duterte shaking the tree — prelude to martial law and federalism?

Walden Bello
NO DOG IN THIS FIGHT
Since people have been pressing me for an opinion, I am briefly breaking my abstinence from Zuckerberg’s virtual evil empire, to say that while I find some of President Duterte’s policies murderous and reprehensible, when it comes to the conflict between God and Duterte, I ain’t got no dog in this fight, as someone famously said.  [93 likes, loves, haha. 4 shares]

Joel David Finally, a sensible position. I’d actually uphold a militant atheist call, but PRRD’s recent outburst isn’t really atheist, only militant in an awful manner.

exactly my sentiments.  it’s an argument that no one can win anyway, not duterte, not the church, not civil society.  duterte only has the upper hand because he’s president and also because all creation myths naman — such as adam and eve and snake in a paradise with a tree of good and evil — are the stuff of fairy tales and meant to be taken with a grain of salt.

JORGE ARAGO:  Those guys from the highlands say that long, long ago the gods came down to earth and found it a bore with no people around. So they scooped up some clay and moulded two figures, then plucked feathers off a chicken and tickled one clay figure until it laughed – that was the man. Of course the myth doesn’t say if the gods laughed with or after the woman and maintains a plucky silence about the chicken. [Pro Bernal Anti Bio. ABS-CBN publishing inc. (2017) page 35]

besides, the big bang and evolution make more sense to me now that i’m lightyears away from convent school.  but, yes, just the same, we humans like to do creation myths.  read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Creation_myth and other sources.

i actually have no problem with the adam-eve-serpent story that i grew up with, may pagka-cinematic pa nga, contodo plot beginning, middle, and ending.  but the bible is not clear about what life was like in paradise in the beginning, before the temptation — were adam and eve already having sex?  and all was good?  but no kids maybe?  or did the sex come after eve, and then adam, succumbed to temptation, and it’s been downhill since?

“Who is this stupid God? Estupido talaga itong p***** i** kung ganun. You created some—something perfect and then you think of an event that would tempt and destroy the quality of your work,” he said in a speech in Davao City during the opening of the 2018 National ICT Summit.

Duterte found fault in the creation story in the Bible which said that the snake tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, then she in turn gave it to Adam. “So kinain ni Adam. Then malice was born,” he said.

… “So tayo ngayon, all of us are born with an original sin. Ang original sin—ah sin—ano man ‘yan? Was it the first kiss? O… What was the sin? Bakit original? Nasa womb ka pa, may kasalanan ka na,” he said.

the president asks, too, why god had to create eve.

… “Nandiyan na si Adam. Okay na sana ‘yun. Sabi ni God—God found that Adam will be lonely. So he took one of his ribs, bone, and created the woman. Na-l***** na. [laughter] ‘Di kung si Adam lang, mag-dumugan na tayo lahat ng lalaki dito. Okay na ‘yun. Okay lang,” he said.

believe it or not, he speaks from experience.

… ‘yung dalawang brother-in-law ko bakla. Ako noong sa high school pa hindi ko alam kung maglalaki ako, ‘pag magbabae. Eh parang gusto kong maging lalaki, gusto kong maging babae.  Kaya lang sa Philippine Women’s mas maganda talaga ang mga babae, marami doon eh. Kaya ako na-tempt… [17 dec 2017]

but to ask why god had to create woman pa, to scoff at the idea of man being lonely without woman — it is absurd, coming from one who will talk about women and sex every chance he gets, asking for a public kiss here and there, bragging about his many women, even raving about that little blue pill for sex-obsesssed old men, as though it were all some measure of macho cool.

“Sinasadya ko ‘yan eh [I’m intentionally doing it]. You know why? This country is in a doldrums. I’m shaking the tree para mabuhay lahat para makita ko [to wake everyone up so I can see],” Duterte said before an assembly of barangay captains in Zamboanga del Sur.

“Pati ‘yung mga salita ko bastos. I’m trying to go to the boundaries of hanggang saan [Even my words are rude. I’m trying to go the boundaries of how far I can go],” he added.

so.  the kabastusan on all levels is deliberate, to shake us out of the “doldrums”, and also, to test our limits.

“There would be a time to speak, and I will, maybe in the coming days. For now, I will just keep my silence for I want to see how the nation reacts. Kumbaga, I’m shaking the tree. If you’d notice me every now and then, either national or local, ginugulo ko talaga ‘yung puno (I’m really shaking the tree).”   

hmm, shaking the tree  — i.e., arousing to action or reaction, disturbing — but to what end?  to get us so angry that we take to the streets?  to  provoke us into actions that he can pronounce illegal, subversive?  to encourage a climate of violence and instability so he can declare martial law?

nade-deja-vu ako.  alam naman natin na the president is desperate for a shift to federalism — i’m not sure why — and the people are not.  so it’s like he could be taking a page from the marcos playbook —  declare martial law and THEN have the new charter ratified by citizens’ assemblies somehow, anyhow — kaya lang this time there is no threat from the communists to justify it, even now that the peace talks are off-again.  in fact, it’s mostly police operations that are freaking us out.  and the traffic, of course.  and rising prices.  and the falling peso.  and china.

the drama king, as calixto chikiamco now calls the prez, would need to come up with a major major event signalling a major major threat,  better than the alleged-and-denied ambush of defense minister enrile’s convoy in 1972.

and then, again, he might surprise us yet.  what if he’s being singularly offensive pala because he really does want us to oust him as in EDSA, pagod na pagod na kasi siya, ang hirap pala maging presidente, si leni na lang.  omg.  let us pray.

Comments

  1. TONY LA VINA: “… In Javellana, through the Supreme Court, the 1973 Constitution was legitimized despite the Court’s own finding that: “there is no proper submission to the people there being no freedom of speech, press and assembly, and there being no sufficient time to inform the people of the contents thereof.” Indeed, a majority of Justices actually found that there was no valid ratification of the 1973 Constitution. A plebiscite is an election, according to that majority, and the citizen’s assemblies Marcos convened would not qualify as an election required rules on qualifications of voters, secret balloting, and accurate counting of votes. Despite this, the Court, with strong dissents from four members of the then nine-person court, dismissed the petition on the ground that the ­determination of whether the people have accepted the 1973 Constitution was a political question only the people, and not the Court, could decide. This was totally against the 1935 Constitution and its provisions for the process of amending the constitution or adopting a new one.” http://manilastandard.net/opinion/columns/eagle-eyes-by-tony-la-vina/269536/a-tale-of-two-supreme-court-decisions.html

Comment