Thursday, October 20, 2005
Ang Balintuna ng UP-PGH
Matagal nang angal ng pamilya ko yang UP Med na iyan. Pamilya kasi kami ng duktor at alam namin kung gaano kagagaling ang mga duktor na napproduce ng UP-PGH. Pero alam din namin iilan lang ang natitira dito sa Pilipinas para maglingkod sa kapwa Pilipino. Kung nandito man sila, wala sila tiyak sa mga public hospitals kundi nandun sa St. Lukes, Asian Hospital, Medical City – gumagamot ng mayayamang pasyente. Ayaw ko rin naman lahatin dahil may mga duktor na nagcclinic sa Manila Doctors pero nagsisilbi rin sa PGH, nagtuturo o nagppractice. Yung punto ko rito, lugi talaga ang mamamayan sa pagpopondo nila sa mga ito dahil hindi naman talag naibabalik sa kanila nang maayos ginagastos sa pag-papaaral sa mga ito. Bukod pa rito and walang kamatayang akusasyong ng palakasan sa pagpasok sa PGH.
Kapag anak ka ng Diyos, o yung mga anak ng mga consultants at alumni, ngumiti ka na dahil sigurado matutulungan ka sa pagpasok. Papaano naman yung mga mahihirap na estudyante na walang kakone-koneksiyon sa loob ng PGH? Kailangan pa ba nilang makakuha nang napakataas na grado para makapasok diyan? Talo na sila sa undergrad pa lang dahil wala naman silang pambili ng mga libro at umaasa lang sa library na luma pa yung mga edisyon. Yun punto ko rito, bahagi ng matinding brain drain sa mula sa PGH ay bunsod na rin ng elitistang kultura nito. Matinding irony ito dahil nasa gitna sila ng isang ospital na siyang pangunahing pangmasang ospital ng Pilipinas. Confirmed tuloy na guinea pig lang talaga ng mga career ng mga estudyante ng PGH ang masang kanilang ginagamot nila.
Ang institusyong pinamumugaran ng mga peti-bugoy at matataas na saray ng lipunan ay hindi talaga maaasahang gagawa ng paraan sa paglingap ng malalim na sugat ng lipunang Pilipino sa paraang pagsisilibi sa sektor pangkalusugan nito. Karera at Indibidwalistikong mga pangarap lamang ang mahalaga sa ganitong institusyon. Banggit nga ng kuya ko na intern ngayon sa PGH, nung nagcommunity med sila sa isang barangay sa Santo Tomas, Batangas, nagdala pa ang isang babaeng intern ng bodyguard! Kasi raw baka marape siya o makidnap! Langya, anong akala niya sa masa? Masasamang tao!? Kaya hindi nakakapagtaka kung bakit iilan lang sa mga duktor dito ang pumipili na maging doctor to the barrios kahit sa loob lang ng isang taon dahil kahit nasa UP sila, hindi nila alam kung ano talaga ang ibig sabihin ng Iskolar ng Bayan at mga panangutan nito sa sambayanan. Ang ganitong konserbatismo ay walang puwang para isang insitusyon na marapat na naglilingkod nang buong-buo sa mamamayan.
Sa ganitong kulturang pyudal na pami-pamilya at palakasan, huwag nang asahan na hindi aalis ang mga duktor ng PGH. Nakakahiya. Daig pa sila ng mga duktor galing sa Palo, Leyte. Buhay at kamatayang naglilingkod sa bayan.
Kapag anak ka ng Diyos, o yung mga anak ng mga consultants at alumni, ngumiti ka na dahil sigurado matutulungan ka sa pagpasok. Papaano naman yung mga mahihirap na estudyante na walang kakone-koneksiyon sa loob ng PGH? Kailangan pa ba nilang makakuha nang napakataas na grado para makapasok diyan? Talo na sila sa undergrad pa lang dahil wala naman silang pambili ng mga libro at umaasa lang sa library na luma pa yung mga edisyon. Yun punto ko rito, bahagi ng matinding brain drain sa mula sa PGH ay bunsod na rin ng elitistang kultura nito. Matinding irony ito dahil nasa gitna sila ng isang ospital na siyang pangunahing pangmasang ospital ng Pilipinas. Confirmed tuloy na guinea pig lang talaga ng mga career ng mga estudyante ng PGH ang masang kanilang ginagamot nila.
Ang institusyong pinamumugaran ng mga peti-bugoy at matataas na saray ng lipunan ay hindi talaga maaasahang gagawa ng paraan sa paglingap ng malalim na sugat ng lipunang Pilipino sa paraang pagsisilibi sa sektor pangkalusugan nito. Karera at Indibidwalistikong mga pangarap lamang ang mahalaga sa ganitong institusyon. Banggit nga ng kuya ko na intern ngayon sa PGH, nung nagcommunity med sila sa isang barangay sa Santo Tomas, Batangas, nagdala pa ang isang babaeng intern ng bodyguard! Kasi raw baka marape siya o makidnap! Langya, anong akala niya sa masa? Masasamang tao!? Kaya hindi nakakapagtaka kung bakit iilan lang sa mga duktor dito ang pumipili na maging doctor to the barrios kahit sa loob lang ng isang taon dahil kahit nasa UP sila, hindi nila alam kung ano talaga ang ibig sabihin ng Iskolar ng Bayan at mga panangutan nito sa sambayanan. Ang ganitong konserbatismo ay walang puwang para isang insitusyon na marapat na naglilingkod nang buong-buo sa mamamayan.
Sa ganitong kulturang pyudal na pami-pamilya at palakasan, huwag nang asahan na hindi aalis ang mga duktor ng PGH. Nakakahiya. Daig pa sila ng mga duktor galing sa Palo, Leyte. Buhay at kamatayang naglilingkod sa bayan.
Batas-Militar
Professor Simbulan gave a chilling account about Martial and I got scared for myself. Those dark years of martial rule must have put to the limit the extent of the human spirit and commitment for the cause of social liberation. I am hard-pressed then to assess myself on my preparedness to live the way those people lived then and offer my life for and to the people.
Can I really measure up in the face of bullets and rifles? In the face of torture and electrocuted genitals? I really do not know the answer to that. Can i really leave my charmed life, eating out during the weekends for a life which might leave me hungry at times as my other comrades in the student movement are experiencing oftentimes? Can I really join the guerillas in the hills and wage armed struggle against the regime especially when the prospect of an undeclared martial law is now coming to the fore? Can I leave my family and my girlfriend-comrade for the revolution? For the people whose class is not my own? I used to romanticize about the countryside, living with the peasants. Can i actually do that for the rest of my life? Leave a the prospect of a good life behind me? Can i actually send my kids to Ateneo for them to have a Jesuit education or in Poveda or Miriam if all i have is an allowance from the movement? Can I just live a normal life, as i have had when i was not an activist?
These are questions which i can only answer soon enough, when the circumstances are right and destiny is knocking on my doorstep. I can choose two paths, the normal life with money and prestige or the life in the road less travelled, dangerous, but complete and worthwhile. I do not have answers as of yet because doing so would be prejudicial to my future as I would never want to renege on my word when I finally decide on what to do with my life. Soon enough I will have to resolutely face my fears and these quesitons will indeed be answered. I can only hope that I choose the path of serving the people as there can never be a life more worthless than that of a revolutionary sell-out as Mike Defensor and many other activists before him who are the greatest reactionaries of our time.
This is why I love the life of Edgar Jopson so much. Ever since, he has always been my model on how the petty-bourgeois should conduct their lives in a meanigful way. He had a big corporate life ahead of him and a business empire to be inherited from his father, yet he turned his back from it all and lived the simple life and hard struggle together with the people. Did Edjop and Joy get to send their kids to good schools? I think so. They went to good girl schools and their son went to the Ateneo. But Edjop did pay a price for his struggle. He got shot in a raid in their safehouse and got killed. But he died a hero of people, and he will forever be one of the greatest figures of Martial Law and the student movement who rose out of their comfort zones to fight against the dictator and fight for and together with the people in their struggle for social justice and equality.
Can I really measure up in the face of bullets and rifles? In the face of torture and electrocuted genitals? I really do not know the answer to that. Can i really leave my charmed life, eating out during the weekends for a life which might leave me hungry at times as my other comrades in the student movement are experiencing oftentimes? Can I really join the guerillas in the hills and wage armed struggle against the regime especially when the prospect of an undeclared martial law is now coming to the fore? Can I leave my family and my girlfriend-comrade for the revolution? For the people whose class is not my own? I used to romanticize about the countryside, living with the peasants. Can i actually do that for the rest of my life? Leave a the prospect of a good life behind me? Can i actually send my kids to Ateneo for them to have a Jesuit education or in Poveda or Miriam if all i have is an allowance from the movement? Can I just live a normal life, as i have had when i was not an activist?
These are questions which i can only answer soon enough, when the circumstances are right and destiny is knocking on my doorstep. I can choose two paths, the normal life with money and prestige or the life in the road less travelled, dangerous, but complete and worthwhile. I do not have answers as of yet because doing so would be prejudicial to my future as I would never want to renege on my word when I finally decide on what to do with my life. Soon enough I will have to resolutely face my fears and these quesitons will indeed be answered. I can only hope that I choose the path of serving the people as there can never be a life more worthless than that of a revolutionary sell-out as Mike Defensor and many other activists before him who are the greatest reactionaries of our time.
This is why I love the life of Edgar Jopson so much. Ever since, he has always been my model on how the petty-bourgeois should conduct their lives in a meanigful way. He had a big corporate life ahead of him and a business empire to be inherited from his father, yet he turned his back from it all and lived the simple life and hard struggle together with the people. Did Edjop and Joy get to send their kids to good schools? I think so. They went to good girl schools and their son went to the Ateneo. But Edjop did pay a price for his struggle. He got shot in a raid in their safehouse and got killed. But he died a hero of people, and he will forever be one of the greatest figures of Martial Law and the student movement who rose out of their comfort zones to fight against the dictator and fight for and together with the people in their struggle for social justice and equality.
May Topic na Ako!
Sa wakas, na-approve na yung topic ko pagkatapos kong magbigay ng sampung thesis proposals na iba-iba yung scope. Medyo naiintinidhan ko na kung bakit sinasabi ni Ser na over-researched na yung ibang mga topics pero sa tingin ko pa rin kaya naming angguluhan ng maganda yung mga passé nang topics. Rationalization ng government employees yung topic ko. Hindi gaanong adventurous katulad ng dati kong mga nabanggit na topics sa journal na ito pero ok na rin. Kung matatandaan, nabanggit ko na ang topic na ito sa mga nagdaang journal entry. Tama, kinuha ko yung topic ng kaibigan ko sa Ateneo, tutal ayaw na rin naman siyang payagan ng titser niya, sinabi kong ako na lang ang gagawa ng pag-aaral dito.
Bagamat gusto ko talaga sanang community immersion din ang thesis ko, tulad ng mga thesis ukol sa urban poor at pesante, kung saan kailangan talagang tumira sa komunidad nang ilang araw kahit papaano, ok na ito dahil kakain ng malaking oras ang pagstay-in sa mga komunidad lalo na’t nasa national office ako ng NUSP. Pinagbabalanse ko kasi ang iba ko pang mga gawain sa school tulad ng sa frat ko at gawain akademiko. Excited na rin ako sa topic ko lalo matindi ang naka-ambang tanggalan sa trabaho ng rehimeng ito. Bukod pa rito ang banggit ng pamahalaan na wala silang perang pambayad sa full retirement benefits ng mga tatanggaling empleyado ng gobyerno. Hindi totoong walang pera ang gobyerno. Sa bayad-utang lamang kasi ito napupunta. Ito ang gusto kong pag-aralan. Pagkatapos nilang maglingkod sa pamahalaan nang matagal, hindi rin pala sila babayaran ng dapat nilang matanggap mula rito. Mayroong pera ang gobyerno, pero hindi para sa kanilang naglilingkod dito.
Bagamat gusto ko talaga sanang community immersion din ang thesis ko, tulad ng mga thesis ukol sa urban poor at pesante, kung saan kailangan talagang tumira sa komunidad nang ilang araw kahit papaano, ok na ito dahil kakain ng malaking oras ang pagstay-in sa mga komunidad lalo na’t nasa national office ako ng NUSP. Pinagbabalanse ko kasi ang iba ko pang mga gawain sa school tulad ng sa frat ko at gawain akademiko. Excited na rin ako sa topic ko lalo matindi ang naka-ambang tanggalan sa trabaho ng rehimeng ito. Bukod pa rito ang banggit ng pamahalaan na wala silang perang pambayad sa full retirement benefits ng mga tatanggaling empleyado ng gobyerno. Hindi totoong walang pera ang gobyerno. Sa bayad-utang lamang kasi ito napupunta. Ito ang gusto kong pag-aralan. Pagkatapos nilang maglingkod sa pamahalaan nang matagal, hindi rin pala sila babayaran ng dapat nilang matanggap mula rito. Mayroong pera ang gobyerno, pero hindi para sa kanilang naglilingkod dito.
The Chilean Coup and the Allende Murder of the 1970s
I thought it was set here.
The film It’s Raining in Santiago is such a brilliant film because it is relevant today as it were during the days of the CIA-sponsored military dictatorships in Latin America and the Philippines. At a time of growing political dissent by the people over grave socio-economic inequalities, the venue is ripe for social revolution but at the same time fertile ground for maneuverings by a fascist miltary out to take power for themselves. A struggling people in the Third World can never triumph by the use of parliamentary struggle alone, if at all by electing a leftist people to the highest position of the land, as parliamentarism and legalistic struggle can never undo decades of social contradictions and power relations that have transformed the socio-political landscape of a country.
It should never be forgotten that Third World semi-colonies will always be protected by the US from progressive militants, especially communists out to takeover their precious investments in those semi-colonies. The fall of Allende and the rise of Pinochet validates the claim of Althusser that the accumulation of contradictions in a country will have two raods to take – one towards revolutionary rupture on the one hand and historical inhibition on the other. In Chile, it was the latter that took place. Instead of winning against enemies of the people, the progressive forces were overwhelmed by the power of the fascists and reactionaries.
Could it be said though, that this was because of the utter reliance to parliamentarism? Perhaps. Why did the masses not stand together with the radicals? Is it because grassroots organizing has been put into the backburner by the leaders? Did Unido Popular maintain the basic alliance between the workers and the peasants, the campesinos in particular or there was a primacy in organizing the working class without due regards for other oppressed classes in a US semi-colony? Thus, it could be inferred that there was no broad united front that existed to put up a big fight against the fascists. The balance of power has always been in the hands of the rightists despite Allende in power, as other sectors were unorganized to fight for socialism. The Chilean experience brings to mind the need for armed struggle as well, as a strategy or a tactic in tipping the balance of power in favor of the people and the Left. Without arms, leadership in reactionary politics is paper influence and paper power.
This is unlike Hugo Chavez, though, who won through popular elections. Chavez had links to the military and part of its patriotic and idealistic group were the ones who brought Chavez back to power after the attempted coup by the rightwing forces. The Chilean experience serves as a reminder as well for the current political situation in the country. There can never be total victory for the people if all hope is pinned on this united front against the regime and even in the event of a transition government of progressves and some reactionaries, the people should never put their guard down. The surviving clique of reactionaries can still outmaneuver the progressive bloc in the transition government by commanding an unreformed and mercenary armed forces to ous the progressives out of the new government.
The film It’s Raining in Santiago is such a brilliant film because it is relevant today as it were during the days of the CIA-sponsored military dictatorships in Latin America and the Philippines. At a time of growing political dissent by the people over grave socio-economic inequalities, the venue is ripe for social revolution but at the same time fertile ground for maneuverings by a fascist miltary out to take power for themselves. A struggling people in the Third World can never triumph by the use of parliamentary struggle alone, if at all by electing a leftist people to the highest position of the land, as parliamentarism and legalistic struggle can never undo decades of social contradictions and power relations that have transformed the socio-political landscape of a country.
It should never be forgotten that Third World semi-colonies will always be protected by the US from progressive militants, especially communists out to takeover their precious investments in those semi-colonies. The fall of Allende and the rise of Pinochet validates the claim of Althusser that the accumulation of contradictions in a country will have two raods to take – one towards revolutionary rupture on the one hand and historical inhibition on the other. In Chile, it was the latter that took place. Instead of winning against enemies of the people, the progressive forces were overwhelmed by the power of the fascists and reactionaries.
Could it be said though, that this was because of the utter reliance to parliamentarism? Perhaps. Why did the masses not stand together with the radicals? Is it because grassroots organizing has been put into the backburner by the leaders? Did Unido Popular maintain the basic alliance between the workers and the peasants, the campesinos in particular or there was a primacy in organizing the working class without due regards for other oppressed classes in a US semi-colony? Thus, it could be inferred that there was no broad united front that existed to put up a big fight against the fascists. The balance of power has always been in the hands of the rightists despite Allende in power, as other sectors were unorganized to fight for socialism. The Chilean experience brings to mind the need for armed struggle as well, as a strategy or a tactic in tipping the balance of power in favor of the people and the Left. Without arms, leadership in reactionary politics is paper influence and paper power.
This is unlike Hugo Chavez, though, who won through popular elections. Chavez had links to the military and part of its patriotic and idealistic group were the ones who brought Chavez back to power after the attempted coup by the rightwing forces. The Chilean experience serves as a reminder as well for the current political situation in the country. There can never be total victory for the people if all hope is pinned on this united front against the regime and even in the event of a transition government of progressves and some reactionaries, the people should never put their guard down. The surviving clique of reactionaries can still outmaneuver the progressive bloc in the transition government by commanding an unreformed and mercenary armed forces to ous the progressives out of the new government.
Pag-aralan Natin ang Simbahan, ang mga Heswita sa Partikular
Dahil wala pa rin akong topic, naisip ko noong isang araw na pag-aralan yung kayamanan ng Simbahan, lalo na ang orden na Kapisanan ni Hesus, o higit na kilala sa tawag na Jesuits o Heswita. Malapit kasi sa puso ang orden na ito. Aba’y napakarami ng mga naging kaibigan kong pari at brother diyan nung nasa Ateneo pa ako! Naturuan ata ako ng maayos na Ingles diyan e. Ganunpaman, gusto ko rin kasi pag-aralan kung saan nakukuha ng Jesuits yung pera para sa maintenance at operations ng lahat ng aspeto ng pastoral work nila, bukod sa kita galing sa mga eksklusibong paaralan nito. Nabanggit kasi sa akin ng paring kilala ko na nagiinvest din sa stock market ang orden, o kaya naman binubuksan din ang mga paaralan nito para sa investments, katulad sa Ateneo de Manila kung saan si Manny Pangilinan na ng PLDT ang Chairperson ng Board of Trustees nito.
Maganda rin kasing makita kung sang mga korporasyon napupunta ang corporate investments nito, dahil may matinding etikal na konsiderasyon dapat ang orden kung saan iiimbak ang yaman nito. Gusto ko ring makita kung grossly overpriced ang edukasyon sa mga eskuwelahan nito, partikular sa flagship university nito na Ateneo de Manila. Naaalala ko kasi noong nasa High School ako na kung anu-anong fee ang kinokolekta mula sa mga estudyante tulad ng development fee na hindi naman mapapakinabangan sa kasalukuyan ng mga estudyante na pampatayo ng mga bagong building.
Kailangan ko pang kinisin ito. Medyo Malabo pa kung ano yung gusto kong pag-aralan.
Maganda rin kasing makita kung sang mga korporasyon napupunta ang corporate investments nito, dahil may matinding etikal na konsiderasyon dapat ang orden kung saan iiimbak ang yaman nito. Gusto ko ring makita kung grossly overpriced ang edukasyon sa mga eskuwelahan nito, partikular sa flagship university nito na Ateneo de Manila. Naaalala ko kasi noong nasa High School ako na kung anu-anong fee ang kinokolekta mula sa mga estudyante tulad ng development fee na hindi naman mapapakinabangan sa kasalukuyan ng mga estudyante na pampatayo ng mga bagong building.
Kailangan ko pang kinisin ito. Medyo Malabo pa kung ano yung gusto kong pag-aralan.
Ikaw na Aktbista, Hindi Sapat ang Propaganda
Sa pagtitiyaga kong hindi mainip sa nakakainip na paksa ng pagbuo ng research proposal naisip ko na tunay ngang hindi sapat ang propaganda lamang. Kailangang may laman ang sinasabi mo, may pinanggagalingan. Hindi sapat na dumaan ka sa kursong masa ng kilusan para sabihing mong alam mo na ang lahat, kung paano ipaliliwanag ang lipunan at kung papaano babaguhin ito. Sa research proposal na bahagi ng klaseng ito natukoy ang kahaalagahan ng disiplina sa pagkuha ng datos at pagbuo ng pag-aaral. Naisip ko tuloy ang Ibon Foundation. Pultaym silang gumagawa ng mga lathalain ukol sa lipunan at tiyak gumagamit sila ng ganitong gma metodo sa kanilang mga research. Nakausap ko nga noon si Antonio Tujan ng Ibon. Tinanong ko siya kung ND leaning ba ang IBON lalo’t higit gumagamit ang mga researchers ng mga tipikal na ND jargon katulad ng burukrata-kapitalismo at iba pa.
Ang banggit niya, ang mga jargon na ito ay sinasabi hindi dahil kailangang magpropaganda kundi ito ang siyang hinihingi ng pag-aaral na banggitin, dahil iyon mismo ang phenomenon na nagaganap sa lipunan. Sa madaling sabi, ang research ay hindi simpleng propaganda na saulado ng mga aktibista ang pag-aaral ng mga kondisyon at pagsusuri. Ang research ay walang awtomatikong sagot sa mga bagay-bagay. Kung ganoon na rin lang, hindi na kailangang daanan ang mabusising pagbuo ng research design at proposal at ang buong sistematikong paraan ng pagkalap ng mga datos at masinsinang pagsusuri. Ang social research nga ang scientific na verification kung tunay na umiiral pa ang mga kundisyong panlipunang sinasabi ng kilusan at kung makabuluhan pa ba ang paraan ng pagkilos ayon sa mga kondisyon. Ito kasi yung pinakasakit ng kabataang aktibista ngayon.
Parang ayaw na nilang dumaan sa sistematikong pag-aaral ng mga bagay-bagay, na tipong sapat nang nai-spoonfeed na sa kanila ang mga ideya ni Marx, Lenin at Mao at Joma, sapat na. Na parang wala nang kailangang malaman pang iba. Ito ay maling pag-iisip at anti-Marxistang gawi, dahil hindi Bibliya ang ideolohikal na gabay at hindi Diyos at propeta ang mga ideologue ng kilusan.
Sa research nagkakaalaman kung sino ang may tangan ng katotohanan o kung sino ang maingay na nagpropropaganda lamang.
Ang banggit niya, ang mga jargon na ito ay sinasabi hindi dahil kailangang magpropaganda kundi ito ang siyang hinihingi ng pag-aaral na banggitin, dahil iyon mismo ang phenomenon na nagaganap sa lipunan. Sa madaling sabi, ang research ay hindi simpleng propaganda na saulado ng mga aktibista ang pag-aaral ng mga kondisyon at pagsusuri. Ang research ay walang awtomatikong sagot sa mga bagay-bagay. Kung ganoon na rin lang, hindi na kailangang daanan ang mabusising pagbuo ng research design at proposal at ang buong sistematikong paraan ng pagkalap ng mga datos at masinsinang pagsusuri. Ang social research nga ang scientific na verification kung tunay na umiiral pa ang mga kundisyong panlipunang sinasabi ng kilusan at kung makabuluhan pa ba ang paraan ng pagkilos ayon sa mga kondisyon. Ito kasi yung pinakasakit ng kabataang aktibista ngayon.
Parang ayaw na nilang dumaan sa sistematikong pag-aaral ng mga bagay-bagay, na tipong sapat nang nai-spoonfeed na sa kanila ang mga ideya ni Marx, Lenin at Mao at Joma, sapat na. Na parang wala nang kailangang malaman pang iba. Ito ay maling pag-iisip at anti-Marxistang gawi, dahil hindi Bibliya ang ideolohikal na gabay at hindi Diyos at propeta ang mga ideologue ng kilusan.
Sa research nagkakaalaman kung sino ang may tangan ng katotohanan o kung sino ang maingay na nagpropropaganda lamang.
Economic Development sa mga Sona at Larangang Gerilya Dulot ng Rebolusyunaryong Agraryo
Ito talaga yung tipo kong paksa para sa ilang buwan ng pananaliksik para sa tesis. Medyo nakakakaba nga lang dahil alam kong delikado talaga sa mga lugar na iyon bunsod ng matinding militarisasyon sa kanayunan. Nagtanong ako sa mga kasama kung saang erya kaya mayroong ganito na matagal nang may umiiral na gobyernong bayan at nakapaglatag na ng minimum na programa ng rebolusyunaryong agraryo. Sa mga bahagi raw ng Bikol mangilan-ngilan na. Naibaba na raw nang malaki ang renta sa lupa, nabuwag na ang usura at hindi na ganoon kataas ang tubo ng mga komersyante sa mga gamit-pamproduksiyon katulad ng abono at fertilizer. Sa iba naman daw, naipamahagi na ng mga kasama ang lupa sa mga magsasaka. Ito yung gusto kong pag-aralan.
Kung tunay ngang bumuti ang kalagayan ng mga pamilyang magsasaka sa mga lugar na ito o kung tulad lang ng sinabi ni Propesor Simbulan na kaya rin umuunlad dahil sa low-intensity measures ng estado sa mga lugar na ito, tulad ng farm-to-market roads, bilang bahagi ng kampanyang anti-insurhensiya subalit hindi naman talaga para sa pagpapaunlad sa kabuhayan ng mamamayan ang esensiya. Ngayon, lalo tuloy kumitid yung mg erya na puwede ko pang piliing pag-aralan. Kailangan ko ngayong pumili ng sonang gerilyang matagal nang tinayuan ng gobyernong bayan at hindi tinagos ng counter-insurgency community measures ng gobyerno para controlled yung variables na gagamitin ko sa pag-aaral. Nakausap ko si Propesor Gomez ng Economics, na dating gerilya noong panahon ng Martial Law, impraktikal yung thesis ko dahil sa pagkakaalam niya, walang erya na matagal nang may gobyernong bayan dahil laging dinudurog ang mga ito ng militar.
Nalungkot naman ako. Nakakuwentuhan ko rin si Ser Ed nung isang beses at sinabi ko sa kanya yung topic ko. Nagustuhan naman niya, lalo na raw kung gusto ko ng adventure. Natuwa ako pero ganunpaman, kung iilan lang yung mga eryang ganoon mukhang mahihirapan ata ako sa pananaliksik, lalo na kung sa dulo ng isla ng Luzon pa ang mga ito, mga tipong Sorsogon! Paano na? Buti sana kung pultaym na researcher ako para sa Ibon, kakayanin, o kung nasa masteral level na ako, tulad ng ginawa ni Ser Abe Padilla sa masteral thesis niya sa parehong topic. Nagulat na lang ako nang sinabi ni Prof Simbulan na dalawang taon pala sa erya si Prof Padilla nang sinulat niya yung tesis niya. Ako nga yung plano ko lang na panahon ng pananaliksik ay sa sembreak at sa bakasyon ng Pasko. Naunawaan ko rin yung sinabi ni Prof Simunbulan na baka hindi magkasya ang pananaliksik sa ganito kasensitibong paksa sa loob ng napaka-igsing panahon.
Bukod pa, baka hindi na ako bumalik o kaya hindi na ako makabalik! Magkaibang bagay ang mga ito. Una, baka matuloy na ako sa pagsapi sa hukbong bayan nang wala sa panahon. Pangalawa, baka isipin ng militar na ako yung bagong rekrut ng hukbo galling Maynila at pagdiskitahan ako o kaya baka sa panahon ng pagsasaliksik ko sa baryo magaganap ang pagsosona ng militar. Wala akong takas nun.
Kaya hindi ko na pinilit. Mahirap na. Nag-isip na lang ako ng ibang topic.
Kung tunay ngang bumuti ang kalagayan ng mga pamilyang magsasaka sa mga lugar na ito o kung tulad lang ng sinabi ni Propesor Simbulan na kaya rin umuunlad dahil sa low-intensity measures ng estado sa mga lugar na ito, tulad ng farm-to-market roads, bilang bahagi ng kampanyang anti-insurhensiya subalit hindi naman talaga para sa pagpapaunlad sa kabuhayan ng mamamayan ang esensiya. Ngayon, lalo tuloy kumitid yung mg erya na puwede ko pang piliing pag-aralan. Kailangan ko ngayong pumili ng sonang gerilyang matagal nang tinayuan ng gobyernong bayan at hindi tinagos ng counter-insurgency community measures ng gobyerno para controlled yung variables na gagamitin ko sa pag-aaral. Nakausap ko si Propesor Gomez ng Economics, na dating gerilya noong panahon ng Martial Law, impraktikal yung thesis ko dahil sa pagkakaalam niya, walang erya na matagal nang may gobyernong bayan dahil laging dinudurog ang mga ito ng militar.
Nalungkot naman ako. Nakakuwentuhan ko rin si Ser Ed nung isang beses at sinabi ko sa kanya yung topic ko. Nagustuhan naman niya, lalo na raw kung gusto ko ng adventure. Natuwa ako pero ganunpaman, kung iilan lang yung mga eryang ganoon mukhang mahihirapan ata ako sa pananaliksik, lalo na kung sa dulo ng isla ng Luzon pa ang mga ito, mga tipong Sorsogon! Paano na? Buti sana kung pultaym na researcher ako para sa Ibon, kakayanin, o kung nasa masteral level na ako, tulad ng ginawa ni Ser Abe Padilla sa masteral thesis niya sa parehong topic. Nagulat na lang ako nang sinabi ni Prof Simbulan na dalawang taon pala sa erya si Prof Padilla nang sinulat niya yung tesis niya. Ako nga yung plano ko lang na panahon ng pananaliksik ay sa sembreak at sa bakasyon ng Pasko. Naunawaan ko rin yung sinabi ni Prof Simunbulan na baka hindi magkasya ang pananaliksik sa ganito kasensitibong paksa sa loob ng napaka-igsing panahon.
Bukod pa, baka hindi na ako bumalik o kaya hindi na ako makabalik! Magkaibang bagay ang mga ito. Una, baka matuloy na ako sa pagsapi sa hukbong bayan nang wala sa panahon. Pangalawa, baka isipin ng militar na ako yung bagong rekrut ng hukbo galling Maynila at pagdiskitahan ako o kaya baka sa panahon ng pagsasaliksik ko sa baryo magaganap ang pagsosona ng militar. Wala akong takas nun.
Kaya hindi ko na pinilit. Mahirap na. Nag-isip na lang ako ng ibang topic.
Teoretikal na Balangkas: Pagkapaso sa Marxismo
Tama si Ser John Ponsaran. Mapapako at mapapako ang DevStud student sa tunggalian ng uri, sa estado bilang instrumento ng naghaharing-uri, sa lipunan bilang mala-pyudal, mala-kolonyal. Napakarami raw teorya na maaaring gamitin. Nariyan ang functionalism na paborito ng mga sociologists upang ipaliwanag ang interdependency ng bawat sangay ng lipunan upang imentina ang social order. Nariyan din ang postmodern theories na gustung-gustong durugin ang meta-narratives, lalo na ang Marxismo sa pagpapaliwanag ng mga phenomena sa lipunan. Sabi ng iba, hindi na raw kasi uso ang class conflict at historical materialism. Passé na baga, lalo na dahil globalisado na raw ang mundo at natunaw na ang sosyalistang Rusya at kapitalista na ang dating matatag na Tsina. Sinasabing nabigo raw ang eksperimentong panlipunan ng sosyalismo kaya hindi na dapat ginagamit ito.
Subalit mahalagang itanong. Passe na nga bang talaga ang tunggalian ng uri? Wala na bang kontradiksyong nagaganap sa mga lipunan ng mundo, kahit sa first world? Tama bang sabihing dahil nabigo sa praktika ang ilang bansa sa sosyalismo ay mali na ito? Mali. Kaya bang sagutin ng postmodernism kung bakit naghihirap ang mamamayan ng mundo ngayon, sa panahon ng pataas nang pataas na langis, at kung ano ang tamang rekurso para rito?
Napakagaling ng teorya ni Marx sapagkat hindi ito nadudurog ng panahon, dulot ng panaka-nakang pagbulusok ng krisis sa mga bansa at sa mundo. Hindi rin nagiging paso ang kanyang mga sinasabi ukol sa pagpapalaya ng uri lalo na sa panahong sukdulan ang kontradiksyon sa loob ng mga bansa. Mainam ding gamitin itong balangkas upang ipaliwanag kung bakit naghihirap ang mga mahihirap na sector ng lipunan samantalang mayaman ang Pilipinas sa likas na yaman. Hinahain ng Marxismo at ng lahat ng mga teoryang umusbong mula rito ang pagbibigay kapangyarihan sa walang kapangyarihang mayorya ng mga bansa upang mabigyan ng siyentipikong pagsusuri ang kalagayang panlipunan.
May pagtingin tuloy akong hungkag ang isang pananaliksik panlipunan na walang aspetong nagbabalangkas ng mga tunggalian sa lipunan na tila bagang isang panta-serye ang lipunan na sa dulo ng lahat ay magmamahalan ang mga bida at kontrabida.
Hindi ganito kadalisay ang dynamics ng lipunan. Lalong hindi paso ang istorikong materyalismo at tunggalian ng uri.
Subalit mahalagang itanong. Passe na nga bang talaga ang tunggalian ng uri? Wala na bang kontradiksyong nagaganap sa mga lipunan ng mundo, kahit sa first world? Tama bang sabihing dahil nabigo sa praktika ang ilang bansa sa sosyalismo ay mali na ito? Mali. Kaya bang sagutin ng postmodernism kung bakit naghihirap ang mamamayan ng mundo ngayon, sa panahon ng pataas nang pataas na langis, at kung ano ang tamang rekurso para rito?
Napakagaling ng teorya ni Marx sapagkat hindi ito nadudurog ng panahon, dulot ng panaka-nakang pagbulusok ng krisis sa mga bansa at sa mundo. Hindi rin nagiging paso ang kanyang mga sinasabi ukol sa pagpapalaya ng uri lalo na sa panahong sukdulan ang kontradiksyon sa loob ng mga bansa. Mainam ding gamitin itong balangkas upang ipaliwanag kung bakit naghihirap ang mga mahihirap na sector ng lipunan samantalang mayaman ang Pilipinas sa likas na yaman. Hinahain ng Marxismo at ng lahat ng mga teoryang umusbong mula rito ang pagbibigay kapangyarihan sa walang kapangyarihang mayorya ng mga bansa upang mabigyan ng siyentipikong pagsusuri ang kalagayang panlipunan.
May pagtingin tuloy akong hungkag ang isang pananaliksik panlipunan na walang aspetong nagbabalangkas ng mga tunggalian sa lipunan na tila bagang isang panta-serye ang lipunan na sa dulo ng lahat ay magmamahalan ang mga bida at kontrabida.
Hindi ganito kadalisay ang dynamics ng lipunan. Lalong hindi paso ang istorikong materyalismo at tunggalian ng uri.
Ukol sa Value-Free na Research
Nakausap ko nung isang araw yung kaklase ko sa Ateneo High School dati. Natuwa ako dahil yung mungkahi niyang paksa para sa research niya sa economics ay ukol sa rationalization policy ng government employees at ang epekto nito sa fiscal crisis. Ang nagbunsod daw sa kanya upang maisipan iuto ay ang pagiging malapit ng kanyang puso sa mga kawani ng kanyang nanay sa DENR. Matapos ang isang linggo, nakausap ko siyang muli at hindi tinanggap ang tesis niya. Bakit daw? Sabi ng kanyang thesis adviser, magiging subjective na ang research dahil may emotions na involved sa pagbuo ng thesis. Value-laden na raw tuloy ang research kung ganoon ang mangyayari. Sayang, imbes na mapagpalaya na sana ang thesis ng kaibigan ko, nauwi tuloy siya sa pangkaraniwan nang neo-liberal na thesis ukol sa kahalagahan ng foreign direct investments. Imbes na makikita niya sana ang kabulukan ng sistema, pinili ng kanyang thesis adviser na lamunin siyang muli ng isang pang-ekonomikong patakarang maka-dayuhan at kailanman hindi makabayan.
Hindi ko na siguro malalaman ang motibo ng kanyang guro sa pagbasura ng kanyang thesis topic subalit kalokohan na sabihin niyang magiging value-laden ang topic kung malapit sa puso mo ang paksang nais mong pag-aralan. Huwag na lang din nating aralin ang kalagayan ng mahihirap vis-à-vis mga patakarang pangkabuhayang nagpapahirap sa kanila dahil subjective na ito, may bias ka na kaagad. Tama si propesor Simbulan at mali si August Comte. Kahit anong pagsisikap ng isang dalubhasa na maging obhektibo sa kanyang pagsasaliksik, hinding-hindi niya ito magagawa dahil lagi’t laging may suhetibong kondisyon. Sa higit na militanteng pagtingin, ang pagpipilit na sa pagiging neutral o walang pinapanigan ay katulad na rin ng pagpanig sa sistemang mapang-api.
Sa paggiit ng titser ng kaibigan ko na huwag mo nang pag-aralan yang rationalization plan na iyan, sinasarado na rin niya ang utak niya sa malalim na potensyal ng pagbabagong panlipunang hain ng pag-aaral ng kalagayan ng mamamayan kaysa mga estadistika, tables at charts ng datos-ekonomiko. Lagi’t laging may pulitika sa pagsasaliksik. Maibabalanse lamang ang bias na ito sa pamamagitan ng paggamit ng mga datos upang maging ganap na obhetibo ang mga ito at hindi simpleng propaganda o haka-haka.
Hindi ko na siguro malalaman ang motibo ng kanyang guro sa pagbasura ng kanyang thesis topic subalit kalokohan na sabihin niyang magiging value-laden ang topic kung malapit sa puso mo ang paksang nais mong pag-aralan. Huwag na lang din nating aralin ang kalagayan ng mahihirap vis-à-vis mga patakarang pangkabuhayang nagpapahirap sa kanila dahil subjective na ito, may bias ka na kaagad. Tama si propesor Simbulan at mali si August Comte. Kahit anong pagsisikap ng isang dalubhasa na maging obhektibo sa kanyang pagsasaliksik, hinding-hindi niya ito magagawa dahil lagi’t laging may suhetibong kondisyon. Sa higit na militanteng pagtingin, ang pagpipilit na sa pagiging neutral o walang pinapanigan ay katulad na rin ng pagpanig sa sistemang mapang-api.
Sa paggiit ng titser ng kaibigan ko na huwag mo nang pag-aralan yang rationalization plan na iyan, sinasarado na rin niya ang utak niya sa malalim na potensyal ng pagbabagong panlipunang hain ng pag-aaral ng kalagayan ng mamamayan kaysa mga estadistika, tables at charts ng datos-ekonomiko. Lagi’t laging may pulitika sa pagsasaliksik. Maibabalanse lamang ang bias na ito sa pamamagitan ng paggamit ng mga datos upang maging ganap na obhetibo ang mga ito at hindi simpleng propaganda o haka-haka.
Para Kanino ang Panlipunang Pananaliksik?
Walang ibang dapat pag-alayan ang isang panlipuanang pananaliksik kundi sa sambayanang Pilipino, sa komunidad o sektor na pinagdausan ng tesis sa partikular. Hindi ito dapat para sa simpleng pang-akademikong pag-unlad ng isang dalubhasa sa lipunan. Sa konteksto ng kurso ko, hindi lang ito para sa pagkamit ng gawad best thesis sa araw ng pagtatapos. Ang masa ng bayan ang siyang pangunahing makinabang sa mga pagsasaliksik na malilikha lalo’t higit ng mga Iskolar ng Bayan. Hindi ito dapat para sa higit na paglikom ng tubo para sa isang korporasyon, kung saan aaralin ang viability ng isang relocation site subalit tutubuan nang doble ng mga kontraktor ang mga mahihirap na dinemolish mula sa isang pook iskwater. Hindi dapat pag-aralan ng mananaliksik kung papaano nito higit na papahirapan ang komunidad na kanyang pag-aaralan. Hindi rin ito dapat magbigay nang rekomendasyon na hindi mag-eempower sa komunidad na kumilos at labanan ang mga kontradiksiyon ng kanilang kalagayan, katulad ng mungkahi ng kaklase ko sa DevStud na kung may pera lamang siya, bibigyan na lang niya ng pera ang mga katutubo ng Cordillera.
Hindi dapat ginagawang busabos o pulubi ang masang pinagkukuhanan ng mga datos. Maling-mali siya doon sa rekomendasyon na iyon na tila wala siyang teoretikal at konseptwal na natutunan ukol sa kahirapan ng mga batayang sektor ng bansa. Ang motibo ba dapat ng pananaliksik ay nakasentro sa pagkamit ng mga gawad at parangal sa mga sinaliksik na datos? Hindi rin sapagkat kung ganoon, tila mga daga at guinea pig lamang ang masa sa paningin ng researcher. Kailangang tandaan lagi na ang social research ay kaiba sa scientific research. Mga tao ang mga variables sa isang social research na may matinding etikal na konsiderasyon hindi tulad ng paggamit ng daga bilang variable na kung magkamali man o hindi man bigyang pagpapahalaga, ayos na, kasi pwedeng pwede naming palitan, mura lang naman. Sa kadulu-duluhan, walang saysay ang anumang panlipunang pananaliksik kung nakatago lamang ito sa cabinet ng DSS o kaya naman gagamiting panlinlang ng estado at ng mga korporasyon upang pagsamantalahan ang masa.
Kaya napakahalagang ang panlipunang pananaliksik ay isang ring aktibong proseso na nagbibigkis ng sector at komunidad, upang higit na maipagtagumpay nila ang kanilang mga interes at pangangailangan.
Hindi dapat ginagawang busabos o pulubi ang masang pinagkukuhanan ng mga datos. Maling-mali siya doon sa rekomendasyon na iyon na tila wala siyang teoretikal at konseptwal na natutunan ukol sa kahirapan ng mga batayang sektor ng bansa. Ang motibo ba dapat ng pananaliksik ay nakasentro sa pagkamit ng mga gawad at parangal sa mga sinaliksik na datos? Hindi rin sapagkat kung ganoon, tila mga daga at guinea pig lamang ang masa sa paningin ng researcher. Kailangang tandaan lagi na ang social research ay kaiba sa scientific research. Mga tao ang mga variables sa isang social research na may matinding etikal na konsiderasyon hindi tulad ng paggamit ng daga bilang variable na kung magkamali man o hindi man bigyang pagpapahalaga, ayos na, kasi pwedeng pwede naming palitan, mura lang naman. Sa kadulu-duluhan, walang saysay ang anumang panlipunang pananaliksik kung nakatago lamang ito sa cabinet ng DSS o kaya naman gagamiting panlinlang ng estado at ng mga korporasyon upang pagsamantalahan ang masa.
Kaya napakahalagang ang panlipunang pananaliksik ay isang ring aktibong proseso na nagbibigkis ng sector at komunidad, upang higit na maipagtagumpay nila ang kanilang mga interes at pangangailangan.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Critique of Habermas' Discourse Ethics
Jurgen Habermas errs in assuming the absence of conversations, if at all, relationships bereft of domination by coercion or by instinct. In a pluralistic world, social contradictions of class continue emanating despite the absence of an over-arching authority such as a feudal Catholic Church dictating on people.
While it is true that there is recognition of vulnerability among individuals and everyone has the capacity to act thoughtful, kind or considerate, it is precisely this vulnerability which is exploited by those who wish to enslave and oppress, even under a system which has ceased having the state at the center of society. Even rabid capitalists who fund military-industrial complexes have this innate capacity to be kind, to even be philanthropists to foundations and pour their loose millions into its funds. But this is not because of a consensus between people who are part of a social intercourse but due to class determinations in which a mask of benevolence should be worn by scheming capitalists to elicit images of corporate social responsibility. Even Hitler had propaganda posters kissing babies! The fact that the individuated, marginalized and ostracized is still in society’s periphery holds despite changes in superstructures and even in the modes of production, without the necessary prerequisite of revolution.
There is interdependency, yes, but interdependency based on exploitation of classes in the service of profit. It is never borne out of love, in a social scale, that is. The language community that Habermas speaks of is actually a language of coercion and deception, using quasi-love and terror tactics to achieve an end on a hapless ruled majority. Oh, there is a tacit language too, the language of war between classes. Lyotard was correct in using chess moves as an analogy but unlike chess, the social intercourse between classes does not have rules as both will break the rules in order to win in the game or in the discourse. There is actually no consensual discourse that occurs even in a postmodern society where the relations of production continue to press forth. The worldview too that is created by this is a worldview of a need to destroy the class dictatorship of the rulers on one hand and the need to suppress the revolutionary progress on the other. This is truly how it is hoped one would conduct one’s life recognizing the existence of a class war, using overt and covert forms of language and communications to destroy and obliterate one another.
Moral problems can most definitely be resolved rationally and objectively. It is precisely our gift of cognition which separates us from lesser animals. Questions on pre-marital sex, abortion, gay marriage and other looked down upon social taboos can be resolved by the use of intellect. Habermas is correct in saying that such can only be done in a pluralistic society where there is no dominant authority out to sanction and control. Gay marriage cannot certainly be allowed in a very feudal-patriarchal society such as Iran, but it is certainly allowed in Scandinavian nations with very lax socio-cultural norms. Women will be stoned to death in the Middle East if they had lovers and had sex outside their marriages! A college couple in the Philippines would most certainly be asked to tie the knot had they been caught by their parents having sex at the girl’s house!
Pluralistic societies, which many misconstrue as postmodern societies have the luxury of deciding for themselves what to do without the need for social pressures from norms and traditions. But this laxity over norms contributes also to a decadent culture with norms trashed for selfish purposes and elicits irresponsible and immature behavior, especially among the youth. This is caused by the consumerism of a postmodern world and a manifestation of economic contradictions in an advanced stage of capitalism where in the guise of liberalism and openness to change, people are rendered ignorant further as they are eaten up by a culture of consumerism brought precisely by the rational mind by using choice as an excuse.
In that, there is great doubt if justice can ever be reached and if at all, solidarity.
While it is true that there is recognition of vulnerability among individuals and everyone has the capacity to act thoughtful, kind or considerate, it is precisely this vulnerability which is exploited by those who wish to enslave and oppress, even under a system which has ceased having the state at the center of society. Even rabid capitalists who fund military-industrial complexes have this innate capacity to be kind, to even be philanthropists to foundations and pour their loose millions into its funds. But this is not because of a consensus between people who are part of a social intercourse but due to class determinations in which a mask of benevolence should be worn by scheming capitalists to elicit images of corporate social responsibility. Even Hitler had propaganda posters kissing babies! The fact that the individuated, marginalized and ostracized is still in society’s periphery holds despite changes in superstructures and even in the modes of production, without the necessary prerequisite of revolution.
There is interdependency, yes, but interdependency based on exploitation of classes in the service of profit. It is never borne out of love, in a social scale, that is. The language community that Habermas speaks of is actually a language of coercion and deception, using quasi-love and terror tactics to achieve an end on a hapless ruled majority. Oh, there is a tacit language too, the language of war between classes. Lyotard was correct in using chess moves as an analogy but unlike chess, the social intercourse between classes does not have rules as both will break the rules in order to win in the game or in the discourse. There is actually no consensual discourse that occurs even in a postmodern society where the relations of production continue to press forth. The worldview too that is created by this is a worldview of a need to destroy the class dictatorship of the rulers on one hand and the need to suppress the revolutionary progress on the other. This is truly how it is hoped one would conduct one’s life recognizing the existence of a class war, using overt and covert forms of language and communications to destroy and obliterate one another.
Moral problems can most definitely be resolved rationally and objectively. It is precisely our gift of cognition which separates us from lesser animals. Questions on pre-marital sex, abortion, gay marriage and other looked down upon social taboos can be resolved by the use of intellect. Habermas is correct in saying that such can only be done in a pluralistic society where there is no dominant authority out to sanction and control. Gay marriage cannot certainly be allowed in a very feudal-patriarchal society such as Iran, but it is certainly allowed in Scandinavian nations with very lax socio-cultural norms. Women will be stoned to death in the Middle East if they had lovers and had sex outside their marriages! A college couple in the Philippines would most certainly be asked to tie the knot had they been caught by their parents having sex at the girl’s house!
Pluralistic societies, which many misconstrue as postmodern societies have the luxury of deciding for themselves what to do without the need for social pressures from norms and traditions. But this laxity over norms contributes also to a decadent culture with norms trashed for selfish purposes and elicits irresponsible and immature behavior, especially among the youth. This is caused by the consumerism of a postmodern world and a manifestation of economic contradictions in an advanced stage of capitalism where in the guise of liberalism and openness to change, people are rendered ignorant further as they are eaten up by a culture of consumerism brought precisely by the rational mind by using choice as an excuse.
In that, there is great doubt if justice can ever be reached and if at all, solidarity.
Critique of Habermas' Idea on the Theory of Knowledge as a Social Theory
The essay of Habemas on the Theory of Knowledge as a Social Theory elicits the sense of reading a Marxist thinker on the side of Postmodernism. He has a concrete grasp of Marxist social and economic theories, alternating with Hegelian concepts of dialectics.
The existence of the relationship between the knowledge of nature and man’s harnessing power over it should be recognized. The mastery of science will only remain in the books if it is not transformed into usable technology by the workingman. The steam engine and all other innovations and inventions which the world enjoys at present were created by the input of labor by the workingman on the knowledge generated from harnessing nature.
On the other hand, the theory of relativity by Einstein will only remain up in the air if it were not tested by the discovery of nuclear fusion and fission, which in turn created nuclear reactors for electricity and its evil counterpart – the nuclear bombs of every kind and size threatening the world with annihilation. This then verifies Habermas’ assertions on control of the natural processes being an instrument of control of social life processes. For the longest time since the Atom Bomb, the world has been shrieking in fear at the thought of a nuclear war between superpowers, especially during the Cold War. This nuclear blackmail is being foisted upon rogue nations such as Cuba, Iran, and North Korea etc. to compel them to kowtow to the might power of the lone superpower in the world. It is also this irony of the control of technology which creates further contradictions between US imperialism and the world’s peoples. Aside from nuclear weapons, US imperialism has consistently patented products, goods, inventions and discoveries which will hold the world at its mercy in terms of international trade. It is using technology as a carrot stick to continue the subservience of its neo-colonies, even to the extent of exploiting even the resources and discoveries of its neo-colonies for its own technological advancements.
While Habermas affirmed the need for revolutionary activity as a result of the continued existence of social classes, class antagonisms in society, he erred in his utter dependence on technology as a motive force in the emancipation of the proletariat. There is such a thing as an uneven development of societies and technical knowledge differs greatly from one society to another. Does this mean then that emancipation can only come to advanced capitalist states in the sense that the evolution of the capitalist mode of production will necessarily lead to a heightened stage in the class war between the bourgeois and the proletariat? He will then be no different from the German Social-Democrats who insisted on parliamentary forms of struggle in the hope who thought that the development of the economy of Germany would lead to a crisis of overproduction. But as Althusser quipped, it did lead to a crisis of overproduction which led to the imperialist wars for territory but revolutionary rupture was never there, if at all, only for a few weeks or months, after which the fascists and Nazis grabbed power away in the Reichstag.
Shall the same be said of countries which up to now are beset by rabid imperialism, in the wake of a global crisis triggering the need for a supranational economic organization to manage peacefully the surplus goods to these nations? Countries like such have stunted economic growths and collapsed domestic economies with little technical know-how than its industrialized counterparts. But the contradictions in these countries are great, if not greater than the contradictions present in states using technical knowledge to advance its ends. This confirms, however, his assertions that capitalism uses masks, pretending emancipation due to the transfer of necessary labor to machinery. What he has to realize, though, is that it is this technical knowledge which precisely alienates the worker from his work, and more often than not, is the reason for his retrenchment. It should be remembered that this technology diffusion from the hands of the laborer to the machine is not a bridge towards emancipation, but a factor that determines the struggle for emancipation.
He asserts that the materialist spell will never be broken unless it is broken technologically. It is a direct revision of Marxist concepts regarding the economy being the base of all superstructures in society. The emancipation of necessary labor and transfer to technical processes is not a surefire guarantee that the materialist spell will be broken as natural processes and the corresponding technological advancements is a mere part of the mode of production and not the entirety of the mode of production. Althusser was better in deviating form classical Marxism by asserting the independence of superstructures in the determination and resolution of contradictions. To answer that contradictions in society will be resolved because of technology is not only erroneous but does not hold theoretical grounding.
Class-consciousness and the need to wage revolution are present in the minds of the productive forces even during the backward stages of development of the economy. The generalization in this matter should never be Eurocentric, involving only advanced capitalist states with a broad industrial base and the majority of population comprising of workers. The conditions in every state where there are class contradictions are different and should not be pigeonholed into a catch-all framework of class consciousness. Doing so would invalidate the dialectics of social classes. There will be class-consciousness as long as class contradictions in societies exist, though the magnitude of such consciousness may be limited to an advanced group of class-conscious individuals at an earlier stage of the class contradictions. There are gradations, yes, in the ability of the working-class for example, to comprehend their situation and consolidate themselves to wage revolution. This is brought about by cyclical economic contradictions in a society such as crises in overproduction. But the working-class is not waiting for an advanced stage of capitalism to push forward in order for them to gain class-consciousness. From the most backward stage of capitalism to the most advanced stage, there will be class contradictions and such premise is enough to create the conditions of class-consciousness.
The existence of the relationship between the knowledge of nature and man’s harnessing power over it should be recognized. The mastery of science will only remain in the books if it is not transformed into usable technology by the workingman. The steam engine and all other innovations and inventions which the world enjoys at present were created by the input of labor by the workingman on the knowledge generated from harnessing nature.
On the other hand, the theory of relativity by Einstein will only remain up in the air if it were not tested by the discovery of nuclear fusion and fission, which in turn created nuclear reactors for electricity and its evil counterpart – the nuclear bombs of every kind and size threatening the world with annihilation. This then verifies Habermas’ assertions on control of the natural processes being an instrument of control of social life processes. For the longest time since the Atom Bomb, the world has been shrieking in fear at the thought of a nuclear war between superpowers, especially during the Cold War. This nuclear blackmail is being foisted upon rogue nations such as Cuba, Iran, and North Korea etc. to compel them to kowtow to the might power of the lone superpower in the world. It is also this irony of the control of technology which creates further contradictions between US imperialism and the world’s peoples. Aside from nuclear weapons, US imperialism has consistently patented products, goods, inventions and discoveries which will hold the world at its mercy in terms of international trade. It is using technology as a carrot stick to continue the subservience of its neo-colonies, even to the extent of exploiting even the resources and discoveries of its neo-colonies for its own technological advancements.
While Habermas affirmed the need for revolutionary activity as a result of the continued existence of social classes, class antagonisms in society, he erred in his utter dependence on technology as a motive force in the emancipation of the proletariat. There is such a thing as an uneven development of societies and technical knowledge differs greatly from one society to another. Does this mean then that emancipation can only come to advanced capitalist states in the sense that the evolution of the capitalist mode of production will necessarily lead to a heightened stage in the class war between the bourgeois and the proletariat? He will then be no different from the German Social-Democrats who insisted on parliamentary forms of struggle in the hope who thought that the development of the economy of Germany would lead to a crisis of overproduction. But as Althusser quipped, it did lead to a crisis of overproduction which led to the imperialist wars for territory but revolutionary rupture was never there, if at all, only for a few weeks or months, after which the fascists and Nazis grabbed power away in the Reichstag.
Shall the same be said of countries which up to now are beset by rabid imperialism, in the wake of a global crisis triggering the need for a supranational economic organization to manage peacefully the surplus goods to these nations? Countries like such have stunted economic growths and collapsed domestic economies with little technical know-how than its industrialized counterparts. But the contradictions in these countries are great, if not greater than the contradictions present in states using technical knowledge to advance its ends. This confirms, however, his assertions that capitalism uses masks, pretending emancipation due to the transfer of necessary labor to machinery. What he has to realize, though, is that it is this technical knowledge which precisely alienates the worker from his work, and more often than not, is the reason for his retrenchment. It should be remembered that this technology diffusion from the hands of the laborer to the machine is not a bridge towards emancipation, but a factor that determines the struggle for emancipation.
He asserts that the materialist spell will never be broken unless it is broken technologically. It is a direct revision of Marxist concepts regarding the economy being the base of all superstructures in society. The emancipation of necessary labor and transfer to technical processes is not a surefire guarantee that the materialist spell will be broken as natural processes and the corresponding technological advancements is a mere part of the mode of production and not the entirety of the mode of production. Althusser was better in deviating form classical Marxism by asserting the independence of superstructures in the determination and resolution of contradictions. To answer that contradictions in society will be resolved because of technology is not only erroneous but does not hold theoretical grounding.
Class-consciousness and the need to wage revolution are present in the minds of the productive forces even during the backward stages of development of the economy. The generalization in this matter should never be Eurocentric, involving only advanced capitalist states with a broad industrial base and the majority of population comprising of workers. The conditions in every state where there are class contradictions are different and should not be pigeonholed into a catch-all framework of class consciousness. Doing so would invalidate the dialectics of social classes. There will be class-consciousness as long as class contradictions in societies exist, though the magnitude of such consciousness may be limited to an advanced group of class-conscious individuals at an earlier stage of the class contradictions. There are gradations, yes, in the ability of the working-class for example, to comprehend their situation and consolidate themselves to wage revolution. This is brought about by cyclical economic contradictions in a society such as crises in overproduction. But the working-class is not waiting for an advanced stage of capitalism to push forward in order for them to gain class-consciousness. From the most backward stage of capitalism to the most advanced stage, there will be class contradictions and such premise is enough to create the conditions of class-consciousness.
The Role of the Public Sector Workers in the Class Struggle
The public sector workers in National Government Agencies are mostly part of the middle and the left-wing section of the petty-bourgeois class. They are grossly overworked and underpaid by a reactionary State which has an ultimate aim of perpetuating itself in power to continue forth with the existing relations of production in a semi-feudal and semi-colonial Philippine society. Public sector workers have yet to get increases in their salaries as their campaign for a 3000 across-the-board increase is yet to be acted upon by the State whose annual task is to pay more foreign debts to imperialist-led multi-lateral financial institutions.
The state, led by the local allies of imperialism, which essentially are composed of landlords and comprador-bourgeoisie, continue kowtowing to imperialist frameworks of development pegged on foreign aid and capital. The rationalization policies of government in the guise of re-engineering the bureaucracy are part of this collusion among the ruling class and its imperialist masters. The goal of the rationalization policy is not to provide efficient services and maximize economy in government really but to divert more and more funds into debt servicing which by this year accounts to more than seventy percent of the annual budgetary appropriations. This is necessarily done by local allies of imperialism to continue wielding economic and political powers over the classes it is in conflict with – the proletariat, the peasantry, the petty-bourgeois which government employees are part of, and the vacillating national bourgeois.
Such is the reason why despite years of struggle and political campaigns by government workers to increase their salaries, it still has fallen into the state’s deaf ears. The interests of the public sector workers is never a part of the agenda of a state dominated by the ruling class of compradors and landlords because it is diametrically opposed with the interests of their class in the need to pay tributes to their foreign masters. The state is also using state apparatuses such as civil service laws to stifle the rights of these public sector workers from voicing out their just demands as prior restraints such as the limit on the right to strike and the ban on political activity. These are effectively utilized by the state to keep their salaries at a very minimum and lay-off its employees on demand with very little opposition.
Though they may be a part of the government machinery, the resounding character and consciousness of their class persists as the lowly government worker is not a bit like his/her political appointee boss in terms of getting multi-million kickbacks from the spoils of government contracts, among others. While it is true that a lot of government employees sometimes engage in under-the-table dealings, this is brought about by the economic fact that despite working very long hours in a cramped government office, less than ten thousand pesos is what he/she gets for all the effort he has put into his/her work. This role as a government employee in a reactionary state machinery is confusing for the petty-bourgeois consciousness which practically explains why in the most part, a lot of government employees still opt to continue working than join political struggles such as that which opposes their very retrenchment from office.
While they fully realize that it is the very State that they serve which is the cause of all their misery and alienation, many still opt to be its willing servants, not because of trust and belief in a reactionary State but for sheer lack of other means of employment. But in the event of a snowballing of support for their sector’s cause and the clear threat of retrenchment or on a larger scale, the cause of ousting a president who ordered their retrenchment, there is little doubt that they might join the political struggles in the future.
As such, it is essential for public sector employees to arouse, organize and mobilize themselves into potent political actors in advancing their demands for job security and higher wages. The state will not give these demands on a silver platter. It should be struggled for by the government employees, alongside the struggles of the Filipino people.
The state, led by the local allies of imperialism, which essentially are composed of landlords and comprador-bourgeoisie, continue kowtowing to imperialist frameworks of development pegged on foreign aid and capital. The rationalization policies of government in the guise of re-engineering the bureaucracy are part of this collusion among the ruling class and its imperialist masters. The goal of the rationalization policy is not to provide efficient services and maximize economy in government really but to divert more and more funds into debt servicing which by this year accounts to more than seventy percent of the annual budgetary appropriations. This is necessarily done by local allies of imperialism to continue wielding economic and political powers over the classes it is in conflict with – the proletariat, the peasantry, the petty-bourgeois which government employees are part of, and the vacillating national bourgeois.
Such is the reason why despite years of struggle and political campaigns by government workers to increase their salaries, it still has fallen into the state’s deaf ears. The interests of the public sector workers is never a part of the agenda of a state dominated by the ruling class of compradors and landlords because it is diametrically opposed with the interests of their class in the need to pay tributes to their foreign masters. The state is also using state apparatuses such as civil service laws to stifle the rights of these public sector workers from voicing out their just demands as prior restraints such as the limit on the right to strike and the ban on political activity. These are effectively utilized by the state to keep their salaries at a very minimum and lay-off its employees on demand with very little opposition.
Though they may be a part of the government machinery, the resounding character and consciousness of their class persists as the lowly government worker is not a bit like his/her political appointee boss in terms of getting multi-million kickbacks from the spoils of government contracts, among others. While it is true that a lot of government employees sometimes engage in under-the-table dealings, this is brought about by the economic fact that despite working very long hours in a cramped government office, less than ten thousand pesos is what he/she gets for all the effort he has put into his/her work. This role as a government employee in a reactionary state machinery is confusing for the petty-bourgeois consciousness which practically explains why in the most part, a lot of government employees still opt to continue working than join political struggles such as that which opposes their very retrenchment from office.
While they fully realize that it is the very State that they serve which is the cause of all their misery and alienation, many still opt to be its willing servants, not because of trust and belief in a reactionary State but for sheer lack of other means of employment. But in the event of a snowballing of support for their sector’s cause and the clear threat of retrenchment or on a larger scale, the cause of ousting a president who ordered their retrenchment, there is little doubt that they might join the political struggles in the future.
As such, it is essential for public sector employees to arouse, organize and mobilize themselves into potent political actors in advancing their demands for job security and higher wages. The state will not give these demands on a silver platter. It should be struggled for by the government employees, alongside the struggles of the Filipino people.
The role of the petty-bourgeois class in the class struggle
In a semi-feudal and semi-colonial society such as ours, the role of the petty-bourgeois in the class struggle and ultimately, in the triumph of the revolution is very critical. According to Mao Zedong, the petty-bourgeois class deserves special attention due to its class character and size. (Mao, 1926) This class includes, “the owner-peasants, the master handicraftsmen, the lower levels of the intellectuals--students, primary and secondary school teachers, lower government functionaries, office clerks, small lawyers--and the small traders.” (Mao, 1926) He divides the petty-bourgeois into three sections. The first are mostly engaged in small-scale production such as master handicraftsmen and owner-peasants. The middle section of the petty-bourgeois is “suffering from the oppression and exploitation of the imperialists, the warlords, the feudal landlords and the big comprador-bourgeoisie, they have become aware that the world is no longer what it was. They feel they cannot earn enough to live on by just putting in as much work as before. To make both ends meet they have to work longer hours, get up earlier, leave off later, and be doubly careful at their work.” (Mao, 1926) This middle section includes a lot of office workers and professionals who would always rather remain neutral or hesitant to join any political struggle, but do not oppose it.
The third section of the petty bourgeois may be aptly called the left-wing of the class as it “consists of those whose standard of living is falling. Many in this section, who originally belonged to better-off families, are undergoing a gradual change from a position of being barely able to manage to one of living in more and more reduced circumstances. When they come to settle their accounts at the end of each year, they are shocked, exclaiming, "What? Another deficit!" As such people have seen better days and are now going downhill with every passing year, their debts mounting and their life becoming more and more miserable, they "shudder at the thought of the future". They are in great mental distress because there is such a contrast between their past and their present.” (Mao, 1926) This is the section where public school teachers and government functionaries are part of at a time when their salaries are stunted despite constant price increases of commodities and services.
According to Mao, the petty-bourgeois is a friend of the revolution as they too are part of those oppressed and exploited by the ruling class of “warlords, the bureaucrats, the comprador class, the big landlord class and the reactionary section of the intelligentsia attached to them.”
The third section of the petty bourgeois may be aptly called the left-wing of the class as it “consists of those whose standard of living is falling. Many in this section, who originally belonged to better-off families, are undergoing a gradual change from a position of being barely able to manage to one of living in more and more reduced circumstances. When they come to settle their accounts at the end of each year, they are shocked, exclaiming, "What? Another deficit!" As such people have seen better days and are now going downhill with every passing year, their debts mounting and their life becoming more and more miserable, they "shudder at the thought of the future". They are in great mental distress because there is such a contrast between their past and their present.” (Mao, 1926) This is the section where public school teachers and government functionaries are part of at a time when their salaries are stunted despite constant price increases of commodities and services.
According to Mao, the petty-bourgeois is a friend of the revolution as they too are part of those oppressed and exploited by the ruling class of “warlords, the bureaucrats, the comprador class, the big landlord class and the reactionary section of the intelligentsia attached to them.”
The State functions as the instrument of the ruling class
It is there to preserve the status quo and render powerless the exploited and the oppressed. Lenin paraphrased Marx in his book State and Revolution by saying, “…the state is an organ of class rule, an organ for the oppression of one class by another; it is the creation of "order", which legalizes and perpetuates this oppression by moderating the conflict between classes.” (Lenin, 1917)
Moreover, Engels, in his Work on The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State expounded on the rise of the state in the midst of the conflict between classes by saying, “"Because the state arose from the need to hold class antagonisms in check, but because it arose, at the same time, in the midst of the conflict of these classes, it is, as a rule, the state of the most powerful, economically dominant class, which, through the medium of the state, becomes also the politically dominant class, and thus acquires new means of holding down and exploiting the oppressed class...." (Engels, 1884)
The state then becomes an instrument of repression to continue the existence of the ruling class and the relations of production. Engels continues by saying, “Society thus far, operating amid class antagonisms, needed the state, that is, an organization of the particular exploiting class, for the maintenance of its external conditions of production, and, therefore, especially, for the purpose of forcibly keeping the exploited class in the conditions of oppression determined by the given mode of production (slavery, serfdom or bondage, wage-labor).”
The notion then of the State by Hegel as the reality or the Truth of people’s collective consciousness is also shattered and instead, exposed as working in the service of the ruling class. Louis Althusser thus declares, “…the essence of the State…is no longer above human groups, but at the service of the ruling class; it is no longer religion and philosophy, but to set them to serve the interests of the ruling class, or rather to force them to base themselves on ideas and themes which it renders ruling; it therefore ceases to be the ‘truth of’ civil society, to become, not the ‘truth of’ something else, not even of the economy, but the means of action and domination of a social class. etc.” (Althusser 1962)
The State then was created by the ruling class to preserve itself in power, to tip the balance of power in its favor, using bourgeois law as its legal basis for existence and police powers to threaten all those who seek to question and overthrow especially the exploited and the oppressed.
Moreover, Engels, in his Work on The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State expounded on the rise of the state in the midst of the conflict between classes by saying, “"Because the state arose from the need to hold class antagonisms in check, but because it arose, at the same time, in the midst of the conflict of these classes, it is, as a rule, the state of the most powerful, economically dominant class, which, through the medium of the state, becomes also the politically dominant class, and thus acquires new means of holding down and exploiting the oppressed class...." (Engels, 1884)
The state then becomes an instrument of repression to continue the existence of the ruling class and the relations of production. Engels continues by saying, “Society thus far, operating amid class antagonisms, needed the state, that is, an organization of the particular exploiting class, for the maintenance of its external conditions of production, and, therefore, especially, for the purpose of forcibly keeping the exploited class in the conditions of oppression determined by the given mode of production (slavery, serfdom or bondage, wage-labor).”
The notion then of the State by Hegel as the reality or the Truth of people’s collective consciousness is also shattered and instead, exposed as working in the service of the ruling class. Louis Althusser thus declares, “…the essence of the State…is no longer above human groups, but at the service of the ruling class; it is no longer religion and philosophy, but to set them to serve the interests of the ruling class, or rather to force them to base themselves on ideas and themes which it renders ruling; it therefore ceases to be the ‘truth of’ civil society, to become, not the ‘truth of’ something else, not even of the economy, but the means of action and domination of a social class. etc.” (Althusser 1962)
The State then was created by the ruling class to preserve itself in power, to tip the balance of power in its favor, using bourgeois law as its legal basis for existence and police powers to threaten all those who seek to question and overthrow especially the exploited and the oppressed.
Alingawngaw ng mga Punglo: Isang Pagninilay
Ang sosyo-ekonomikong base ng pasismo ay ang mismong base ng kilusang pambansa-demokratiko – ang masa. Hindi ito katulad ng pasistang diktadura-militar sa Latina Amerika kung saan panggitnang saray ang malaking bilang ng kasundaluhan. Doon, lantarang instrumento ng burges na paghahari ang kasundaluhan upang maikonsolida ang hawak nito sa kapangyarihan ng estado-poder. Dito, ang pagsusundalo ay bunsod ng kawalan ng ibang larangang mapagkukuhanan ng pantustos sa pang-araw-araw na pangangailangan ng isang mahirap na pamilya.
Ito ang pinakamalungkot na anggulo ng patuloy na paghahasik ng lagim at pagyurak sa karapatang-pantao ng rehimeng ito at ng mga nakalipas pa. Ginagawang bala ang kapwa masa laban sa sarili niyang kauri upang maipagpatuloy lamang ang makadayuhang balangkas ng ekonomiya ng bansa at maipagpatuloy lamang ang lokal na paghahari ng iilang nakikinabang sa pawis at dugo ng sambayanan. Ang mga gumagawa ng tortyur at pagpaslang sa mga ligal na aktibista ng bayan ay mismong nagmula sa mga uring inaapi at pinagsasamantalahan sa isang malapyudal at malakolonyal na sistema. Lumilikha naman ang estado ng salik upang bigyang katuwiran ang ganitong pagpatay – kesyo mga kaaway ng estado, subersibo, komunista at ngayon, terorista na ang tanging balak gawin ay maghasik ng kaguluhan at agawin ang kapangyarihan.
Matatawag kaya silang pusakal na mga mersenaryo? Mersenaryo siguro, pero hindi pusakal na mersenaryo. Ang ganyang katawagan ay para lamang sa mga katulad ni Maj. Gen. Palparan na wala nang ginawa sa bawat probinsyang pagdestinuhan kundi patingkarin ang pagdurog sa mga ligal na organisasyon ng kilusan. Mersenaryo sila sapagkat kapwa nila masa ang kanilang pinagdurusa, para lamang sa kakarampot na sahod at butas na botas. Pero kung kapit ka nga naman sa patalim, paanong hindi mo gagawin ang utos ni Colonel na sunugin ang baryong pinagtataguan ng Hukbo?
Kung ang pangmatagalang pakikibaka para sa lupa, dagdag na sahod, pambansang industriyalisasyon, dekalidad na edukasyon, pabahay, trabaho at iba pa ay ituturing na kilos ng terorismo, higit na mabuti yatang pahirapan, apihin at paslangin kung para sa interes naman ng sambayanan ang pilit na sinusulong at ipinagwawagi. Tama lamang ang tiyempo ng pagpapalabas ng Alingawngaw. Ilang araw lang bago isulat ang sanaysay na ito, pinaslang ang lider-manggagawa ng Nestle Philippines, si Ka Fort Fortuna.
Lubhang nakakabahala ito sapagkat katatapos lamang ng paggunita ng deklarasyon ng Batas Militar ay mayroon nang ganitong pangyayari laban sa mga pwersang lumalaban sa rehimen. Higit pang nakakatakot sapagkat nakaamba ang mga pahayag ukol sa napipintong pagdeklara kuno ng kasalukuyang rehimen ng Batas Militar. Pero hindi ba hindi deklaradong Batas Militar ang nakapangyayari sa lipunang Pilipino ngayon? Nabuo ang Alingawngaw noong umpisa ng termino ni Gloria Arroyo. Apat na taon na ang nakalipas, limpak-limpak na ang kaso ng rehimeng ito ng paglabag ng karapatang pantao, kabilang dito ang pagpaslang, tortyur, pagsosona, pagsusunog ng mga baryo at iba pang krimen laban sa sambayanan.
Hanggang sa araw na ito, wala pa ring napaparusahan sa mga salarin ng mga paglabag na ito. Walang pinipili ang rehimen – media, aktibista, makabayang pulitiko. Hanggang ngayon, nakaupo pa rin sa Malakanyang ang isang pasista at huwad na pangulo. Huwag siyang mag-alala. Magtatagpo rin sila sa wakas ng Kasaysayan. Darating ang araw na mapapawi rin ang luha ng isang bayang api at masang pinagsamantalahan. Tiyak iyan. Lagi’t laging may daan patungo sa paglaya.
Ito ang pinakamalungkot na anggulo ng patuloy na paghahasik ng lagim at pagyurak sa karapatang-pantao ng rehimeng ito at ng mga nakalipas pa. Ginagawang bala ang kapwa masa laban sa sarili niyang kauri upang maipagpatuloy lamang ang makadayuhang balangkas ng ekonomiya ng bansa at maipagpatuloy lamang ang lokal na paghahari ng iilang nakikinabang sa pawis at dugo ng sambayanan. Ang mga gumagawa ng tortyur at pagpaslang sa mga ligal na aktibista ng bayan ay mismong nagmula sa mga uring inaapi at pinagsasamantalahan sa isang malapyudal at malakolonyal na sistema. Lumilikha naman ang estado ng salik upang bigyang katuwiran ang ganitong pagpatay – kesyo mga kaaway ng estado, subersibo, komunista at ngayon, terorista na ang tanging balak gawin ay maghasik ng kaguluhan at agawin ang kapangyarihan.
Matatawag kaya silang pusakal na mga mersenaryo? Mersenaryo siguro, pero hindi pusakal na mersenaryo. Ang ganyang katawagan ay para lamang sa mga katulad ni Maj. Gen. Palparan na wala nang ginawa sa bawat probinsyang pagdestinuhan kundi patingkarin ang pagdurog sa mga ligal na organisasyon ng kilusan. Mersenaryo sila sapagkat kapwa nila masa ang kanilang pinagdurusa, para lamang sa kakarampot na sahod at butas na botas. Pero kung kapit ka nga naman sa patalim, paanong hindi mo gagawin ang utos ni Colonel na sunugin ang baryong pinagtataguan ng Hukbo?
Kung ang pangmatagalang pakikibaka para sa lupa, dagdag na sahod, pambansang industriyalisasyon, dekalidad na edukasyon, pabahay, trabaho at iba pa ay ituturing na kilos ng terorismo, higit na mabuti yatang pahirapan, apihin at paslangin kung para sa interes naman ng sambayanan ang pilit na sinusulong at ipinagwawagi. Tama lamang ang tiyempo ng pagpapalabas ng Alingawngaw. Ilang araw lang bago isulat ang sanaysay na ito, pinaslang ang lider-manggagawa ng Nestle Philippines, si Ka Fort Fortuna.
Lubhang nakakabahala ito sapagkat katatapos lamang ng paggunita ng deklarasyon ng Batas Militar ay mayroon nang ganitong pangyayari laban sa mga pwersang lumalaban sa rehimen. Higit pang nakakatakot sapagkat nakaamba ang mga pahayag ukol sa napipintong pagdeklara kuno ng kasalukuyang rehimen ng Batas Militar. Pero hindi ba hindi deklaradong Batas Militar ang nakapangyayari sa lipunang Pilipino ngayon? Nabuo ang Alingawngaw noong umpisa ng termino ni Gloria Arroyo. Apat na taon na ang nakalipas, limpak-limpak na ang kaso ng rehimeng ito ng paglabag ng karapatang pantao, kabilang dito ang pagpaslang, tortyur, pagsosona, pagsusunog ng mga baryo at iba pang krimen laban sa sambayanan.
Hanggang sa araw na ito, wala pa ring napaparusahan sa mga salarin ng mga paglabag na ito. Walang pinipili ang rehimen – media, aktibista, makabayang pulitiko. Hanggang ngayon, nakaupo pa rin sa Malakanyang ang isang pasista at huwad na pangulo. Huwag siyang mag-alala. Magtatagpo rin sila sa wakas ng Kasaysayan. Darating ang araw na mapapawi rin ang luha ng isang bayang api at masang pinagsamantalahan. Tiyak iyan. Lagi’t laging may daan patungo sa paglaya.
