Category: edsa

the radical significance of EDSA

over @ anti-pinoy.com :) blogger ilda who was either too young or not around yet in 1986 asks valid questions about EDSA One.

If an Edsa Denial group were to emerge today, their job will be easy. Aside from Ninoy Aquino’s statue on Ayala Avenue, his image on the 500-peso bill, and the Edsa “Shrine” at the corner of Ortigas Avenue, evidence of any legacy left by the 1986 “revolution” in Philippine society is becoming harder and harder to come by. What constitutes evidence that the Edsa Revolution did happen? What was the result of this event? Where is the country now in terms of economic stability and security — that “progress” that seemed so within our reach amidst the euphoria of 1986?

i’d say it’s pretty much like the 1896 revolution inspired by rizal and led by bonifacio, we (i) believe it happened because the history books (and my lola’s memoirs) say so, even if it only saw us eventually being handed over by one colonizer to another for some $20 million.   in the case of the EDSA revolution, most of my parents’ and my generation and our eldest kids’ saw it happen, that stunning non-violent change from dictatorship to democracy, even if it turned out to be just one elite group taking over from another.

just the same neither revolution was a waste of lives or effort.   i happen to be immersed in floro c. quibuyen’s A Nation Aborted — Rizal, American Hegemony, and Philippine Nationalism [Ateneo Press, 1990] for a book i’m writing on my lola’s memoirs, and this sums up pretty well what was so great about that armed revolution even if neither rizal nor bonifacio lived long enough to see it:

Summarizing the revolutionary gains of 1898, the Jesuit historian Horacio de la Costa writes: “For a few brief months, over a large area of the Islands, Filipinos were free.” The victories clearly indicate that the Revolution against the Spanish regime had been successful, and that an independent nation-state would have grown had not the Americans arrived to nip it in the bud. As Cesar Majul lamented, “The Revolution was a child that was not allowed to grow.” Herein lies the tragedy of the nation. But the tragic course of the Revolution had begun much earlier in the failure of Bonifacio and Aguinaldo in 1897 to forge a united leadership. [254]

The year 1898 marked the heyday of the Revolution, when the historic bloc that Rizal and Bonfiacio had dreamt of was finally formed.Ilustrado colleagues of Rizal who were initialy lukewarm to the movementof Bonifacio, fearing that it was ill-prepared and ill-organized, now enlisted in Aguinaldo’s army. A number of ilustrados, among them Antonio Luna, came home from Europe to join the Revolution. Apolinario Mabini, who had earlier refused to join Bonifacio’s Katipunan became, in 12 June 1898, Aguinaldo’s personal adviser (and ghost-writer in Spanish), and then, albeit briefly during the Philippine-American War, the prime minister in the revolutionary government. Throughout Luzon and the Visayas, practically all revolutionary units were organized, directed, and led by the local ilustrados, prominent members of the principalia, and even the native clergy. What Elias had hoped for in the Noli became a reality in the Revolution of 1898. (254-255)

as for EDSA, well, it was a completely different genre of revolution.   here’s an excerpt from my intro to the Chronology posted @stuartxchange.com actually meant for the english edition of Himagsikan sa EDSA–Walang Himala! that’s almost done but not quite.

Beamed worldwide from EDSA by satellite TV for all the world to witness, the dramatic People Power Revolution that non-violently ousted entrenched Philippine dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos from power into exile was the first of its kind and deserves serious study, never mind that it “failed,” as critics and cynics love to point out, to usher in social and political change. But before the failure came the success: the people stopped the tanks and Marcos fled, what a coup! no mean feat! how on earth did that happen?

Many still think the ouster was orchestrated by the Americans. As many others still insist that it was a miracle, an act of God. Not to be outshone, the military rebels claim credit for the uprising: had they not defected, there would have been no EDSA. Altogether the effect, deliberate or not, is to diminish the People’s role in that unexpected triumph, to insinuate that the People acted as mere puppets of some higher power.

Contrary to Marcos propaganda, the Americans were not responsible for the EDSA Revolution. Ronald Reagan’s trouble-shooter Philip Habib knew that something was brewing but he failed to get a handle on it. The Ramos-Enrile defection (Day 1) caught the Americans napping, People Power (Day 2) knocked them out. It was already Day 3—the battle was practically won—when the Americans intervened in earnest, and only in the matter of Marcos’s escape. Intelligence reports from the CIA may have helped the rebels during the four days but if the Americans had completely stayed out of it, EDSA would have happened anyway and it would have ended more decisively.

Neither were the military rebels responsible for EDSA. Their defection only served as catalyst for the display of People Power. Remove the reformists and some other agitators would have come along. At the time, Cory’s boycott campaign versus Marcos-crony businesses was starting to peak and the business community was beginning to hurt. Had the reformist military not defected, Big Business would have had to make a move to force Marcos to step down for the sake of the economy. The reformists would have fallen in line eventually, and People Power would have stolen the show just as stunningly, just in time to render moot Marcos’s inauguration. If anything, the military defectors owed their lives and status, post-EDSA, to the People who not only saved their lives but also prevailed upon Cory to avail of their armed services.

Neither was EDSA a miracle, beyond human understanding. There is a rational cause-and-effect explanation, unfortunately kept hidden from the public, for everything that happened during those four days, from the Enrile-Ramos defection to the Marcos-Ver escape. Walang himala! No sick were healed, no water turned into wine, the sun did not dance, and the Marian apparition is all in the Cardinal’s mind. EDSA was about ordinary people in great numbers who dared to confront, unarmed, the military might of the dictator and discovered in the process their mind-boggling powers when united by a common goal. Walang himala. The task of removing the dictator was well within the people’s natural human powers.

In fact, EDSA was wrought by People Power, which was made flesh by the martial law regime when it jailed, and then made a martyr of, opposition leader Beningno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr. EDSA was the climactic and final chapter of the fierce rivalry between Marcos and Ninoy which saw the widow Cory rising triumphant on a glorious wave of People Power. Also, EDSA is a sublime, if controversial, chapter in the Filipino people’s continuing struggle for freedom which inspired the world but proved an empty victory at home. As in the aftermath of the 1896 Revolution, the masses in 1986 went home empty-handed, the spoils pre-empted by old peninsulares and new ilustrados. Nonetheless it was sublime, and the Four Days (and preceding events, to some extent) bear recalling and scrutinizing, if only for lessons in non-violent warfare and the dynamics of People Power.

like 1898, 1986 saw the rare “historic bloc” formed, this time unarmed, masses of poor, middle class, and rich coming together with one goal in mind: the ouster of marcos.   the action climaxed in EDSA on day 2, a cool sunday afternoon, when a sea of people stood in the path of tanks that had orders from marcos to ram through! and general tadiar and his men, instead, bowed to the will of the people.   that was the end of marcos.   the message of EDSA is simple: to effect CHANGE without bloodshed, the filipino majority only need to unite and rally behind a common cause.

the catch is, we have to unite, rally, behind a common cause.   to unite thus, we have to be adequately informed on issues.   in ’86 it was possible to unite against marcos after more than 13 years of martial rule and disappearances and salvagings and crony capitalism, and after more than two years since ninoy’s assassination, and only because there emerged the brave mosquito press that defied censorship rules and spread the word about the conjugal dictatorship, the hidden wealth, the profligate shopping, the fake war medals, the human rights violations, the behest loans, the failing economy, his kidney problem, at kung ano ano pa, which was critical in building up and unifying and mobilizing the anti-marcos movement behind ninoy’s widow when the dictator finally was pressed into calling snap elections.

in 2001 edsa dos succeeded in replacing erap with gma largely because of the free media’s exposes of the presidential mansions and mistresses and then eventually because of the nationally televised impeachment trial over some two months, replayed over and over at night and on weekends, until the second envelope issue triggered the walkout that brought the students massing in edsa, not knowing that behind the scenes the arroyos were plotting with the generals.   and because that’s all we rallied behind — the ouster of erap — that’s all we got.

since then every call for people power has failed.   the so-called edsa tres because the crowds, not knowing better, turned violent, and so the military didn’t hesitate to disperse them.    the post-garci oust-gloria rallies because, well, the people are a little more sophisticated: kung wala naman tayong ipapalit na matino, what’s the point.   indeed.

so it’s not as manolo quezon alias the explainer suggests, that EDSA is no longer significant, no longer relevant to these times.    EDSA will never lose its significance, not in a humane world where non-violence should rule.   invoking EDSA is not helping noynoy’s candidacy only because EDSA is all about CHANGE and a noynoy presidency, so far, promises only small change.

the media are the key to CHANGE.   an informed media would make all the difference.   popular print and broadcast journalists who will find the time to read and to think critically and write and talk about EDSA, and about the economic, environmental, health, and education issues that hound us, so that the public can have a better sense of the options open to us, would make all the difference.

enough of talkshow hosts who don’t read the right books *lol* who expect to be spoonfed by pundits who don’t read the right books either *lol* worse , who can’t be bothered to read yet dare talk about it.   google it man lang, guys!

enough of the wowowee idiocracy!

vote with y/our remote!

de quiros, aquino, edsa

conrado de quiros is sounding like a broken record these days, insisting that “edsa” &  “people power” and “good vs. evil” are the themes to work on if we want to see noynoy aquino again racing ahead of the pack like after his mom died.

and so a guy asked him daw:

“DON’T you think that transforming the choice into a moral one is a little too high for the masa to grasp? Don’t you think the better tack would be to talk about gut issues (malapit sa bituka)?”

the noted columnist’s reply is so last decade:

Not at all.

To begin with, you would not be transforming anything. You would not be raising or reducing or reshaping anything. That was exactly how the masa saw the choice from the very start, when Cory died and Noynoy Aquino announced his intention to run: the choice was a moral one. It was not a gratuitous choice between presidential candidates, between Noynoy and Villar (Villar never even figured in the equation), between what the candidates had to offer. It was a desperate choice between the GMA curse and the Cory legacy, between Noynoy (or what he represented) and Gloria (or what she is), between life and death.

It was a choice between Good and Evil.

The fact that Noynoy got more than 60 percent showed this wasn’t merely a middle-class or elite sentiment…

yes, but that was then, we were in grief, we were emotional and romantic, we wanted more of cory and ninoy (not of gma) and noynoy seemed like the next best thing.   but this is now, we have been through a lot since cory died — killer floods, the ampatuan massacre, the murder of the rh bill, and now the illegal arrest and torture of 43 ngo health workers — and some of us are looking for answers to many questions beyond who-what is good who-what is evil, according to whom?   dams are good in times of reasonable rain, but evil in times of excessive rain.   due process is good, but why is it that the law is more protective of the rights of indicted evil-doers?   and where is due process for the health workers accused of being bomb-makers?   is the military good or evil?    is contraception good or evil?   it’s all too muddled to work as a winnowing concept and yet de quiros thinks the world of this good vs. evil theme.

For a long, long time, GMA was seen as the worst leader this country has ever had after Marcos, or for some even before Marcos. Yet all that it elicited from the public was cynicism and text jokes. It was only after Cory died and Noynoy arose in her wake that the cynicism turned into a revulsion for an intolerable situation and the text jokes turned into an epic desire to change things.

For the Aquino camp, that means it’s not just enough to harp on the hell that the GMA curse is, or the heaven that the Cory legacy can be, it needs to harp on the hell that the GMA curse is and the heaven that the Cory legacy can be, at the same time. For the Aquino camp, that means that it’s not just enough to harp on Villar as the embodiment, continuation or extension of GMA (literally or in a kindred way) or Noynoy as the inheritor, keeper, and perpetuator of the Cory legacy, it needs to harp on the one as the disease and on the other as the cure.

but what is this heavenly change that cory’s legacy will bring about through noynoy?   mababaw ang kaligayahan ni de quiros.

Who cares about Noynoy’s plans for education? Simply removing the monsters whose very existence teaches the young that lying, cheating and stealing are rewarded and whistle-blowing, telling the truth, and being courageous are punished is an entire curriculum unto itself. Who cares about Noynoy’s plans for economic development? Simply stopping a reign of corruption stops poverty completely literally in that there is no mahirap where there is no korap, and completely spiritually in that nothing impoverishes a country more than an utter lack of moralidad. Who cares about Noynoy’s plans for national security? You arrest the usurpers who made the country home to desperation and insecurity, and line them up against the wall, or its legal equivalent since we don’t have the death penalty anymore, though we can always make an exception, and we will have more security than can be guaranteed by the armed forces or the insurance companies.

but we should care about a presidential candidate’s plans for education; the curriculum problem goes beyond / goes deeper, it’s not just ethical and moral but academic and pedagogic and even a problem of language.   and we should care about noynoy’s plans for economic development because de quiros exaggerates, stopping corruption will not stop poverty “completely literally”: it would only mean a little more money for health education and dole-outs for some but not nearly enough to make a sustainable difference in the lives of the many many poor, not while the oligarchy reigns and the debt policy rules.    and we should care about noynoy’s plans for national security because current policies discriminate against pinoys (think vfa) and civil society (pro-poor ngos) and do nothing to secure our environment, and our very lives, from deadly trash and irresponsible land use and destructive mining and rapid reckless deforestation.

in another column, de quiros waxes nostalgic about edsa and people power and the cory magic.

The Cory magic hasn’t lost its magic, it has simply not been used. Or the Cory magic hasn’t lost its magic, it has simply been lost on the people who held it in their hands but never knew what they had. The Cory magic is Edsa. The Cory magic is People Power. The Cory magic is the glimmer of hope piercing through the dark of despair.

I said last year that the Noynoy camp had a tremendous advantage in that the opening of the year presented two Edsas, January being Edsa II and February being Edsa I. Both resonated with good triumphing over evil, a concept GMA has been at pains to make people forget, which is why she has tried to hide the very thing—and people, who were Cory and Jaime Cardinal Sin—that brought her to power. Both stood to unleash the Cory magic in all its glory.

January came and went, and not a single statement on Edsa, or about Edsa, issued from the lips of the Aquino camp. We’re on the second week of February, and not a single statement on Edsa, or about Edsa, has issued from the lips of the Aquino camp. We’re on the fifth month after Noynoy declared his intention to run, and not much, if not not a single statement, has issued from the lips of the Aquino camp about their cries of anguish and anger from the pit of the land, about the glimmer of hope piercing through the dark of despair, about the people and their power.

The Cory magic is not something that works by itself, it works only by being used. The Cory magic is Edsa, the Cory magic is People Power, the Cory magic is people drawing the line, demanding change, commanding change, shouting at the top of their lungs, “tama na, sobra na, palitan na.” You do not invoke these things, you do not conjure these things, you do not say the magic words that unleash these things—there is no Cory magic.

ah, yes, EDSA.   de quiros makes it seem like we are back in 1986 and the choice is simple, black and white, good vs. evil, cory vs. marcos.    indeed “tama na, sobra na, palitan na” were magic words back then, but it was clear kung sino ang dapat palitan at sino ang dapat ipalit, the opposition being united behind one cory (doy did a mar upon the clamor of the people).   eh hindi naman ganyan ang sitwasyon ngayon.   ang daming choice.   maliban kay mar, walang kandidatong kusang nagbibigaydaan kay noynoy, each one thinks himself/herself as the good one vs. the evil one.   and maybe all of them are right, all in their own small ways.

if the object was were to beat gma’s annointed and everything evil she stands for in the may elections, and if the strategy was were to go by, be guided by, the EDSA tradition, then villar erap gordon gibo jamby perlas bro.eddie and jc, should have, one and all, when cory died, humbly nobly happily rallied behind noynoy as the one opposition candidate.   of course it didn’t happen because there was no clamor to that effect.   the real clamor is for CHANGE but noynoy is only promising small change — to stop corruption and streamline the system, the very system that needs changing.

truth to tell, it’s jamby madrigal and nicanor perlas who are running on platforms of CHANGE, and noynoy and the rest should be giving way to them, i.e., if we are to go by EDSA.   but the people aren’t ready, pinagiisipan pa nila, pinagtatalunan pa, kung sino ano ba talaga ang paniniwalaan, ano nga ba yung tama na, alin ba ang sobra na, paano ba papalitan, atano ang ipapalit.   clearly people power continues on “hold” while seeking to level-up beyond good vs. evil.

environment 9: sustainable devt

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS
SPIRITUAL AND REVOLUTIONARY PRAXIS

Junie Kalaw

Toward the end of this century as of the last one, dramatic changes have taken place under the impact of, among others, the industrial revolution, two world wars, struggles for political independence, the internationalization of economics, and the globalization of mass media.  These forces have had shearing effects on the fabric of political and economic society, some appearing first as part of the solution, even a boon (like pesticides), and only later as a problem.   Through all these changes and upheavals, the structures of oppressive domination have persisted on different levels occasionally changing external form but otherwise entrenched firmly enough in society to continue denying Filipinos and other Third World populations their freedom and autonomy.

Today’s Revolutionary Conditions

Poverty remains the Philippines’ major problem, aggravated by the depletion of our natural resources, the impending breakdown of our life-support systems, and the high rate of our population growth.  With our remaining forests down to less than 800,000 hectares, only 20% of our coral reefs in good condition, 18 major river systems biologically dead, 13 provinces severely eroded, fresh-water reservoirs drying up, and the population requiring 40% more food by the year 2000, we face a critical situation and time is not on our side.

The deterioration of the Philippine environment is traceable to economic activities designed to support the consumption needs of other countries.  Ecological footprints of the development of industrialized countries are to be seen not only in our degraded ecology but also in the waste that is exported back to us.   This historical trail of international trade based on the exploitation of our natural resources by former colonial masters has piled up ecological debts that remain uncompensated.   Sadly, this system of “ecological colonialism” has been institutionalized in the present international economic order.

Highlighting the crisis are new perspectives from ecological economists like Herman Daly and Robert Goodland.  They see our economic system as an open system functioning with the closed system that is our planet’s biosphere.  With the current global economy amounting to about US$32 trillion, we are consuming 40% of the primary production of terrestrial photosynthetic energy from the sun.  This means that in one doubling time, we will be using 80%, a condition that with its attendant waste may exceed the “carrying capacity” of the planet.  Thus it is posited that there is no room for aggregate economic growth and that sustainable economic growth for everyone is not possible.  This raises such issues as the rights of poor countries to their equitable share of remaining clean space, access to their own natural resources, access to information and technology, and bargaining power in markets.  Further, inasmuch as the relationship between rich and poor is a function of power, there is nothing to stop the rich from using this self-same power to maintain their wasteful consumption patterns and perpetuate an inequitable system.

Revolution Based on Reconciliation

Pope John Paul II in Rome calls it a “moral crisis,” the lack of a “morally coherent world view.”  A lumad datu in Mount Apo ascribes it to a foreign belief system that has exiled God to the heavens so that we no longer see God in the trees, streams, mountains, and animals, nor in our fellow humans.  The reference is to the same fundamental gap between our personal ethics and the system’s ethics, and the need for a systems ethics which translates personal decisions in to decisions for the common good.  More concretely, it is the gap between what is an honest living for loggers and what is good for the environment and the common welfare.   The gap is widened not just by plain greed but also by a moral and ethical blindness to, and lack ofcomprehension of, the norms for a just and sustainable functioning of bigger systems.

At its worst, the gap renders futile church teachings on honesty and love for the poor on account of its inability to translate doctrine in terms of land reform or equitable wages or conservation of forest and marine resources.  In the end we realize that we have not yet found our wholeness.  We have yet to manage successfully the integration of personal and social transformation.  The exception was the EDSA Revolution, when a critical mass of Filipinos got their inner and outer values together and created the spiritual and political space that made the sharing of pan de sal across military defenses an operative Communion of the People, and that produced transformative political change, but which, unfortunately, we were unable to sustain.

Nowhere is the fundamental gap between personal ethics and systems ethics more dramatic and disastrous than in the policy of equal access to the benefits of creation.  Whereas in an ecological system life flows, sustaining and fulfilling the lives of all in a process we can call “ecological justice,” in the current system control over and access to life-giving natural resources are awarded to a privileged few — a situation which has produced the poverty and resource depletion that imperils our life-support systems.  Moreover, we have cast the responsibility and accountability for these effects to the impersonal free enterprise and market systems.

The conflict between our economic system and nature’s ecological processes has been a fundamental cause of the destruction of our ecosystems.  While natural systems consist of organic unities such as families, communities, cultures, and ecosystems, we manage to evaluate and reward our economic activities according to functional sectors and enterprise organizations.  We gauge national development by adding the production of these sectors and industries into a gross national product (GNP); not measured are local community welfare and ecosystem enhancement.  This has resulted in a big normative gap between the welfare of corporations, both transnational and national, and the welfare of local ecologies and communities.  The bridging of this gap requires more than just environmental protection measures or community projects by business enterprises.   It requires a whole re-orientation of the way we do business and a re-discovering of the true essence of hanapbuhay, a truly Filipino concept that searches for the life-flow, like the Kalinga concept of wealth that is based on the enrichment of life rather on a life of personal enrichment.  We cannot relegate this revisioning to our economists and government planners alone.  We need to take responsibility for our country’s economic development models, policies, and practices, and to participate in the political processes that will enable us to create a just and sustainable future not only for ourselves but for the generations of Filipinos to come.

Politics, whose primordial function is to serve the welfare of the whole, is the human activity that should be most spiritually informed.  Most efforts at political reconciliation have as their objective the consolidation of power under the ruling regime.  Thus, one presently sees accommodations being made with the forces of he past dictatorship under the pretext of hastening the healing of the nation.  What needs reconciliation and healing is not the gap between contending politicians with vested interests but the gap between their interests and the welfare of the people, between the welfare of the state bureaucracy and the welfare of the environment and local communities.   This requires the relocation of authority from the ideologies of political parties to the reality of the interdependence of life in an ecology; the re-vesting of power from the centralized bureaucracy of state, party committee, and church to persons in communities; the affirmation of the subsidiarity of parts and the ecological and spiritual solidarity of wholes; and the establishment of a local citizenship and a global polity.

It is a reconciliation that needs to find a new concept of security and management of changes in the shift from national security based on militarization and armaments to a “natural” security based on securing clean water, fertile soil, fresh air, and food.  It requires a fundamental re-orientation of power from one based on the accumulation of goods and information to one based on the capacity to make goods and information flow, where power becomes something one does not hold on to but something ope opens up to for the life process to flow in service to others.

Such a reconciliation gives witness to the great lesson of ecology that all life is interconnected and echoes the teachings of all great spiritual traditions that the governance of communities is a sacred task, whether we call it the Christian Mystical Body, the Moslem Uhma, or the Kalinga ili.

Conversion and Renewal

Christian churches are now seeking an alternative to the ruling anthropocentric model of man subduing the earth.  The new theological understanding of creation spans a spectrum of interpretations: the sacramentalist model, where everything is a manifestation of God; the stewardship model, which argues for the sustainable use of power, knowledge, and natural resources; the creative model expounded by Matthew Fox, where God is ever “birthing and nurturing creation”; the Franciscan model of kinship of “brother sun and sister moon”; and the evolutionary model of Teilhard de Chardin and Thomas Berry.  They all have broadened the praxis of faith to include “justice, peace, and Integrity of Creation” and redefined “a spirituality that integrates our faith and our daily lives and all of Creation.”

Here at home, in defense of what we Filipinos call lupang hinirang (beloved country), the Philippine Independent Church recently announced its advocacy of a total ban on commercial logging for 25 years.  Following the Catholic bishops’ pastoral letter “What Is Happening to Our Beautiful Land?” and the involvement of bishops and parish priests in blockading logging trucks on Bukidnon, picketing DENR offices in Nueva Ecija, and apprehending illegal loggers in Cagayan, there is clearly an escalation of activism among Christian churches and a growing concern for the integrity of life on earth.

A more concise expression of the revolutionary message of the Gospel has yet to be made by any church group in the Philippines, but it is important to remember that the times call for a new conversion.   In the past, conversion was brought about by mediation between people and the Divine, or between people and other people.  Today’s need is a mediation between people and nature, a mediation we call “sustainable development.”  It is a conversion that comes from revelations through nature, revelations that link polarities into higher levels of integration and renewal, revelations that affirm the integrity of God’s creation whose truth lies beyond contending ideological positions and is encompassed in an ecology.  It will come from re-remembering what our indigenous Filipinos knew about the sacredness of the land, our lupang hinirang.  It will come from re-experiencing the tradition of nurturing the Earth, our tipan sa Mahal na Ina.  It will come from responding to the biblical revelations to be stewards of the earth.  A conversion where “carrying capacity” becomes the operative term for compassion, and the patterns of community life a metaphor for wholeness.  It will require the devolution of power away from its institutional sites in the bureaucracies of state, party, and even church, and into people in the communities as the locus of the Mystical Body.   It will empower people to participate in the creative act of sustainable development by witnessing the Spirit that runs through all life.

This kind of conversion will gain its meaning from the operationalization of sustainable development strategies, programs, and projects.   It will need to find expression on the level of communities, affirming their cultural identity while cherishing diversity by upholding (1) indigenous rights to ancestral land, (2) equal rights for women, (3) social equity through agrarian, aquatic, and urban land reform, and social forestry, and (4) an ecologically sound economic system that is community-based and exports only ecological surplus or excess carrying capacities.  It will practice the sustainable utilization of natural resources, clean production technologies, and the proper recycling and disposal of waste.  It will come from governance that is based on moral values translated into public good, a democratic participatory process, a system called Pamathalaan — Pamamahalang nakatindig sa sariling taal at nakahandog kay Bathala.

In the final analysis, sustainable development depends on the personal conversion, commitments, and communion of everyone.   It needs a conversion that translates into personal choices regarding what to consume and what lifestyle to live.   In a post-modern age, it will mean making a conscious choice from among the diversity of options brought about by modernization.  Many of these options will be offered by expert systems where people have little control over processes, whether these be biogenetic systems that program the sex of our offspring or communications systems that tell us we are what we consume.  They will involve matters disembedded from space-time locality so that we no longer directly experience the consequences of our actions.  Such will be the landscape of a “post-modern revolution.”  The future will therefore need the wisdom of our historical traditions, the moral anchors of our faith, and our living communion with all people and God’s creation.

Enviroscope, Haribon Foundation Bulletin, December 1993

in cory’s wake

when ninoy died and his remains lay in bloodied state sa times street, pumila kami that night, my husband and i, to pay our respects, never mind that marcos might get mad or his military might be watching.   we just had to pay homage to this man who won our respect when he, alone, suffered jail for seven years and seven months rather than bow to a dictator, and when he dared come home from exile because the filipino is worth dying for.

past the gate a couple of kids handed us a black ribbon each, a small strip with aspili.   the patio too was small, the space enough only for the line of people snaking single-file around the coffin for a quick hello and goodbye, as quick as the pass-by cory’s coffin i’m now seeing on tv.   it was also very quiet.   the house was closed, there was no sign of any family or friends.   except for two or three watchful guys standing by (security siguro) we, the people, were alone with ninoy.   a starkly simple affair.

with cory, aba, sosyal!   what a case-study of a scene.    the huge venues and tv cameras, the people quietly filing by the coffin while family and friends sit around, move around, make chika nearby.   how rare, masses and elite sharing the same space happily, clear divisions and all.   the silent masa are just happy to be allowed a glimpse of cory one last time, never mind that they enter by a different gate, and are not treated like guests and offered seats.   the elite are just happy that the masses are there too, imagine if they weren’t, what a snub, how embarrassing.

interesting, too, that gma the once lucky bitch is now the the odd woman out.   indeed, she’s damned if she goes, damned if she doesn’t.   pero dapat kaya niyang magpunta.   just as dapat kaya ng mga aquino na tanggapin siya.   of course kung type niyang magdrama, she could always do the unexpected, like, line up with the people, why not, pay her respects to cory first, before facing cory’s clan.   i’m sure even kris would be lost for words  (well, at least for a while ;).

of course it would mean gma counting on the people to be too awed by her pa-humble chutzpah to do anything but welcome her among their ranks.   but what if the people remember only that cory had asked her to resign.   what if they do an edsa instead, like, you know, stop her from getting any closer to cory, kapitbisig human-shieldeffect.   lol.   that would be the end of her.   safer not to cross lines.   safer to face kris.