'This the season

"I am this... I am that... I will do this... I will do that... I will not..." 

All statements that are templates to every candidate's speech, most especially in Philippine politics. And truly, it is nothing but exhausting. Over and over again, for years even decades now, candidates have been repetitive in their promises. Most prominent is the promise to "eradicate poverty and corruption". I know that, they know that, we all know that. The only difference now is that the people seem to have a better grasp of how a general platform is not enough.

The people are tired and will no longer tolerate the empty promises that campaign season always brings with it in the mouths of the candidates. This time around though, it seems people are more prudent in selecting their leaders. Qualifications in capabilities are being scrutinized even by the people form the poorest of classes, rather than simply choosing a candidate on the mere basis of what they seem to be. This is a little surprising, but it is good. It shows that the people are awake. It shows the realization of concretizing an ideal. It shows a change and seems to have been dormant for a while. 

But still, it is not enough. The people are awake, but their senses are still clouded. Their judgments have more conference bases, but the bases are not reasonable at all times. And the prospect of the effects is scary. Our people are so starved of progress and hungry for change that it seems we will choose a leader who can promise everything in the blink of an eye.  It is scary because it means that while we are no longer willing to put up with their political ways, we are also no longer willing to put up with waiting. The prospect of wanting fast results is scary because not everything can be given thoroughly and correctly in the fastest means. 

At this point in our political development, we need a President who can and will be both the dark and the white knight. 

To the candidates this coming elections, I plead you. Back down if you have no good intentions for this country and its people. Be honorable, be just, and be excellent in your intentions.

To the people of the Philippines beg you, please choose wisely. Vote for the one whom you think and see can bring development to this be labored country in the next six years. Vote for a statesman, not a politician.

Yours,

Czarina

P.S. 

Recommended books for our candidates and voters to read:

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli

The Little Prince by Antoine Sant Exubery

The Tao of Pooh by Benjamin Hoff

The Te of Piglet by Benjamin Hoff

Rich Dad Poor Dad by Robert T. Kiyosako

Freakonomics by Steven D. Levity and Stephen J. Dubner

Blink by Malcom Gladwell

David and Goliath by Malcom Gladwell

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

Justice for the Fallen 44

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

#JeSuis

I am not French, nor am I Jewish or Muslim. I am an artist, and I am a Catholic. As an artist, I sympathize for the members of the French press. As a Catholic, I grieve with them because it was a senseless loss of precious lives. Producing and publishing that work of art was within their rights. Freedom of the press, as we call it, and freedom of expression go together like two peas in a pod; and the publication of that cartoon was merely an example of these rights. However like all rights, even these have limitations. Thus begs the question, was this expression too far? 

In the Philippines, the limits of the exercise of these rights were tested when an incident in August 2010 shook the country. A local police officer held as hostages a bus full of tourists for a whole day as a form of revenge against the force. While on the bus, the suspect and the tourists all tuned in to the local news channels and heard about the movements of the task force. The incident ended in the loss of the lives of all but one tourist. Even the suspect died. This to me seems a good parallel of how freedom of expression through freedom of the press can go too far.

But were the incidents in Paris anything like this?

In my sole opinion, it may have partly been. Yes it may have been because of the explicit display of critique on the varying religious beliefs. As a Catholic My religious affections would have been scraped if it were my God criticized in a way I think is unbecoming. But, as a Catholic as well, I would exercise control over my feelings and be more understanding of others, and not condone violence. This is not the way to deal with it. I cannot speak for those who reacted so violently in the face of so little a threat, but I can speak the thoughts of their religious leaders based on their own words. And I can say that we have the same opinions on the matter.

Partly may have been because despite the knowledge of growing religious tensions in their area, they still chose to publish the cartoon embodying thoughts that they knew would spark religious controversies. As an artist, the knowledge of having to limit my expression to conform with society's emotions and thoughts puts a hamper on my creative process and the results of my work. But because we do live in societies, thinking about others cannot be prevented. Not even when this means producing artwork that would not contain the full extent of the thoughts and emotions I intend to impart. It may have been careless disregard on the part of the victims, or fierce loyalty and violent reactions on the part of the suspects. I do not know which one had more weight in causing the incidents, but one thing I am certain is that too much of anything is never good.

In drawing a parallel on the Paris and Manila incidences, I do not mean to state that the press should stop publishing critiques because that is precisely one of their purposes. I also do not mean to state that the religious should not take offense against wrongful interpretations of their beliefs. We are entitled to both these rights, but that does not mean we always are.

In the context of the law there is such a thing as abuse of rights. This happens when a person exercises a right granted to him by law, or one that is inherent in him, in a way that it impedes upon the rights of others. This incident I think is a good example of what could happen when two factions abuse their rights against one another. 

To everything we are granted, and to everything we are given, there is always a limit. I hope that this disturbing incident leaves a mark in our hearts and in our minds to remind us always of our actions.

My condolences to the victims and their families.

Czarina 

January 10, 2015- 11:00pm

Nothing good comes out of blind empty acts

"Preferably iced tea please"

"Air condition and a pitcher of cold drink, preferably iced tea please. Thank you darling." It is a request you would hear from the rich and famous asking their hired help for amenities, not from convicted and detainees in a maximum facility prison. Alas, this is the Philippines, and prisoner or not, legislators seem to think they deserve only the best of the best no matter what.

Senator Miriam, I commend you, truly and honestly for your efforts in the "No frills bill". It basically states that there shall be no preferential or special treatment for VIP inmates. I agree with your advocacy and standard of outlook in the laws. However, no good intention comes unwarranted, especially when you're a politician in the Philippines.

If this bill ever gets passed, this will yet be another law providing clearer policies and guidelines for Filipinos regarding political affairs. This bill adheres to the standard that "the law is harsh but it is the law." But if this bill does get passed into a law, what does that say about the rest of the Filipino society? Are the current laws not clear enough, particularly the constitution and the rules on criminal procedure, and our criminal laws, regarding the matters of improsonment and the rights and obligations of prisoners? 

I should like to think that with all the general and special laws surrounding the matter, that there should be no issue on this. And yet here we are, reading news articles showing how obtuse and self regarded these politicians are. Should it not already be clear to all that how the law works? Apparently not so. What does it say then about The Filipino judicial and legislative systems that we still need such a legislation just to show us what is already embedded in the constitution?

Intriguing, yet not so material. Depressing, no?

Think about it. But in all honesty, I do admire Senator Miriam for her courage, strength and advocacy on the matter. If only all legislators were as educated and strong as she. The possibility of future legislators being like her is exciting. Then again, if the current ones live long, the future seems like it will be just as glib as it is now.

Kudos Senator Miriam! I hope for the best outcome in this endeavor.

But if you ask me? I suggest a bill passing the establishment of a new maximum facility prison in the middle of an offshore island in the west Philippine sea, preferably close to Spratlys, exclusively for the VIP. Now I think they would prefer that better, don't you?

Most enticed,

Czarina

P.S.

Here is a link to an article by Rappler on how our legislators seem to think they are gods on earth who deserve nothing but the best from the worst: 

http://www.rappler.com/nation/61198-miriam-no-vip-treatment-inmates-senators

Enjoy! Oh and do be careful and watch your blood pressure while reading their requests.

How glib Mr. President, how glib

Indeed smiles can go a long way, just as much as pointing fingers can save your face. Today, one of the Philippines' most famous senators, a former movie actor, voluntarily submits himself to the anti-graft court and asks for bail.

If a common thief were to ask for such, it is a right that shall be granted him upon compliance with the rules of procedure. The same I hope goes for this man and his corrupt colleagues. There is just something to be said for an administration that began its campaign and its governance on leading a straightforward path of transparency, then turning sideways and back at its own discretion just to prove a point. But I am getting ahead of myself. The issue(s) plaguing me about this PDAF scandal are the following:

1. In the course of identifying officials that shall be charged under the anti-plunder and anti-graft and corrupt practices act, there seems to be a selective justice being implemented. For one, if the goal is to try and convict all those who have misappropriated the funds, then should not all of the previous legislators who received them from the time they were allotted be investigated upon? Why is it that only those from the previous administration are the ones being investigated?

One of my professors might call this the peanut butter strategy, which is the very one that the other senator charged used during one of his speeches. But I countermand right now that it is not. My concern is not for the sake of those who are being investigated now, but for the lack in diligence that the adminsitration seems to be practicing. It is not easy work to carry out I am sure, however, if you will pursue something as vigorous a task as this, make sure that you do it thoroughly and evenly. Do not be so limited because of certain political constraints. Which brings me to issue number two.

2. While the list or the "Napolist" is being developed, one of our professor gave the assignment that we conduct our own research under a presumption that published articles and data regarding all officials suspected are true. Our research lead us to reveal about one thousand legislators and members of the executive then and now to be included in the list. Of course this is on a presumption, but given the data we based our research on were accurate, I would speculate that the list published is meager. There are about fifty names on that list out of a possible one thousand. Probably those were the only ones they could find clear and convincing evidence against at the moment.

At this point, that is forgivable since it is difficult to provide the names. However, I do encourage the executive to release more names despite the lack of clear and convincing proof against them. They are or were government officials you are investigating. They position means that they are in public office, which means that they must be ones who uphold the highest sense of morality and service in the country. Slight mishaps or felonies acts should qualify them as candidates because no such tolerance should be granted when it comes to government posts. Doing such taints and ruins the trust and dignity of the offices that should be held in the highest esteem. Which brings me to my third issue.

3. Being in government means transparency of service to the people. This was part of the campaign of the current president and was the goal of eliciting the "Napolist" in the first place. However, the problem with this method of weeding out does not seems to be apparent to all. So, allow me to elucidate on the matter. I mentioned earlier that the investigation is too limited to officials of the current and previous administration. It seems that this investigation only aims to go as far back as then, when the matter stretches way further back. How then is the matter of transparency of government to be attained?

One might notice that in recent months the government has been trying to attain this goal through internet communications. They have accounts on most of the most popular social networking sites, and they are revamping national and local government key websites.this is good, except that transparency goes beyond that. I know they are providing these as a means to provide more access to information and government services much easier. But as I said, it goes way beyond that. Transparency in government means no transgressions in or out of the system, by civilians and officials alike. However, this is not the current state, and will never be the state. Realistically then, transparency in government means no transgressions in the most visible and important offices. This brings me back to my first point, and we have gone full circle.


The people of the Philippines expect too much of its president and his current administration. They cannot be faulted for doing so because of the promises he must keep. However, that does not mean he must be expected to perfect every single promise he keep. But, a double negative is necessary here because though neither citizen and president can be faulted here, the bigger responsibility and burden of proving that government can be trusted is in the latter's hands.

Given the issues presented, I then pray to this administration to exercise the fair harshness of the law, as well as the extraordinary diligence expected of them. It might seem to much to ask, but that is their  prerogative. They asked to be elected, and they accepted the appointments, so they must face the   consequences.

I commend you on a job well done for ferreting at least three of the fifty, out of the possible one thousand corrupt officials you have. How obtuse. Will this investigation continue to be so? I guess we will never know. But of course I hope we do so, otherwise what would be the point of all of it, right?

Yours sincerely,

Czarina

P.S. 

I really have nothing more I wish to say, but just in case you missed it, the world of politics can never be clean and perfectly transparent. But I do hope you do not give up. This country needs more broomsticks in public office than it does in the midnight streets.

Trafficking is... tolerable

I seriously hope that people will not just stop and stare when they see something like this again. 

I also hope that the men who stayed to watch "the show" did not just walk away like nothing is wrong.Or if they did walk, I hope it is a walk of shame.

I earlier saw another video regarding feminism. I only want to add now to it a scene like this, where men are in the place of women.

Human trafficking is rampant no matter how much statistic governments all over the world release about having reduced its incidence. Actually, it may have reduced due to the fact that in some countries it is either not illegal, or it has been declared legal. It is not illegal when the law is silent on it, or indifferent towards it. It is legal when the law declares it to be allowed.

In this video we see the city of Amsterdam. It is well known that prostitution is legal in that city. This was done to allow the prostitutes a way to protect their rights as women, while working in the sex trade industry.

However, just because it is legal does not mean it is right. There is more to what is right than the law declaring it so. The law is merely a tool which states have created to regulate its citizens in conformity with the nation's interests and morals. It does not tell you how to treat another person with care. Nor does it show you how to respect. It only tries to embody those principles which we, as people, deem to be right.

So, if you think it is right that these women who hoped for better futures be subject to occupations they did not want, then I think there is something wrong. There is something wrong with what we think is right. 

For some of those men who watched them dance, the right thing to do was to react and slowly disperse from the crowd. For some of them maybe the right thing to do was to engage themselves in the anti-trafficking campaign. For some, maybe they will continue to patronize the sex trade industry. 




Truly yours,


Czarina

Impressionable Young Minds

It is true what they say about children that they have impressionable minds. And it is precisely because of that that we should take extra care and caution of what we say and do to them and around them. So it is not surprising that the children that grow up to be the best people we know are those who have been constantly given and shown the right amount of affection and discipline.

Butt to discipline a child is entirely different from abusing them. It is often suggested that some of the ways parents have used to discipline their young are already forms of child abuse. I remember in grade school there was this television program showing stories of children who have suffered abuse from their families. Oddly enough then, it seemed like a normal thing to me that those incidents happened in poor families. But fifteen years later I realize those incidents may be happening on a regular basis, but they should not be. In no person's eyes or thoughts should it ever be alright that a child be subject to any form of physical, mental, emotional, or social suffering.

I found an article written by my professor in Rights of Women and Children a few years ago. It lays down elements of what acts by adults would constitute discipline still, and what acts are those that are already borderlining abuse. You can find a copy of her article in the link below. One of those she listed down was if the act was anger-driven. It says in sum that when an adult punishes an action by a child because it caused him anger, then that act of punishment is a form of abuse. I personally experienced this as a child when my nanny scalded me with a hot kettle on my left shoulder when I was about three years old. She got infuriated with me for being a bit of a rugrat.

Child abuse need not be entirely physical as well. I remember one of my high school teachers in religion class shared one of his experiences as a child. We were discussing the power of spoken words could do to others and so we must be careful what we say to them. He noted that this care must be extended especially to children because children have such a terse memory and a fragile hearts, and so they can remember most what struck them most may it be positive or negative. He was in elementary school and they were rehearsing a dance performance for a school feast. During their rehearsals he had some difficulty following the steps so his teacher lost her temper at him. She marched onto the stage, he recalls, and pulled him by the arm and said "Bakit ba hindi mo makuha? Ang tanga tanga mo namang bata ka! Hindi ka marunong sumayaw!" 

Children have a way of retaining memories that affect them. That is probably why you could remember something from as far back when you were five or eight. You remember when someone calls you ugly, or stupid. You remember the first time you were praised for creating a grand sculpture or winning a medal for running. You remember it because it made you feel in a way that you liked, or that you did not.

Children remember as much of those because they are eager to learn. Instinctively, they learn through experience, and in experience, you listen with your mind and your heart. Because of that, childhood memories are sometimes hard to shake. There are so embedded in you that even when you try to forget some of them, you remember them again later on. And so this is what adults hope to achieve when they discipline their children. But just keep in mind and in heart that whatever children experience, they never forget, much like you do.

I just hope that this is not too much for you to remember. I hope you do not forget.


Here is the link to my professor's article:
http://pinayjustice.blogspot.com/2005/04/child-abuse-or-child-discipline.html



Hoping to inspire,


Czarina
April 3, 2014- 4:30pm
"Na sa kabataan ang pag-asa ng bayan."
                       - Dr. Jose P. Rizal

How bothersome

Watching the news today made me realize we are the specie that is never content with what we have. In a way it is a good thing because our thirst for bigger and better things drives us to be extraordinary. Most of the time though, we can never get our heads together and see what we have.

It is just disappointing. I don't know if somebody else out there sees it, but it seems no matter how much we try nothing better than the desire to live above standards will prevail. We are driven by desires and nothing more. We are blind to how this affects others. Or maybe there are those who see, but refuse to do anything. Maybe there are those who care, but end up doing the wrong thing. 

Maybe this is the sign that we are close to another world revolution.

-Czarina

A sincere thanks, from the people of the Philippines

In light of the recent events in the Philippines, I would like to extend the warmest thanks, on behalf of the Filipino people, to the international community for the quick responses. These initiatives you made to reach out to the Philippines warmed the hearts of those in need in the affected regions. Thank you for sending aid to the people in the Visayan region despite your non-affiliation towards us. It may be that some are obligated and some are not, but thank you nonetheless. Your aid will never be forgotten, I promise you that.

I would also like to thank the local international non-government organizations for their initiatives. Lastly, I would like to thank the other private institutions and other local governments for their efforts.

To the foreign aid governments, thank you for filling in the void that our national government seems incapable to do at this time. The amount of relief goods you sent in no doubt will reduce the state of anarchy in these areas. Also, thank you for reducing the task load of the national government in what they needed to provide for in such a state of calamity. At least now they could focus on reconstructing, restoring, and rehabilitating these cities.

To the non-government organizations, other local governments, and institutions, thank you for you relief efforts. Thank you for taking the initiative to help the victims make it through this tough period in their lives.

Now that you have taken care of this angle of the problem resolution, I have to wonder what our national government is doing to rehabilitate the areas destroyed not just by the typhoon, but also by the preceding earthquake. I guess now it is their turn. If only they will respond just as quick.

This is not the kind of Christmas that many of us here wished and hoped to have. But despite our losses, you gave us a glimpse of hope that we can move forward still. 

Thank you and may you have a blessed holiday ahead of you.

Greatfully yours,

Czarina

Medieval Governance

I would like to make a sarcastic note first:
"Want to take a trip back in time and see the middle ages? Oh wait, we're here already."

We are currently caught in the middle of the "pork barrel scandal". For this entry, I would like to recognize my esteemed professor in administrative law for giving our class this assignment because it just made me realize how much immature, or premature our government really is-- even with our glorified president in power right now.

As I write here, the newspapers are scattered with clippings and opinions on these funds. The news currently states that our government plans on abolishing these funds in the next budget allocation and adds that due to the findings of misuse and misappropriation of the funds by legislators, the budget is set to be re-allocated to the branch of government that should be the one to hold the funds for projects. The executive branch being at the forefront of this seems to be appropriate. I would also agree with the budget reform plans that they should be the branch given the funds since they are the ones

Coming fresh from reading medieval history, the excruciating image of the reign of monarchs is still in my head. Because of  this, I realized that there really is not much of a difference in the way they ruled and the way the state of our government is right now. I remember writing a few years ago in my political science essay that our government is still young and underdeveloped despite being in the advent of the age of technological advancements. It is sad to think, but I still hold that opinion today. The horrible part is probably that the whole scheme of it is familiar to that period of state governance when king-militants were necessary. I guess this shows just how much we have progressed in the area of state governance. Or has it?

But what I think is worse of it is that I held out hope for impending development. But to give the President the benefit of the doubt, I do believe and think that he is doing a better job than any of the past administrations-- other than Magsaysay of course.

What is it then with the medieval ages that I found is so familiar still in today's government? The discretion. Back then, the king held all the power subject to what he deemed would be a favorable decision to God's will. He gave grants and gifts to his kinsmen as a form of political alliance. This was to show that the power and resources were being distributed evenly so that they would reach the people, the ultimate beneficiaries of it all. He decides then who gets the royal titles, and the lands and riches that go along with them and who gets the favors from the royal treasury. Evidently, it is up to his good graces. The decision as to who gets what is decided by a single factor, political alliance. As a result, members of the royalty tried their best to be on the king and queen's favor in hopes of being given those titles.

Today those good graces and discretionary powers of the king are apparently still around. History would show us that several treaties and international conventions were signed to strip monarchs of such powers. Thus the formation of other forms of government. The laws were revised and the separation of powers were encoded in what several states today call the constitution. In our country's current state, I slowly realized how much the separation of powers imbibed in the constitution serves only as a reminder, but that it takes no particular effect to the actual exercise of these powers. 

Dani

November 7, 2013- 10:42PM

Take everything with a grain of salt

I've Got this in the Bag!

That was just one of the few phrases that lingered in my head as I pretended to be one of the top contending candidates for this year's senatorial and local elections. Yes, dear citizens, it is that time of year again, and it is that time when we must all go about our duties as citizens and elect some people into office again. Sam old same old.

But then again, maybe it's not the same. I realized checking out these candidate's commercials that something  has changed. It hasn't gone on a complete 180 spin, but perhaps a 30 degree spin for the better? I'd add a smile to that because it means the race is getting tougher to win. And by that, I mean the following factors have changed substantially in terms of national poll results and advertising strategies:

1. Less candidates seem to make campaigns revolving on being seen with the poor
2. Less poor people shown in commercials
3. Less celebrity endorsers
4. More talking in advertisements
5. More speeches on what their platforms are, though they do not really elaborate on any plan
6. Still the same promise of eradicating poverty, but still no clear plan of action
7. More interaction with people of the working class-- which I think is to simulate the idea that they are going to make more policies on quality job opportunities.
8. More smiling in campaigns
9. More political endorsers-- it's an evolution from the less celebrity endorsers. I think this was meant to raise their credibility status in the public eye. I just don't know by how much
10. More serious smiles in photographs rather than "cute-pleasantry" smiles.
11. More posters and fliers illegally posted everywhere.-- Which I think they should be penalized for.
12. More campaign caravans with irritating jingles.
13. More sympathetic commercials regarding their outlook over the Filipino poor
14. More ballot numbers in posters


So, for the most part this list comprises of observations mainly on the main factors purportedly affecting voters' choice. Back in college my friend and I wrote our senior research paper on the same subject, only it was to compare the national and barangay elections in 2010. I'd be doing the same here only it would be shorter and would mainly be about the national elections only.

In its most recent survey, Pulse Asia released results on the top contenders for seats in the Senate. Not surprisingly, most of them are incumbents, and at the top of the ranks are those who were personally endorsed by the President himself in TV commercials.A short note I have about this move is a simple question. This question is directed to the President: "Why would you make such a political move?" On the plausible honest side I would like to give the benefit of the doubt that he truly believes in the capabilities and moral of these people. On the odd side that this is merely a political campaign to boost his party's name, I think it is a very cautious move. Then again, he is the President, and I doubt he would make such a move that he knew would hurt his reputation. I just think that on the blind side it is giving off the notion that he favors this set of candidates to win so that he would fully support their proposals.It comes of as a prejudiced move in short.

As to incumbents being at the top ranks, I would have to commend them on that because it means that campaign wise, they are very good-- or very creative. Still, what this only means for the veracity of campaign ads in pre-election periods is that they are still a very powerful force even with the learned. It is quite bothersome, but at the same time, commendable. Bothersome because it only shows how much better political analysts and campaign managers have gotten much better at merging recent favors of the electorate and purporting that to be the spitting image of the candidate's plan. Commendable because it means the Filipino voter is getting more complex and prudent when it comes to voting for a candidate. 

This is evidenced by the attempted data input in the campaigns. An example would be illustrating or indicating their platforms. Though still general, the attempt is shown. The mere phrasing of "I will eradicate poverty and create more viable jobs" is no longer good enough to sway the average voter. I guess this is the product of years of experience under non-productivity from incumbents. I am surprised though at the slow pace of realization. But the electorate cannot be blamed. After all, it was only under the recent regime change that honest information freely circulated.

For the most part though, I guess you could say an increased quality in voter scrutiny and campaign complexity is at hand. They are not completely at the stage of "let us see what his platform is" because as you can see, most of the incumbents are still at the top ranks. How do I know then that voters have become more prudent? From the campaign materials being flashed on screen and in the radio. If you could listen to one, the prominent features from the fifteen I mentioned are the mention of plans, less celebrities, and more political endorsers. Not much progress though on the manifestation theory on physical presence because campaign posters have evolved to show the ballot number of the candidate.

Just a note to the candidates then, do not be mad, or start filing suits against COMELEC if your ballot number is suddenly changed. it was you who decided to endorse yourself using your ballot number and nobody else. However I would have to say that that is highly unethical.

Back to the campaign results then. As mentioned, the voter scrutiny has changed. Why then? More than the fact of more information circulating, it is the fact that members of the electorate are tired of mere unfulfilled promises. This is why-- to the candidates who have nothing but songs and smiles in their campaigns-- it is likely that voters would choose to vote for those whom they actually hear concrete plans from. Though they may not be well-planned out, these plans would be worth their vote.

It is now only six more days before the election. I would love to tell you who to vote, and who not to vote, but I will not. Yes, I will not do such out of my conscious effort to help you exercise your right. It is your right, not mine, nor anybody else's. So choose wisely my dear citizens...




With faithful scrutiny,


Czarina

Here's to Hoping

To the Senate President, 

Shame on you! Shame on you  for even merely entertaining the idea of distributing those funds to your senator friends. Shame on you for tainting the honorable office that you hold. Mostly, shame on you for demeaning yourself. I was beginning to look up to you after your incredible speech during the impeachment trial. Now, those expectations just dropped a hundred degrees below zero. I am sorry that I might cause you some hurt if you ever get to see this. I am sorry that you are old enough to not change. And I am sorry that your better judgement might have gotten lost somewhere in the books and papers you have piled up. Maybe it's somewhere in your gloomy office at PECABAR *yes I've been there a few years ago on a career trip*. Mostly though, I am sorry that I think this way of you and you probably don't even deserve it. But what would I know, I'm still learning.

Forgive me for this ungraceful note, but I think it is just for you to hear such a criticism especially at this time when expectations have run higher and higher than they ever have. I thank the President for that. I was hoping to see the same illustrious performance from the senate, but then again, the people there still do not seem to know what being a senator truly means. Again, I apologize for tarnishing your reputation even more, but this is not my intention.

Prudence and honor are merely some of the compositions that I look for in a statesman. Sadly that does not seem to be present in many of our legislators. I do not hope to offend any more than I might already have. But you know how the Tagalog saying goes, "bato bato sa langit, tamaaan huwag magalit." I believe that our ancestors came up with that idiom for a good reason. However, as to you sir, I expect no hurt because I want to believe that a Senate President does not have anything to be embarrassed or ashamed of. I still want to believe that. And I am hoping that I will soon learn to. I am hoping that soon, I will come to have some form of faith in the legislature.

I am nothing but disappointed in what transpired in that session. The President's headlining comment made my day then. I seriously hope not to see anymore setbacks from this branch than it has accumulated. But to me, the lowest point of that confrontation was the mere fact that it had to happen at all.

First  of all, why doe the Office of the Senate President give out such funds to other members of the senate? For what use is it? I should think the answer is obvious but I refuse to state it out loud because I said, I wish to gain even a shred of faith in this branch. And it is proving to be more difficult than I had hoped. Those funds were initially meant for what? I was under the impression that members of senate had a pork barrel as well because it was to "aid in executing projects as approved in legislature". Though what these projects are I have no idea. Perhaps I should care to ask the common passerby. Or perhaps the little man crossing the street carrying a rice sack filled with assorted items to his home on the corner of the side walk next to the decrepit street light. Or I could be wrong. Perhaps those funds were meant for the internal operations and daily functions of your office? Please do educate me on this matter.

Either way, I need a very basic answer to a very basic question. What were those funds of the office for? Why were they distributed to members of the senate? And, perhaps most important for this sparked all the controversy, why were the amounts distributed uneven as to the four members? You might not see this, but I am hoping for an honest and honorable answer good sir.

Second of all, why did you retaliate during the interrogation? Being the intelligent man that you are and the knowledgeable lawyer I know you to be, why on earth would you answer that way?

In criminal law, it is common knowledge that flight is an evidence of guilt. To this end sir, that manner of speech you did shows a retaliation that tries to escape from a problem. I am not sure if this lackluster defense of yours is due to your age, but nonetheless, your honor should have spoken true for you. And with that I pity you. I pity you for despite the riches you have gained, which I know you will also try to disguise, the end of your graceful career  as a statesman will always be tarnished with your ungracious evasion of that question.

I am sorry Mr. President. I am sorry your peers at the senate hoped to remove you from your position. I am sorry nothing is going well for you now. But when you get to see this, and I am hoping that you do, I hope you come to realize that at the end of all this, nothing is more worth than living for the betterment of all. Nothing, sir. Nothing.


Hoping for more enlightened days,


Czarina

True Colors are Shining Through

Forgive me for the very cynical attitude that I usually put in my entries. But could you blame me for doing so when I live in a country where politicians center their arguments during sessions in congress on personal debts? If you have not heard of the news, then by all means, feel free to search around for articles on the recent confrontation between two Philippine senators during session. Particularly ones that pertain to their arguments on personal debts, when the session was meant to have been for discussing the unnecessary expenses from the Office of the Senate President.

I might have said too much already. But just to give you a brief background, here's the gist. The Senate President was being accused of distributing the exclusive funds of his office to other members of the senate. Based on their arguments, it appears this is a usual practice of the office. The distribution-- its occurrence, and the amounts released--, it would seem, is based purely on the Senate President's discretion. However, on the recent distribution, a few members of senate revolted stating the funds they were given were outrageously less than those given to others. Because of this, they  confronted the Senate President and questioned his action of distributing his office's funds "unnecessarily".

Well, if I were these senators, I really would feel like I was ripped off and deprived of my right to those funds! I mean, a quarter of a million is a very long way from the two million the others got! 

As to the Senate President, shame on you! Shame on you  for even merely entertaining the idea of distributing those funds to your senator friends. Shame on you for tainting the honorable office that you hold. Mostly, shame on you for demeaning yourself. I was beginning to look up to you after your incredible speech during the impeachment trial. Now, those expectations just dropped a hundred degrees below zero. I am sorry that I might cause you some hurt if you ever get to see this. I am sorry that you are old. And I am sorry that your better judgement might have gotten lost somewhere in the books and papers you have piled up. Maybe it's somewhere in your gloomy office at PECABAR *yes I've been there a few years ago on a career trip*. Mostly though, I am sorry that I think this way of you and you probably don't even deserve it. But what would I know, I'm still learning. (the extensive part of this paragraph/ letter is posted in the next entry)

As to the four senators, and well, the other silent ones as well, I really hope you do know what a senator's career description is. At the very least that is my expectation of you. That is my expectation of you as the senators of today. My expectations of a senator in general are different. But I wouldn't bother posting them here because I know you wouldn't bother knowing either.

But kidding aside, I do think the manner the Senate President answered the inquiries thrown at him was very ungracious and lack-luster. I am very disappointed in him to say the least. I am very disappointed in all of them. But I guess my expectations should not have been raised too much. After all, the President of the Philippines cannot control their actions, nor their election. *ehem!*

Speaking of which, I do commend President Aquino for his take on this incident in senate. It seems he is very frustrated that he can do nothing  to alleviate the dirt from this branch of government. I share your sentiments Mr. President. I truly do. However, you, dear Filipino citizen reader, can.

The race for the senatorial  elections is in a few months. Oddly enough, I have only begun to see media advertisements of these candidates just a couple of weeks ago. I guess that show how effective the new election policy on advertisement banning is. Thank you to whoever pushed for finally implementing this and to the people who worked on it. Now I don't have to switch channels as much as I used to during campaign periods.

If you haven't seen their commercials yet, try watching out for them on your local channels AT YOUR OWN RISK!
I cannot provide a link to any video as none is available at this time

I appreciate the fact that they're trying to portray them selves as "simple approachable and goodwilled" people. However, I also appreciate the fact that I know advertisements are just that. They're advertisements. Meaning they convey the image that is expected of the viewer to like. Translation, what you see in TV is probably not true. Some of them perhaps convey a genuine image of the product, yes. But I forgot one thing. This is politics. What are the products in their advertisements? I honestly am not sure.

If you do watch their advertisements you will find a common trend. Used to be it was "helping the poor by doing charity work" or "giving to the poor their basic needs". What happened to the poor in those advertisements? I do not know. I'm guessing they're still poor given the fact that senate hasn't even come up with a good enough legislation these past few years to boost the economy.  That or those people were just really good actors, or the media just never sensationalized other works of legislation. Lately though the new theme of these commercials is "helping the Filipino get better jobs" and "enriching the Filipino living". Any difference? YES! It appeals more to the middle class and those who are in the lower brackets of society. Why the change? Because people finally realized all the falsities in the previous ones. This one seems more realistic does it not? YES! But that does not mean they will materialize. As I said, an advertisement is merely and advertisement.

I warned you in the beginning of this entry that I tend to be very cynical.

That aside though, I am not saying do not vote. That is a very irresponsible thing to do. I clearly remember one of my professors stating recently that "Voting should not be a right. It should be a responsibility, an duty, an obligation." I could not agree with him more. This might give you something to think about too, and I really hope it does. I remember my sister also telling me, "if you keep thinking every single one of them deserves no spot in office then nothing will happen, and no one will ever vote." On that note, I encourage you to choose very very carefully who to vote for.

So, the next time you see their faces and names plastered with wide smiles across your screen, try to do the following:
1. List down their names
2. Search for ANY, and I mean any, entries about them on the internet.
3. Read all those pertaining to them on official and unofficial publications
4. Build a credential list on them. Type this in if you want
5. Make a mental criticism on their capabilities to intelligently write and construe the law. Also, take note of those who are husbands, sons, daughters, siblings or wives of any existing politician.
6. Take note of these the next time you see any ads pertaining to them, or them in person.
7. Vote based on these notes. Please choose ones that care enough, and know the ways of the law.



With that, I leave you with a quote I cherish on politics from one of my favorite books:
"I ask you, what could the woman do, left by the death of her husband with five little children, and two families who though only of grasping the crown? I am surprised she didn't do worse."- Henry IV, Confessions of Catherine de Medici



Charmed,


Czarina

I Commend You!

It's no secret to anyone that our country is plagued (or maybe blessed as some may call it) by its geographical location to be passed by an average of 26 tropical storms a year. Ever since I was a child, it's been a common notion to us when we were kids that whenever there are rains, classes will get suspended and will not resume until the floods subside.

Today, I'm already in graduate school and that's still the case. But up until a few months back I've had this notion that perhaps nothing could possibly be done to alleviate this concern especially in the metro areas of the country. But quite honestly, I do not believe that nothing can be done. I think something can be, but it is just not being done. Why? Your guess is better than mine.

Last year I have had the privilege of having the experience of being stranded in a coffee shop close to campus during a thunderstorm for about 4 hours. I have spent those hours sitting, looking around, eating, reading, posting, and mostly mindlessly doing nothing. I write this entry now because it is actually raining outside again, and it has been raining for the entire day. No doubt the streets have already been flooded a few hours ago and the news will feature more of the disastrous outcomes of this calamity.

The headlines of the news will probably say something like "Isang pamilya patay sa baha!" *knock on wood*

But more of the media criticism later on.

As I was saying, the streets of this country have always sunk below sea level during times of storms. Now this problem has been around ever since before the Marcos era has started. The concern I have is why has no administration ever come up with a proper solution to this? Is it too much of a rocket science problem that the solution is too difficult to find? I don't know. But as a concerned citizen, my mind only goes into the part where I'm concerned where the taxes are going.

But as I make this criticism, it seems the current administration has taken a step forward. And for that I commend them. I commend both the national and local government for at least recognizing that there is a problem with our roads, and sewage system. I commend them for trying to act upon this concern. Most especially I commend them for taking a step, a small step though, to developing the streets.

A few months back after the last storm passed, they started changing the pipes of the sewage system and rehashing them. This is good actually because the outcome showed itself immediately when a recent storm passed by and flooded the streets again. Only this time, the floods subsided immediately instead of the 2-7 days it takes. However I think this is not enough. Such a solution they have come up with is merely a short term one. They need to think of a more long term solution. For example, clean the sewers underneath the cities and change the pipelines leading to them with larger ones. I'm not entirely sure if this can or will bring about a proper recourse, but I do feel like it can at least shorten the period it takes for the flood to subside.

But even though this may work for the cities, it is not enough because there are large parts of the country that are agricultural lands. And these are the ones that are mostly affected by the storms because the crops get destroyed. If sum, we need to find a solution for the irrigation and sewage systems there as well. If not, then we can say goodbye to our agricultural sector and hello to more importation of food.

But this is all just a thought. Might as well slap a tape over my mouth because they won't hear this anyway.

But hey! Cheers to them for trying... right?

Hater Proponent of the RH Bill and the C**** Crime Law

It's been more than a year now since my last entry. And it's been more than a year now that the past bill written of has been in the limelight. But now, even after all the debates, the prayers, and the controversies surrounding this bill, where does it stand? In a state of limbo.

I wonder, in the first place, why such a bill has been even drafted that way. 

I guess I'm getting ahead of myself right now. Entering law school made me change my perspective on it. It's not just all about the words in it, but the reason for it. In law, we must learn to interpret things as they are written. Reading this bill now gave me a new idea of what it is really about. I criticized it along with others giving their statements for why they want it or why they don't. I hold firm on my stance that to make such a judgment, we should first know what is written in it. However now I have a new position. I still do encourage people to make a choice on the bill based not on what mass media impressions are made on it, but based on the words written in it. Read it, I plead. It is actually the necessary means so that we can educate ourselves on what our lawmakers are really doing with all their time in congress.

As I revisit this bill again, my opinion on its passage has changed. Why? It's as simple as it's proposals are not even necessary. I know many will criticize me for making that statement, but again I ask you, read the bill. The projects and programs it proposes are good, however they are not what this country needs in order to alleviate the problems it seeks to prevent. On its face, they produce good arguments such as  "preventing poverty through preventing further population growth" and "helping mothers evade unnecessary death". Do not get me wrong I do think the healthcare programs proposed there are good. My only problem is that they already exist, and to pass this bill and implement its projects would be a mere redundancy. As Sen. Pimentel said (in his feeble attempt at early campaigning in Gandang Gabi Vice :p- sorry but it's really obvious you guys), "why not use the proposed fund we will shell out for this bill to improve the existing health programs we already have?" He's right. Why not? I want you to think about the same thing. Why not? I would like to give him an answer but it would mean violating (I think..) a law that was enacted to screen unpublished (print) words. I think you all know what this is. But then again, do you? I ask you to read it as well because it is only through reading it that we can fully criticize it and those who wrote it for what they have effected.

All this talk of the recent law and curtailing of rights has somehow gotten overblown. I do not blame users of social media for thinking so, but I also do not blame the lawmakers for enacting the law (read it so you will know what it really contains, PLEASE). My only concern about it is that, along with the RH Bill, it provides an another avenue for officials (legislative and executive) to "EARN" more from the allocated budget than properly using it. Oh, and another would be that even though they try to mask "that" intent with the intent of the words of the law, it is arguable that the crimes it wants to prevent are possible to police. One funny provision of that law though is that it handed such power literally to the police. Not to throw stones, but you just have to wonder how this will work. In addition, there are no existing rules yet on how to proceed with doing this, so how will they implement this? Those are just thoughts, based on that one provision that got everyone worked up. As for the rest of the law, the only comment I have is it seems a great feat to try and implement them. They are very ambitious and vague at the same time. And it is because of these features of the law that make them easy to circumvent. I don't want it mostly because they will just take advantage of it rather than actually implement it for the good of the public, thought they say that is their reason (plus to save the dignity of one certain Senator for his slip during their debates on the RH bill. I hope he does not attempt to plagiarize again because it's very embarrassing for all of us that a Senator does that then degrades his source).

I urge you, read the bill and the law. Make your stance know for what they are. Do not depend on the impressions others and the mass media give you as bases for your choice. Make the better choice and educate yourself. Go further than what other say and make your own say.


Reproductive Health/ Responsible Parenthood Bill
http://www.congress.gov.ph/download/basic_15/HB04244.pdf

Cyber Crime Law
http://www.gov.ph/2012/09/12/republic-act-no-10175/

Click the Link for the HB4244

http://www.likhaan.org/sites/default/files/pdf/15th_congress_hb4244.pdf

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 2: Power in the Dining Table

The typical family has roles in it. In our family, the play of power is very evident most especially when the time comes for us to make decisions. Here is how it works:

My father is the one whom I think is the most respected decision maker amongst us. Although it is unspoken, the rule is somewhat to ask him for permission before asking our mother because he would ask for the specifics that are necessary. He is the one who seems to be the most balanced between him and my mother that he is able to earn a great degree of our respect. He struggles with making decisions with us during the times that we have “mixed up” schedules.

My mother is the one who seems to fill the typical roles of a mother. She tries to be able to give tips at times. They end up being helpful often, though the method she brings them to us is sometimes uncalled for. Most of the time she is the one whom convincing is hardest when it comes to permissions. I think this was brought about by her lack of experience in the events we ask her for permission to. She often states we should not do so because of the dangers and hazards these could bring us.  Though she s hard to convince, once all the necessary arrangements are given to her, she will allow us. But the problem is that often, there is the hesitation in her to actually give us the permission. Why there is is still beyond my understanding.

My sister is the one whom I am able to discuss my decisions with regard to any matters. I think this is because there is a more open relationship between us than between me and my parents. She is also the one I know the family considers to be the image of responsibility since often most of us are unable to fill some roles that she is able to.

The juxtaposition of power here comes in the dining area when we are able to sit down and discuss issues we see at the time. Often they are political and social issues. The manner of debating arises when my mother and father talk. My father wins most of the time. Although, there are times that my mother wins, but mostly it is because my father does not wish to go further into the discussion. A wise move, I think. My sister and I often join in the debate, but we withdraw on the account that my mother is already starting to raise her voice.

Power and respect here, as I see it, comes into play in familial relations whenever it is possible that the family member is unable to relate much with the other or when issues arise that differing ideas about them are perceived. It is difficult yes, but it is stimulating at the same time. I think that in this manner, such conflicts are ones that are able to strengthen our bonds and are able to boost our respect for one another.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 1: In the Name of Culture

What is it with our names that people say it tells a lot about who we will be and who we are? Perhaps it is a true assumption that in a way the names we have manifest parts of who we come to be.

In my inquiry, I say that the names we, as a people, say something about how our culture is. To be specific, we Filipinos somehow embody our personality and culture as a people in our names. But what do the names we have mean for our culture? This inquiry is what this entry is all about. The main question I asked branches further into these:

Do the names we have manifest the diversity and adaptability of our culture? Or do they embody the colonialist mentality of the Filipino people? What does it implicate on the culture of the Filipino people?

One assumption here is that Filipinos were mostly and are often named after the reigning influences of the time. Most often than not, these influences are foreign influences. Why? Because it is the deemed dominant culture or how we politely imply as “better culture” at that time. This then highlights the submissive and subordinate trait of Filipinos. Another hypothesis though is that this adapting of foreign names was one way on how Filipinos in the past and at present try to “survive” with the times while trying to persist their culture. To see which it is that is truer, I tried to make a scientific study of it.

I went around asking my peers and older relatives how their names came to be. I found out that from generations before, most of them have their names patterned after a character from either the Bible, history, or a famous celebrity. The latter and most recent generations are often named after their grandparents or influential characters of the Bible or history as well. A very significant commonality though was that most of the influencing characters are of foreign origin. One of the peers that I interviewed was named Ivan. His name was based on the name of his grandparents. His grandparent’s name “Ivan”, on the other hand, was taken from the historical figure Ivan the terrible. The reason for naming he says is “I think it’s because my grandparent’s parents wanted him to be sturdy when he grew up.”

Common names of older generations are also mostly influenced by the Spanish background where most are named Maria, Eduardo, Andres, Juan, Felipe, Corazon, and the like. The latter generations, I found were more influenced by American and other European origin. Names such as Martin, Jessica, Camille, Irene, Erin, Patricia, and Czarina are just some. Of course those from the bible are also persistent like Ruth, Daniel, John, Paul, Peter and such.

How does this then implicate over the Filipino culture? Is it submissiveness of the people that they accept the other culture already? In part it is because it is the embedded colonial mentality upon the Filipino people that persists in such preferential conditions. The preference for foreign material is then no doubt a product. But what about adaptability? It could also be an answer but the strength of which could not be given much justification. But the great possibility of it is this: that the adapting of foreign names by our ancestors could have been one of their means to try and protect their children from the cruelty of the ruling foreign entities, mainly the Spanish reign. Such masking then came to be a habit that the real Filipino names have been forgotten. As time passed, it has become a form of coping for Filipinos in order to try to “fit in” with the society dictated by the “other”. So to speak, it is not much that fanaticism is in play, but is appears that the origin of Filipinos coming to have foreign names is because of the desire to survive the times in the context of the social construct they were living in.

"We Built Our Nation on Mediocrity"

I felt a sense of unease yet agreement as I heard our professor utter this statement. But even if it does hurt as a Filipino, as a critic I would have to agree with this. I do not know if this is for all the times that we have faltered or have had historical moments, but I do know that is is for the times at present that we are unable to stand up and save our country from the perils that faces each one of us. Perhaps that is the problem right there. Each one of us. Ako. Ikaw. Siya. Sila.

We have had this culture of not caring much about our meighbor for so long that if someone is actually able to do so out of kindness, it makes the evening news. How about that. And we say we are hospitable people when we could not even afford to make our own country hospitable for ourselves, our communities, our people, our nation. How is it even possible that we come to care about situations only when it involves our sake or the sake of people we care about? This is how I see it then. Our naiton is not mediocre because our people are lazy or anything of that matter. It is not that because if we were a culture of lazy people we would not have success stories overseas. Heck, we would not have Senators or House Representatives who came from nowhere to where they are now if you get my point.

What then is the issue here, the issue here has somehting to do with you, me, them, and all of us-- COLLECTIVELY. I quite enjoy that word and would like to hear it more often in this country. It is precisely I think because of the lack of collective efforts that we are unable to grow and develop as a nation. We have all these notions about what a leader is and who a great leader is but if do nothing to help the leader obtain his goals for development then we are just as much to blame for the situation of this country as he, and his cabinet secretaries are.

It hurts to hear the truth. But once we hear it, we think about it and once we do, we begin to have ideas. These ideas are once that, hopefully, will allow us too have a stronger sense of nationalism, and community.

COMMUNITY, and then IDENTITY.

CRITICAL COMMENTARY (3)

Dear Fellow Filipinos,

This will be my first address to you in this blog. I will be blunt as I do not enjoy sugarcoating much of the truth when it comes to matters of the nation because it affects me badly and because I know that it will affect future generations to come. It may appear a bit dictatorial, but I assure you I am merely expressing passion in my words.

I am deeply hurt that for countless years now our people are suffering from loss of cultural identity. When they are asked, "Who is the Filipino?" They can reply none but a stare, a smile and an attempt to an answer but then improbably give none. Why does this happen? Why?

I will tell you why. It is because we have allowed ourselves to be dominated that's why. But no more should this domination of the other beings take place in our country. Such submission to their presence only affirms their suspicious instincts that this country is one that they can easily invade through its culture. No more of this. In the written history of our country they have already taken the front seat when it is supposed to be us who is the subject of it and not them. How do I mean you say? Well, take for example the alleged "discovery of the Philippines". The Spaniards claim the fame for it when it is absolutely a figment of their imagination that they did. I take offense at this because they immediately did not recognize our native ancestors who have been residing over the islands for decades prior to their awareness of its existence. Another one? In our elementary schools when we are asked to memorize "our history", who's names are deemed significant? Majority of them are not our natives. Yes there are those who are Filipinos but they do not comprise a majority of the names. 

Why then did we accept this imposition of others upon us? Why? I believe that it is because of our people's kindheartedness and welcoming souls that lead to such taking advantage of the others. In sum, it is not purely our fault that we have been colonized. But i would like to make the stance and congratulate today;s generation for trying to impose a sense of nationalism among our lost-identity- generations. Though this may be a product of cultural fanaticism, I still commend it. It is one step toward the Indigenization of the Philippines.

Let me first state how I admire the Hawaiians for their assertiveness in preserving their culture. In the lecture class we had, the video clip showing the new generation of Hawaii natives trying to bring their culture to the tourists has brought me to the point of envy. Yes I envied them.  I envied them because even as they experienced a tragic fall in their indigenous population and a dramatic abusive past,  they were able to revive their past through the future generation. What they did was go within themselves and try to find who the Hawaiian is. It is for this reason that I think when they are asked "who is the Hawaiian", they are able to give a straight forward and confident answer accompanied with a strong sense of passion.

I would very much like to have this in the Philippines once more. Even if it is a far search into indigenizing from "within", it can work. Of course, I think that to be able to make that leap, the first step is to indigenize our country from "without" or using sources or works by the others in order to juxtapose our own. This step has already been taken by many of our historians such as Teodoro Agoncillo, Luis Dery and Virgilio Enriquez. The latter, Virgilio Enriquez has already taken the steps toward analyzing the Filipino psyche and come up with the commanding statement that "we should focus on our own voices and not the others' thoughts" as a way to make a propaganda against thecolonial mentality that has plagued this country.

I admire him for being blunt. He is the model from which I try to pattern out this address to you. And just as he challenges Filipinos to take history away from the hands of the others into their own, I challenge today's generation to make a stand. Do not make this found sense of nationalism a mere icon of popularr culture. It may have started out that way but it should not end that way. Take it to a higher and deeper level. Be the instrument of the Filipino culture and be the ones to bring the identity of the Filipino back. That way when you are asked by people of foreign culture, "Who is the Filipino?" Your answer will be a deep look to his eyes, a smile, and the words "I am the Filipino." accompanied by confidence and passion for your country.

Remember, A nation is only as strong as its roots are groounded to its heart.

If you wish to further strengthen your ideals of the Filipino, click on below and see how Virgilio Enriquez was able to do so.

Virgilio Enriquez- Ang Ama ng Sikolohiyang Pilipino