Nationality means nothing

In several FV posts, benign0 has been asking a very difficult question:  What does the “Filipino” stand for? Quite predictably – and prolly because of who asked the question rather than because of the question itself – the horde replied quite emotionally.

It’s actually a very simple question with a very simple answer: Filipino stands for parochial.

Parochial means - insular: narrowly restricted in outlook or scope; being provincial, being narrow in scope, or considering only small sections of an issue; narrow-minded. Ever heard a more concise description of a Filipino?

Flag-wavers of every stripe will of course complain. Not a few will trot out examples of ‘global Filipinos’ or some such bullshit. But, puh-leeze. To every general rule, there is an exception; and if you try to find a definition that will include even the exceptions, you’re gonna be looking for a very long time.

Filed under: Filipino , Filipino

Audio/Video

AUDIO

A tip o’ the beret to LaTtEX for this ‘un. Gary Granada takes on GMA Kapuso Foundation for using his revisions to their lyrics (for a jingle he was commissioned to compose) without attribution – and here’s the kicker – using an audio-cast! Pure public relations genius, that! On one level, you’d think that the choice of medium – new media – was prolly a no-brainer. Granada was talking about music and lyrical composition after all, and it packs a helluva lot more punch to have the audience actually hear the claimed IP klepto-ing than to just say “I wuz robbed!” But on a PR level, Granada got his side out first, and did it in a way that puts GMA on the defensive in a really bad way. For one thing, Granada’s tone was calm and even throughout – not hysterical in the slightest. That alone clues you in that this is serious. But not so serious that he doesn’t joke a little. The touch of humor tells you that he isn’t desperate for sympathy – and by extension, that he’s not desperate for allies and is not out to raise a jihad. Like a general closely following Sun-Tzu’s play, Granada has chosen his battleground, and has clearly chosen it well. GMA is now on a slippery slope that it will, perforce, have to try to defend using legalese. In a country positively exhausted with the concept of “legally-right even if morally-questionable,” good luck with that

!

SIDEBAR: My quick and dirty analysis of the situation: Granada isn’t claiming that GMA used his music. What he claims is that GMA used his revisions of the lyrics – original copy was given to him and he tweaked it to fit the music he wrote – and set it to someone else’s music. According to Granada, the industry practice is that if the client isn’t happy with the work and decides to give it to someone else, then the client ought to give the new artist the original copy and let that new guy tweak it himself. GMA, according to Granada didn’t do that. Instead, GMA gave the new artist the lyrics as tweaked by Granada. Granada in effect says that the tweaking he did constitutes intellectual property, and that the use of his tweaked lyrics sans attribution is, at the very least, objectionable. I haven’t read GMA’s reply, but from what Granada himself quoted, it seems that GMA’s tack has been to claim that the tweaking of the lyrics was a ‘group effort.’ Granada admits that at least some of the changes were made during a pow-wow with GMA’s creatives – where presumably he suggested a few changes that the creatives agreed with. But he takes exception that that made it a group effort. At this point in the audiocast, Granada attempts to distinguish a song-writer from a copy-writer. Listen to the ‘cast and come to your own conclusions of course, but Granada’s distinctions seemed logical if a bit fuzzy. He basically says that adapting written copy – essentially a kind of poetic prose – to fit a song is something that only a song-writer can do; and that even if a song-writer does the tweaking in the company of a group of copy-writers who eventually agree, that still cannot qualify as group-writing. Group-writing to me implies that there was cooperative give and take; that it wasn’t Granada alone who made the changes but that some of the changes were proposed by the copyists. GMA may be implying that this is exactly how it went down, and Granda himself does not clearly refute this. He only sez that it’s ridiculous to call it a group effort. Like I said, fuzzy. Also: It is important to note that GMA has already telegraphed it’s potential defense that Granda’s tweaking was too minor to transform the original lyrics – copyright owned by GMA obviously – into a new work whose copyright belongs to Granada. But then again, even if the tweaks were major enough to create a new work out of the old, looking at the situation from an IP p-o-v, it is fairly safe to say that even tho’ the person who commissions the work does not necessarily own the copyright, he will usually have the right to use the work for the purpose for which the work was commissioned. And if GMA actually paid Granada for his work, you can imagine that it’ll be even easier to assume that GMA did have the right to use the work for their ad. On the other hand, the creator – Granada (assuming that the tweaked lyrics can be considered a new original) – also has the moral right to attribution. Now he can take action if the work is attributed to someone else, but does he have an actionable right if there was no attribution at all? Again, with only Granada’s ‘cast to go by, still pretty fuzzy. You can bet everything you own that this will be GMA’s playground if this tiff with Granada gets any bigger.

Over-all, even if GMA does prove that it owes Granada nothing, it will still come off as the bad-guy in this story. And for that, Granada has to be thankful to the power of new media. Me, I’m inclined to go with the moral aspect – the moral obligation of GMA to attribute at least some of the work to Granada. Besides, having Granada’s name attached to the project can only bring greater goodwill. Ironic that GMA apparently ignored that truth. VIDEO Hat tip to TSD for this one: Apparently, some people are starting to grumble about this ad, complaining about how it portrays Filipinos as ‘hungry’ and prone to violence. The prone to violence aspect is obvious. As for the ‘hungry,’ that can only make sense in the original tagalog idiom: patay-gutom. A better translation for that would be ‘greedy’ I guess. Or ‘greedy-guts.’ Whatevs. You get the point. Course, I would be happier if the guy who broke the mirror weren’t Filipino. But since he is, I have to wonder: so the fuck what? On another note, doesn’t the Skittles guy look familiar?

Filed under: Filipino, blogging, international, pop-culture , gary granada, gma kapuso foundation, new media, skittles

Wrong on so many levels

Like everyone else, I was really stoked to find out that Charice Pempengco, that little girl with the big growling voice, was going to sing at one of the pre-inaugural balls for the new American President.

At least I was until I found out what she was going to sing.

The kid is singing God Bless America. Now that is just so wrong on so many levels.

God Bless America, 
Land that I love. 
Stand beside her, and guide her 
Thru the night with a light from above. 
From the mountains, to the prairies, 
To the oceans, white with foam 
God bless America, My home sweet home.

While we must of course avoid being too literal minded about songs and such, the fact remains that this is not an ordinary song. As far as anthems go, God Bless America is right up there with the Star-Spangled Banner and Hail to the Chief. 

It’s a song that is so steeped in American tradition and sentiment that, one would think, it is a song that only an American should sing. Or a foreigner wanting to become an American.

After all, what is she supposed to sing? God Bless America, land that you love,  your home sweet home?

Filed under: Filipino, fandom, pop-culture, society, vacuity , Barack Obama, Charice, Charice Pempengco, inauguration

benign0 answers

Read B.A.D., then this.

Go ahead.

I’ll wait …

nuninuninuni … oh. you’re back. Good.

Here’ what benign0 wrote:

 

smoke, thanks for the interest in my piece. I have a response to it that can be summarised in two words:

Filipino Chinese.

- 

 

The link to Filipino Chinese goes to benign0’s homepage. Here’s what it says:

 

We don’t have to look too far to find cultural success stories. Right under our noses, the Filipino-Chinese community had gone from Third Class Citizenry to Captains of Industry. Although this phenomenon is by no means unique to the Philippines, we like other Third World cultures, have been on the front row to a self-development show that we have slept through for centuries. And during our waking hours, we as a people focused our efforts on mediocre and corrupt politicking and self-pity activism.

So how does one explain an ethnic underclass that succeeds in hurdling prejudice, poverty, and cultural isolation to turn their ghettoes into today’s prime real estate while the indigenous people bred chaos, mutual oppression, and decay? In this light, any kind of excuse is invalidated. Bad governance and lack of education are the top scapegoats, for example. They simply beg the question: the Chinese community was with us through countless corrupt and inept administrations, they had to register their businesses in the same public offices, and they paid taxes to the same government. Furthermore, they landed on our shores, speaking not a word of English or Tagalog. Now, their volunteer fire brigade is far more reliable (and honest) than the government-run force.

Enough books and studies have been made on Chinese culture to help anyone figure out why things are this way. This does not mean, that we have to undertake a massive effort to analyse Philippine culture to figure out how we move forward from here. The bottom line is that the Chinese community in the Philippines is a shining example of the precept that we, as a people, have not worked hard enough at overcoming obstacles to development. 

Can it get any simpler than that?

 

There is no denying that the Filipino Chinese represent a tremendous success story (and my dad would kill me if I disagreed anyway! LOL!). However, the question really is, can the success of that relatively small – and fiercely self-contained – community be emulated by an entire country? 

Let’s take one ingredient of FilChi success, for instance: self-containment. 

The FilChi community is an incestuous little bunch that – during their rising years – was nearly impossible for outsiders to penetrate. As a result, their culture remained isolated from others and their mores – as well as their business gumption – got passed on to their inheritors with very little degradation. 

Just as importantly, this self-containment pretty much assured that the money never strayed too far from the community. If Ji Wen Ja, f’rinstance, needed bearings for his manufacturing business, he wouldn’t dream of going to Joe Smith. He’d much rather go to Li Fang, even though Li Fang’s product might not be as good as Smith’s. Now this kind of arrangement made it possible for the FilChi to engage in predatory pricing, which basically cut the legs out from under his not-chinese competitors. And of course, after several decades of that, is it any surprising that they’ve risen to the top.

Parenthetically, this was also – in several parts of Europe anyway, particularly pre-Nazi Germany – the model of Jewish prosperity. Like the Chinese, European Jews were pretty self-contained, treating outsiders as mere consumers. Which calls to mind another of bening0’s assertions: that the Chinese were an ethnic underclass.

Being an ‘underclass’ seems to me to be a matter of perception. The Chinese, and the Jews, were derided as mere merchants. But did they care? They were rolling in money. Who cared if the stupid consumers thought little of them? Officially, then, they may have been an underclass. But in many of the ways that mattered, they were far better off than the people who needed official labels to feel good about themselves.

And this kind of phenom isn’t extinct either. Many of us today are still surprised to see street vendors along Ilaya in Divisoria getting picked up by luxury vans. The surprise is a direct result of our impression – whether we acknowledge it or not – that these street vendors are a kind of ‘underclass.’ While we talk to them condescendingly; while we snigger at getting them to knock 100% off of their asking price; and while we go home to our dinky little houses, they’re laughing at us all the way to their homes in White Plains. 

Another thing that made the FilChi rise to the top possible – inevitable even – was the fact that for a long time, competition in the general marketplace from not-chinese businesses was virtually non-existent. That virtual monopoly might even have pre-dated the Spanish colonization. And during Spanish times, Europeans brought in their wares, of course, but mostly for other Europeans as well, totally inaccessible to the masses. The Chinese had a corner on the masses. So is it surprising that they’re on top now? Hardly. 

Now, as benign0 would have us do, compare that with the native Filipino. When the Chinese already had an entire business district named after them, the Filipinos were not even allowed to think of themselves as a nation. With a headstart like that, what would be surprising is if the FilChi didn’t end up on top.

All told, I don’t want to trivialize the role of culture in FilChi success. But even benign0 has to admit that it wasn’t just culture. It was also that the FilChi have been doing business longer than Filipinos have had the freedom to even call themselves a nation; it was also that the FilChi have a strong sense of identity – allowing the phenom of self-containment – which FIlipinos have been denied; and it was also that the FilCHi community is not exactly a country – it’s not even a democracy. 

Now, the question is, is your typical Filipino standing on equal footing as the FilChi such that a valid comparison can be made between the two? 

That should be simple question to answer.

Filed under: Filipino, society , Filipino Chinese, poverty

B.A.D.

Seriously. People should really think abut renaming the Blog Action Day, if only to avoid the lousy acronym. 

….

Over at FV, benign0 has made something of a slogan of “It’s simple, really.” And sometimes, reading his posts, I have to wonder whether he means ’simple’ as in ‘not complicated,’ or ’simple’ as in ‘retarded.’

In the case of benign0’s poverty post, I daresay it’s the second one. Poverty is never a simple issue andhis textual equation (as he calls it) is a canard. He writes:

Poverty in the Philippines is a simple issue to me as it comes down to this simple textual equation:

We locked ourselves into commitments beyond any inherent ability in us to honour them.

It’s a self-evident formula that is applicable across four inescapable parameters around which our utter failure to prosper as a society can be quantified in black-and-white in a balanced scorecard:

 Population
 Consumption

 Production
 Capital

The first two, population and consumption, are relevant to the first part of the sentence, and the latter two are relevant to the second part. We laughed our way through the first two, and muddled along the latter two.

Result: POVERTY on a grand national scale.

One gets the feeling that benign0 spends the better part of everyday sitting around trying to reduce everything into pseudo-koans like that. That simplistic (in the sense of uncomplicated) reasoning is pretty attractive because it seems to put the whole problem comfortably into a nutshell. But hell. Any reasoning that fits in a nutshell belongs there. 

First off, benign0’s pseudo-koan totally ignores the fact that there are many factors that bring about poverty – especially on a ‘grand national scale’ – apart from the four he mentioned. Sure we’re over-populated, and yeah, the vast majority of Filipinos live beyond their means, but these two factors alone do not sum up the reasons why there is widespread poverty, that is to say – contrary to benign0’s sweeping generalization – Filipinos are not the only ones to blame for the widespread poverty we have now.  In fact, I would go further to say that with all these handicaps, even if the entire nation woke up one morning fitting benign0’s conception of what the perfect Filipino should be, we still wouldn’t be able to get out this quagmire within his lifetime.

Lest anyone forget, we Filipinos were doing relatively ok until the dictatorship ravaged us and left us saddled with a ginormous debt. Granted debt servicing should never have been made automatic, but the mere fact that the lion’s share of the budget goes to paying off those Marcos-era debts simply means that there’s just too little money to go around to adequately address poverty. Can you imagine just how awash in cash we would be if, for one year, we didn’t service our debts?

Can this be part of what benign0 meant when he wrote that we had ‘locked ourselves into committments …” Probably. But the thing is, even if we didn’t have autmatic debt servicing, we would still have pay our debts back. And since we started out with so much debt, it was inevitable that we would have to borrow more and more money, which really only aggravated our situation. And then too factors like the Asian financial crisis, Bush the first’s war in Iraq,  and Dubya’s war among other things have conspired to make it difficult for our country to rise above our woes.

But in his haste to pin everything on what he perceives to be the dysfunctional Filipino – hasn’t bening0 ignored all these things?

Secondly, benign0 insists that we ‘muddled along (production) and (capital). And just so we’re clear: benign0’s use of the word ‘muddled’ very clearly implies that mediocrity is what he actually means. 

Normally, I would not disagree. Most Filipinos are so besotted with small-time success that we often lose sight of the need to basically aim high. Worse, we are under the thumb of a Church that has so relentlessly pushed the message of nobility in poverty that we have entire generations lacking the motivation – the ambition – to rise beyond a certain level of comfort. And anyone who acts otherwise is often stigmatized as being too big for his britches or something similarly moronic. As a result, mediocrity is almost our default state. 

However, my disagreement with benign0 has to do with his assumption that these mediocre ones determine the fate of the nation. They do not. The prosperity of a nation ultimately lies in the hands of the ruling middle class. The people who, precisely because they are not mediocre, have managed to put up businesses that employ other people; and to end up in leadership positions where they are able to influence the growth and development of the nation. The problem with these people is, therefore, not so much mediocrity as corruption.

Our leaders, in general, are fairly competent. It’s just that they are so damned crooked. And their competence is channeled, not for the nation’s good, but for the purpose of making themselves rich. Their depradations are yet another factor that benign0 has chosen to ignore in favor of simplicity. 

I am familar with the argument that says corruption, if predictable, is not a hindrance to business. In fact, I subscribe to that belief. However, I would that for corruption to be an insignificant factor, it should not just be predicatable, it should also not be over-the-top. As one rather cynical businessman once told me, the government should strive for a 70-30 mix. 70 percent of their effort should go to serving the country; 30 percent should go to serving their own interests.

In more practical terms, it’s ok to take money from a supplier, for as long as the goods or services being supplied are not worthless. Our problem is that corrupt government usually doesn’t care how shitty the product or the service is as long as it gets its cut. That isn’t mediocrity. That’s blinding greed. And i don’t see that anywhere in benign0’s pseudo-koan.

And lastly, I take issue with benign0’s use of the word ‘inherent.’ It implies that Filipinos have some sort of limitation in terms of what we can achieve. This is bullshit. Our problem is not some glass ceiling. Our problem is that our leaders have not provided us with a ladder tall and sturdy enough to enable us to reach – and shatter – that glass ceiling. 

…

Poverty isn’t simple. Calling it simple … now that’s simple. And I don’t mean uncomplicated.

Filed under: Filipino, church and state, musings, politics, society , blog action day, poverty

youarenotninoy … still

A writer I respect deeply recently wrote of my previous post:

clearly the information is inadequate, therefore the concluson is flawed.

in fact ninoy was one of those “who stayed and lived their lives in constant danger of death”. he was not one of those who fled, like oppositionists heherson and manglapus and maceda a.k.a. “steak commandoes” in america demonstrating against the dictator and martial law from afar. ninoy did not flee to america, he was offered medical treatment in america when his heart began to fail after 7 years and 7 months in jail. and once he was well, he could think of nothing but the homeland and going home, even if it meant going back to his prison cell.

From the iamninoy website, however, we find this:

Ninoy was moved to the Philippine Heart Center, where he suffered another heart attack. Refusing to be treated at the Center for fear of threats on his life, he requested permission to go to the US for treatment or be brought back to his cell.

His request was granted and Ninoy was allowed to go to the US for surgery, together with his entire family. This was arranged after a secret hospital visit by Imelda Marcos. This “emergency leave” was set when Ninoy supposedly agreed to the First Lady’s 2 conditions: that if he leaves, he will return; and while in America, he should not speak out against the Marcos regime.

Ninoy was operated in Dallas, Texas and made a quick recovery. After which, he decided to renounce the agreement saying, “a pact with the devil is no pact at all”.

Note the internal struggle to deal with this awkward part of the mythos. In the second paragraph, the narrative says that Ninoy ’supposedly’ agreed to the Marcos’ terms. And yet, in the third paragraph, Ninoy himself repudiates the ‘pact.’ One does not repudiate a pact that does not exist.

Nevertheless, even after deciding that his agreement with Marcos was void,

He, Cory and their children started a new life in Massachusetts. He continued to work on two books and gave a series of lectures while on fellowship grants from Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His travels across the US had become opportunities for him to deliver speeches critical of the Marcos government.

Doesn’t that seem at all similar to what the respected writer wrote of manglapus et all?

… oppositionists heherson and manglapus and maceda a.k.a. “steak commandoes” in america demonstrating against the dictator and martial law from afar.

As for ‘being in constant danger of death,’ it’s well documented that Ninoy had profound respect for Marcos’ intellect, and that respect was returned in equal measure. It was a dance between the two, and both knew that neither would do anything to end the dance prematurely. Ninoy had a death sentence that was not carried out; and even with that, he was allowed to run for Congress. Despite imprisonment, I daresay Ninoy’s death at Marcos’ hands was a remote possibility at best. Not like the daily reality that it was for some people.

Ah. But one could argue he was merely waiting for the right time to return, as opposed to manglapus et al who may have been waiting simply for the marcoses to die off. And so, when did the idea of returning become irresistible to ninoy? Again, from the website:

For the next three years in self-imposed exile, Ninoy’s love for his country and countrymen did not diminish but only grew stronger. By beginning of 1983, he was determined to return especially after having heard of the declining political situation in the Philippines, as well as Marcos’ growing health risk due to lupus.

His original intention in coming home was to talk earnestly to Marcos and convince him to restore democracy through peaceful means. Though realizing that this may be futile, it did not stop him from wanting to return knowing that , “I will never be able to forgive myself if I did not at least try.”

Despite orders not to issue him a passport; threatening airlines that they will be denied landing rights if they fly him in; and threats of imprisonment and even death, Aquino persevered insisting that “If it’s my fate to die by an assassin’s bullet, so be it… the Filipino is worth dying for.”

Other accounts are less conflicted about Ninoy’s motivations, but the kernel of truth is there, despite attempts to gloss it over. Ninoy sensed his political opponent weakening, and knew that his time to return was approaching.

Now, looking at this situation without being overly-awed by Ninoy – and cognizant of the fact that Ninoy remained a consummate politician – it can be easily understood that his decision was a political gamble. If he stayed in the States and Marcos died, he would have no claim to power. But if he went home and lived, he would be the next president almost by default. Getting killed, therefore, was a calculated risk.

In fact, Ninoy spared no effort to tell the Philippines – and the world – that he was on his way home. He was, one could argue (if one were able to argue about this topic dispassionately) that Ninoy was setting up a grand homecoming. He knew that if he talked about it enough, there was a chance that Marcos would not have him killed. After all, what idiot would willingly play the role of murderer so craftily prepared by the victim himself? Unfortunately for Ninoy, the smart man he knew would never walk into his trap wasn’t totally in control. Morons were running the show, and morons tend to ignore even traps festooned with neon lights.

And besides, I never said Ninoy didn’t have a strong sense of destiny.

Next, my previous post was quoted thus:

Ninoy Aquino’s death didn’t free us.

We freed ourselves.

In fact, the EDSA revolution wasn’t even about Ninoy, was it? It was about Enrile and Ramos battling their way out of corners they’d found themselves painted into. It was Cardinal Sin who turned it into a Ninoy Aquino lovefest – and to great effect. The soldiers Enrile and Ramos were smart enough to recognize a tactical advantage and were quick to jump on the bandwagon.

What sets him apart from all his peers – people like Tanada and Salonga – is that his death happened at the right time and under the right circumstances that allowed it to be used by US as the seed of OUR revolution. The idea of him being killed by the dictator gave us the focal point we needed for our simmering discontent to boil over into massive mobilization. Except, of course, if Ninoy hadn’t died, he would have succeeded Marcos (prolly) and his feet would be touching the same base clay as Salonga and Tanada, and the discontent would have escaped into the atmosphere as nothing more than so much vented steam.”

This was followed by the question: “if EDSA were about ramos and enrile, why then did enrile not end up the president?”

What my post actually looked like was:

When he returned and died everyone rallied around him as a SYMBOL. And that’s what made him the hero he is today. As heroes go, he is being packaged as a kind of messianic figure – a secular Jesus almost – whose greatest contribution was that his death moved US to fight for our freedom.

Get that right.

Ninoy Aquino’s death didn’t free us.

We freed ourselves.

What sets him apart from all his peers – people like Tanada and Salonga – is that his death happened at the right time and under the right circumstances that allowed it to be used by US as the seed of OUR revolution. The idea of him being killed by the dictator gave us the focal point we needed for our simmering discontent to boil over into massive mobilization. Except, of course, if Ninoy hadn’t died, he would have succeeded Marcos (prolly) and his feet would be touching the same base clay as Salonga and Tanada, and the discontent would have escaped into the atmosphere as nothing more than so much vented steam.

In fact, the EDSA revolution wasn’t even about Ninoy, was it? It was about Enrile and Ramos battling their way out of corners they’d found themselves painted into. It was Cardinal Sin who turned it into a Ninoy Aquino lovefest – and to great effect. The soldiers Enrile and Ramos were smart enough to recognize a tactical advantage and were quick to jump on the bandwagon.

But when the smoke had cleared, the two soldiers parted ways: Enrile clandestinely sought to continue his coopted coup – making the Cory Administration the most coup-bedeviled regime; while Ramos embraced the new order and ended up President.

Notice how the last paragraph was inadvertently omitted? That last paragraph would have answered the enrile question. Enrile didn’t become president because his revolution was coopted; but his subsequent actions clearly indicated that he didn’t enjoy it. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that. When Cory had the people eating out of the palm of her hand, basking in the reflected glory of the Martyr, Enrile knew that it was pointless -possibly even fatal – for him to argue. So he went with the flow. Him and Ramos both. Only Enrile started counter-flowing, while Eddie simply let himself coast with the current. And that’s why Enrile didn’t end up as President.

And as for Ninoy being a humdinger of a President, well, who’s to say?

The Aztecs have a story about twin brothers who were commissioned to create stone calendars for a new temple. The competition was fierce between the brothers as each poured all his craft into the work. On the day of the unveiling, one brother went first. He revealed the Sun Stone, a stone calendar that exists to this day and is still hailed as a high point in Aztec culture.

The other brother’s work – which people called the Moon Stone – however, was lost in the deep lake surrounding Tenochtitlan, the capital city during transport. It was completely covered when i rolled off the causeway and disappeared beneath the waters. No one ever got a chance to see it.

Upon hearing this news, the first brother killed himself, knowing that his work would forever be considered inferior to his brother’s. Nothing tangible, he understood, would ever stand a chance of being better than something that would forever remain in the realm of people’s expectations.

Ninoy, I think, is our Moon Stone.

Filed under: Filipino, blogging, politics, pop-culture, society, stories , ninoy aquino

youarenotninoy

Now, his memory will be emblazoned on shirts sold by some popular local brands, on billboards along the capital’s major avenues, on television, in the newspapers and on the Internet.

That’s the iamninoy project in a nutshell: a merchandising campaign that prostitutes Ninoy Aquino’s image (euphemistically called his ‘memory’) in the same way that Che Guevarra’s handsome mug is now seen on everything from t-shirts to toilet seat covers (i kid you not!). Way to go spreading “the man’s spirit and values within pop culture.”

The “iamninoy” collectible merchandise—mostly clothes, eyewear and sports gear—will bear an image of Aquino’s eyeglasses as the campaign icon.

“The idea is to inspire young Filipinos to look at where we are now and what is it that we need to change in ourselves, so in the process we can change the country,” Raphael Lopa, executive director of the foundation, told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in an interview.

“It’s seeing the country in Ninoy’s eyes,” Lopa said.

I own a heath ledger-as-the-Joker t-shirt. I suppose “the man’s spirit and values” are ingrained in me now. Wait … why so serious, Mr. Lopa? LOL!

This moronic scheme, hatched by the Benigno Aquino Jr. Foundation, “ride(s) the buying trend of the young Filipinos of today.”

“Young people want to buy things [and] we thought that if they buy a Ninoy shirt, they may be inspired to claim ownership of his values and beliefs, his fight for freedom and justice,” Lopa said.

So, it’s not just a crass attempt at cashing in on Ninoy’s death, its also a way of promoting crass commercialism. As if having a Starbucks franchise within the school grounds of a high-school campus weren’t bad enough, we have to wrap consumerism in the flag and tell kids – a vast majority of whom spend money they haven’t earned – it’s ok to buy stuff because it might – MIGHT – inspire you to fight for freedom and justice. What stupidity is that?

ninoy is not bono

The “iamninoy” project was inspired by rock star and activist Bono, who launched “Project Red” in 2006 to fight HIV and AIDS in Africa, and bicycle racer Lance Armstrong for his “Livestrong” campaign to help people with cancer live healthy lives.

The two men partnered with several companies to offer products under their respective campaigns to raise funds for their causes.

Here’s where the Foundation started to screw up, thinking that Ninoy is Bono. Both the Red and Livestrong projects are fund raisers. These are attempts at creative capitalism where the consumerism of the haves is made somehow beneficial for the have-nots.

Believe it or not, people who buy Red products or those yellow baller IDs don’t really bother learning about AIDS or cancer. It is enough for them to know that a bit of their money went to some kid with HIV or to some cancer victim. It’s a frigging psychological comfort; a salve for the guilt that comes with the power to purchase.

But that isn’t the avowed purpose of the iamninoy project, is it?

Said Lopa: “With this campaign, we want the young people to see the country and [its] problems and create a full experience of having to make a very important choice, like what Ninoy did, [that may eventually change] the destiny of our country.”

IS the purchase of an iamninoy product supposed to make Ninoy more significant in your life? Are you going to look at your Ninoy t-shirt and go “what would ninoy do?” Is your Ninoy wristwatch going to make you more punctual? Or prevent you from slipping that hundred peso bill to the traffic cop who pulled you over for running the rd light because you were late for work? HAH! Not fucking likely.

Ninoy isn’t Bono; Ninoy isn’t Lance Armstrong; and even if you got every single fucking Ninoy collectible, you are not fucking going to be Ninoy.

Ninoy who?

In fact, who is Ninoy, and what makes him a hero?

Seriously.

What does Ninoy actually represent, other than that he was a victim of a dictator (just like hundreds of other public intellectuals, labor leaders, journalists, and so on)?

Kids today don’t know squat about him, or about what he did. His place in our pantheon of heroes was secured for him by the fact that he was assassinated. Prior to that, he was just one of the many who were victimized by the Marcoses. Fine, he was primus inter pares or something, but at the end of the day, I tend to admire more those who stayed and lived their lives in constant danger of death, rather than those who fled.

I mean, Joma is in the Netherlands, isn’t he? And don’t we all laugh at how he runs the communists here by remote control? Well, if you’re being honest about it, that was exactly what Ninoy’s exile was all about.In the meantime that he was gone, people at home were being harassed, hounded into the hills, and getting impoverished by the importunings of the dictator.

The only time he returned was when, according to him, he felt that the time was right to convince Marcos to hand over the reins of government to him in order to prevent the turmoil that would inevitably result when Marcos died and his lieutenants began fighting for their share of empire (kinda like how Alexander’s generals – Ptolemy and all the rest – carved up Alexander’s empire into smaller kingdoms). Sure he braved death, but at least part of that bravery was openly motivated by the will to power. Not very heroic that, eh?

Ah, but here’s the prestige.

When he returned and died everyone rallied around him as a SYMBOL. And that’s what made him the hero he is today. As heroes go, he is being packaged as a kind of messianic figure – a secular Jesus almost – whose greatest contribution was that his death moved US to fight for our freedom.

Get that right.

Ninoy Aquino’s death didn’t free us.

We freed ourselves.

What sets him apart from all his peers – people like Tanada and Salonga – is that his death happened at the right time and under the right circumstances that allowed it to be used by US as the seed of OUR revolution. The idea of him being killed by the dictator gave us the focal point we needed for our simmering discontent to boil over into massive mobilization. Except, of course, if Ninoy hadn’t died, he would have succeeded Marcos (prolly) and his feet would be touching the same base clay as Salonga and Tanada, and the discontent would have escaped into the atmosphere as nothing more than so much vented steam.

In fact, the EDSA revolution wasn’t even about Ninoy, was it? It was about Enrile and Ramos battling their way out of corners they’d found themselves painted into. It was Cardinal Sin who turned it into a Ninoy Aquino lovefest – and to great effect. The soldiers Enrile and Ramos were smart enough to recognize a tactical advantage and were quick to jump on the bandwagon.

But when the smoke had cleared, the two soldiers parted ways: Enrile clandestinely sought to continue his coopted coup – making the Cory Administration the most coup-bedeviled regime; while Ramos embraced the new order and ended up President.

iamninoy positioning Ninoy Aquino as the coffee-club hero

But no one remembers that now. Or at least, no one wants to remember it that way. Which isn’t to say that Ninoy is no longer relevant.

The cool kids and the kids with money to burn on iamninoy merchandise, they’re the same untethered bunch who, in between cups of coffee frap, cast about for an intellectual way of fighting the perceived injustices of a system that is – all things considered – treating them pretty well. And Ninoy is nothing if not a hero on an intellectual level in that his heroism is is rooted in the willingness to sacrifice a comfortable life for a higher goal – something that the coffee-sipping clique all loudly proclaim from the comfort and security of their middle-class lives. And so, it is a perfect fit.

Radical street fighters love Bonifacio the brawler; while the cool, coffee-club kids who rail against injustice at Starbucks adore Ninoy (when they bother to think about it, at least) who won the martyrdom they’ve all convinced themselves they will be capable off – when the time is right to leave the latte behind. And the iamninoy merchandise? Well, it’s a way of proclaiming that capability to all and sundry, without having to say a word.

Kewl!

All that aside …

As an aside – if the idea is to get kids to buy this crap to give them an entry point to some nobler ideas like patriotism, then what entry point will there be for kids who can’t afford to buy the merchandise? Oh, but I forget, this campaign isn’t really high-minded enough to aspire for any kind of egalitarianism, is it? It’s targeted at kids who have money to burn.

Filed under: Filipino, politics, pop-culture, society, vacuity , iamninoy, ninoy aquino

Manny Pacquiao is not the Philippines

Manny Pacquiao is a superlative athlete. After his win over Diaz today, I heard people referring to him as the best pound-for-pound fighter today. Whatever that means. So, yeah, its a given: the boy can box. But since we’re Filipinos, you can expect that there will inevitably be an orgy of race-based self-congratulations where everybody will take as much credit – no matter how vicariously – as they can for the awesome felling of Diaz.

Stupid stupid stupid. Today was not a victory for Filipinos; it was the victory of a Filipino.

First of all, talent and skill at any discipline is never a function of race. It is a result of natural ability, good training, and dedication to craft. Manny has all three; despite his frequent -and frequently abortive – forays into non-boxing pursuits, his dedication to the sport cannot be questioned. When he starts training, he fucking disappears, except when Roach says the world can see him again. The sad truth is, Pacquiao could be ethnically Mexican and he would still be as good.

Secondly, Pacquiao’s Filipino-ness is totally eclipsed by the fact that his boxing ability is honed by foreigners. This means that he is not the product of Filipino intelligence and values, but of foreign, specifically American.

WHAT PASSES FOR A SIDEBAR:

Remember Rocky IV (I think)? Dolph Lundgren played the role of Drago – the Siberian Express. A fucking giant of a man who felled Apollo Creed, then a symbol of America.

Drago was the product of Russian technology (yes, he shot steroids and so was a fucking cheat), and his training was directed by Russian values – a cinematic exaggeration of course, and prolly not an accurate representation – and intelligence. He was, therefore, Mother Russia focused to a laser point in one man.

By contrast, Apollo Creed embodied American disdain for its enemy. He trained lackadaisically, owing to the belief that Russians were inferior and could therefore do nothing to threaten the superior American – and by extension, American superiority. Creed died.

Then comes Rocky. Rocky represented a return to the core values that made America great: hard work, building strength through adversity (Hitlerian shadows there), and individual triumph over deprivation. In the final fight, Rocky brought to the ring everything that Americans believed good about themselves, and clashed with everything the Russians thought admirable about themselves. And since it was an American movie, American values won. Rocky was America.

Manny Pacquiao is NOT the Philippines. He did not go into the ring bearing anything even remotely Filipino, unless you count his rosary and his devout rituals. While it can be said that at least that aspect of him represented us Filipinos – in the sense that almost by default, we think adversity can be beaten by prayer – everything else he needed to secure a tangible victory came from his American trainor – and by extension, America.

ANOTHER SIDEBAR:

I can hear howls of protest: he embodies perseverance under extreme personal adversity – isn’t that Filipino? Yes, it is. However, so did Navarette, so did Velasco, and so did that other guy who looked like my college classmate. But where are they now, eh?

The truth is, Pacquiao’s perseverance under extreme personal adversity was enough to get him knocking on the door of greatness. Beyond that door, how can that perseverance matter? He’s not even in adversity anymore. Beyond that door, other values and traits start taking precedence.

In the case of other almost-great Filipinos, the traits we’ve most often seen are hubris, self-indulgence, and terminal cases of persecution complexes. These things we see everyday in our neighbors and in ourselves; and it takes a deliberate effort of will – also known as discipline – to overcome them. Are we – in general – a disciplined people?

And third, the victory of one Filipino says nothing – absofuckinglutely nothing – about Filipinos in general. Despite Manny, far too many Filipinos are still lazy, unimaginative, and mediocre; far too many of our youth are pathologically enamored with consumerism; and we are still a nation run by morons, who are ‘fiscalized’ by idiots, with running commentary from mercenary retards.

Filed under: Filipino, musings, sports , Manny Pacquiao

It’s what today?

When the taxi driver greeted me with a ‘hapi independens day, mam!’ I had a brief moment of ‘it’s what today?’

When i recovered my wits, I was mortified.

This, i think, is the reason why the independence day holiday should never be moved to the nearest monday or whatever. With all the things you need to do just to survive, the higher things – like remembering to commemorate Independence – tend to get snowed under. If today were a holiday, Independence day would have been the first thing on my mind. Instead, all I could think about was making my ten o’clock meeting.

To a large extent, forgetting was a personal failure. But still, I was pissed to find out that I wasn’t alone in my lapse. After being reminded by that taxi driver, I made it a point to put on a bright smile and greet everyone a happy independence day. Most of the people I greeted returned the same blank stare that I’m sure I gave the taxi-guy. And like me, those blank stares were quickly replaced with memory and a mumbled, ‘I forgot.’

But that’s not the worst of it.

There were some people who just looked at me with a kind of sneer and said, ’so what?’ They knew it was independence day, but they didn’t care.

This is the kind of trivialization of important observances – independence day included – that ‘holiday economics’ promotes. It kills our sense of history, numbing us to the sacrifices of our forebears and thereby robbing us of the ability to see ourselves as being part of the tapestry of history – if nothing else, then as inheritors of people who fought and died for the freedoms we now take for granted. It’s shameful, I tell you.

By reducing independence day to the status of just-another-excuse-to-skip-work we are slowly but surely inducing a national amnesia of our forefathers’ sacrifices, and we make ourselves more and more incapable of asking what we can do for our country and our people. Instead, we find it ever easier to ask only what our country and our people should do for us.

Without reminders of our place in history, we tend to focus only on what we need to do to ensure individual survival, reducing the national psyche to subsistence levels, and inculcating in us a pathologically mendicant mentality. Ultimately, this will result in psychic stagnation – the state of being so fixated with the here and now, with what our entitlements are, and with the utter sense of despair that we never get everything we have convinced ourselves we unconditionally deserve that we can no longer imagine – much less work for – a grand future.

I’m sorry I forgot it was independence day. I will not forget again.

Filed under: Filipino, musings, politics, pop-culture , Independence day

Bashing versus Praise: A synthesis of sorts

So far, these are the positive Filipino traits that my little brainstorming exercise netted. Fourteen positive traits as opposed to thirty-three negative traits.

Filed under: Filipino , bad traits, comparisons of good traits and bad traits, Filipino, filipino bashing, filipino praise, good traits