In The Name of the Truth
(The following is my column for today, July 12, 2006 at the op-ed section of The Manila Standard Today).
THE “truth” is the new catchword in town, and it’s been hanging from every politician’s mouth the last few days.
“In search of the truth,” they say, and it is truly a blessing that many of our politicians and civic leaders are hams in the acting department. Otherwise, we would not only have to put up with trite dramatic dialogues but awful melodramatic renditions of the phrase as well. (Imagine the great actors in the Senate looking straight at the camera with misty eyes and quivering lips intoning, “sa ngalan ng katotohanan!” and see if you don’t want to run screaming out of the room). If alarm bells were rung every single time someone invoked “the truth” in the last two days, we would all be deaf by now.
If people truly believe that “the truth shall set us free” and want to embark on a major quest to find it, who in his right mind would think of beginning the search in the halls of Congress?
I am not accusing our senators and congressmen of being such big frauds although the idea is really tempting. Even if truth were written in upper case neon letters 20 feet high right where the huge Philippine flag is displayed at the main hall of Congress, I doubt very much if all our honorable congressmen will see it. Or at least see it as such, as they will probably debate on the question of whether words constitute essence, or whether what they are seeing is objective reality or an interpretation of reality, or something just as nonsensical. This is not to say that they all need glasses or brain transplants, although these sound like good excuses too; just that people do not see things that they do not want to see, period.
And to be fair, it’s really not just in Congress where this phenomenon called selective perception is prevalent. Wasn’t it just a few years back when many respected journalists wrote passionate essays about truth being subjective—that it must side with the causes of the oppressed and the marginalized? Didn’t civic groups led by you-know-who (I can’t say her name without going into a laughing fit; it is a long story which involves community singing of “If We Hold On Together”) bend the truth in their favor when they justified that ill-fated CODE-NGO project a few years back? Don’t businessmen hire public relations experts to twist the truth a little to suit their purposes? The point is, we are all guilty of twisting the truth in our favor.
Therefore, if anyone wants to embark on a quest for the truth, I suggest they begin the search in the most logical starting point, which is within their selves (yes, Rep. Francis Escudero, that’s where you should begin). And I guess this is the message of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines that sadly got lost in political translation. In effect, what the bishops are saying is, “you cannot accuse someone of being immoral if you yourself are doing something immoral.” (I have been saying the same thing and more in my blog in the last five months and I didn’t have to go through a weekend retreat to do that).
It is shameless and hypocritical the way some people invoke the “truth” as absolute justification for their political agenda. They say that all they want is to know the truth about whether the President cheated in the last elections. Duh. We already know the truth— everyone cheats during elections in this country and I dare any politician to come forward to claim that he or she is clean. All candidates, and I do mean ALL candidates, violate election laws— from the printing and posting of posters, to the distribution of sample ballots, to vote-buying, etc. So instead of asking the obvious, how about asking a more sincere and proactive question: since we all cheat during elections, how do we make sure that cheating is eradicated from our system? But I guess that question requires real work for our legislators and civic leaders. It is just so much easier to just blame someone than to be responsible for the solutions.
I can go on and on, but let’s cut through all this BS and call a spade a dirty shovel. What they really mean when they say they want to find the truth is to dig political mud, dirt and sleaze enough to shame the President into resigning from office, or enough to galvanize people into supporting their cause. In the process, the country can burn and we may lose all semblance of respect and dignity as a people. It is also possible that everyone gets implicated and the bloodbath will run 10 feet deep. But who cares as long as some people emerge as heroes and heroines and we can all live under a new dispensation of new tyrants and more of the same corrupt officials. I know some people who live in ivory towers and can therefore afford to romanticize all these, but tell it to someone who actually lives through the hardships of everyday living and see if you don’t get cursed.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me restate my position. I truly believe that under normal circumstances, impeachment is a valid and legal option. I also believe in my heart of hearts that this President has to go sooner or later—both for her sake and for the country’s. But the problems of this country are bigger and larger than whether GMA should be retained or given the boot. We need to go beyond demonizing the President or looking for someone to blame and instead focus on proactive solutions. In the words of the bishops, focus on “the common good.” And along the way, yes, let us make sure she is made accountable for her grievous mistakes.
Unfortunately, some people who dare to call themselves patriots still refuse to read the writing on the wall. To them, it is still all about GMA. And everything else, including progress and listening to the real needs of the people, is secondary.
GMA is a problem, but there are bigger and larger problems that we need to focus on. We are also part of the problem. Unfortunately, this is the truth that some people cannot handle.
THE “truth” is the new catchword in town, and it’s been hanging from every politician’s mouth the last few days.
“In search of the truth,” they say, and it is truly a blessing that many of our politicians and civic leaders are hams in the acting department. Otherwise, we would not only have to put up with trite dramatic dialogues but awful melodramatic renditions of the phrase as well. (Imagine the great actors in the Senate looking straight at the camera with misty eyes and quivering lips intoning, “sa ngalan ng katotohanan!” and see if you don’t want to run screaming out of the room). If alarm bells were rung every single time someone invoked “the truth” in the last two days, we would all be deaf by now.
If people truly believe that “the truth shall set us free” and want to embark on a major quest to find it, who in his right mind would think of beginning the search in the halls of Congress?
I am not accusing our senators and congressmen of being such big frauds although the idea is really tempting. Even if truth were written in upper case neon letters 20 feet high right where the huge Philippine flag is displayed at the main hall of Congress, I doubt very much if all our honorable congressmen will see it. Or at least see it as such, as they will probably debate on the question of whether words constitute essence, or whether what they are seeing is objective reality or an interpretation of reality, or something just as nonsensical. This is not to say that they all need glasses or brain transplants, although these sound like good excuses too; just that people do not see things that they do not want to see, period.
And to be fair, it’s really not just in Congress where this phenomenon called selective perception is prevalent. Wasn’t it just a few years back when many respected journalists wrote passionate essays about truth being subjective—that it must side with the causes of the oppressed and the marginalized? Didn’t civic groups led by you-know-who (I can’t say her name without going into a laughing fit; it is a long story which involves community singing of “If We Hold On Together”) bend the truth in their favor when they justified that ill-fated CODE-NGO project a few years back? Don’t businessmen hire public relations experts to twist the truth a little to suit their purposes? The point is, we are all guilty of twisting the truth in our favor.
Therefore, if anyone wants to embark on a quest for the truth, I suggest they begin the search in the most logical starting point, which is within their selves (yes, Rep. Francis Escudero, that’s where you should begin). And I guess this is the message of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines that sadly got lost in political translation. In effect, what the bishops are saying is, “you cannot accuse someone of being immoral if you yourself are doing something immoral.” (I have been saying the same thing and more in my blog in the last five months and I didn’t have to go through a weekend retreat to do that).
It is shameless and hypocritical the way some people invoke the “truth” as absolute justification for their political agenda. They say that all they want is to know the truth about whether the President cheated in the last elections. Duh. We already know the truth— everyone cheats during elections in this country and I dare any politician to come forward to claim that he or she is clean. All candidates, and I do mean ALL candidates, violate election laws— from the printing and posting of posters, to the distribution of sample ballots, to vote-buying, etc. So instead of asking the obvious, how about asking a more sincere and proactive question: since we all cheat during elections, how do we make sure that cheating is eradicated from our system? But I guess that question requires real work for our legislators and civic leaders. It is just so much easier to just blame someone than to be responsible for the solutions.
I can go on and on, but let’s cut through all this BS and call a spade a dirty shovel. What they really mean when they say they want to find the truth is to dig political mud, dirt and sleaze enough to shame the President into resigning from office, or enough to galvanize people into supporting their cause. In the process, the country can burn and we may lose all semblance of respect and dignity as a people. It is also possible that everyone gets implicated and the bloodbath will run 10 feet deep. But who cares as long as some people emerge as heroes and heroines and we can all live under a new dispensation of new tyrants and more of the same corrupt officials. I know some people who live in ivory towers and can therefore afford to romanticize all these, but tell it to someone who actually lives through the hardships of everyday living and see if you don’t get cursed.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me restate my position. I truly believe that under normal circumstances, impeachment is a valid and legal option. I also believe in my heart of hearts that this President has to go sooner or later—both for her sake and for the country’s. But the problems of this country are bigger and larger than whether GMA should be retained or given the boot. We need to go beyond demonizing the President or looking for someone to blame and instead focus on proactive solutions. In the words of the bishops, focus on “the common good.” And along the way, yes, let us make sure she is made accountable for her grievous mistakes.
Unfortunately, some people who dare to call themselves patriots still refuse to read the writing on the wall. To them, it is still all about GMA. And everything else, including progress and listening to the real needs of the people, is secondary.
GMA is a problem, but there are bigger and larger problems that we need to focus on. We are also part of the problem. Unfortunately, this is the truth that some people cannot handle.
Comments
As a contributor of mine observed even way back in 2002:
We need to have something that would prove that the Philippine society is just more than an historical or fortuitous accident in order to justify its continued existence. We have to formulate some deeper ideology shared by all filipinos that would inspire personal or moral conviction beyond mere emotionalism or sentimentalism. Patriotism could only be sustained if it's rooted on more timeless principles and yet peculiar only to the filipino people. Anything else, would be fleeting.
Even our concept of "nationalism" and "patriotism" had already been hijacked by self-styled "cause-oriented" groups.
So-called "cause-oriented groups" (COGs) at present seem to have a monopoly over the label "nationalist" or "patriot". They claim to be the only true nationalists simply by virtue of their willingness to invoke chaos on our streets and to express themselves in a form of Tagalog that makes generous use of six-syllable words that most ordinary Filipinos hardly ever come across; all in the name of the Filipino masses, so they claim.
A more sensible approach of course is to think of the Philippine Nation as one that needs to earn its people's pride. And its people, in turn, need to recognise that they have to work at building a nation that they could be objectively proud of. We need to re-visit the true essence of nationalism -- the desire to build a just, safe, and prosperous country that can earn the pride of its people.
Let's return the concept of nationalism to its rightful owners -- the ordinary Filipino citizens who earn a productive living doing their job properly. No one Filipino -- or organisation of Filipinos -- has an exclusive claim to the titles nationalist or patriot or makabayan, whether he or she be a CEO of a multinational corporation or a rice farmer.
I chided Helga of B&W once in their website. I told her I thought B&W was spending an inordinate amount of energy on GMA when she's just a symptom. To her credit, she acknowledged it and said B&W's advocacy was about GMA but that doesnt mean the members are not doing anything to address the deeper problems. Im quite sure that B&W member individuals and organizations are doing all they can, too, to address these.
Got this piece in my e-mail just now, mainit pa. Tamang-tama sa subject matter mo: politicians. Laughed so hard when I read this and I thought of sharing it with you. Gusto kita patawanin sandali. Here goes...
"Four surgeons are discussing who has the best patients to operate on.
The first surgeon says, "I like to see accountants on my operating table because when you open them up, everything inside is numbered."
The second responds, "Yeah, but you should try electricians! Everything inside them is color coded."
The third surgeon says, "No, I
really think librarians are the best; everything inside them is in alphabetical order."
But the fourth surgeon shut them all up when he observed: "You're all wrong. Politicians are the easiest to operate on. There are no guts, no heart, no balls, no brains and no spine, and the head and the ass are interchangeable."
Actually we could add more to the last sentence but it will take lots of space and our hearts might burst from laughing so hard. Needless to say, I hold a lot of our politicians to the highest ridicule.
Good afternoon, Bong!
MommyJo
In this revived impeachment case, I was wondering how many will sign this time. I haven't noticed lately that young ineloquent congresswoman (Antonino-Custodio? She doesn't seem bright to me.) who was in charge of their secretariat last year. One more thing that did not escape me last year was that many of these political families seemed to be namamangka sa dalawang ilog. You know,one sides with GMA while a relative was for impeaching her. That Antonino and her uncle is one example. Then for all of the noise created by the male Cayetano, why was his sis in the senate discreetly quiet? O di ba? There were more, I just couldn't recall right now, maybe you have noticed them too. So why on earth would they expect me to take them seriously when they are so blatantly only interested in their or their families' political hides? Creeps!
MommyJo
bong
i believe that the basic premise of situating things at the extremes of only one continuum is dangerous. in one tv show, i caught enteng romano debating with the likes of chit pedrosa and that lambino guy. he only had one position - kahit ano at kahit sino pwede, basta patalsikin lang si gloria muna. huh?
Bong austero
don't be surprised if the very same people pushing for impeachment runs under the administration party in the may 2007 elections.
thanks for the joke. i will use it in this blog.
bong
For what it's worth, i'm also interested in your answer to Manuel Buencamino's questions from the last post.
And for people like enteng romano, there is only one truth - that is the "truth" they believes in. They won't accept any more truths from other people, truth commission or impeachment. If any of these yield findings which are against their idea, he won't accept it.
The previous post's title maybe is the answer you are looking for cvj: Here we go again. Eh?
Answering Manuel Buencamino's post would have us going around in circles. Just what I think. I won't put words in bong's mouth.
cheers ^^
bat di na lang nya sabihing kahit sya pwede rin. hehe
that is why i actually agree with the bishops - searching for the truth in polluted waters is a futile exercise and gives people false hopes.
cvj, tolerance is one thing, critical thinking is another thing. contrary to the seeming moral point of view, just because people like me appear to be allowing mrs arroyo some slack now does not mean we are not seething underneath nor taking note of all the transgressions one by one.
the reason why i did not answer manuel buencamino's questions is because i don't see the point - he has made up his mind about what kind of a person i am and has already made judgments about me in many blogs. whatever i say will not make a difference. in fact in MLQ's blog today, he makes allusions about people like me being "nakalublub sa putik."
bong a
in fairness, even mlq did acknowledge before that he agreed with some of the things i said. it doesn't matter who said what first - what is important is that there is some consensus emerging even if it seems it is a fragile and together "coming together." i can empathize with what you are feeling - my mom always chides me for writing what i write - she thinks it is just not worth it when you look at the savagery i get from others.
i can't even squeeze in the time required to write two decent columns a week. writing for this blog is easier, i can always correct myself immediately. but once a column gets published, there is no turning back...your statements haunt you for the rest of your life and they are often taken out of context. with the 8-5 full time job in the bank and a teaching load in the evenings and on weekends, plus my responsibilities at the NGO i am part of, my nerves are already tested to the limits. so am afraid a daily column is out of the question, not that the paper will even consider it.
but thanks for taking the trouble to write your comments. pakilala ka, leave your name and email address in your next comment which i will not publish - comments are moderated so you are safe.
kumusta na lang sa mga taga abuyog.
bong a
that's good. OTOH, you've also supported and defended Arroyo's legitimacy claims. (not that there's anything wrong with that. you're entitled to your beliefs and opinions.)
I myself don't trust the "move on" people, the COMELEC operators, and Arroyo's military, and people who claim they're "independent" or "non-partisan"...
You know the only thing i trust at this point? The Manila Standard Today.
I feel that what the CBCP did was belittle the capability of ordinary citizens to present their case to their representatives in Congress; to convince their reps to vote for impeachment. It only needs 70+ votes. It is winnable. But now with the CBCP's backing of the view that 'we can't win in Congress', they have only made it more difficult. I agree with you, bong, that we have to choose our battles, but I think that the impeachment battle is one we must try to fight. Winning in the impeachment battle is not a false hope.
in your blog, for example, you lifted a whole paragraph of my column (incidentally the same paragraph which alden says he likes the most) and held it up as the essence of what constitutes my political beliefs (or by association, my value system). that is your opinion and as much as I find that objectionable, i respect your right to say anything you want to say in your blog, which is why i am not calling you names. however, that doesn't necessarily mean your intepretation is correct. there is room for everyone's opinion in the this whole political hellhole.
Bong a