Mirrors
Mirrors
Posted 10:49pm (Mla time) Feb 07, 2005
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 8, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
"SOME people have been asking me who've signed up with us, half-hoping I'd mention some big names. Well, we don't have big names. Who cares about big names?"
That was what Nandy Pacheco, a youthful idealist at 72, told me when I saw him last week. Pacheco isn't just the prime exponent of the Gunless Society in this country, he is the prime exponent of a new kind of politics in this country. He is the head of Kapatiran, a political party that was launched in 2003 but wasn't able to field candidates in the elections last year for lack of time -- and recruits.
It's not easy being an entrant to the cause, at least as far as the current expectations of people who want to go into politics go. To do so, you must first forswear the "pork barrel," the very reason people want to become congressman to begin with. The one has become almost synonymous with the other: Congressmen are people who hold on if not to the actual monies to be disbursed to their pet projects at least to the power to determine what those pet projects would be and who gets to carry them out. The last normally consists of friends and relations.
I'll just put down a few of the other controversial things the party stands for and expects members to obey religiously. Under "political platform": "abolish all forms of gambling, whether run by government or the private sector," "abolish the death penalty," "end fraternity violence in schools." Under "social dimension": "abolish the 'pork barrel' system," "make it a criminal offense for anyone to carry a gun or any other deadly weapon in public places," "end the practice of appointing former military officers as secretary of national defense," "disallow elected and appointed public officials from writing regular columns, acting in movies and TV shows, and acting as commentators or anchorpersons on radio and TV, and appearing on TV and radio commercials and print advertisements and billboards." There's more, but you get the drift.
Your first reaction is to smile bemusedly and wonder if you can count the prospective members of the group beyond the fingers of your hands. Your second reaction is to wonder why that is your first reaction. Because to see this as the product of naiveté or a loose hold on the realities of this society must eventually reflect on what you take to be sophistication and accept as the necessary conditions of your political or social life. Or put another way, to see this as a pipe dream is to show what you accept as the terms of your waking hours.
In fact, Kapatiran is another one of those trick mirrors this country is full of that seemingly reflect things in fantastic ways but really reveal huge kernels of truth in them. What makes Kapatiran for instance bizarre as a political party is that it acts as a political party in the sense that the truly democratic, or plain civilized, countries do, but which this country clearly does not.
In other countries, people join political parties. In this country, political parties join people. In other countries, political parties are bigger than their members; they have a life of their own that goes on long after individual members have come and gone. In this country members are bigger than their parties and parties rise and fall depending on the fortunes of those who head them. In other countries, voters vote for which political party can best deliver the things they need. In this country, voters vote for which candidate can best sing the songs they want. Now, which is really perverse -- a party like Pacheco's, or a politics like ours?
I've said it before: the thing that really needs changing is not this country's Charter but this country's party system. We never develop any real political party, one that stands for something other than a springboard for the ragged ambitions of a "presidentiable" or "prime-ministeriable," and no amount of Charter change will rescue us from silliness or despair. But that's another story.
As to Kapatiran's agenda, you may disagree with it, or some of it, but to see it as something totally unrealistic is again to wonder what you accept, or have come to accept, as possible. Why should we naturally find reasonable the idea that no politician in his right mind will run for anything other than personal gain, or in this case for the institutionalized tribute or “balato” known as pork barrel? Why should we not demand from public servants an overriding desire to render public service?
The Kapatiran motto is "Common good is common sense," and it does make sense. If I recall right, that was what Russell Crowe as John Nash proposed in "A Beautiful Mind": Everyone looks out for himself, everyone loses. Everyone looks after the group, everyone gets laid. What applies to getting laid as an individual applies to getting ahead as a nation. Well, if I recall right again, Nash was thought of as a crackpot. Which he partly was, but that, too, is another story.
You'll hear no end of groans and sighs from Filipinos today despairing of this country ever getting better. This country has become so miserable, the refrain goes, but there is no alternative in the horizon. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo sucks, but Joseph Estrada, who proposes to dislodge her in turn, does so even more. Well, alternatives are strange creatures. We've never really lacked for them, we've always had them. What we've always lacked is the wit to recognize them when they present themselves. Or this country has become so Alice-in-Wonderland-ish, so topsy-turvy, we find sanity parochial and hustling cosmopolitan. What we've always lacked is the will to do them, saying to ourselves life is impossible on this soil, only death flourishes. Better to live in America.
Who really is the crackpot in this case?
Posted 10:49pm (Mla time) Feb 07, 2005
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 8, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
"SOME people have been asking me who've signed up with us, half-hoping I'd mention some big names. Well, we don't have big names. Who cares about big names?"
That was what Nandy Pacheco, a youthful idealist at 72, told me when I saw him last week. Pacheco isn't just the prime exponent of the Gunless Society in this country, he is the prime exponent of a new kind of politics in this country. He is the head of Kapatiran, a political party that was launched in 2003 but wasn't able to field candidates in the elections last year for lack of time -- and recruits.
It's not easy being an entrant to the cause, at least as far as the current expectations of people who want to go into politics go. To do so, you must first forswear the "pork barrel," the very reason people want to become congressman to begin with. The one has become almost synonymous with the other: Congressmen are people who hold on if not to the actual monies to be disbursed to their pet projects at least to the power to determine what those pet projects would be and who gets to carry them out. The last normally consists of friends and relations.
I'll just put down a few of the other controversial things the party stands for and expects members to obey religiously. Under "political platform": "abolish all forms of gambling, whether run by government or the private sector," "abolish the death penalty," "end fraternity violence in schools." Under "social dimension": "abolish the 'pork barrel' system," "make it a criminal offense for anyone to carry a gun or any other deadly weapon in public places," "end the practice of appointing former military officers as secretary of national defense," "disallow elected and appointed public officials from writing regular columns, acting in movies and TV shows, and acting as commentators or anchorpersons on radio and TV, and appearing on TV and radio commercials and print advertisements and billboards." There's more, but you get the drift.
Your first reaction is to smile bemusedly and wonder if you can count the prospective members of the group beyond the fingers of your hands. Your second reaction is to wonder why that is your first reaction. Because to see this as the product of naiveté or a loose hold on the realities of this society must eventually reflect on what you take to be sophistication and accept as the necessary conditions of your political or social life. Or put another way, to see this as a pipe dream is to show what you accept as the terms of your waking hours.
In fact, Kapatiran is another one of those trick mirrors this country is full of that seemingly reflect things in fantastic ways but really reveal huge kernels of truth in them. What makes Kapatiran for instance bizarre as a political party is that it acts as a political party in the sense that the truly democratic, or plain civilized, countries do, but which this country clearly does not.
In other countries, people join political parties. In this country, political parties join people. In other countries, political parties are bigger than their members; they have a life of their own that goes on long after individual members have come and gone. In this country members are bigger than their parties and parties rise and fall depending on the fortunes of those who head them. In other countries, voters vote for which political party can best deliver the things they need. In this country, voters vote for which candidate can best sing the songs they want. Now, which is really perverse -- a party like Pacheco's, or a politics like ours?
I've said it before: the thing that really needs changing is not this country's Charter but this country's party system. We never develop any real political party, one that stands for something other than a springboard for the ragged ambitions of a "presidentiable" or "prime-ministeriable," and no amount of Charter change will rescue us from silliness or despair. But that's another story.
As to Kapatiran's agenda, you may disagree with it, or some of it, but to see it as something totally unrealistic is again to wonder what you accept, or have come to accept, as possible. Why should we naturally find reasonable the idea that no politician in his right mind will run for anything other than personal gain, or in this case for the institutionalized tribute or “balato” known as pork barrel? Why should we not demand from public servants an overriding desire to render public service?
The Kapatiran motto is "Common good is common sense," and it does make sense. If I recall right, that was what Russell Crowe as John Nash proposed in "A Beautiful Mind": Everyone looks out for himself, everyone loses. Everyone looks after the group, everyone gets laid. What applies to getting laid as an individual applies to getting ahead as a nation. Well, if I recall right again, Nash was thought of as a crackpot. Which he partly was, but that, too, is another story.
You'll hear no end of groans and sighs from Filipinos today despairing of this country ever getting better. This country has become so miserable, the refrain goes, but there is no alternative in the horizon. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo sucks, but Joseph Estrada, who proposes to dislodge her in turn, does so even more. Well, alternatives are strange creatures. We've never really lacked for them, we've always had them. What we've always lacked is the wit to recognize them when they present themselves. Or this country has become so Alice-in-Wonderland-ish, so topsy-turvy, we find sanity parochial and hustling cosmopolitan. What we've always lacked is the will to do them, saying to ourselves life is impossible on this soil, only death flourishes. Better to live in America.
Who really is the crackpot in this case?
posted by Dante at 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home