Posts From My Facebook Timeline In 2013

December 21:

One thing is sure to all clear-thinking Filipinos: corruption pervades all levels of government in the Philippines. But we must realize that corruption and political violence are twins that feed each other in a vicious cycle. 

The Ampatuan mass murder in Maguindanao four years ago that killed so many journalists, the never-ending killings of radio commentators mostly from Mindanao, the unsolved rubouts by policemen trying to cover up their involvement in criminal activities, the recent assassinations of a mayor and his family right outside the capital's airport and the recent shooting of Atty Fortun's wife just outside her home, to name a few, are evidence of the sad state of democracy in the country. The violence serves its purpose of intimidation to terrorize the people and silence any opposition.

Many politicians are somehow linked to these criminal elements and terrorists. They finance, maintain and sustain them. And all that using taxpayers' money through corruption. Unless these twins - corruption and political violence - are somehow mitigated, the country will never be able to achieve genuine democracy. Freedom of expression is one guarantee of a true democracy and the right to hold opinion without interference is universally recognized among the basic human rights.


December 20:

This one is a clear version of the CCTV footage of Junjun Binay's incident. It's a prima facie evidence that's difficult to controvert by the Binays on how abusive the mayor and his sister of their power. 

What bothers most concerned Filipinos is the likelihood that the father will sit as the next president of the country in two years. Erap all over again? One giant step forward, two giant steps backward?

December 14:

Dr Jose Rizal's "Noli Me Tángere", written more than 127 years ago, remains the most influential political novel in the Philippines to this day. The title is Latin for "touch me not", a reference to the bible's John 20:17 ("touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father"). It exposes what ails Philippine society back then - the injustice and deep-rooted corruption committed primarily by Catholic priests and government officials of his time. He exposed "matters...so delicate that they cannot be touched by anybody." One of the early English translation of the novel has this title: "Social Cancer."

Corruption is indeed a malignant social cancer that has far-reaching effect across Philippine society. Rizal's "Noli Me Tángere" remains relevant to us Filipinos particularly this year. How deeply rooted corruption in the Philippines is can be gleaned from the turn of events this year. A few months ago, it was revealed that many senators and congressmen are involved in a P10B pork barrel scam. The revelation convulsed the whole country, disgusted by the alleged crime committed by no other than the country's lawmakers, among the highest officials of the land. Recently, it's been revealed that a certain Arlene Angeles Lerma is the alleged “decision-broker” in the judiciary bribing judges and justices into issuing rulings favorable to her clients. The fixing of high-profile cases include those of the Court of Appeals. Lerma is supposedly the equivalent of Janet Napoles in the judiciary. And the executive branch? We all know that Erap was convicted of plunder, jailed and later pardoned by his successor, GMA, who is now facing similar charges. Unbelievable, not one branch of government up to the highest level is spared from corruption.

It's time to revisit Rizal's Noli Me Tángere. I hope it is still required reading for our students. Time for all Filipinos to examine our convictions and do a deep soul-searching. What can we do to at least minimize corruption in the country?

December 10:

This video may be taken out of context but Roxas clearly said "You have to understand [that] you are a Romualdez and the President is an Aquino so.. so we just want to legalize it. if not legalized, well, then, ok, you are in charge. we'll just help you. bahala na.... [unintelligible]."

I'm not a lawyer but what Romualdez told Roxas makes more sense: "Why is it illegal? As far as I know, the President of the Philippines is also the President of Tacloban City. I don’t see anywhere in the law that says you need a letter, an ordinance, from me for you to come in and do what you’re doing."

Last month, the administration was clearly engaging in patronage politics even in the midst of total chaos post-Yolanda. Even the snail-pace casualty count up to now did not escape the watchful eyes of the international media.

"International aid agencies find the official figures low, as flights over the region three days after Yolanda struck on Nov. 8 reported thousands of bodies floating in the water. The missing now number 8,000, but the NDRRMC counts only reports passing through the approved official layers. NDRRMC in Manila reported the death toll at 5,924, with 1,779 people missing."

Are the president's men trying to artificially lower the casualty count to save the president from further embarrassment as the figure inch closer to what was estimated by the police chief who got sacked by the president as a result? It seems to look that way and, if true, his men actually erode his credibility even more. Clearly, this administration's response to the disaster is itself disastrous.

December 9:

"Do not judge me by my successes, judge me by how many times I fell down and got back up again." ~Nelson Mandela

As the world is mourning and getting ready to bid farewell to one of its finest, we also remember that even the best among us stumble. Mandela stumbled when it comes to HIV and AIDS. When Mandela became president of South Africa, the rate of HIV and AIDS in his country was less than 1%. But his government's indifference to the plight of AIDS victims was reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's when AIDS first started to break out in San Francisco in 1981.

Reagan's pathetic response to the budding epidemic in the early 1980s was influenced by the religious right at the time and Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority. AIDS became a tool for the politics of fear and discrimination. Instead of helping them, the victims were being blamed. Falwell: "AIDS is the wrath of God upon homosexuals." Reagan's communication director, Pat Buchanan, argued that AIDS is "nature's revenge on gay men." As a result, AIDS became a full-blown epidemic. When AIDS started to infect everybody else, that's when the public realized that it is not just a "gay thing." That's very unfortunate. The outcome could have been different had the US government been very aggressive at the start of the outbreak.

Mandela's similar mistake in the 1990s was made worse by his successor, Thabo Mbeki, who believed that "AIDS was not fatal, that HIV did not cause AIDS, that home brew treatments could cure AIDS and that life-saving antiretroviral drugs were being promoted so the West could profit at South Africa’s expense." Ignorance can be fatal. South Africa now has the worst epidemic of HIV in the world.

When it did come close to home, Mandela finally realized his mistake. In 2003, he started to voice out his concern. He created the Nelson Mandela Foundation to fight AIDS and it became his top priority. In 2005, he announced that his son died of AIDS.

The tragedy resulting from the mistakes of world leaders while dealing with AIDS seems to get repeated by our current world leaders when it comes to climate change. I hope they will open their eyes soon and rectify their mistakes before it's too late. Just like the AIDS ignorance of Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan and Thabo Mbeki years ago, no need to drag God into the climate change issue.


December 7:

According to Sec. De Lima, Santiago "sent her a letter on Thursday asking her to tap the National Bureau of Investigation to investigate Enrile.

Santiago wanted Enrile placed under investigation for alleged involvement in smuggling, illegal logging, gambling, as well as the death and disappearances of thousands of people during the martial law years when Enrile was defense minister."

I'm totally flabbergasted. Didn't the government knew since the time of Cory the sins of Enrile especially the death and disappearance of thousands of people during the martial law years when Enrile was defense minister? Is the government that inutile that they have to wait for Miriam to "spill the beans" on Enrile before realizing the need to investigate the other sins of Enrile like smuggling, illegal logging, illegal gambling and so on?

What about Miriam? If she truly has the moral high ground, then why wait to spill the beans until she gets insulted by Enrile for being so full of herself, bragging about her achievements at every opportunity, when she could barely passed the bar examination as cum laude law graduate of UP? If she truly believe that the sins of Enrile need to be investigated, she should have pursued this relentlessly a long time ago. Why just now Madam Santiago? Is it because Enrile badly hurt your feelings?

Most Filipinos knew that Enrile is an old sly fox. When he sensed that his boss Marcos' grip to power was declining, he launched a disastrous coup d'etat, only to be saved by the people at EDSA, later betrayed Cory by attacking her government in a series of coup attempts through his proxy, Honasan. The two of them never really paid for their sins to the people. Interestingly, they even became lawmakers post-EDSA. Only in the Philippines.

The Bliss of Being Poor (Why We Need Spiritual Poverty To Be Truly Happy)

          "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of God."  Matt. 5:3

          This is possibly the most famous of the beatitudes by Jesus. But what does it really mean to be “poor in spirit”?

         The truly poor in this world are usually described as those who live without any possession of their own. They own nothing of value and, therefore, they simply have nothing to get attached to. They are generally carefree. Unlike the poor, the rich and the not-so-rich are always preoccupied with many things and are anxious, even fearful, that they might lose their possessions.

          In my humble opinion, to be poor in spirit means to behave like one and thus have no attachment to all kind of possessions, material or otherwise. That is, we must be willing to part ways with anything (or anyone) we have in this life that will hinder us from receiving the kingdom of God. Jesus himself said “No one of you can be my disciple who does not give up all his own possessions.” (Luke 14:33).

        I'm sure Jesus did not mean that we should start giving away anything of value even at the expense of our own families. Instead, I believe it is related to the concept of detachment. To be honest, many of us will find the biblical passage quite difficult to understand and to follow. But, by learning certain philosophy of Buddhism (and, to a similar extent, those of the other religions from the Indian subcontinent like Hinduism, Jainism and Sikhism), the same phrase gets a bit easier to understand. Let me explain further. Buddhists believe that nothing in this life is permanent and that the root cause of all our sufferings (dukkha) is our craving for these impermanent things. Our material possessions, the people close to our hearts, all our pleasurable experiences, even our own bodies - all of them are impermanent and will go away.

       If we can only fully comprehend and be mindful of this truth and then learn to cease

1.) our attachment to material things
2.) our attachment to pleasurable experiences
3.) or its opposite, our "attachment" to NOT experiencing any unpleasant feeling or experience like pain (avoidance is the better word).
4.) our attachment to the people we love and even to ourselves (narcissism)

then our sufferings will cease. This is not a suggestion to become a cold and distant person (who ignores the world) nor an exhortation to stop loving the people around us, especially our significant others. Quite the opposite actually. We are rather being encouraged to be "mindful" of this truth. Buddhists believe that suffering will continue to be experienced (from this life to the next) in perpetual cycle until one reaches nirvana, a blissful state where one is liberated from all these attachments. Among Hindus, they believe that when you achieve nirvana, you actually become united with the Supreme Being.

       In this context, we can now bring ourselves to understand one of the most controversial statements attributed to Jesus, "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Gospel of Matthew 10:34). I believe Jesus was only stating the truth on how we are going to "receive the Kingdom of God": that we must learn and be willing to detach ourselves from anything and/or anyone (including our loved ones).

       He went on to say "...for I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34–39). At first glance, it appears contradictory to what Jesus always preach to his disciples. In fact, when I first came across this passage, it was quite shocking to me to say the least. But once you put it in the context of Buddha's concept of detachment, you will start to understand where he was coming from.

       At a practical level, understanding the concept of detachment will actually help us to quickly recover from  tragedies that sometimes cross our path. You can just imagine, for example, the terrible experiences of  the people who survived the devastating earthquake and giant tsunami that hit Banda Aceh, Indonesia in 2004 who also lost most, if not all, of their loved ones during the catastrophe. For the years that followed, many of them surely must have felt extreme guilt and got severely depressed for being the sole survivors of their respective families. It's easy to imagine that some of them end up losing their minds or, worse, committing suicide. But when you deeply understand and absorb the concept of detachment, if a similar tragedy will strike at you, I'm confident that you will learn quickly to move on with your life. You will still be the same loving and concerned parent, spouse or sibling to your family. Nothing else in you will change. Except that you are no longer "attached" to them. In the eyes of God, you have no more possessions and therefore have gained "spiritual poverty" and it's actually a good thing.

      It must have felt quite liberating for Warren Buffett when he decided some years ago to donate almost all of his wealth to charity. Or, St. Francis of Assisi, for that matter. Or even the Buddha when he decided to let go of his wife and son, and all his wealth in his quest for spiritual enlightenment.