Flesh and spirit November 30, 2006

ONE part of me is elated. I’m glad Gaspar Vibal has managed to track down and bring back first-edition copies of “Noli Me Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo.” They’re now on display inside a glass panel in Hyatt Hotel. The copies are very rare and were retrieved only after 25 years of dogged pursuit. My thanks go to Vibal.

But another part of me is dismayed. It’s all very well to have something as valuable as these back home. Especially since the value of the novels is largely intrinsic or sentimental, unlike GSIS president Winston Garcia’s fetish, the Juan Luna paintings, whose value is extrinsic -- or indeed fabulous. Vibal brought home the Jose Rizal novels only as a result of dogged pursuit, Garcia did so the Juan Luna paintings as a result of wanton spending of government employees’ retirement money. The value of Rizal’s novels to this country is incalculable, the value of Luna’s paintings to Garcia and company is very calculable.

But that is not the source of my dismay. It’s simply that I don’t know that the repatriation of the first edition of the novels does not produce an ironic commentary on our life and times. I don’t know that our having those novels in those glass panels does not speak volumes about the same foibles of the "indios" Rizal loved to write about. Chief of them our monumental capacity to substitute form for substance, ritual for practice, façade for integrity. A foible he reposed among others in the character, or caricature, of Doña Victorina in “Noli Me Tangere.”

I mean: What’s the use of having with us Rizal’s novels, even in their rarest form which is their first editions, when their spirit does not animate us, or when our capacity to see them as limpid pools that reflect our times is rarer than an honest person in Malacañang? What’s the use of having with us Rizal’s novels, when we do not recognize in them our very own condition and strive to transcend it while avoiding the pitfalls of the ways of false prophets? Indeed, what’s the use of having with us Rizal’s novels, when you have the very person who is responsible for today’s tyranny (which resembles almost facet for facet, viciousness for viciousness, the Spanish colonial rule) and whose only common feature with Rizal is height, preening before the cameras in front of them in a photo op?

All artifacts, remnants, relics, vestiges of the past are important. They are physical reminders of what came before, they are links to our origins, they are the magical threads that point us out of the Minotaur’s cave. But they are only as good as their significance is grasped. They are only as good as their meaning is lived. The American Declaration of Independence is a magnificent document, but its magnificence does not lie only in the yellowed paper that contains its words, it lies in the hearts and minds that breathe life into those words. The American Declaration of Independence means nothing if its principles do not take on living, breathing and vibrant expression among the people who honor it.

I don’t know that most of us have even read Rizal’s novels. I suspect that if you gave Jose de Venecia’s minions in the House a quiz on them, most of them will flunk miserably. Not least the ones who liked quoting the majesty of the law to perpetrate the murder of the impeachment bid. Well, they will probably excuse their ignorance as a refusal to bow down to “Manila imperialism.”

But far more than that, what were the “Noli” and “Fili” all about? They were, as the novels themselves say again and again, about a social cancer. They were about the corruption not just of the body but of the soul. They were about a tyranny, not just the one wrought by tyrants upon a hapless people but the one wrought by a hapless people upon themselves. They were about the perversion of values, where the rulers led the ruled to the path of ruin, where the spiritual leaders led the flock to the path of evil, where everywhere cruelty and pettiness and mediocrity triumphed. They were about an order that was a political “Alice in Wonderland,” one that turned the world on its head, where right became wrong and wrong became right, where good became evil and evil became good.

Isn’t that world familiar? Isn’t that the mirror image of what we have today? Isn’t that a humongous parody of an answer to Rizal’s famous essay, “What Will the Philippines Be A Century Hence”?

The part in particular about evil becoming good and good becoming evil, right becoming wrong and wrong becoming right, is something we can’t possibly miss. I’ve been in a number of youth forums lately, to prepare first-time voters to vote, and the question of values has always cropped up, most kids saying we no longer have any sense of right and wrong. I keep saying it’s worse than that. It’s not just that we no longer have a sense of right and wrong, it’s that we’ve made right wrong and wrong right, we’ve made good evil and evil good. Just look at the Marines who are in detention today, a couple of them recipients of the Medal of Valor, the highest award given to a soldier for showing bravery over and beyond the call of duty, and look at the generals who helped Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo steal the elections sitting in judgment over them. The only consolation I can offer Ariel Querubin and company is that the Medal of Valor on their chests is nothing compared to the Medal of Honor they are being bestowed by a grateful people, if only in their hearts and minds, for fighting an even bigger battle and showing courage over and beyond the call of heroism.

Vibal spent 25 years of his life to bring back the original “Noli” and “Fili” to these shores. I can only hope we do not spend the same time to bring back the original spark of love of freedom those novels meant to ignite.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=35505

Be scared, be very scared November 29, 2006

I SAW the scariest movie ever last weekend. It was Al Gore's lecture-documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."

I had read the reviews about it, and it deserves all the raves it got. Gore, of course, was, as he himself puts it, "at one time the next president of America." He was George W's opponent in 2000, and won the majority of votes -- half a million more than Bush -- but lost the Electoral College. Many, including Michael Moore, think he won even the Electoral College, except that Bush cheated him in Florida.

Extrinsically, Gore's documentary shows the epic tragedy that was the American elections of 2000. It wasn't just that the wrong man won, it was that the right man lost. It wasn't just that the stupidest and most unprincipled man got to hold the reins of power of the most powerful country in the world, it was that one of the brightest and most principled Americans did not.

Well, Gore may have lost the battle but he may just win the war. He may have found his true calling in what he's doing right now, which is trying to save the planet where his previous opponent is busy trying to destroy it. Gore would have made a brilliant teacher -- a calling he holds in the loftiest regard, as shown by his abiding respect for his teachers whom he credits for first giving him a window through which to look at what is to come. "An Inconvenient Truth" is a lecture, but it is far more riveting than the car chases of action movies. Gore himself is battling a bigger menace than the world-domination ambitions of villains in movies and the nasty antics of terrorists in real life. He is battling the causes of a dying planet.

The "inconvenient truth" he talks about is global warming. That it is a truth is patent. It is no more and no less than the truth that tobacco causes cancer, although the tobacco companies find that inconvenient and do everything in their power to muddle it. There have been thousands of scientific papers written about global warming, Gore says in one powerful part of his lecture, and how many of those studies say global warming is not a reality and/or it is nothing to be alarmed about? Zero.

All the signs of a dying planet are there. The atmosphere, which is but a thin layer surrounding the planet (imagine a model of the globe given a coat of polish and that coat is the atmosphere) is crammed full of carbon dioxide at a level never before seen in earth's history. Which, not quite incidentally, refutes the notion that global warming is cyclical, it has happened before in the past -- true, but never at this scale. The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is preventing the earth from exhaling the heat (yes, the earth breathes too, and is getting more and more asphyxiated), which is what's causing global warming.

The term itself may sound abstract but its consequences are not. The planet's ice caps are melting, which is causing water levels to rise, which is causing the vicious "natural" disasters we have seen over the last few years. The tsunamis, the hurricanes, the tornadoes, the floods that break all record for heights, and the droughts. Yes, even the droughts (I leave you to watch the documentary for the scientific explanation). I personally am glad for this part of the documentary because a couple of years ago, when I wrote about the frightening floods (Infanta, Quezon), tsunami (Aceh) and hurricanes and tornadoes that had beset the United States (Katrina et al.), and said it was obvious something was very wrong with the planet, I got the usual letters from the usual idiots saying I was being alarmist. Well, it's good to be an alarmist when there's cause for alarm.

Unless something is done to check the unabated inundation of the atmosphere of CO2 , a great deal of what we know as land will be underwater in 50 years or so. Truly scarily, Gore warns: You've seen the humanitarian crisis that happens when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of refugees. Think of what would happen if you were dealing with hundreds of millions of them.

There is no doubt about the scale of the problem, except the doubts that are being spread by those who stand to profit from the status quo. Or who imagine they stand to profit from it, since the death of the planet will be their death, too. The oil companies, the car companies who think they can make money off scrimping on environmental controls, and their backers in government, chief of them the dolt they put in the White House. The doubts they're spreading are the same doubts the tobacco companies spread when the surgeon general determined with absolute certainty that smoking causes cancer.

There is no doubt about the scale of the problem, except the doubts that are being spread by those who stand to profit from the status quo. Or who imagine they stand to profit from it, since the death of the planet will be their death, too. The oil companies, the car companies who think they can make money off scrimping on environmental controls, and their backers in government, chief of them the dolt they put in the White House. The doubts they're spreading are the same doubts the tobacco companies spread when the surgeon general determined with absolute certainty that smoking causes cancer.

I leave the reader to know the practical suggestions he has for solving the problem at an individual level from watching the movie. One of those suggestions, in fact, is to tell friends to do just that. I'll go further and say that if you've got a DVD burner, make copies of the thing and give it to as many friends as you can this Christmas. I imagine Mr. Gore—I use that honorific "Mr." only for people I respect—will not greatly mind having his intellectual property propagated in this way. It's too important to be left to the pirates of Quiapo to distribute.

The truth shall set you free. It shall also keep your children alive well after you're dead.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=35266

No, you don't November 28, 2006

HOUSE Speaker Jose de Venecia is fuming. In a press conference last week, he lashed out at the justices who voted against the "people's initiative."

Those eight justices, he suggested, have no "utang na loob." He did not actually use that phrase, but that was what he meant. He nearly lost his speakership, he said, when he defended Hilario Davide from being impeached. And this is how the justices repay him!

Clearly, he said, the eight justices were biased. They refused to hear the oral arguments of the petitioners. "Does this mean that they had already made up their minds?"

Taking a populist stance, he delivered his coup de grace (or so he thought): "Political, electoral, and structural reforms as well as reduction of corruption are the reasons we are pushing for Charter change. These are the things that we are fighting for to give us, the people, a chance to vote on it, 'hindi yung' [not those] eight men and women who would kill it and prevent it from being voted upon by the Filipino people."

What's wrong with his tirade?

Everything.

To begin with, how can you believe that this guy is capable of undertaking reform, structural or piecemeal, political or personal, when all his utterances show him to be the most incorrigible "trapo" [traditional politician] of all? What is he saying, but that this country's leaders should make decisions not on the basis of principle but on the basis of "pakikisama"? That is the mentality his remarks on Davide show. He made "pakikisama" to the chief justice when he was beleaguered, Davide's protégés in that Court should return the favor by making pakikisama to him when he is beleaguered, or "atat na atat." You can't get any more trapo than that. That is the politics of "I scratch your back, you scratch mine." Would you trust a man like that to have a mind that reform could possibly inhabit?

But that is nothing. This guy is truly a piece of work, lamenting as he does that the eight justices had closed minds, they were unwilling to listen to the merits of the initiative because they had decided beforehand that they were going to kill it. Does that charge sound familiar? But of course. That was what he and his Mafia in Congress did to the bid to impeach GMA. Mafia is the word. How else does one call those thugs who cited the majesty of the law to wreak a travesty upon justice? If they lived up to anything, it is only to what Shakespeare said about the devil himself loving to quote Scripture to suit his purposes.

What was Edcel Lagman's favorite phrase? A cadaver. The impeachment bid, he said again and again (he loved the term, imagining it to be the height of wit), was a cadaver when it got to them.

Not so. It was every inch alive and breathing until it got to them. They murdered it, mangled it and threw it to the dogs. The justices had decided beforehand they were going to kill their initiative? Look who's talking.

The irony is all the richer for one thing. Which is that there is no peep emanating from the bowels of the land to change the Charter but everyone was shouting his head off to change the Usurper. To hear a non-existent "sigaw" but be deaf to a thunderous one, well, only someone whose ears are constructed that way can do that.

While at that, how can you believe that reform can possibly originate from someone who, occupying as he does one of the highest offices of the land, can't seem to grasp its fundamental tenets? The most fundamental of them being the separation of the branches of government. The executive may not interfere in the affairs of the legislature and the legislature may not interfere in the affairs of the judiciary. Legal affairs are the provenance of the judiciary, not of the legislature. Certainly not of the House of Representatives and certainly not of Jose de Venecia.

His coup de grace is truly a coup de grace -- on him. Why the Supreme Court can't see that Charter change will usher in political, electoral and structural reforms and stop corruption, he says, only it can say. Well, why he sees that it will do so, only he can say. There is easily one thing that is absolutely, unqualifiedly, 100-percent, guaranteed to usher in political, electoral and structural reforms and stop corruption. That is for Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to resign for being an illegitimate president. And that is for De Venecia and his ilk to follow suit for propping her up.

They all resign and, presto, we have epic electoral reform. Finally, we will have clean elections. Or never mind clean elections, finally we will have real elections. We haven't had one since Arroyo came along. All we've had are comedies parading as that. They all resign, and, presto, we have epic political reform. Finally, we'll put an end to "trapo" politics. Or more than that, to the ultimate worst of "trapo" politics, which is dictatorship. That is its natural culmination. They all resign, and, presto, we have epic structural reform. At least the structural integrity of human beings, in the particular form of journalists and political activists, will not be impaired by murdering them.

They all resign, and, presto, we have epically stopped corruption. Indeed, corruption of the worst sort, which is not just the corruption of the body but the corruption of the soul. Not just the theft of public money but the theft of public morals. More than Marcos, who stole this country's wealth and freedom, this government has stolen this country's pride and honor.

The equation remains the same. The Charter is real, they are fake. Don't change the Charter, change them.

* * *

Tonight, the Stop the Killings Bar Tour stops at Pier 1, Ortigas Home Depot, between Julia Vargas Avenue and Ortigas Avenue, back of Metrowalk. It's the last stop. True Faith, Paolo Santos and Pido are playing. Like I said yesterday, we're hoping to raise money for a Dec. 10, International Human Rights Day, gig to end the first leg with a bang. Maybe you can help?

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=35080

Inexcusable November 27, 2006

IN THE PAST, I'VE WRITTEN SEVERAL COLumns protesting the way Muslims, or Moros, were treated in this country. I’ve protested the times when Muslims were profiled or stereotyped and had their homes raided, particularly in the aftermath of 9/11. I’ve protested the times when the MNLF and the MILF were portrayed as bandit or terrorist elements, deserving of slaughter. I’ve protested the raiding of “pirates’ lairs” in Quiapo and elsewhere, which grinds down only the Muslim poor, who are the retail sellers, and not the Muslim and Chinese rich, who are their sources.

All of which is to say that I’ve earned my spurs here. I abhor discrimination. But I am not going to protest what happened to Lanao del Sur Rep. Faysah RPM Dumarpa at the Batasan dining lounge. In fact, I am going to protest most vehemently what she did there.

The incident, as everybody knows by now, including the istambays in my neighborhood who discussed it over Red Horse and roasted pork ears for several nights, was that Dumarpa discovered at one point that the noodles she was eating contained pork. She went ballistic and allegedly started berating a staff member of the catering outfit, Virginia Fernando-Altamirano. Not content with that, she allegedly slapped the girl in the face while hurling words upon her that you wouldn’t hear in the Koran. And still not content with that, she went back to her table, reportedly grabbed a knife and was about to attack Altamirano when her colleagues finally held her back.

Never was the phrase “fit to be tied” more apt. Dumarpa should have been.

Let me be clear. I am not inappreciative of the scale of the injury. Some years ago, I also read a newspaper account of a Muslim security guard murdering two fellows for playing a prank on him. The two mixed pork in a dish they offered him, and after he had eaten it, they told him about it to much laughter. It would be the last time they would laugh. That night, while they slept, the incensed Muslim knifed them to death.

What can one say? Devout Muslims take the proscription against pork deathly seriously—the deathly there can often be literal. There’s no arguing with religion, and to the extent that the beliefs and practices don’t harm anyone, they are to be respected.

But devoutness does not justify murder. A Muslim deliberately fed pork as a joke may not just dispatch the pranksters into the next life and be excused for it. A congresswoman accidentally fed pork may not violently abuse a presumed culprit and be excused for it. I am not a Muslim, but I believe I can say with reasonable certainty that between having a body contaminated by pork and having a mind contaminated by thoughts of mayhem, I know which crime the most compassionate Allah is more likely to forgive.

Dumarpa had a right to be furious. She had the right to complain. She had the right to demand an apology. She had no right to act like a swine.

At the very least, the demand for Christians to respect the cultural and religious sensitivities of their Muslim brothers and sisters goes with a similar demand for Muslims to respect the cultural and religious sensitivities of their Christian brothers and sisters. Dumarpa is in Metro Manila. Mistakes like that happen, and to the extent that they are honest ones, she may only ask Allah to forgive the erring for they know not what they do. A Filipino diplomat in Vietnam or Taiwan may not attack a Vietnamese or Taiwanese waiter because the waiter found a rosary on the floor and threw it among the trash.

At the very most, Dumarpa is a representative, not a warlord. There is a difference, even if her elders and betters in the House and Malacañang can’t seem to see it, too.

Which brings me to why I find her behavior reprehensible. Because she abused someone who had no power to fight back. Obviously, she would not have done that to anyone of her colleagues who might have done that to her while she was a guest in their home. The only reason Dumarpa did that to Altamirano was that she figured Altamirano was nothing more or less than one of her menials whom she could treat like a germ. If Dumarpa can do that to someone in Metro Manila, think of what she can do, and probably does, to her constituents in Lanao.

What she did to Altamirano was not an act of faith, it was an act of arrogance. It was not an expression of devoutness, it was an expression of bad breeding.

I abhor discrimination, and none more so than the discrimination by the powerful of the powerless. Or those the powerful deem powerless. I’m glad Altamirano’s outfit is defending her and has pulled out of its Batasan concession. They may not cater to swine. Altamirano was not the author of discrimination, she was the victim of it. And a most unforgivable form of discrimination, too.

Dumarpa herself does not do Muslims proud, she does them ill. Coming as her action does at a time when Muslims and Christians are struggling to build bridges amid the divisions created by Bush’s and GMA’s concept of anti-terrorism, it sucks completely. It stokes the fires of racial and religious bigotry that responsible Muslims and Christians have been trying to douse. If the sentiments expressed by the istambays in my neighborhood about Muslims are anything to go by, much of it not being fit to print, Dumarpa has set progress back by leaps and bounds.

What she did was just plain inexcusable.

* * *

Tomorrow the Stop the Killings Bar Tour stops at Pier 1, Ortigas home depot, between Vargas and Ortigas, back of Metrowalk. It’s the last stop. True Faith, Paolo Santos and Pido are playing. It is hoped that we can raise money for a Dec. 10, International Human Rights Day, gig to end the first leg with a bang. We too got blown out by “Milenyo,” with many of those who pledged to contribute backing out to give to “Milenyo’s” victims first. Maybe you can help?

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=34926