Requiescat in Pace

To those who died in the Leyte Landslide of February 17, 2006.

There is a difference between what you have observed and what you have experienced.

In an ideal world, you detach yourself from the experience if you want to get a valid and rational observation. The scientific method insists on this. Why? Because you have to get all sides of the story; you have to get all empirical data that will prove the theory. This is specially true with the social sciences. Historians and sociologists don’t present their experiences; they observe people, they ask questions, they present their observations. You have to be detached so that your observations will be free from the taint of irrationality that an experience may bring.

I hate the detachment. It reduces humanity into quantifiable variables and unrealistic generalizations. It refuses to acknowledge the human dimension of the problem at hand.

Ironically, by detaching oneself from the experience, you are making an incomplete observation. True, there will be no true completeness; comprehensiveness is the best term. I believe that to present a comprehensive observation, you should immerse yourself in the experience.

True, there are times you have to really be detached, because you wouldn’t want to experience such. That’s why I don’t comment on things that I can only observe from a distance – stealing, perhaps, or kidnapping, or murder. I can comment about lying, because I was dishonest in some points of my life.
***
Poverty as a root cause of social problems has been reduced to theoretical discussions, turning the concrete into abstract. Employing tools from sociology to psychology to history, poverty is now just a subject to be discussed, debated, and quizzed. The poor are now lab rats, subject to experiments on how they behave; they are just statistic that no one bothers to understand. In the end, nothing is produced; in the end, it will be all words and rhetoric. Simple: poverty has been observed, and is being observed, with detachment.

If you believe in the totality of things, then you must be ready to accept fault for things that you are a part of; if you are part of a system, and that system has problems, then you must accept the fact that you contribute to the problems (even if you think you don’t). That’s why I am tired of reading treatises on poverty that pins the blame on anybody. Poverty is a problem of the society as a system; I am part of that system, ergo I contribute to that problem. Hence I am at fault. Denying that you are not part of the problem is observing with detachment. And definitely you are not part of the solution, either.
***
We live in a world of denial. People dismiss poverty as a cause of problems because people feel powerless about it. Some of us even deny it exists – how many times have we seen beggars and pretended we did not see them?

It’s not good to give alms. But have you done anything that will contribute to alleviating the effects of the problem? Unfortunately, sitting in ivory towers, blaming, and living in denial are not solutions.

I have learned two things in the past few days:

• The Calibrated Preemptive Response (CPR) is only applied to anti-Arroyo rallies.
• The government can finish investigations as fast as it want it to.

Questions:

• They say people began camping at ULTRA Monday, January 30, 2006. A lot of people were there, in a public street. Why didn’t the police apply CPR?
• If it can finish investigations in 72 hours, how come it takes the government years to solve other crimes, specially corruption?

Also: Pinoys love being in the cameras. And giving them the mike will give them heaven. However, they shoot before they think. Evidence: Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez and Interior Undersecretary Marius Corpus.

Atty. Lambino to Cito Beltran’s Straight Talk: We are all at fault. I agree.

A stinging indictment by the youth of their elders.

However, it does not absolve the youth. Unfortunately, the youth will clean up the crap that their elders had made. I suggest they begin now, as it is a lot of trash to clean. Otherwise, they’ll just repeat the errors of their elders.

A sad reflection of poverty in the Philippines is the Stampede of February 4, 2006.

Wowowee is one of the flagship noontime shows of ABS-CBN, the country’s largest network. Promising large prizes and highlighting the plight of its winners, many people saw it as their hope to get out of the hellish life that poverty brings. Thousands of people line up in the night to have a chance in getting in the studio for the next day’s show, and hoping to get the top prize.

The show would have celebrated its anniversary by doing a show at the Philsports Arena (formerly ULTRA) today, and thousands of people lined up last night just to get a chance of getting inside the arena. Getting in the arena gives you the chance of winning the top pot. Then, the shocking tragedy happened.

Poverty is a sad reality in this country, and despite the indifference of the affluent, its reality cannot be denied, and its existence will be highlighted. The massive crowd that lined up the streets near the ABS-CBN studios, and indeed, those who lined up at Philsports Arena, is proof of poverty. People see game shows like Wowowee as their last hope, the ticket out of the muck of poverty.

The host lamented the deaths and stated that they only wanted to entertain and give hope. Some individuals chided ABS-CBN for exploiting the poor in order to get higher ratings. One weblog even berated the company for such poor planning and organizing. The said comments are rather unfair; who wanted such tragedy to happen?

ABS-CBN has announced that it will shoulder all medical and funeral expenses of the victims of the Stampede. Well and good. At least it is not shirking on its responsibility, although some skeptics may – again – claim that this action is just damage control.

ABS-CBN should rethink its concepts about Wowowee. It has created false hopes and unduly contributed to the vicious cycle of poverty, feeding to the fast-buck thinking. The intentions are good; their effects are, in the long run, not.

Let me rant against a certain columnist in a certain newspaper (nope, I won’t be naming the columnist nor the newspaper).

Sen. Ping Lacson is upset that GMA is claiming credit for the strong peso. Actually, it’s not GMA who’s saying it but Toting Bunye who is paid to tell lies like that fellow Comical Ali, Saddam Hussein’s spokesman who, during the closing days of the Iraq invasion by the US allied forces, was insisting that the American troops were getting a beating and about to retreat.

Hay. Mr. Columnist: Mr. Liar-Liar Bunye is acting in behalf and as an extension of GMA. Who are you kidding.

He also ranted against UNICEF and other related organizations:

There are many organizations receiving such tax-free funds from kind donors who do not seem to require any audited or verifiable report on the expenditures. How about a financial report from the Unicef so we don’t suspect that the funds are merely going to salaries and perks of the people behind this organization? For example, P20,000/day was spent for child protection. Who were the children protected and who were paid to protect them and how much? The sum of P7,575,961.32 was spent for education. Can we get a list of the children and the schools which received the funds and how much each? P18,193,313.80 was spent as relief to communities affected by tsunami and typhoon. Again, can we see the list of communities? Were they given cash or goods? P7,966,367 was channeled to unspecified projects where assistance was most needed. Hey how about some real accounting report?

So he wants exactness and specificity. But take note of the next:

There’s no use railing against the GMA administration. As long as there is no credible opposition party with alternative programs to offer, the masses will just ignore all those reported scandals, corruption and misgovernance. The much vaunted NPs and LPs are perceived as no better, nothing more than a bunch of politicians just waiting for the chance to get into power. As one memorable “trapo [traditional politician]” was quoted as saying, “You people in the administration have all been stealing us blind all these years, how about giving us a chance naman?”

Tell me if he is consistent or not. He wants UNICEF to state the names of its beneficiaries, as if he was a major donor. Fine, that is good. But to quote a certain trapo and not even have the balls to state the name is pushing his unfairness too far. Di ba, kung gusto mo specific reports from others, why can’t you be so specific yourself? You are actually implying that UNICEF and other orgs are just making reports to cover their asses. And here you are, covering your ass by not telling the name of the trapo that you quoted. Are you afraid of libel?

We need to know so that (1) we won’t elect him if he runs for an office, or (2) we would not listen to him ever.

Hay, opinions. Good columnists are CONSISTENT (think de Quiros). Guys like Mr. Columnist are just killing trees.

This new year, may people ponder on this quote by Hellen Keller:

Science may have found a cure for most evils; but it has found no remedy for the worst of them all – the apathy of human beings.

In a comment posted in a blog, a person wrote, and I quote:

“That attitude of moral superiority is exactly what makes a lot of people cringe and drive away any supporters. You question my PERSONAL moral values for disagreeing with your organization? I do not question your PERSONAL moral values – or any person involved in BWM. This is the best argument you can come up with in defense of your movement, huh? Laughable.”

Precisely why we are in this rut.Isn’t moral superiority the reason that drove people to EDSA I and II? Laughable? Pathetic. And by the tone of the comment, the commenter is exercising moral superiority, no?
Continue reading →

In reaction to GMA’s war against media speech (yes, Virginia, I am exaggerating), I posted this comment on Jove Francisco’s blog:

Pls. tell GMA to give us good news that her administration is really responsible for. She should stop claiming credit for something that definitely is not due to her doing.

Also, the media will not report a thing if it didn’t happen. It’s as simple as that. That’s what I had learned when I was a student journalism. The facts speak for themselves – her government is making so many slip-ups. If the media don’t report those, the people would say the media is anti-GMA. And vice versa. It is a dilemma.

GMA is not the right person to define what is responsible journalism for (1) she is, and was, not a journalist; and (2) she has no qualms about not telling the truth.

We always shoot the messenger (ok not shoot, maybe persecute) when they speak the bad news. That’s also biblical, with the way the prophets lived at those times.

The media is not perfect. There are those who abuse their responsibilities. There are those who confuses news with opinion. But the industry has a self-regulating mechanism, and most of its practitioners are responsible enough to do their work honestly and with integrity.

What struck me about Joey Legarda’s comment is this line: I think that if media does not humble it’s(sic) self, it will not grow. True. Maybe you can also say that to your president. If she keeps on being arrogant, dishonest, and insincere, she will not grow (figuratively, as we can’t do anything about the literal).

Her arrogance will be her downfall. If the bumbling opposition, the confused “progressives”, and the well-intentioned people cannot unseat her, her arrogance will be her own undoing. You can get away with trespasses, but only to a point. If she keeps on pushing everyone on the brink with such smugness, I cannot guarantee what will happen next.

What she need to do is to look at the mirror and ask herself if she knows what she is doing. Attacking the media will not profit her. She just keep on adding enemies.

Sir, keep on reporting the news as it is. You know what you are doing. Read or listen to comments from those who’d rather sit out and let things be, then take them in stride.

Lastly: honesty is the best policy, specially in journalism. That’s all.

I disagree with this blog entry.

Why? The basis for that PCIJ blog entry is available for public scrutiny; it’s been on official records of the gummint. Privacy? The wife of foolish Tiongco lost it when her stupid husband dipped his d**k into public domain that is politics. Again it is on OFFICIAL RECORD.

Tiongco wanted his n-minutes of fame. He should have told his wife to brace for impact.

The blog entry in question is already taken down. Here is the Yahoo! cache and the Google cache of that blog entry. Read and decide for yourself.