Kamusta ang UPCAT? sana makapasa, ang daming may car sa Peyups nung nag-UPCAT dito last week, indicating na nasa high income bracket na ang mga next batch ng Skolar ng Bayan, nagka-trafic jam tuloy. anyways, gudluck! kung makapasa ka, see you next year. at next year din gagraduate na ako sa Chem eng'g! weeee! sana!
Ciao!
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
It was bearable naman. Hehe. Worst part for me was Mathematics, but we'll see. LOL. I did the best that I could naman, so now I leave everything to the Higher Power.
I hope to see you at UPD next year, kung loloobin ng Diyos. Hehe. Good luck on your studies din! :D
ADRIAN
· 4 months ago
Math? Hmmm... actually, may mala-calculus silang nilagay dati samen. Pak tlg! Anu pala First Choice Campus mo at 1st and 2nd Choice na Major? I bet Journ or anything from Mass Comm! Wee! GUdluck din sa iyong last year sa HS... make it super worthwhile. makakamiss mga kalokohan...
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Actually, sa UPD, Business Administration and Accountancy ang first choice ko, then Journalism, and sa UP Cebu, PolSci then MassCom. LOL
al
· 4 months ago
I really don't think labeling the arroyo administration as illegitimate is righteous. Fraudulent or not, her legitimacy as an expression of the philippine political will was put beyond question when she was democratically elected as the "supreme leader". well, she is known for her anomalies, but popularity does not equal righteousness.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
I didn't say her administration was illegitimate—I said it was *possibly* illegitimate. We don't know if she in fact was democratically elected, do we? She stuffed the Mindanao vote, as her wiretapped calls to Garci will tell you, and all she did was apologize. Not very prudent.
al
· 4 months ago
apologized profusely if you'd ask me. It's not like all the other candidates were a bunch of infallible saints who didn't cheat a least one vote, props to her for at least, apologizing at that. politics is infested with bastards who do nothing but corrupt and cheat, she simply fits right in.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Right, but profusely apologizing didn't make her presidency any more legitimate, I don't think.
Just because our country's political landscape is filthy to the brim doesn't mean we should be complacent or apathetic. "That's normal in the Philippines" is no excuse for being indifferent to the goings-on within the corridors of power. In fact, there isn't an excuse for being apathetic. We should all take action and hold our leaders accountable for their actions. After all, they were elected to serve us and not the other way around. We cannot afford to stand idly by and let them screw us over.
al
· 4 months ago
it's good to detach ourselves from this world of conformity at some point, but many contributing factors (boolean theory, mainstream mentality, socially accepted norms) have crystalized distinction between what's good and what's evil, hence, we have standards.
My point exactly, we need to take actions. Tolerance and apathy is a no-no. But if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate. If not arroyo, who?
just because she serves as the omnipotent authority of the state, it doesn't necessarily mean that the country fucked up because of her. Ask the senate, the congress, and lastly, ask yourself.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
OK, a couple of things:
# If only doing a complete reformat of our government were at all feasible... LOL.
# There *are* many, many government officials who got to where they are now by means that aren't exactly legitimate. If you have incontrovertible proof, why not file cases with the appropriate government agencies, right? There is strong proof that Gloria Arroyo cheated to remain seated in 2004 (see this PowerPoint presentation on Scribd). It was imprudent of her to decide not to extract her person from the office she occupied, at least until it could be proven that she is indeed our country's democratically elected President. An apology cannot possibly justify such a brazen insult to our democracy.
# It's true we all have a role to play in the progress of our country. The nation's failure is everyone's failure, not just that of the people in power. Please show me where I pointed my finger at Arroyo for the failures of this nation and I will gladly correct myself.
However, when a public servant falls short of what is expected of him—honesty, transparency, and respect for democracy, the rule of law, and the people he serves—he should be held accountable, bar none. Arroyo disrespected the ballot. She disrespected the sanctity of the vote, which is to say she disrespected the Filipino people. We all expect more from she who sits in the Palace by the Pasig. What she did in 2004 was not only immoral, it was downright illegal, and yet five years later, she still sits in power. If that's not fucked up, I don't know what is.
at
· 4 months ago
exactly, it will never be feasible, which is why changes must be gradual, not abrupt. I continue to ask, if arroyo didn't cheat, where would be our country right now? In the hands of other incompetent pseudo-leaders who obviously cheated as well. and for better or for worse, he/she would have been subjected to sever public scrutiny and criticism as well. Not because society is vigilant, but because society entails this judgmental character.
You may view it as an infringement of democracy, but from a macrocosmic perspective, democracy is rarely being exercised, especially after the marcos regime. I stick to my stand: if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate.
what's problematic with society is it views its leaders negatively, as if they'd be any better.
Yes, she must be held accountable, but not just her, everyone who took part in acts of cheating, all those who are illegitimate, and those who's *very tiny* heads, have been flourished into graft. but if hypothetically they'd all be subjected to execution, the country would run out of public officials and wed be devoured into the pits of chaos and disorder.
Sometimes, in order for righteousness to pop out from its nutshell, you must highlight the evil because there is distinction.
al
· 4 months ago
*severe
al
· 4 months ago
*we'd
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
"You may view it as an infringement of democracy, but from a macrocosmic perspective, democracy is rarely being exercised, especially after the marcos regime." There you go again. That sounded like "Philippine democracy keeps on being trampled naman, eh. Hayaan mo na lang."
I don't believe, as you do, that Arroyo's governance—the extrajudicial killings, the Le Cirque and Bobby Van's dinners, unbridled corruption—justifies her cheating. If we follow your logic, Arroyo could therefore violate the Constitution and remain in power indefinitely—tutal magaling naman na leader kuno.
It is very, very possible that Arroyo acquired the power she has now through illegitimate means. That holds true regardless of the way she has governed the country. Good governance does not rationalize a grave, grave violation of the sacredness of the vote.
To quote Marocharim, if you want the sanctity of your vote violated, then suit yourself, but don't assume that everyone else is willing to bend over and be screwed.
al
· 4 months ago
dude, I value each vote, but it's not like if somehow, through some strange twist of fate, society chooses to boycott the elections, the results would end up to be blank. Trust me, chances are, FPJ or some psychotic religious leader would've cheated more votes. we're just condemning this one person because she ends up being the supreme leader and our lives still fuck up.
I'm not saying that just because the infringement of democracy is inevitable, we might as well let it be. All I'm saying is that with where we are right now, we should be contented, because people are too insatiable, that they've undermined that fact that poverty isn't because the government cannot give us privileges, but because we're a bunch of couch potatoes who swell up into a social disease of lazy-ass people.
Sometimes, economic growth isn't hindered by graft, overpopulation and all that jazz, but because we cannot find the initiative to take action.
Instead of throwing rocks at the government (which is obviously counterproductive), we might as well do something which could pose tangible benefits.
Fighting for everybody's rights may have won us back democracy, but it never won us luxury. Because people expect that once we negate against the governments absurd grievances, that our lives would automatically swell into a metaphorical silver plate.
Violations against the constitution happen a lot, and as much as possible, we try to regulate it. But do you really think that if society somehow opens avenues beyond the government's control, pertaining the correction of the evil, that everything would be better? Let's ask the people from the guantanamo bay detention camp, let's ask obama's foreign policies and how he abolished the camp for being inhumane. Or we might as well legalize death penalty in order to stop insurgency.
Let's look at the coup in honduras backed by military force and elitists. They've overthrown zelaya but is their condition any better?
Now let's look at the communist means of china and its regime. Their economy is one of the best in the world, they strategize through cheap work force, they attract foreign investors which equated into the economically competent china of today, but human trafficking is everywhere. Are they happy? no
Let's look at the marcos regime dating back which dates back to the 1960's. We weren't impoverished. We weren't suffering from famine. In fact, we were filthy rich. But were people happy? no. Sometimes, people should think that we can't have the best of both worlds. We can't have both democracy and economic growth, given the primitive ideologies of the philippine body. Sometimes, it takes risking democracy to survive, not as individuals, but as a mob. And what does our *cough* great *cough* leader get for ATTEMPTING to forward betterment? pitiful.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Dear goodness. Where do I start.
First, let me point this out: the Philippines is a democratic country (so far), and as such we value our democracy above everything. If economic prosperity for you means having to sacrifice that, then you're better off moving to another country. Don't assume that all your 90 million countrymen are willing to sacrifice our most precious treasure for material wealth.
You said you value each vote. Why, then, do you condone the way Arroyo disrespected the will of the Filipino people? You either respect the sanctity of the ballot or condone what Arroyo did. Choose a side.
You said, "Because people expect that once we negate against the governments absurd grievances, that our lives would automatically swell into a metaphorical silver plate." It definitely wouldn't, but holding our officials responsible for their actions, their grievances against the people, would certainly be a step towards prosperity. If taxpayer money goes to bolstering livelihood, improving agriculture, bettering infrastructure, and educating people about reproductive health instead of to the pockets of our politicians, won't we be one step closer to a prosperous Philippines?
Throwing rocks at our government is only counterproductive if done without cause or reason. When we demand answers from them with regard to the way they're discharging the duties they are sworn to, that isn't "throwing rocks"—that's "making them do their jobs".
Don't get me wrong. I definitely believe all of us should, both individually and collectively, strive hard and use our talents and resources as best as we can. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep the government in check, that we shouldn't express our dissent whenever the government does a bonehead move, because that is as much our responsibility as it is our right. You cannot fault Juan dela Cruz for looking out for the Philippines.
Lastly, let me just say that I am clueless as to why you adore the President so. Arroyo may give the impression of attempting to better the Philippines. I believe she did, once upon a time, work for the betterment of the people. But somewhere, somehow, her priorities shifted and the Filipino people took a back seat to personal gain in the process. The ZTE - NBN deal, the abductions and extrajudicial killings, the inexplicable, exponential growth of her wealth, and even the dinner at Le Cirque—an utter disrespect to the Filipino people that just shows how lacking in propriety this administration is—all reveal this administration's true colors. All the supposed good she has dealt this country does not justify all the unforgivable disrespect she has given us.
al
· 4 months ago
haha! completely ridiculous.
I do value democracy but what's wrong with filipino mentality is that they want total and utter exercise of civil liberty and personal autonomy. But on the flip side, they bitch about how poor our country is, to a point where average people can no longer access food for their families. On the other side of the table, they condemn charter change without even looking at the essential nature of what "changes" it will bring--unitary to federalism, bicameral to unicameral etc.--and start operating under the assumption that arroyo is flourished into undeniable evil, so evil she might just start a regime. You completely disregarded my examples pertaining china, and the marcos regime. Certain economically growing developing countries do have to sacrifice certain valuable connotations such as democracy at some point, for the incentives of monetary compensation. Let me remind you that it is not me who is clamoring for both democracy and economic growth, it is the philippine body. Like I said, we all want the best of both worlds but when somebody infringes them, we start throwing rocks without even considering their cause.
I don't condone cheating, I'm just saying that her presidency is legitimate nonetheless, I mean, she had to do what she had to do--cheat--because it's not like she's the only one who's doing it anyway, it just so happens that she's better at cheating. Let's look at iran, when ahmadinejad who obviously explored anomalies pertaining the elections, and mousavi bitching about it. I don't think it's righteous but if mousavi was at all, "reasonable", he would have done the same thing especially with the presence of the controversial assembly of experts.
you said exhausting our grievances towards the governments absurd policies wouldn't pose tangible benefits, but why do people even bother? People bash oil companies for imposing high prices, but did they consider the skyrocketing prices of oil in other countries? No. Like I said, what's so wrong with people is that they view the government as some omnipotent being who pre-determines fate, that by some reason, their lives fuck up because of this government.
Let me educate you. Counterproductive is when it poses both tangible harms and benefits. Throwing rocks at the government is counterproductive because to some extent, the voices are being heard, but on the flip side, the government condemns the philippine left for being a bunch of extremists who express their grievances in a radical mechanism. it is not making them do their jobs when we are burning their images because we believe that we are suffering under their supremacy.
There are many contributing factors to our, well, suckish country. Let's look at sudan and their jurisdiction. When Al-bashir was charged because of ethnic cleansing, genocide and crimes against humanity by the international criminal court, it alarmed the african union because they believed otherwise. To al-bashir, his cause was righteous and justified, based not on international standards pertaining righteousness, but based on the cultural distinctions and ideologies the people of sudan lives by.
How about the people Mugabe of Zimbabwe when he was charged of the same crimes, under his standards, crimes against humanity is righteous when justified, but the ICC viewed it otherwise, and to quote, completely unorthodox. The point is, let's undermine the fact that corruption flourished. Let's undermine the fact that her presidency might be illegitimate. Let's look at how people respond to the policies of the government. How about considering that the country is predominantly catholic and the people chooses to multiply rather than to exercise population control policies. Same reason why china had to take a hard-lined stance. How about considering the ideologies of the people as a primary contributing factor to the poor philippines of today. Because when treaties are implemented, they are answered with violations. When violations are corrected, they are answered with retaliations.
I don't blame china for its communistic approach towards its people because discipline is a hard thing to earn, and sometimes, taking a hard-lines stance is the best way to hype.
It is our right to protect our nation. But looking at our means of expression, is it appropriate?
Let me just clarify that I don't adore our president, I just think that it's as much of our fault as to why our country is on the verge of poverty. extra-judicial killings are never justified, I abhor it at that, but these are simply acts of retaliation. Nevertheless, the actions are unorthodox and the victims didn't die under a dignified death, hence we should condemn arroyo. But is it just arroyo who operated under the dichotomy of radicals versus moderates? Please ask estrada, and even marcos. I still don't get it why an expensive dinner at la cirque is such a frenzy everybody's clamoring upon. I seriously don't give a fuck if they ate a 1 million peso worth meal, it's none of my business.
Disrespect is a strong word, even for our president. If you condemn the arroyo administration, might as well condemn the entire political hierarchy for bullshitting this country.
Marocharim
· 4 months ago
al:
1. Your haphazard exercise of comparative politics is a textbook exercise in suggesting a perspective that does not apply in a situation. You are comparing apples and oranges. your advocacy of ethnic cleansing, bankrupting a nation, permanent war, and the perpetuation of crisis is not congruent - and not acceptable - in the Philippines. you are disregarding the elementary canons and principles of political science: context and empirical analysis. you are merely dropping incidents, not clarifying situations.
2. You are freely and ardently confessing that the President's legitimacy is valid because of cheating. I suggest you take up a thesaurus and look up "fraud" and "legitimacy" and you will find that they are antonyms. ergo: they do not mean the same thing. since mandate is constantly renewed in a democracy, the question of her legitimacy in the 2004 elections by "cheating" (as you put it) means that for the past eight or so years, the President has been cheating us every day.
3. The mere fact that I pay my taxes and I vote come Election day is a justification for me to air my grievances, to express my dissent, and to demand where my votes and my taxes go. I believe in citizenship by taxation and citizenship by suffrage. I am obliged to perform my obligations to the state, as the government is obligated to serve me within what is lawful, what is legal, and what is constitutional. public service is a public trust. what the President does when she is not President is none of my business as a taxpayer. she was in the United States in her capacity as President of the Philippines. Therefore, it becomes my business. this is not a concerted demolition job against GMA as it is the exercise of independent, critical citizenship; something that, admittedly, lacks in this country, and something that you obviously do not understand.
4. You are contradicting yourself in saying that you value democracy, but it is OK to cheat. You are free to surrender your ballot to the machinations of cheating, but do not - under any circumstances - drag my ballot along with yours. the same goes with the rights we enjoy in this society. you are free to give up your rights - each and every single one of them - in the name of progress, but do not dare surrender mine.
your response, while welcome, is not something i am looking forward to. i hope you understand that your dissenting, contrarian-for-the-sake-of-the-contrary opinions are not grounded on something scholarly, situational, researched, or logical, and therefore do not stand in the crucible of debate. thank you for your bullshitry.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Al, that last comment of yours was all over the place. You declared your abhorrence for extrajudicial killings and defended genocide. You denied condoning cheating and exonerated Arroyo for blatantly betraying the sanctity of the vote. You suggested—and I still can't quite wrap my head around this—that we ignore corruption and brush off the fact that someone stole the Presidency of this Republic. (You even went so far as to say that Arroyo had mad cheating skillz!)
It is difficult to reply to your last comment. It's hard to counter a point when there seems to be no point in the first place. You keep mentioning current events without concretely applying them to the Philippines' present status. You pepper your response with big words and small thoughts. You keep castigating those who express their dissent when it is their right (and in a sense their duty) to do so, yet you absolve government when they refuse to act on that dissent and properly discharge the duties of their office.
Open and lively debate is important for a thriving democracy. I value this lively exchange of ideas because we do this with the vision of a better Philippines in mind (or so it seems). But for debate and discussion to be effective, it must be held on sensible and logical grounds. Your ideas of justified corruption and rationalized murder—those are counterproductive.
muzzerfooka
· 4 months ago
moracharim:
haha! you have a very nonsensical and logic-deprived analysis. You forgot to consider how I situated the scenarios in the philippine context. The philippines being predominantly catholic and how inhumane virtues are unacceptable, that's a given fact, you can't argue with that. But when I gave a comparative analysis with the crimes against humanity in sudan and zimbabwe, I operated under the notion of culture. To you, genocide may be evil but to them? It's a parallel approach to the philippine context, with, circumcision as a right to passage, cultures which may differ. You cannot deny the fact that cheating has been the trend in our local elections and as a "politically mature" person, this has become a pre-requisite for survival, since everybody else is doing it anyway.
So are you saying that if hypothetically, arroyo didn't win, perhaps fpj or somebody else, you would have condemned him as well? it's elementary logic: everybody cheats. So we would have a very similar situation as to now (illegitimate president, graft and corruption), except we have a different supreme leader. And what does that say about us? pitiful. Our democracy has been infringed long before arroyo was put to seat. Don't you actually see a pattern? Every supreme leader we've had have been subjected to public scrutiny and criticism? I don't think if those past leaders were beaten during the elections, things would have been different. So your logic simply says, kasi president, masama.
insolence. I obliged my self to exercise civil rights, to inculcate the privileges as given by the law, but what's so wrong with your analysis is that you condone mass grievances. The grievances of the people and the left are justifiable because they do are not contented with the state's contribution, but when was it ever appropriate to blame this one person for just about every bullshit in this country? Have you ever thought of that?
You've misread the signals. I do value democracy but cheating is a trend. They cheat as a part of urban culture, modern politics, and dirty politics at that. If arroyo didn't cheat, somebody else would be ruling this country. Do you really expect that person, whoever he is to do any better? And do you really think his legitimacy is intact? these are questions you need to ask before you come and operate on too many false assumptions. Lastly, if not arroyo, who?
Your case is flourished primarily on principle notions. Democracy is good. Corruption is bad. The president is illegitimate therefore we should condemn her. Duh, do you really think any of these would apply in the real world? You fail to substantiate on the pragmatic grounds, that's why you are fooled by false leaders. Check your facts.
dean:
When did I defend genocide? Sometimes dean, you need understand what you're reading.
Extra judicial killings are bad, props to you for that. But genocide may seem evil to us, but to them, it could be otherwise. I never condoned arroyo for cheating, all I said was that you should at least give her the benefit of a doubt. It's not like she's the only one who cheated anyway. Ignored corruption? Bullshit dean, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE READING.
I am not condemning society for expressing their ideologies, all I'm saying is that what's legal are not at all times what's right. Thats why I paralleled the philippine setting to the git'mo bay because what's legal to them--torture--is not legal to everyone else. Like how Switzerland have suicide clinics who assist people in killing themselves, and it actually opens avenues for other nationals to kill themselves, isn't that an infringement of our constitution? All I'm saying is that we should stop blaming the government, simple.
Have you ever considered how developing countries take a hard-lined stance against their people? Russia not letting go of georgia and ukraine. The chinese massacre in the tiananmen square. Ethnic cleansing in africa. All of these are extremes, but these are needed to perform better in society. That's why I continue to question, do we want either economic growth or democracy?
Fritz
· 4 months ago
"if arroyo didn't cheat, where would be our country right now? In the hands of other incompetent pseudo-leaders who obviously cheated as well." Oh omnipotent one, read for me my future. Will I buy the LX3, the ZS3, or the SX200IS? My mind's all blown up with all the data presented to me by magazines and the internet for comparison although I'm quite sure I'm more inclined to getting the ZS3. The 25k peso question is, will I be happy with this choice, with the tool, with its features? Will using it justify the photography genius that I am?
"if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate." I've seen squatters all over. Let's all burn their houses down, end their pathetic lives, put a stop to their "hobby" of multiplying, lower unemployment rates, lessen the people riding the MRT, do away with poverty, and lower crime rates. I apply your logic with this analogy and I am satisfied with the outcomes.
"Trust me, chances are, FPJ or some psychotic religious leader would've cheated more votes. we're just condemning this one person because she ends up being the supreme leader and our lives still fuck up." The crystal ball says that the future is bleak, ergo, status quo is inevitable/acceptable. I shall be content. The act shall justify the wrong. I will not move. Are these not the very qualities of apathy? Too late, they have already laced the porcelain cup with poison. Drink this in memory of me.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Al, I don't know if you know this, but it is impossible to understand an incoherent argument such as yours. It's difficult to understand how one could so openly say "Yes, Arroyo cheated, but that's OK", or "Yes, corruption is part of daily life in the Philippines, but let it be". It just doesn't make sense, you know?
"The point is, let's undermine the fact that corruption flourished.", you said in your comment timestamped 10:23 PM, August 21, 2009. Yan ang bullshit.
In your most recent comment timestamped August 22, 2009, 3:35 PM, you denied condoning Arroyo's cheating. Yet in your comment timestamped 10:23 PM, August 21, 2009,you said "she had to do what she had to do--cheat--because it's not like she's the only one who's doing it anyway." Yan ang bullshit.
In your most recent comment timestamped August 22, 2009, 3:35 PM, you mentioned Switzerland's suicide clinics and said that violated our Constitution, as if our Constitution had jurisdiction over what goes on in foreign lands. Bullshit.
It might not be appropriate to blame one single person for everything that's wrong with this country, but it is more than appropriate to blame her for the bullshit she has done to this country. See the difference?
"All of these are extremes, but these are needed to perform better in society." You're actually suggesting that the government violate the constitution it's supposed to protect and uphold. Yan ang bullshit.
Our logic is not "kasi president, masama." Our logic is, "kasi nanloko, kasi magnanakaw ng boto, kasi ninakawan ang kaban ng bayan, masama."
Your "logic", on the other hand, is, "Never mind that the government is screwing us over and failing to do its job. Expressing our dissent and calling them out on their wrongdoings, practicing the democracy our Constitution guaranteed us, is wrong and unproductive."
Yan ang bullshit.
muzzerfooka
· 4 months ago
fritz, ditto.
dean, are you illiterate? She cheated and cheating based on norms is bad, but it's in the trend, everybody's doing it anyway, and if she didn't do so, we would only be in the hands of another leader. But basically, philippines will still suck. I never said corruption is okay, that's why I'm making you choose, democracy or economic growth? Because given the obsolete mentality of the filipinos, these can never co-exist.
Yun na nga eh, let us undermine this fact and look at the picture from a macrocosmic level. The government does suck, but so do the people. If we want to achieve a better philippines, we mustn't only change the government alone, but the people as well. Two of the most integral fibers in this entire political system. Isn't it unfair that we're blaming the government for everything?
CHEATING IS BAD NGA, that's a given fact, but what she had to do justifies how she simply conformed with what's mainstream. Can't believe I'm arguing with someone who persistently labels my arguments as absurd without even understanding them first.
It is a violation of our constitution that's why a part of obama's foreign policies is to ban amsterdam for catering to the international community its service of prostitution because people can openly avail of suck services which is viewed as taboo in their respective nations. Suicide clinics in switzerland opens an avenue not only for the swiss but for everybody to assist them in suicide. Hence, that's an infringement of each sovereignty.
I do see the difference but it still isn't believable. We can blame her for corruption, but how about the congress? the senate? the house of representatives, the local government? Should we just say "they're on the bottom of the food chain and the one on top is who we are after". absurd.
I am not suggesting that we do that, I am suggesting that we should be open for reforms, for amendments. Because clearly, our constitution isn't working for us, then why not adopt cha-cha?
Oo nga, kasi nanloko, kasi magnanakaw ng boto, kasi ninakawan ang kaban ng bayan, masama. I continue to ask, if it weren't arroyo, do you think it would be any better? Do you think it would have been different? Chances are, society would have a bigger propensity of going down.
My logic is that we can express our grievances but where do we draw the line? What qualifies of productive activism and what does not? When can you say that your life sucks because the government sucks.
You keep telling me stuff about nationalistic concerns, how we should fight for democracy, but you forgot to consider that it is democracy which is holding us back from economic growth. Because for a productive economy, the government must take a hard-lined stance. I continue to say, that china is productive because of communism.
Sorry dean, but your arguments fail to qualify elementary logic.
logiczone
· 4 months ago
This is logical and truth.
2 Chronicles 7:14
That is the only way the Philippines will be lifted from the miry clay. Any move to solve any of the problems in the country is futile and in vain if the Filipinos will still be adulterous and selfish.
This may be harsh to those people who think legally or on some twisted logics.
Deantastic
· 4 months ago
Al, understand these:
# The point of contention here is simply whether or not Arroyo cheated. Whether or not the true winner of the election could have effectively led the country is subject to further discussion, but what is definite is she did cheat her way to the Presidency, and that is indisputable.
Don't assume that your opinion (i.e. that Arroyo is the right person for the Presidency, that things wouldn't be any better if someone other than Arroyo held the office) is shared by everyone else. Obviously, if that was the case, Arroyo wouldn't have had to cheat. And need I remind you that it is not only your opinion that counts, but the opinion of the majority of the voting Filipino public, and the latter holds much more weight than the former. In 2004, the Filipino chose someone other than Arroyo to be President, ergo Arroyo is not the President chosen by the people. How can I make it any clearer?
If not her, then who? I'll tell you who. He (or she) who was elected by the people, that's who.
# The Swiss Death Clinics are outside the jurisdiction of our Constitution. The Philippine Constitution is effective only within the Philippine territory, and since the death clinics do not operate where our Constitution is in effect, they do not violate the Constitution. But the Swiss Death clinics are an entirely different argument altogether, so don't drag that into this discussion and bury your argument under more irrelevant comparisons.
# Cheating the vote, especially to get the highest position in the Land, is in no way justifiable by the Constitution. In the end, this country is not decided by what you think about something, but by what the Constitution promulgated by the Filipino people thinks about it. You think Arroyo's cheating is justified; the law begs to differ.
# The notion that democracy and economic prosperity cannot co-exist is preposterous. I cannot help but think you were actually serious about reinstating Martial Law as in during the Marcos regime to bring prosperity to the country. I refuse to even entertain such a vacuous argument.
# If you will look back at my previous comments, I stressed the importance of keeping the government in check. By government, Al, I was referring to the entirety of the Philippine Government and not just Malacañang or the Batasang Pambansa. I never said that only the President is corrupt in this country. I know better than to think that.
# Fritz's clever comment wittily disputed your argument, and your agreeing with him only proves that your argument is a precariously built house of cards.
*** Also, I would like for you to expound on how the Philippines would fare any better with authoritarianism, taking into consideration the differences between the culture and ideologies of communist states and the Philippines.
muzzerfooka
· 4 months ago
dude, you seriously need to analyze my words carefully. I have long conceded that she cheated and cheating is bad. But it wouldn't make her any less legitimate knowing the fact that everybody else did it too.
my opinion doesn't count? Tell that to democracy and free speech. prove that people preferred somebody else and that somebody else was so much of a saint, that he never cheated a vote.
he or she who was elected by the people cannot be more legitimate unless he's a saint.
you should seriously understand why I injected seemingly external issues into this discourse. What I meant by swiss suicide clinics being an infringement of sovereignty is when they cater the same service to foreign nationals. What's the use of federalism if every homosexual can just move to las vegas and get married there? duh. Obama's foreign policies?
do you really think the inhumane torture exhausted into insurgents in the git'mo bay was unconstitutional and unorthodox? Perhaps yes, but through a desperate attempt at correcting what's initially believed is wrong, then it's justifiable, plain and simple.
prosperity and growth have a fine line between them. I never said that every economically growing country is prosperous. Your incoherence beckons. Just look at it this way, during the marcos regime, people negated. When aquino reinstated democracy, she was criticized because the economy went down. Filipino mentality entails that every supreme leader is to be criticized. That's how it works.
So are you saying that the only way to fix the country is to change the government, hello? cha-cha? so are you then saying that the philippine body is entirely infallible? that the country's future will only be pre-determined by its rulers?
I'm not saying that what's taylor fit for the chinese culture will automatically mean the same for the philippines. South korea also exercises presidential democracy but they're prosperous. All I'm saying is that it takes many changes to find the perfect ingredient. I condemn society for saying no to cha-cha without even knowing how it works.
All Comments
Ciao!
I hope to see you at UPD next year, kung loloobin ng Diyos. Hehe. Good luck on your studies din! :D
Just because our country's political landscape is filthy to the brim doesn't mean we should be complacent or apathetic. "That's normal in the Philippines" is no excuse for being indifferent to the goings-on within the corridors of power. In fact, there isn't an excuse for being apathetic. We should all take action and hold our leaders accountable for their actions. After all, they were elected to serve us and not the other way around. We cannot afford to stand idly by and let them screw us over.
My point exactly, we need to take actions. Tolerance and apathy is a no-no. But if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate. If not arroyo, who?
just because she serves as the omnipotent authority of the state, it doesn't necessarily mean that the country fucked up because of her. Ask the senate, the congress, and lastly, ask yourself.
# If only doing a complete reformat of our government were at all feasible... LOL.
# There *are* many, many government officials who got to where they are now by means that aren't exactly legitimate. If you have incontrovertible proof, why not file cases with the appropriate government agencies, right? There is strong proof that Gloria Arroyo cheated to remain seated in 2004 (see this PowerPoint presentation on Scribd). It was imprudent of her to decide not to extract her person from the office she occupied, at least until it could be proven that she is indeed our country's democratically elected President. An apology cannot possibly justify such a brazen insult to our democracy.
# It's true we all have a role to play in the progress of our country. The nation's failure is everyone's failure, not just that of the people in power. Please show me where I pointed my finger at Arroyo for the failures of this nation and I will gladly correct myself.
However, when a public servant falls short of what is expected of him—honesty, transparency, and respect for democracy, the rule of law, and the people he serves—he should be held accountable, bar none. Arroyo disrespected the ballot. She disrespected the sanctity of the vote, which is to say she disrespected the Filipino people. We all expect more from she who sits in the Palace by the Pasig. What she did in 2004 was not only immoral, it was downright illegal, and yet five years later, she still sits in power. If that's not fucked up, I don't know what is.
You may view it as an infringement of democracy, but from a macrocosmic perspective, democracy is rarely being exercised, especially after the marcos regime. I stick to my stand: if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate.
what's problematic with society is it views its leaders negatively, as if they'd be any better.
Yes, she must be held accountable, but not just her, everyone who took part in acts of cheating, all those who are illegitimate, and those who's *very tiny* heads, have been flourished into graft. but if hypothetically they'd all be subjected to execution, the country would run out of public officials and wed be devoured into the pits of chaos and disorder.
Sometimes, in order for righteousness to pop out from its nutshell, you must highlight the evil because there is distinction.
I don't believe, as you do, that Arroyo's governance—the extrajudicial killings, the Le Cirque and Bobby Van's dinners, unbridled corruption—justifies her cheating. If we follow your logic, Arroyo could therefore violate the Constitution and remain in power indefinitely—tutal magaling naman na leader kuno.
It is very, very possible that Arroyo acquired the power she has now through illegitimate means. That holds true regardless of the way she has governed the country. Good governance does not rationalize a grave, grave violation of the sacredness of the vote.
To quote Marocharim, if you want the sanctity of your vote violated, then suit yourself, but don't assume that everyone else is willing to bend over and be screwed.
I'm not saying that just because the infringement of democracy is inevitable, we might as well let it be. All I'm saying is that with where we are right now, we should be contented, because people are too insatiable, that they've undermined that fact that poverty isn't because the government cannot give us privileges, but because we're a bunch of couch potatoes who swell up into a social disease of lazy-ass people.
Sometimes, economic growth isn't hindered by graft, overpopulation and all that jazz, but because we cannot find the initiative to take action.
Instead of throwing rocks at the government (which is obviously counterproductive), we might as well do something which could pose tangible benefits.
Fighting for everybody's rights may have won us back democracy, but it never won us luxury. Because people expect that once we negate against the governments absurd grievances, that our lives would automatically swell into a metaphorical silver plate.
Violations against the constitution happen a lot, and as much as possible, we try to regulate it. But do you really think that if society somehow opens avenues beyond the government's control, pertaining the correction of the evil, that everything would be better? Let's ask the people from the guantanamo bay detention camp, let's ask obama's foreign policies and how he abolished the camp for being inhumane. Or we might as well legalize death penalty in order to stop insurgency.
Let's look at the coup in honduras backed by military force and elitists. They've overthrown zelaya but is their condition any better?
Now let's look at the communist means of china and its regime. Their economy is one of the best in the world, they strategize through cheap work force, they attract foreign investors which equated into the economically competent china of today, but human trafficking is everywhere. Are they happy? no
Let's look at the marcos regime dating back which dates back to the 1960's. We weren't impoverished. We weren't suffering from famine. In fact, we were filthy rich. But were people happy? no. Sometimes, people should think that we can't have the best of both worlds. We can't have both democracy and economic growth, given the primitive ideologies of the philippine body. Sometimes, it takes risking democracy to survive, not as individuals, but as a mob. And what does our *cough* great *cough* leader get for ATTEMPTING to forward betterment? pitiful.
First, let me point this out: the Philippines is a democratic country (so far), and as such we value our democracy above everything. If economic prosperity for you means having to sacrifice that, then you're better off moving to another country. Don't assume that all your 90 million countrymen are willing to sacrifice our most precious treasure for material wealth.
You said you value each vote. Why, then, do you condone the way Arroyo disrespected the will of the Filipino people? You either respect the sanctity of the ballot or condone what Arroyo did. Choose a side.
You said, "Because people expect that once we negate against the governments absurd grievances, that our lives would automatically swell into a metaphorical silver plate." It definitely wouldn't, but holding our officials responsible for their actions, their grievances against the people, would certainly be a step towards prosperity. If taxpayer money goes to bolstering livelihood, improving agriculture, bettering infrastructure, and educating people about reproductive health instead of to the pockets of our politicians, won't we be one step closer to a prosperous Philippines?
Throwing rocks at our government is only counterproductive if done without cause or reason. When we demand answers from them with regard to the way they're discharging the duties they are sworn to, that isn't "throwing rocks"—that's "making them do their jobs".
Don't get me wrong. I definitely believe all of us should, both individually and collectively, strive hard and use our talents and resources as best as we can. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep the government in check, that we shouldn't express our dissent whenever the government does a bonehead move, because that is as much our responsibility as it is our right. You cannot fault Juan dela Cruz for looking out for the Philippines.
Lastly, let me just say that I am clueless as to why you adore the President so. Arroyo may give the impression of attempting to better the Philippines. I believe she did, once upon a time, work for the betterment of the people. But somewhere, somehow, her priorities shifted and the Filipino people took a back seat to personal gain in the process. The ZTE - NBN deal, the abductions and extrajudicial killings, the inexplicable, exponential growth of her wealth, and even the dinner at Le Cirque—an utter disrespect to the Filipino people that just shows how lacking in propriety this administration is—all reveal this administration's true colors. All the supposed good she has dealt this country does not justify all the unforgivable disrespect she has given us.
I do value democracy but what's wrong with filipino mentality is that they want total and utter exercise of civil liberty and personal autonomy. But on the flip side, they bitch about how poor our country is, to a point where average people can no longer access food for their families. On the other side of the table, they condemn charter change without even looking at the essential nature of what "changes" it will bring--unitary to federalism, bicameral to unicameral etc.--and start operating under the assumption that arroyo is flourished into undeniable evil, so evil she might just start a regime. You completely disregarded my examples pertaining china, and the marcos regime. Certain economically growing developing countries do have to sacrifice certain valuable connotations such as democracy at some point, for the incentives of monetary compensation. Let me remind you that it is not me who is clamoring for both democracy and economic growth, it is the philippine body. Like I said, we all want the best of both worlds but when somebody infringes them, we start throwing rocks without even considering their cause.
I don't condone cheating, I'm just saying that her presidency is legitimate nonetheless, I mean, she had to do what she had to do--cheat--because it's not like she's the only one who's doing it anyway, it just so happens that she's better at cheating. Let's look at iran, when ahmadinejad who obviously explored anomalies pertaining the elections, and mousavi bitching about it. I don't think it's righteous but if mousavi was at all, "reasonable", he would have done the same thing especially with the presence of the controversial assembly of experts.
you said exhausting our grievances towards the governments absurd policies wouldn't pose tangible benefits, but why do people even bother? People bash oil companies for imposing high prices, but did they consider the skyrocketing prices of oil in other countries? No. Like I said, what's so wrong with people is that they view the government as some omnipotent being who pre-determines fate, that by some reason, their lives fuck up because of this government.
Let me educate you. Counterproductive is when it poses both tangible harms and benefits. Throwing rocks at the government is counterproductive because to some extent, the voices are being heard, but on the flip side, the government condemns the philippine left for being a bunch of extremists who express their grievances in a radical mechanism. it is not making them do their jobs when we are burning their images because we believe that we are suffering under their supremacy.
There are many contributing factors to our, well, suckish country. Let's look at sudan and their jurisdiction. When Al-bashir was charged because of ethnic cleansing, genocide and crimes against humanity by the international criminal court, it alarmed the african union because they believed otherwise. To al-bashir, his cause was righteous and justified, based not on international standards pertaining righteousness, but based on the cultural distinctions and ideologies the people of sudan lives by.
How about the people Mugabe of Zimbabwe when he was charged of the same crimes, under his standards, crimes against humanity is righteous when justified, but the ICC viewed it otherwise, and to quote, completely unorthodox. The point is, let's undermine the fact that corruption flourished. Let's undermine the fact that her presidency might be illegitimate. Let's look at how people respond to the policies of the government. How about considering that the country is predominantly catholic and the people chooses to multiply rather than to exercise population control policies. Same reason why china had to take a hard-lined stance. How about considering the ideologies of the people as a primary contributing factor to the poor philippines of today. Because when treaties are implemented, they are answered with violations. When violations are corrected, they are answered with retaliations.
I don't blame china for its communistic approach towards its people because discipline is a hard thing to earn, and sometimes, taking a hard-lines stance is the best way to hype.
It is our right to protect our nation. But looking at our means of expression, is it appropriate?
Let me just clarify that I don't adore our president, I just think that it's as much of our fault as to why our country is on the verge of poverty. extra-judicial killings are never justified, I abhor it at that, but these are simply acts of retaliation. Nevertheless, the actions are unorthodox and the victims didn't die under a dignified death, hence we should condemn arroyo. But is it just arroyo who operated under the dichotomy of radicals versus moderates? Please ask estrada, and even marcos. I still don't get it why an expensive dinner at la cirque is such a frenzy everybody's clamoring upon. I seriously don't give a fuck if they ate a 1 million peso worth meal, it's none of my business.
Disrespect is a strong word, even for our president. If you condemn the arroyo administration, might as well condemn the entire political hierarchy for bullshitting this country.
1. Your haphazard exercise of comparative politics is a textbook exercise in suggesting a perspective that does not apply in a situation. You are comparing apples and oranges. your advocacy of ethnic cleansing, bankrupting a nation, permanent war, and the perpetuation of crisis is not congruent - and not acceptable - in the Philippines. you are disregarding the elementary canons and principles of political science: context and empirical analysis. you are merely dropping incidents, not clarifying situations.
2. You are freely and ardently confessing that the President's legitimacy is valid because of cheating. I suggest you take up a thesaurus and look up "fraud" and "legitimacy" and you will find that they are antonyms. ergo: they do not mean the same thing. since mandate is constantly renewed in a democracy, the question of her legitimacy in the 2004 elections by "cheating" (as you put it) means that for the past eight or so years, the President has been cheating us every day.
3. The mere fact that I pay my taxes and I vote come Election day is a justification for me to air my grievances, to express my dissent, and to demand where my votes and my taxes go. I believe in citizenship by taxation and citizenship by suffrage. I am obliged to perform my obligations to the state, as the government is obligated to serve me within what is lawful, what is legal, and what is constitutional. public service is a public trust. what the President does when she is not President is none of my business as a taxpayer. she was in the United States in her capacity as President of the Philippines. Therefore, it becomes my business. this is not a concerted demolition job against GMA as it is the exercise of independent, critical citizenship; something that, admittedly, lacks in this country, and something that you obviously do not understand.
4. You are contradicting yourself in saying that you value democracy, but it is OK to cheat. You are free to surrender your ballot to the machinations of cheating, but do not - under any circumstances - drag my ballot along with yours. the same goes with the rights we enjoy in this society. you are free to give up your rights - each and every single one of them - in the name of progress, but do not dare surrender mine.
your response, while welcome, is not something i am looking forward to. i hope you understand that your dissenting, contrarian-for-the-sake-of-the-contrary opinions are not grounded on something scholarly, situational, researched, or logical, and therefore do not stand in the crucible of debate. thank you for your bullshitry.
It is difficult to reply to your last comment. It's hard to counter a point when there seems to be no point in the first place. You keep mentioning current events without concretely applying them to the Philippines' present status. You pepper your response with big words and small thoughts. You keep castigating those who express their dissent when it is their right (and in a sense their duty) to do so, yet you absolve government when they refuse to act on that dissent and properly discharge the duties of their office.
Open and lively debate is important for a thriving democracy. I value this lively exchange of ideas because we do this with the vision of a better Philippines in mind (or so it seems). But for debate and discussion to be effective, it must be held on sensible and logical grounds. Your ideas of justified corruption and rationalized murder—those are counterproductive.
haha! you have a very nonsensical and logic-deprived analysis. You forgot to consider how I situated the scenarios in the philippine context. The philippines being predominantly catholic and how inhumane virtues are unacceptable, that's a given fact, you can't argue with that. But when I gave a comparative analysis with the crimes against humanity in sudan and zimbabwe, I operated under the notion of culture. To you, genocide may be evil but to them? It's a parallel approach to the philippine context, with, circumcision as a right to passage, cultures which may differ. You cannot deny the fact that cheating has been the trend in our local elections and as a "politically mature" person, this has become a pre-requisite for survival, since everybody else is doing it anyway.
So are you saying that if hypothetically, arroyo didn't win, perhaps fpj or somebody else, you would have condemned him as well? it's elementary logic: everybody cheats. So we would have a very similar situation as to now (illegitimate president, graft and corruption), except we have a different supreme leader. And what does that say about us? pitiful. Our democracy has been infringed long before arroyo was put to seat. Don't you actually see a pattern? Every supreme leader we've had have been subjected to public scrutiny and criticism? I don't think if those past leaders were beaten during the elections, things would have been different. So your logic simply says, kasi president, masama.
insolence. I obliged my self to exercise civil rights, to inculcate the privileges as given by the law, but what's so wrong with your analysis is that you condone mass grievances. The grievances of the people and the left are justifiable because they do are not contented with the state's contribution, but when was it ever appropriate to blame this one person for just about every bullshit in this country? Have you ever thought of that?
You've misread the signals. I do value democracy but cheating is a trend. They cheat as a part of urban culture, modern politics, and dirty politics at that. If arroyo didn't cheat, somebody else would be ruling this country. Do you really expect that person, whoever he is to do any better? And do you really think his legitimacy is intact? these are questions you need to ask before you come and operate on too many false assumptions. Lastly, if not arroyo, who?
Your case is flourished primarily on principle notions. Democracy is good. Corruption is bad. The president is illegitimate therefore we should condemn her. Duh, do you really think any of these would apply in the real world? You fail to substantiate on the pragmatic grounds, that's why you are fooled by false leaders. Check your facts.
dean:
When did I defend genocide? Sometimes dean, you need understand what you're reading.
Extra judicial killings are bad, props to you for that. But genocide may seem evil to us, but to them, it could be otherwise. I never condoned arroyo for cheating, all I said was that you should at least give her the benefit of a doubt. It's not like she's the only one who cheated anyway. Ignored corruption? Bullshit dean, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE READING.
I am not condemning society for expressing their ideologies, all I'm saying is that what's legal are not at all times what's right. Thats why I paralleled the philippine setting to the git'mo bay because what's legal to them--torture--is not legal to everyone else. Like how Switzerland have suicide clinics who assist people in killing themselves, and it actually opens avenues for other nationals to kill themselves, isn't that an infringement of our constitution? All I'm saying is that we should stop blaming the government, simple.
Have you ever considered how developing countries take a hard-lined stance against their people? Russia not letting go of georgia and ukraine. The chinese massacre in the tiananmen square. Ethnic cleansing in africa. All of these are extremes, but these are needed to perform better in society. That's why I continue to question, do we want either economic growth or democracy?
"if we classify arroyo under that characterization of illegitimacy, we might as well abolish the entire government since it's existence in itself, is illegitimate." I've seen squatters all over. Let's all burn their houses down, end their pathetic lives, put a stop to their "hobby" of multiplying, lower unemployment rates, lessen the people riding the MRT, do away with poverty, and lower crime rates. I apply your logic with this analogy and I am satisfied with the outcomes.
"Trust me, chances are, FPJ or some psychotic religious leader would've cheated more votes. we're just condemning this one person because she ends up being the supreme leader and our lives still fuck up." The crystal ball says that the future is bleak, ergo, status quo is inevitable/acceptable. I shall be content. The act shall justify the wrong. I will not move. Are these not the very qualities of apathy? Too late, they have already laced the porcelain cup with poison. Drink this in memory of me.
"The point is, let's undermine the fact that corruption flourished.", you said in your comment timestamped 10:23 PM, August 21, 2009. Yan ang bullshit.
In your most recent comment timestamped August 22, 2009, 3:35 PM, you denied condoning Arroyo's cheating. Yet in your comment timestamped 10:23 PM, August 21, 2009,you said "she had to do what she had to do--cheat--because it's not like she's the only one who's doing it anyway." Yan ang bullshit.
In your most recent comment timestamped August 22, 2009, 3:35 PM, you mentioned Switzerland's suicide clinics and said that violated our Constitution, as if our Constitution had jurisdiction over what goes on in foreign lands. Bullshit.
It might not be appropriate to blame one single person for everything that's wrong with this country, but it is more than appropriate to blame her for the bullshit she has done to this country. See the difference?
"All of these are extremes, but these are needed to perform better in society." You're actually suggesting that the government violate the constitution it's supposed to protect and uphold. Yan ang bullshit.
Our logic is not "kasi president, masama." Our logic is, "kasi nanloko, kasi magnanakaw ng boto, kasi ninakawan ang kaban ng bayan, masama."
Your "logic", on the other hand, is, "Never mind that the government is screwing us over and failing to do its job. Expressing our dissent and calling them out on their wrongdoings, practicing the democracy our Constitution guaranteed us, is wrong and unproductive."
Yan ang bullshit.
dean, are you illiterate?
She cheated and cheating based on norms is bad, but it's in the trend, everybody's doing it anyway, and if she didn't do so, we would only be in the hands of another leader. But basically, philippines will still suck. I never said corruption is okay, that's why I'm making you choose, democracy or economic growth? Because given the obsolete mentality of the filipinos, these can never co-exist.
Yun na nga eh, let us undermine this fact and look at the picture from a macrocosmic level. The government does suck, but so do the people. If we want to achieve a better philippines, we mustn't only change the government alone, but the people as well. Two of the most integral fibers in this entire political system. Isn't it unfair that we're blaming the government for everything?
CHEATING IS BAD NGA, that's a given fact, but what she had to do justifies how she simply conformed with what's mainstream. Can't believe I'm arguing with someone who persistently labels my arguments as absurd without even understanding them first.
It is a violation of our constitution that's why a part of obama's foreign policies is to ban amsterdam for catering to the international community its service of prostitution because people can openly avail of suck services which is viewed as taboo in their respective nations. Suicide clinics in switzerland opens an avenue not only for the swiss but for everybody to assist them in suicide. Hence, that's an infringement of each sovereignty.
I do see the difference but it still isn't believable. We can blame her for corruption, but how about the congress? the senate? the house of representatives, the local government? Should we just say "they're on the bottom of the food chain and the one on top is who we are after". absurd.
I am not suggesting that we do that, I am suggesting that we should be open for reforms, for amendments. Because clearly, our constitution isn't working for us, then why not adopt cha-cha?
Oo nga, kasi nanloko, kasi magnanakaw ng boto, kasi ninakawan ang kaban ng bayan, masama. I continue to ask, if it weren't arroyo, do you think it would be any better? Do you think it would have been different? Chances are, society would have a bigger propensity of going down.
My logic is that we can express our grievances but where do we draw the line? What qualifies of productive activism and what does not? When can you say that your life sucks because the government sucks.
You keep telling me stuff about nationalistic concerns, how we should fight for democracy, but you forgot to consider that it is democracy which is holding us back from economic growth. Because for a productive economy, the government must take a hard-lined stance. I continue to say, that china is productive because of communism.
Sorry dean, but your arguments fail to qualify elementary logic.
2 Chronicles 7:14
That is the only way the Philippines will be lifted from the miry clay. Any move to solve any of the problems in the country is futile and in vain if the Filipinos will still be adulterous and selfish.
This may be harsh to those people who think legally or on some twisted logics.
# The point of contention here is simply whether or not Arroyo cheated. Whether or not the true winner of the election could have effectively led the country is subject to further discussion, but what is definite is she did cheat her way to the Presidency, and that is indisputable.
Don't assume that your opinion (i.e. that Arroyo is the right person for the Presidency, that things wouldn't be any better if someone other than Arroyo held the office) is shared by everyone else. Obviously, if that was the case, Arroyo wouldn't have had to cheat. And need I remind you that it is not only your opinion that counts, but the opinion of the majority of the voting Filipino public, and the latter holds much more weight than the former. In 2004, the Filipino chose someone other than Arroyo to be President, ergo Arroyo is not the President chosen by the people. How can I make it any clearer?
If not her, then who? I'll tell you who. He (or she) who was elected by the people, that's who.
# The Swiss Death Clinics are outside the jurisdiction of our Constitution. The Philippine Constitution is effective only within the Philippine territory, and since the death clinics do not operate where our Constitution is in effect, they do not violate the Constitution. But the Swiss Death clinics are an entirely different argument altogether, so don't drag that into this discussion and bury your argument under more irrelevant comparisons.
# Cheating the vote, especially to get the highest position in the Land, is in no way justifiable by the Constitution. In the end, this country is not decided by what you think about something, but by what the Constitution promulgated by the Filipino people thinks about it. You think Arroyo's cheating is justified; the law begs to differ.
# The notion that democracy and economic prosperity cannot co-exist is preposterous. I cannot help but think you were actually serious about reinstating Martial Law as in during the Marcos regime to bring prosperity to the country. I refuse to even entertain such a vacuous argument.
# If you will look back at my previous comments, I stressed the importance of keeping the government in check. By government, Al, I was referring to the entirety of the Philippine Government and not just Malacañang or the Batasang Pambansa. I never said that only the President is corrupt in this country. I know better than to think that.
# Fritz's clever comment wittily disputed your argument, and your agreeing with him only proves that your argument is a precariously built house of cards.
***
Also, I would like for you to expound on how the Philippines would fare any better with authoritarianism, taking into consideration the differences between the culture and ideologies of communist states and the Philippines.
my opinion doesn't count? Tell that to democracy and free speech. prove that people preferred somebody else and that somebody else was so much of a saint, that he never cheated a vote.
he or she who was elected by the people cannot be more legitimate unless he's a saint.
you should seriously understand why I injected seemingly external issues into this discourse. What I meant by swiss suicide clinics being an infringement of sovereignty is when they cater the same service to foreign nationals. What's the use of federalism if every homosexual can just move to las vegas and get married there? duh. Obama's foreign policies?
do you really think the inhumane torture exhausted into insurgents in the git'mo bay was unconstitutional and unorthodox? Perhaps yes, but through a desperate attempt at correcting what's initially believed is wrong, then it's justifiable, plain and simple.
prosperity and growth have a fine line between them. I never said that every economically growing country is prosperous. Your incoherence beckons. Just look at it this way, during the marcos regime, people negated. When aquino reinstated democracy, she was criticized because the economy went down. Filipino mentality entails that every supreme leader is to be criticized. That's how it works.
So are you saying that the only way to fix the country is to change the government, hello? cha-cha? so are you then saying that the philippine body is entirely infallible? that the country's future will only be pre-determined by its rulers?
I'm not saying that what's taylor fit for the chinese culture will automatically mean the same for the philippines. South korea also exercises presidential democracy but they're prosperous. All I'm saying is that it takes many changes to find the perfect ingredient. I condemn society for saying no to cha-cha without even knowing how it works.