election eve

despite the surveys calling it a sure win for noynoy, the other camps continue to be really upbeat,each one thinking that their candidate still has a good chance of pulling off a surprise win from behind.   which is as it should be.   after all, marami diyang puwede pang magbago ang isip.   marami ring undecided pa at magde-decide lang pag kaharap na mismo ang balota at mga bilog na hugis itlog.

pero kung mababaw ang kaligayahan ko and i were wavering between noynoy and gibo, the miting de avances would have decided me.   caught gibo’s final sugod speech on channel 4 (thanks to a carlosceldran tweet) and he was, wow, sorta outstanding, looked and projected great, toweringly tall, high energy, and whether that was an extemporaneous or a memorized speech, the delivery was awesomely passionate and must have swayed undecideds some.   noynoy’s came later, aired on anc, and in comparison, he was okay lang, i guess because he was reading his speech (well at least for those moments that i turned to look at the tv screen).   no contest.   had to remind myself why i’m not voting for gibo — the VFA — which tells of a limited vision for country, forever chained to mighty america.   looks like it’s jamby’s platform for me pa rin.

as for surveys, i look forward to a presidential campaign na walang surveys.   it would be a totally different exercise.   until then, national artist f. sionil jose‘s  words apply:

Nothing is going to change…. I am 85. I have seen three generations of Filipino leaders fail. They have never been able to transcend themselves, neither their class nor their ethnicity.

Did you read The Economist obituary on her? (referring to Aquino). It said her greatness ended when she became president. Many people were angry. But for those of us who had eyes wide open, her rule was a disaster. She promised land reform. She didn’t do it. She restored the oligarchy. I never forgave her for that.

manila times columnist elmer ordonez is only a little hopeful, and only because of the few partylists that truly represent marginalized sectors.

This election, if it goes through on Monday, whether automated and/or manual, has no special appeal for me. As I wrote earlier, the outcome will be the installation of another faction of the landed oligarchy or that of the relatively new business rich—in power. All within the ruling class.

Opinions about contenders are generally based on survey results and anecdotal information. In the absence of other “scientific” indicators, it is easy to succumb to what may be called survey fetishism, a reliance on statistical counts conducted particularly by two outfits (SWS and Pulse Asia) that seem to have the allegiance of media and the general public.

An alternative survey, conducted by IBON Foundation, using the same tools learned in schools of economics like UP’s, has been red-baited out of circulation by stakeholders in SWS and Pulse Asia. And critics of the latter are called “ignorant” or “incompetent” about the arcana of what the late Dean Jose Encarnacion would call a “quasi-science.” As are all social sciences.

There are charges of “trending’’ and “bandwagon effect” because of the surveys, as people talk freely about “leading” or “front-running” candidates. I myself paid scant attention to those who are in the “cellar”—all of whom seem imbued with idealism, or practice new or nonpatronage politics. Can they look forward to a level playing field through electoral reform?

The winners will of course be known after May 10 but the social change that discerning voters hope for will not come about. Those elected will perpetuate themselves in office through the vast resources and the ideological/coercive agencies under their control—with cronies and “kamag-anaks” waiting in the wings. What else could be new?

….Is there hope for us in this election? Yes, some. For one, the party-lists that represent truly marginalized sectors—like Bayan Muna, Akbayan, Gabriela, Anakpawis and Kabataan are leading in the surveys and are assured of seats. New party-lists like ACT Teachers (unlike one that represents school owners), Agham (science for the poor), and Ang Ladlad (representing gays) are likely to win at least one seat each. These party-lists deserve support from voters turned off by traditional or oligarchic politics. At least they can provide a strong voice in Congress dominated by the establishment.

Satur Ocampo and Lisa Maza of the Makabayan Party had already served ten years as pro-poor party-list representatives in Congress (Bayan Muna and Gabriela) and are running as NP guest candidates to continue their advocacies in the Senate. I am confident they will acquit themselves creditably in their undertaking.

The senatorial lists of all parties include names who will work for the interests of the underprivileged and the dispossessed. I would include (besides Ocampo and Maza), Pia Cayetano, Mario Bautista, Susan Ople, Gwendolyn Pimentel, Adel Tamano, Alex Lacson, Danilo Lim, Teofisto Guingona III, and Sonia Roco in my ballot. A few more are already in the top twelve of the surveys. eaordonez2000@yahoo.com

my list : satur, liza, danny lim, miriam, jpe, lozada, pia, neric, adel, serge, guingona, and either toots or ruffy.


  1. Reuben

    I voted for Cory through the ballot and through my feet not because of land reform. I am of the opinion that many Filipinos have the same sentiments then. What is Mr. Sionil Jose talking about?

  2. buko nut & halo-halo

    @Reuben :-}=
    Although I was not able to cast my vote in 1986, I would have voted for Cory. Pres. Cory’ courageous struggle earned her honor of being the Iconic Saint of Democracy, and thats what she stands for. Her speech at the US Halls of Congress in 1987 was historically recorded as the most applauded and the finest oratory delivered in the chamber of the strongest and most powerful state in the world. Hearing that speech at that time made me proud Filipino and tears of joy flawed unabashly. What was tragic was the politicized military kept her out of focus and mounted coups detat that weaken her administration. She did not fail our expectations, its the people’s undisciplined attitude towards what could have been a defining moment for a “revolutionary govt” to mount the easiest moral reformation and social transformation and economic empowerment available to the bureaucracy. Perhaps, God must have gotten angry for wasting such grace of divine intervention and karma fall upon our people for erecting a monument of false gods not befitting the event.

  3. Edward

    Yes, Cory Aquino did indeed restored the oligarchy and submitted to the pressure of IMF and World Bank of assuming the debt of Marcoses as our own and our children’s. She only looked good compared to Marcos, but not good at all in terms of what a real president should do. Up to know her legacy of failed land reform continues and now haunts our future. The reason why she is so much hyped and admired by the international community is because Cory supported the interests of the capitalists through the IMF and World Bank (the assumption of odious debt). I never really had much respect for her. Genuine land reform is still dead.

  4. Die Hard NoyPi-Riyadh

    @Edward=:=) Yes, She restored the oligarchy. But even Russia,a socialist and hard core Communist, has their own “Oiligarchy”, home groan capitalist. Even China has thread the road of Capitalist economy. We cannot do away as an under-developed society without “the aristocracy of the intellect” to borrow the words of former UP President, Vidal Tan to rise above mediocrity and ignorance. The 360 years of clerical rule by the Catholic Church has stymied the capacity of the people to fight neocolonial feudalism because of economic dependence, superstitous beliefs and practices, the god-father patronage system.