Listen to “One Day More.”
Itaguyod ang Katotohanan.
It is time to be COUNTED!
Join us at the Friday Inter-Faith Prayer Rally
Ayala cor. Paseo de Roxas — 4:00 to 8:00 PM
Where former President Cory Aquino and Jun Lozada will join us as we make the call for Truth and Accountability.
Black and White Movement, together with Hyatt 10/La Salle 60, MBC, MAP, Manindigan,
and other professional and church groups will assemble at the
AIM (Paseo de Roxas) Parking lot at 3:00 PM.
Please join us.
Sa Totoo Tayo. Now Na!
Today there will be people from all walks of life and different generations and varying political and non-political persuasions, coming together to make a stand.
It’s unfortunate that the focus on Makati will obscure the efforts being made elsewhere in the country. Whether a rally in Cebu City, or elsewhere, the only divide I see is between urban and rural Filipinos: though the majority, for some time now, of Filipinos are urban dwellers. I strongly believe the sentiments among urban Filipinos are converging while rural opinion won’t be far behind.
Returning to today’s rally, the authorities are pulling out all the stops: PNP renews warning about communists, terrorists at rally. They’re spooked.Yesterday, something remarkable happened at PUP, see: PUP bomb threat fails to stop Lozada. And something else happened, see: Dirty Tricks in Uniffors.
But two bloggers say it best.
Market Manila declares he will be there:
Because we live in a democracy by choice. Because not speaking up when you know something is wrong makes you an accomplice to the wrong. Because I think everyone must be held accountable for their actions, particularly where their actions impact the welfare of millions. Because of the increasingly brazen disregard for the laws and even basic ethics that should apply to educated individuals. Because in many ways, I am embarrassed to be in the same gene pool as those who are perpetrating and then possibly getting away with such outrageous actions. Because of dozens of other reasons I will keep to myself as I know you get the point.
A reply he gives to a commenter is zeroes in on the issues even more:
mapster, I agree that we have to do everything we can everyday. I pay my taxes and a LOT of them. I have never ever slipped a policeman lunch money. I have voted with a conscience and watched at the polls. I have volunteered services for politicians or candidates which I thought rose above the rest, and I have never accepted any gifts, compensation or positions for the effort. So yes, I think we have to do our daily bit. But I also used to believe that we had a high corruption rate because we were poor… and that somehow the petty corruption of the streets and licenses, etc. were a function of poverty. But that is simply not true. The folks who are implicated in multi-billion scandals are well to do, and as someone above says, how much money do they need to live a decent and comfortable life? And the Hello garci scandal was offensive precisely because it suggests that the elections themselves are rigged, hence the votes of the people are ignored. At the very least, we have to indicate a great deal of displeasure and let everyone know they can’t get away with these kinds of behaviors.
As for being in the company of crooks and wannabees as some intimate above, I think in all democracies people from all walks of life will band together for similar causes, though they all may not look, sound, or be the same. While some of the folks who will be there at the rally this afternoon are opportunists and perhaps not folks I would normally look up to, many others could or should be every day folks who simply want to say, TAMA NA! And while I am not the biggest of Cory fans, I think she IS someone to look up to and her presence is only one of the minor reasons I would show up this afternoon.
I agree with other sentiments about changing the system et al. But I would agree more that we need to change the people on a massive scale with folks that really want to do the BEST for their country, a noble and difficult scenario, I concur.
As for others, you are definitely entitled to your opinion and free to choose what you will, can or want to do. With Marcos it took 20 years to reach the “boiling point.” In subsequent administrations the flare ups occurred with less time required. But at some point, when we all are personally so incensed or affected directly, you too will feel the need to do something.
If you re-read the post above, I would like to point out that I only said that I WOULD BE GOING. Not that I thought all of you should as well, that is obviously your choice.
Touched By An Angel says,
Though not a popular choice by our Catholic Bishops, I believe, GMA has to go. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has to go.
I truly believe that The President and her people have engaged in so much lying that they can no longer recognize the truth even if it stared them in the face. (PDI) As to the next step to take, I will take one step, one day at a time. I do not have the answers yet but in time, I will discern it. Our Filipinos will discern it. I will be there at the The Interfaith rally…
Among young people, there will be those, like on a red day who will be there, as will Tristan’s Mental Assylum ristan’s Mental Assylum and Jamel Ignes who is attending a rally for the first time! (for the religious, see melo touch). Other young people share their views, and efforts at discernment: a slice of wine.. and a shot of cake.. points out the dividing line and respects those who have decided to speak up against the President. There are others who are still uncertain, yet watchful, like Prudence and Mandess, and such as student Timmyland or who remain ambivalent, who will not go but who will be keeping those gathered in their thoughts, see OFW jihAn.zillA. Sh, and Yeweifang’s blog .
Among more senior bloggers, Red’s Herring puts everything in perspective:
If the events that have led to People Power I (EDSA Revolution of 1986 or EDSA I) are any guide, revolutionary uprisings go through certain levels (of consciousness): First, the underlying belief by a sizeable segment of society that the rulers and certain institutional arrangements have lost legitimacy; second, certain intense participants or change agents have gotten around their sense of powerlessness and come to realize they have the power or capacity to effect the needed changes; third, the disaffected members of society have more or less formed a consensus as to the nature and or scope of the changes they desire to occur in lieu of the illegitimated rulers or arrangements, whether be it about a total systemic overhaul, a “regime change,” an extra-constitutional overthrowing of a corrupt or immoral government, etc.
My sense is that People Power III has already reached the first and second levels of consciousness described above. However, before the Great Beast “could take care of itself” today it has yet to hurdle the third level of consciousness.
For one, I have noted even the reformists in the military and the progressives in the civil society are still tentative about the scope and the nature of the changes to be sought (note should also be taken for instance that the mere suggestion during the Manila Peninsula “uprising” that a military junta was being contemplated has not sit well with potential supporters), while other veteran people power practitioners are apprehensive the next exercise “could again end up repeating a vicious cycle of simply ‘moving on’ in circle, and not leaping onward or to a higher ground” or a “new qualitative state.”…
…Now, the question once again: Why is People Power III taking its time?
My own take is: There is yet no general consensus among potential people power participants and activists, as has been in EDSA I or EDSA II, as to what change to aspire for and institute.
Arguably, proposals for reforms or transformations, at odds with each other for the most part, still abound. To cite a few: some who believe the two EDSAs were both a failure aim this time to act against a failed system and plan to overhaul it either according to some rigid ideologies or based merely on the “best practices” of ongoing successful experiments; other groups are just angry and frustrated because of “relative deprivation” (middle class weighed upon with a looming downgrade to the next class complain how come only their counterparts in other regions are having all the fun); still others are focused only on struggling for control of the state apparatuses and effecting “regime change” while keeping both the political and economic structure intact; and specifically, accused coup leader and now detained senator Sonny Trillanes is eager to transform the nation “without reinventing the wheel” or whereas Bishop Francisco Claver can only entertain the belief that “our problem comes down to this: how to correct the aberration that is the present administration without destroying the stabilizing structure that is our democratic system of government.”
…As a result, reactionary moves from old and once reliable alliances, the CBCP in particular, are silently taking place in the form of tokenism (a plea to President Arroyo to take lead in the fight against corruption) and diversion (a call for a new brand of People Power through “communal action”).
Mon Casiple on the part of the political pundits, observes,
The nature and circumstances of this political crisis is such that it can only have one resolution: the end of the Arroyo regime within the context of the existing electoral democracy. From there, it may result in the affirmation of this electoral democracy and thus the integrity of the 2010 elections. Or, more remote, it may lead to the ending of the electoral democracy itself. At any rate, these are the days of reckoning.
The people’s consciousness and readiness to action are developing by leaps and bounds. The usual tactics by the GMA administration are not working anymore and proved to be ironically pushing faster the momentum for change. From the JDV triumphal ouster to its present travails, the Arroyo administration has rapidly traversed a half-circle towards a downward spiral.
What’s Casiple referring to? I can only guess, but think of this. Did you notice the article, 52 governors troop to Palace to show support for Arroyo ? A friend encountered one of these governors on a plane bound for Manila, and the governor prattled on about how he was going to Manila on business -only for my friend to see the governor on TV lurking near the edge of the gathered governors. Said my friend: you see, they’ve begun to get embarrassed over their support for the President (the governor knew my friend’s an oppositionist; but a mere month ago, the governor would needle my friend and crow about the President every chance he got). And the news leaves an even bigger question hanging: what of the other 29 governors?
Recall that one of the officials proclaimed a convenor of the Loyalist rally in Manila on Feb. 25 pointedly told the media, “oh, I’m in Manila doing shopping.”
While Amando Doronila notices that:
Speaking to a joint meeting of the Makati Business Club, Management Association of the Philippines and PinoyME Foundation last Feb. 26, Aquino did not make a pitch for another People Power uprising, to the disappointment of many people. She merely called on President Arroyo to step down, saying it was the least disruptive way out of the “severe moral crisis” facing the country. She said, “She must give way to a credible government that could lead by example. Given our concern to protect the moral pillars of democracy, the extra-constitutional removal of the President is not an ideal we would want to aspire for.”
Aquino’s call for restraint was echoed by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, which in a pastoral statement on Feb. 26, called on the President to allow her officials to tell the truth about the slew of allegations of corruption related to several government transactions, but fell short of demanding her resignation. Instead, the bishops urged the President to be “part of the effort” to seek the truth.
The coyness of Aquino and the disappointing position of the bishops restraining people power highlighted the departure from the dynamics of 1986, when Aquino rode the crest of a forceful people power movement driven by the activist archbishop of Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin, and the mass civilian participation in street protests in support of the military mutiny led by Marcos’ Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Constabulary chief, Lt. Gen. Fidel Ramos.
Today’s configuration has lost the fervor for mass action of 1986. It tells us that today’s movement is not based on mass action to bring pressure on the key support institutions of government to defect, such as the military and the bureaucracy. Today’s movement has changed emphasis. It has shifted its cutting edge from confrontation in the streets to bringing moral pressure on government. The shift is not exerting a powerful pressure on government officials to step down. It emboldens them to stonewall.
Though as the Inquirer editorial today points out,
We realize that, in itself, the language of the recommendation (“Urge the President and all the branches of government to take the lead in combating corruption wherever it is found”) seems to be neutral. But in the present context, it actually disregards a fundamental reality. In the scandal over the National Broadband Network, the President and her men have been less than forthright in telling the truth. That, in fact, is one of the reasons we have a crisis in the first place.
Apropos of the bishops, read An Open Letter to the CBCP at Brown SEO.
(courtesy of pedestrianobserver)