevent by stressing that the good life is the political life: one that encompasses ethics, virtues and manner of living. Democratic activity is not summed up in the ballot or in the ostrakon, but in manifesting their responsibilities and respecting the laws of the land that are in accordance with the Constitution.

In singling out electoral participation as the end-all and be-all of citizenship, one would be falling to the fatal mistake of actually believing that it is only the vote that makes public life worthy. It is as problematic as the Hobbesian perception that only the sovereign (or for that matter, the “tyranny of the majority”) is the one responsible for the endless structuring of the state, decidedly excluding the voices that have been for so long “sub-alterned” by the repressive remnant systems of the Philippine garrison state. We cannot, in democratic and good faith, support such a resolution forcing our representatives in the Sanggunian to renounce their responsibilities as guides of the student body, their problematic understanding of political participation nonetheless, for it would be more destabilizing to the Ateneans’ ability to reflect their aspirations and their desire for legitimate reform and revolutionary means of practicing and living out their responsibility as Catholics, as Filipinos, and as Ateneans.

Sapagka't Si Gary Valenciano (yata) Ang Umawit ng Pambansang Awit Natin

Ginising ako ng umagang ito ng isang malupit, nakakabuwisit at, puwede ba nating sabihin, NAKAKAPAGPAULAN NG NAGBABAGA'T NAKALALASONG PUTANG-INANG headline.

Estrada: I can run again for president

Says plan backed by ‘legal study’

Hindi ko maunawaan kung paano mo sasabihing isang "legal study" ang iyong sinasabi kung hindi mo masabi (isa ka pa Burak Jojobama!) kung saang pambalot ng tinapa (paumanhin sa mga tagagawa ng pambalot ng tinapa at mga tabloid) mo nakuha ang interpretasyon mo ng probisyon ng Saligang-Batas ukol dito. Pinagtatalunan sa isyung ito ang mga probisyong ito:

a. The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date, six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.

b. No Vice-President shall serve for more than two successive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for the full term for which he was elected. (emphasis mine).

- Section 4, Article VII, 1987 Philippine Constitution

Sino ang nagsabing mga "legal luminaries" na pupuwede? Batay sa pagbabanggit ni P. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., Dean Emeritus ng Paaralan ng Abugasya ng Pamantasang Ateneo de Manila, na ang BULUGANG ito (bastos pakinggan oo, pero hindi ko magawang dulutan siya ng kahit kaunting paggalang) ay nagdulot bago siya magbitiw ng isang kartang nagbabanggit na siya ay "nagbitiw" na sa tungkulin. Sa pagbabanggit na ito ng Saligang-Batas, hindi maaaring ituring na pagkaantala ng tungkulin ang pagbibitiw. May mga mangmang na mangangahas sabihing dahil ito'y kabahagi ng Subsection 4.b ay para lamang ito sa mga Bise-Presidente, pero iniiwan ko na ang usaping ito sa mga lumikha mismo ng Saligang-Batas.

Ano nga ba ang aasahan mo sa mga ganitong usapin. ng lehitimasyon at legalidad.. Kung minsan tuloy hindi ko mapigilang tumawang mapait sa sinabi ni Padre Fernandez:

To stamp out a small evil, there are dictated many laws that cause greater evils still: 'corruptissima in republica plurimae leges,' said Tacitus. To prevent one case of fraud, there are provided a million and a half preventive or humiliating regulations, which produce the immediate effect of awakening in the public the desire to elude and mock such regulations. To make a people criminal, there's nothing more needed than to doubt its virtue. Enact a law, not only here, but even in Spain, and you will see how the means of evading it will be sought, and this is for the very reason that the legislators have overlooked the fact that the more an object is hidden, the more a sight of it is desired. Why are rascality and astuteness regarded as great qualities in the Spanish people, when there is no other so noble, so proud, so chivalrous as it? Because our legislators, with the best intentions, have doubted its nobility, wounded its pride, challenged its chivalry! Do you wish to open in Spain a road among the rocks? Then place there an imperative notice forbidding the passage, and the people, in order to protest against the order, will leave the highway to clamber over the rocks. The day on which some legislator in Spain forbids virtue and commands vice, then all will become virtuous!

- Padre Fernandez, The Reign of Greed (El Filibusterismo), Jose Rizal (translated by Charles Derbyshire).

Tilang tamang-tama naman yata ngayon na sa klase namin sa EC 102 sa ilalim ni G. Greg Orara ay pinagsisikapan namin ang pag-uunawa sa pandaigdigang kalakalan. Mga ulit na niyang pinanindigan na dala na rin ng sistemang patron o "bata-bata" na pinalaganap ng bulugang ito ay hindi ka nga magtataka na lalo lamang naipon ang salapi ng bansa na dapat ay umiikot. Kaya nga hindi ko pipigilan ang mga magsasabi ng "NEVER AGAIN!!" Dito mo nakikita kung paanong kahit na mas kahila-hilakbot at kasuklam-suklam ang naging mga kasalanan ni Gloria Arroyo, hindi mo rin masasabing naging mas maayos ang nakaraang mga taon kung natapos niya ang termino niya (salamat at kinahabagan tayo ng ating mga sarili).

Mas lalong tagos rin na sa araw na ito ay pinag-usapan namin sa Hi 165 kay Dr. Ambeth Ocampo ang "unang dayaan sa eleksyon" sa Kapulungan ng Tejeros, na nagwakas sa kamatayan ni Supremo Andres Bonifacio. Bagaman sa usapang ito ay maraming kalokohang usapin (lalo na yaong pinakakalat ng mga bangag na historyador Marxista), isa pa rin itong klasikong usapin ng ating matatawag na sakit ng makasaysayang pagkalimot (historical amnesia).

Hindi natin mapansin-pansin na ilang ulit na tayong kumakanta ng

Isang ngiti mo lang
At ako'y napapaamo
Yakapin mong minsan
Ay muling magbabalik sa'yo
Na walang kalaban-laban...

habang kinakalnatari't pinagmumukhang tanga ng neoliberal demokratikong sistemang ito habang ang dapat naman talaga nating inaawit ay

Walang ibang maasahang Bathala o manunubos,
Kaya ang ating kaligtasa'y nasa ating pagkilos.
Manggagawa, bawiin ang yaman, kaisipa'y palayain.
Ang maso ay ating hawakan, kinabukasa'y pandayin.