Honeymoon
Honeymoon
June 29, 2004
By Condrado de Quiros
I DON'T know that honeymoons are the natural consequence of shotgun marriages. The kind where the groom is marched down the aisle under threat of his sojourn on earth being ended prematurely, or what is truly a fate worse than death having his reproductive abilities severely impaired. Or the kind where even before the groom can say "I do," the bride is shouting to the world, "We're married! We're married!" That is not conducive to improving the groom's disposition, not to speak of zest, for what is to come. What is honeymoon to some is ordeal to others.
"Honeymoon" of course is what Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's camp is asking from the media, from critics, from the public itself. "Truce" would be the better word, suggesting as it does the grudging cessation, or suspension, of hostility rather than the enthusiastic rush to embrace unwanted arms. But even a truce is earned, and is made only with an honorable enemy. Honorable is not the word that leaps to mind in association with the current government.
I remember while I was abroad getting a text message from a television group soliciting my comments on the "making of the president." Well, I thought the "unmaking of the nation" sounded like a better title, or had the better premises. The "making of a president" suggests brilliant strategy, "the unmaking of the nation" suggests the mugging of a people's will.
The perfect metaphor for the last election, and the one that is bound to hound the current government for years to come, is Ms Macapagal-Arroyo being proclaimed in the dead of night while the nation slept. It happened after J.V. Bautista took a last-ditch stand the day before to get Congress to pursue the counting, correctly arguing that the need for credible elections far outweighed the need for producing a president by the end of the month. Indeed superseded it entirely: The need to have a president at the right time cannot be more important than the need to have the right president.
To preempt protest, which in any case they were threatening to scuttle with mayhem, Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's allies in Congress trotted out a picture of her being proclaimed winner. Not unlike coup plotters who trot out photographs of a fait accompli takeover, complete with nervous smiles on the faces of the presumed victors.
There is a phrase associated with doing things furtively in the dark. That is "like a thief in the night." That is the well-known metaphor for death. But you don't have to take the phrase, "like a thief in the night," metaphorically at all, it resonates with very literal meanings.
There is another perfect metaphor for "the making of the (new) president." Which is the planned inauguration of Ms Macapagal-Arroyo in Cebu. I am glad they are doing that because it is a good reminder of what the elections were. It is an election that Ms Macapagal-Arroyo has won on the strength of a statistical improbability, which is a candidate doing far better in a province other than her own. Ms Macapagal-Arroyo has done better in Cebu than in Pampanga. No one has accomplished that feat before. Not Marcos, not Cory, not Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's own father Diosdado. And she did it while being exceedingly unpopular and after being embroiled in a move to oust Cebu's favorite son, Hilario Davide, as chief justice. Miracles never cease.
I suggest that during the inauguration, Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's friends in Cebu replace the motto of the presidential seal with, "What are we in power for?" It would make explicit what has always been implicit in Philippine governance, which is now the official way of determining the outcome of elections.
An eternity ago, when Fernando Poe Jr. offered to become president and offered to unite the country if he became one, I said in a column that unity was not the product of charisma or popularity or merely something that was willed. Unity was the product of shared dreams and expectations. The same might be said today with Ms Macapagal-Arroyo asking for a show of goodwill from the nation. What are we going to rally around, what are we going to aspire for?
Is it fighting corruption? Too late. The entire Ms Macapagal-Arroyo campaign was built on frittering away taxpayers' money for billboards and posters, which is corruption. Is it honest and transparent government? Too late. The very existence of Benjamin Abalos' Comelec is a living reminder of how the crest was won, which was neither honestly nor transparently. Is it listening to various voices and finding consensus for charting the future? Too late. The ganging up of the administration party in Congress to stifle dissenting voices during the count is not a display of openness. Is it respecting differences and bringing people together amid their diversity? Too late. Threatening protesters with arrest for "destabilizing" government does not respect differences. Hell, it doesn't even respect the Constitution, particularly the part that says Bill of Rights.
I have a better suggestion in lieu of a truce or a honeymoon, and that is increased vigilance. The threat of a Poe presidency is over, we are back to looking at a Ms Macapagal-Arroyo presidency that has yet to offer anything by way of making things better. Enough of that mindless chatter about putting things behind us and henceforth making only "constructive" and "positive" suggestions instead of "destructive" and "negative" ones. There is nothing constructive about abiding iniquity, there is nothing positive about affirming wrong. There is nothing destructive about remembering the sins of the past, there is nothing negative about criticizing the ills of the present. The best time for vigilance is not at the end of things, when things have gotten so bad we need an Edsa to crawl out of it. It is at the beginning of things when we can still prevent them from getting worse.
Honeymoons need one thing, and that is consent. The other kind is just sexual harassment.
June 29, 2004
By Condrado de Quiros
I DON'T know that honeymoons are the natural consequence of shotgun marriages. The kind where the groom is marched down the aisle under threat of his sojourn on earth being ended prematurely, or what is truly a fate worse than death having his reproductive abilities severely impaired. Or the kind where even before the groom can say "I do," the bride is shouting to the world, "We're married! We're married!" That is not conducive to improving the groom's disposition, not to speak of zest, for what is to come. What is honeymoon to some is ordeal to others.
"Honeymoon" of course is what Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's camp is asking from the media, from critics, from the public itself. "Truce" would be the better word, suggesting as it does the grudging cessation, or suspension, of hostility rather than the enthusiastic rush to embrace unwanted arms. But even a truce is earned, and is made only with an honorable enemy. Honorable is not the word that leaps to mind in association with the current government.
I remember while I was abroad getting a text message from a television group soliciting my comments on the "making of the president." Well, I thought the "unmaking of the nation" sounded like a better title, or had the better premises. The "making of a president" suggests brilliant strategy, "the unmaking of the nation" suggests the mugging of a people's will.
The perfect metaphor for the last election, and the one that is bound to hound the current government for years to come, is Ms Macapagal-Arroyo being proclaimed in the dead of night while the nation slept. It happened after J.V. Bautista took a last-ditch stand the day before to get Congress to pursue the counting, correctly arguing that the need for credible elections far outweighed the need for producing a president by the end of the month. Indeed superseded it entirely: The need to have a president at the right time cannot be more important than the need to have the right president.
To preempt protest, which in any case they were threatening to scuttle with mayhem, Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's allies in Congress trotted out a picture of her being proclaimed winner. Not unlike coup plotters who trot out photographs of a fait accompli takeover, complete with nervous smiles on the faces of the presumed victors.
There is a phrase associated with doing things furtively in the dark. That is "like a thief in the night." That is the well-known metaphor for death. But you don't have to take the phrase, "like a thief in the night," metaphorically at all, it resonates with very literal meanings.
There is another perfect metaphor for "the making of the (new) president." Which is the planned inauguration of Ms Macapagal-Arroyo in Cebu. I am glad they are doing that because it is a good reminder of what the elections were. It is an election that Ms Macapagal-Arroyo has won on the strength of a statistical improbability, which is a candidate doing far better in a province other than her own. Ms Macapagal-Arroyo has done better in Cebu than in Pampanga. No one has accomplished that feat before. Not Marcos, not Cory, not Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's own father Diosdado. And she did it while being exceedingly unpopular and after being embroiled in a move to oust Cebu's favorite son, Hilario Davide, as chief justice. Miracles never cease.
I suggest that during the inauguration, Ms Macapagal-Arroyo's friends in Cebu replace the motto of the presidential seal with, "What are we in power for?" It would make explicit what has always been implicit in Philippine governance, which is now the official way of determining the outcome of elections.
An eternity ago, when Fernando Poe Jr. offered to become president and offered to unite the country if he became one, I said in a column that unity was not the product of charisma or popularity or merely something that was willed. Unity was the product of shared dreams and expectations. The same might be said today with Ms Macapagal-Arroyo asking for a show of goodwill from the nation. What are we going to rally around, what are we going to aspire for?
Is it fighting corruption? Too late. The entire Ms Macapagal-Arroyo campaign was built on frittering away taxpayers' money for billboards and posters, which is corruption. Is it honest and transparent government? Too late. The very existence of Benjamin Abalos' Comelec is a living reminder of how the crest was won, which was neither honestly nor transparently. Is it listening to various voices and finding consensus for charting the future? Too late. The ganging up of the administration party in Congress to stifle dissenting voices during the count is not a display of openness. Is it respecting differences and bringing people together amid their diversity? Too late. Threatening protesters with arrest for "destabilizing" government does not respect differences. Hell, it doesn't even respect the Constitution, particularly the part that says Bill of Rights.
I have a better suggestion in lieu of a truce or a honeymoon, and that is increased vigilance. The threat of a Poe presidency is over, we are back to looking at a Ms Macapagal-Arroyo presidency that has yet to offer anything by way of making things better. Enough of that mindless chatter about putting things behind us and henceforth making only "constructive" and "positive" suggestions instead of "destructive" and "negative" ones. There is nothing constructive about abiding iniquity, there is nothing positive about affirming wrong. There is nothing destructive about remembering the sins of the past, there is nothing negative about criticizing the ills of the present. The best time for vigilance is not at the end of things, when things have gotten so bad we need an Edsa to crawl out of it. It is at the beginning of things when we can still prevent them from getting worse.
Honeymoons need one thing, and that is consent. The other kind is just sexual harassment.
posted by Dante at 12:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home