Philippine Left's Engagement in/with Elections

Source: Indymedia

I was tagged on Emman Hizon's essay entitled "Two Months after the Midterm Elections: Some Initial Thoughts on the Left and its Electoral Engagement". I take the question of the left's engagement in electoral politics to mean the left's engagement in/with the structures and agents of poverty, patronage politics, clientelism, bossism, violence, oligarchical families, political dynasties, and money politics in Philippine national and local elections.

The following was my comment on Emman's essay.

Thanks for the tag, Emman! It's a good, reflective piece. Something we can build on. Some quick and random feedback here on your initial thoughts. 

1. Maybe it's a good idea to have a common thread/theme on this essay. I think that Akbayan, Makabayan, DemLeft, Risa, Kaka, etc. have its own individual dynamics and specificities so it's difficult -- if not inappropriate -- to lump them together. For example, to what extent has Akbayan impacted on the electoral performance of Risa and Kaka? 

2. I would just like to remind you of the importance of 'class analysis' and 'social-historical' contexts in understanding the left's engagement with the electoral process. Apparently, it's still the trapos and dynasties (i.e., ruling elite classes) that are able to identify with and mobilize the masses. For example, study Nancy versus Teddy, or Nancy versus Risa (but Risa is a different story than Teddy because Risa has A-B-C, issue-based, Team PNoy, personal fan votes, but she did not get the support from most poor and the non-poor just above the poverty line as much as Nancy got -- and even though Akbayan is a staunch supporter of CCT). Further, Akbayan's labor arm, Partido ng Manggagawa, Sanlakas, and many other left parties have not mobilized well the working class and make this sector a potent electoral force. 

And yes, what is missing in the analysis is 'money politics', which has long been the lifeblood of our electoral system! While we have not yet succeeded in the struggle for electoral reforms, engaging in Philippine elections also means engaging in money politics. I think it's also important to have an honest reflection on how the 'left' and its candidates engaged in the use of money in campaigns and elections. 

3. Academically-speaking, Akbayan has been akin to stories of social-movement-turned-political-parties in Latin America. It's an interesting phenomenon and experiment. First, it's like left parties in Nordic and Western Europe that has forged coalition with other (mainstream) parties participating in 'national' elections/government. At the same time, it has grassroots strategy in 'local' politics -- a long-term political strategy which has made many left parties successful in Latin America. 

4. I think that 2016 will be a different ball game! The person to beat is your brod -- Jojo Binay, who remains strong and popular! Indeed, 2013 was not a 'reform election'. On the basis of the personalities and political background of the elected senators, I consider this mid-term election not really a vote of confidence for Team PNoy, but more of a continuation of anti-GMA assertion and sentiments of the masses which was first articulated in 2010 with the election of PNoy. 

My guess is that Akbayan will continue to be part of a coalition that will run against Binay's bloc. On the other hand, I could sense that Makabayan would most likely join Binay's coalition. Amid the historically entrenched social structure of elite democracy and the stalled process of electoral reforms, Akbayan's position thus far in 'national' politics is so uncertain; but you're right that the party should continue to strengthen its local mass base while strategically building cross-class and sectoral alliances. 

Ok, dito na lang muna. Tulog muna ako. Sana makatulong sa pagtatasa't pagmumuni-muni natin. 

Nation to Aquino: 'This is your SONA'!

Reference to Rappler's report: 

"Aquino to nation: This is your SONA"

No. It should be: "Nation to Aquino: 'This is your SONA'!

The theme of PNoy's 2013 SONA is "social transformation"! So be it! Indeed, we should be part of the solution to our country's problems. This notwithstanding, and as expected, SONAs are supposedly well-crafted political speeches. That's why we should be mindful of spins and PR or discursive strategies of politicians. As responsible and active citizens, we should dare speak truth to power and be part of the solution.

Obviously, the highlights presented by PNoy are from the point of view of power, from the point of view of the government, from the point of view of the state. As citizens, we have to speak truth to power! The truth is, until now, I and a multitude of Filipinos still do not know what "Daang Matuwid" means -- let alone, the 'where', the 'why', the 'how', as well as the 'when'. Also, "reforms" and "social transformation"???

To me, the true "state of the nation" are best articulated from the points of view of the rural and urban poor, the under-/un-employed, the sick, the elderly, the disabled, the marginalized, the dispossessed, the workers, the OFWs, the victims of elitist and neoliberal capitalist governance. These are the points of view that are only understood by politicians during times of legitimation through elections, but are systematically ignored during times of governance and power.

We have to be tough on PNoy! So much are at stake on his presidency, especially because the people have entrusted in him a considerable political capital. He should be kept on his toes so that he sides with the progressive forces and individuals within his administration. And this should also send a strong signal to his clever PR and media strategists that we cannot be fooled all the time by their usual resort to spins and propaganda in dealing with the failures and shortcomings of the Aquino III administration. 

As a social critic, I have long believed in the principle of combining the flame of anger (because there are so many morally intolerable things to be angry about) and the flame of hope (to keep us going and give us meaning)!

Rage and hope! Criticize and propose! Change!

Altering Economic Objective to "Growing Through Employment"

Reference to Rappler's post
"Snapshot: Economy under Aquino"

What should we expect from PNoy's fourth State of the Nation Address (SONA) tomorrow?

The President will surely report about the administration's good governance, anti-corruption achievements over the last years, as well as the economy's high GDP growth. He will also tell us his agenda for the remaining three years of his presidency. I do hope that it should, among others, include strategies for the environment (sustainable development) and law & order (especially, safety and security of good citizens in the streets and in day-to-day lives!).

Now, on this snapshot of the Philippine economy under Aquino, the figures should tell us that there is a need to change the economic objective of PNoy: from growing through investments (GDP) to growing through employment. This sounds stupid to orthodox economics because of the assumption that growth derived from investments automatically create jobs. But the reality — as shown in this statistics where there's not just 'jobless growth' but also the coexistence between increasing GDP and high under-/un-employment — is that in economic policy, there's really a trade-off between growing through GDP and growing through employment. 

Source: Rappler

I propose that PNoy should alter the country's economic objective to grow through employment, and moderate its obsession to GDP growth. This alternative strategy can and should be poverty eliminating, politically feasible, and environmentally sustainable — thus potently addressing the country's socio-economic-ecological ills.

On the Poor and Metro Manila Slums: Rage Against the Dying of the Light

A friend has expressed disappointment in his facebook wall with regard to his observation online of bold attempts by some to mainstream sentiments and arguments that target and attack the 'squatters'. Here's my comment and a brief thesis statement on the ongoing class conflict in the streets of the city as well as in the virtual spaces of the (social) media:

Stop reading these kinds of websites, including the comments. As expected, the 'middle class' and the loud netizens would be critical of the underclasses in the slums. 

We are witnessing a sad and alarming generational shift characterized by: 

• blaming the victims; 
• disregard for historical-structural causes of phenomena; 
• an opportunist elite political-economic classes who are clever in utilizing the votes and labor of the poor in pursuit of their interests in power and wealth accumulation during times of elections and for purposes of business production; and 
• youth too young to remember history. 

Indeed, let's rage against the dying of the light!

Source: French Living in the Philippines (Blog)
 

Do I mean, as another friend commented, "that the middle class is cursed to play the role of 'understanding' the socio-economic causes of the phenomena and that all underclasses are blameless"? As always my argument is context-based and premised on a case-by-case basis. I refer to the observed case of many middle-class-netizens attitude towards our brethren in the slums in the context of deepening and widening class divide in 21st century Philippine society. In the social sciences, there have been studies that theorize and empirically show the tendency of the middle class to support the status quo and reactionary forces. 

I do understand the sentiment of the middle class who work so hard and who have all the right to complain about their hardships and the slowness in achieving upward social mobility in the highly stratified Philippine society. This is why there is a sound logic to favour universal social policies (health, education, housing, etc.) and rethink social provisions based on targetting like the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) programme. The 'non-poor' who are just above the poverty line — as well as the 'invisible' middle class — are also vulnerable to become poor themselves. Plus, in the context of our society, we are a nation full of stigmas and being stigmatized is not good for a life of dignity.

But how about those people living under the bridges along waterways whose physical safety are also in danger? In this case, it is in the realm of 'public safety' where the state (i.e., the entity that has the authority, resources, means of coercion, and yes the monopoly over the use of force) has to take charge. In this sense, I hope for a well-meaning state. Here, it may be useful to differentiate between what is 'public' and 'private'. The 'public' concern is understandable; but oftentimes forced evacuation are done by state's coercive apparatus to advance and protect the drive for 'private' appropriation of some powerful vested interests (i.e., the process and strategy of accumulation by dispossession).

Part of my call for a 'moral revolution' is based on my observation that many — if not, most — of our people have become alienated from our true human-being selves. May we all be reminded of the virtues and need to take the point of view of the poor, the victims, the weak, the marginalized in our discourses and actions.