Riposte of a Redstorm Avatar

Studying in UP was a blast. And with all the fireworks for the centennial of the University of the Philippines over, many students, incumbent and former ones, reflect on their UP life. Well, I suppose I should, too. I may have to add to this as I dig up more memories and add more points.

I cherish the university as having nourished the few years when I, along with many others, felt most alive. This is done now with the thought of the things that were accomplished there and the small part I took. After all, how can I call myself a UPian, much less an Isko, if I can claim only to have studied at the UP.

And so, here is a list of things. I have excluded many memorable narratives. The list is mostly concerned with student orgs/institutions and my political involvement with them:

1) The establishment of STAND-UP



2) SPACE, CS-SC/Scientia

3) Continuation of UP Anido

4) Recovery of OSR, KASAMA years

5) Establishment of Solidaridad, UP Alliance of Student Publications and Writers' Organizations -



1) The establishment of STAND-UP - When I first set foot on UP as a student, the radical activists were on the defensive; when I left, there was a slight perception that it was cool to be one.

All of that had to do with the rise of the largest alliance of student organisations in UP Diliman, STAND-UP. As a trivia, I was there at the STAND-UP founding, and I was the last student to have graduated in UP who remained STAND-UP. So I'm the longest serving STAND-UP member who was at the founding, haha.

My first org was the LFS, which everyone knew to be the most radical and idealist student organisation in the university and the country. So much so that I didn't realise later on that that was something some people were scared of.

The first few years in UP's activist circles were some of the most mind-crackling experiences of my life. We had these ED's (educational discussions) and DG's (discussion groups) that fired up and strengthened our idealism. In those ED's, I looked up to Sally Singcol, Noel Colina and others as mentors, even occasionally asking Nato Reyes on some issue of worldview. It was so mind-stirring that I found out that even in physics classes where I had to tangle with aesoteric equations and scientific concepts, issues of imperialism were the foremost in my mind.

I remember our first tambayan at the CSSP Pavillions between Palma Hall and the Faculty Center. There we had the EDs I was most fond of, and general tambay. I recall having to tease and lecture smokers in the tambayan resulting in the implementation of the non-smoking policy later on, lol.

My first PLB (Pangkat Lingkod Bayan=Serve the People Group), which was the basic LFS unit, was with my college-mates from Science, D, LZ, O, and another one, with the team leader (TL) Marlon Lacsamana, who I hear is now an active gender rights advocate. Including the ED's, our activities involved going together to post electoral bills along the college grounds and doing RTR's (room-to-room discussions) and OTO's (org-to-org hoppings). I think my first real position was ED Officer then TL of the PLB. Through the LFS and STAND-UP, I met a few generations of the activists in my time. If I were a bookshelf, these great people are dynamic books in my memory. Suffice to say, they were the best and most awesome people that I met.

By the time STAND-UP became the undisputed largest alliance in UP Diliman, despite the perception that activist thoughts had become the status quo, it was quite the opposite. The constant need to 'arouse, organize and mobilize', the continuous campaigns to highlight pertinent issues, show the necessity to always be on the watch and on the move. Activism is akin to the classic battle of good vs evil, of constant vigilance vs apathy, much like the Philippines' own political historical imperative, even after two EDSA's: thousands of rivers continually flow into the sea, but it is never full. But it only needs little from contaminants to pollute the sea; it is only the continuous flow of the rivers that replenish and cleanse it.

My first memories of UP were these people who glared at us for no apparent reason. I learned later they were SAMASA people, mga inggitero na naglaho na lang sa balat ng unibersidad (Years of battling against their kin and frustrating my years of studying, by their backward-headed political activities, I think I have earned the right to call them that and much worse). Being a fresh student then, it was an early eye-opener to me; even the people from ISA, the other student alliance, were much friendlier than they were. I had been open to accommodating them even as acquaintances, but even over their claims later on of being 'open-minded' and 'pluralistic', we were never fooled: All they had was irrational hatred of the tibaks. I'm not for false modesty, but I hate unfounded arrogance and oppression, even with my own colleagues, and the underdog beginnings of STAND-UP nurtured my clinging to humility despite STAND-UP's dominant status later on. And so I remained a staunch activist - if permitted the term - in the STAND-UP mold.

Now STAND-UP was an offshoot of SAMASA-TMMA, with all the long meanings of those acronyms. It was a result of the split between it and SAMASA. The TMMA was for Tunay, Militante at Makabayang Alyansa (Genuine, militant and patriotic alliance). STAND-UP stood for Students' Alliance for the Advancement of Democratic Rights in UP, with a slight change later to 'Student'. The name change from SAMASA-TMMA was necessary as it had become a bit confused with SAMASA. The first core group were the names you'd usually associate with radical activism: LFS, Gabriela-Youth, Center for Nationalist Studies (CNS, an acronym I'd associate then with Central Nervous System or chemical elements), Alay Sining, PSC, EKIT, EDIT, etc.

So I was there at the moment when SAMASA-TMMA was renamed STAND-UP. The first task was to win the University Student Council (USC) elections, as this was the single biggest institution in the campus that could address student and national issues. In our first electoral fight, we had Trisa Kintanar of the College of Law as the first standard-bearer for Vice-Chairperson. We got the 9th and 12th councilor positions, Jing Corpuz and Dennis Longid, both of them Cordilleran students, also my orgmates from UP Anido.

Our relatively unfruitful USC efforts would go on like this for years. A noteful achievement that I think STAND-UP was rarely applauded for, though - Our first winners were indigenous students from the Cordilleras; The first one also to be No.1 councilor was Satria Candao, a woman Muslim student who had a bright personality. Then there was Rommel Romato in 2002, also from Mindanao, who won as USC Chair. I hear the Student Regent today, a woman of Islamic faith, is also from STAND-UP. So STAND-UP should, I think, be held up for, well, standing up for its advocacy of marginalised sectors, as shown by its quality alumni leaders from these sectors.

We might have had weaknesses in organising in the colleges, but in my opinion, the single biggest block was the fact that the Philippine Collegian was being held in a choke-hold by SAMASA. Despite the successes of rallies, for example, it would always try to find something to criticise about them. And worse, because of SAMASA's philosophy of these forms of protests as being "passe'", it would always portray them in negative light, exposing their pseudo-progressive character, at least to us. While the editorial direction of the Collegian would later on have little effect on STAND-UP's winnability in the USC elections, because it had already established and strengthened itself, the lesson there is that its inital efforts were thwarted by the foul methods of SAMASA people. (They should've been called SAMA-SA-People, bad for the people. haha).

For years, STAND-UP continued with its campaigns despite not being in the USC for more resources. It also helped establish coalitions like the UMAKSYON (Ugnayan ng Mag-aaral Laban sa komersyalisasyon) and other coalitions, including with the academic and non-academic employees and the communities around the campus and beyond. We were of course the foremost centre for national campaigns in the campus. The first breakthroughs, though, were more intensive and extensive college organising, something I've always advocated from the very beginning.

Fraternities were joining the alliance. I remember the time when our drinking buddies were members from various frats. One of the reasons I didn't join one despite the solicitations was alliance work, being a member of one when there were brawls would be a detriment to alliance-building and open discussions with the other frats.

We were winning college student council (CSC) elections as well. What were called balwartes (strongholds?) of STAND-UP then were CAL, CMC, Educ, then FA later on. Against STAND-UP colleges traditionally were CBA (Business Ad), Econ, CSSP, PubAd, and a bit from the College of Law, taking into account that this is to be taken generally, as we had many students for STAND-UP in these colleges. The CSSP, being in the main hall, was where most of the struggle was, and so far as I know, has never been won in the local elections by STAND-UP allies. In terms of population, I had the following approximates: CMC=Econ, CAL=CBA, CFA=NCPAG?. So college solid mass base was almost equal, our winning edge were campaigns and the fractious opposition.

Engineering was also with allies. I noted, however, that as we had started winning university-wide, Eng'g was lost to local parties associated with the other sides. So by the time we were winning the USC, the College of Science was the biggest college with an incumbent party allied with STAND-UP, a critical dam and watershed (That will be the subject of another number).

And so with the confluence of the situation, events and efforts, STAND-UP won a landslide victory in the USC elections in 2000, with Raymond Palatino as our first USC Chair. It was literally the dawn of a new era, as the millennium closed and opened, a STAND-UP parade. From then on, activism declared a comeback in the country's foremost university.

A few things to be noted, though. I don't discount the personalities of Raymond Palatino and his slate, but I think the faceless men and women of STAND-UP should be given more credit, as it was that period when they really started focusing on the colleges, who worked so hard day and night to achieve a semblance of progressiveness and militancy in the campus. The commitment and the selflessness, the energy, the enjoyment they had for what they were doing, make them the pride of the Oblation, which signifies selflessness. Here, then, is a salute to all those people who made STAND-UP what it was and is today.

The other two icons that I opine weren't given much credit for as tipping point factors: The first one was the release of the SAMASA chokehold over the Philippine Collegian, after Seymour 'Mayor' Sanchez became its editor. I think it was little realised that Seymour was a member of STAND-UP. From then on, the Kule, as it was called, was freed from the propaganda crap of the SAMASA and the poison pens of their editors. Setting affiliations aside, the Kule became more objective and could be considered more a journalistic newspaper. While the editorship of Kule would later on have little effect on the electoral fortunes of STAND-UP as it strengthened and became more organised, initially it needed the malicious mudslinging of anti-activists to derail its eventual rise. Activism, without the opposition mudslinging, would have more of a chance to fly.

The other icon that emerged was the re-work of Bob Marley's song 'Get Up, Stand Up' by Babes Alejo along an educational theme. It also musically drummed up the beat for the powerful counter-offensive. When people started singing "You can fool some people some time, but you can't fool all the people all the time", obviously referring to SAMASA, for its years of deceptiveness and divisiveness, you just knew the tide had been turned. Then they sang it up further into a stirring crescendo: "Now we see the light, just STAND-UP for your right!", with much conviction. Now I wasn't much into musical, much less cultural, stuff - I even refused to sing "UP Naming Mahal" for years because it seemed too sectarian and UP-centric when I was meeting with other kids from other schools - but even I was singing what would turn out to be our victory song.

Prior to the USC victory in 2000, it was preceded by big victories in certain colleges. CMC was continuously won by the college STAND-UP CMC. JPaul won as chair of CAL along with his slate. Mong Palatino also won the College of Education council, while I was holding the fort in CS. At one time, during a general assembly of student councils in UP Iloilo, Jpaul, Mong and I would form an informal triumvirate, the result of a joke started by Mong.

While we were ecstatic about the victories, however, something was still amiss. CSSP remained in the other camp, with their networks in other colleges, notably NCPAG (the nest of the nation's policymakers), Econ, CBA, Law, Eng'g, AIT, a bit of CHK and others. I haven't seen this in assessments, but I was alarmed by the loss of the College of Engineering, the biggest college in UP Diliman. So while on the surface, we won landslide USC elections in 2000-2004, there was something else occurring. By 2003, I was already doing fieldwork, so I have scant organising activities by this time in the campus, although I had to attend to another alliance. Our situation was thus precarious in the biggest colleges Engg and CSSP. The third biggest college was CS where our local party was holding sway. In 2004, who would appear to be our strong candidate, Atom Araullo, and his slate, lost the elections due to the 'FPJ' effect, where UP students equated Atom's celebrity status as the same as the stars entering national politics, which was really stupid, since the guy is brilliant and committed. I'm not sure how they campaigned, though, and I have a scant idea how the alliance assessed it. The loss should also offer a lesson on the power of the Internet to stir up viral but dumb analogies, where I heard most of the negative mudslinging against Atom's star status. The next year, however, I heard STAND-UP won again, then the year I think after that. Then last year, the USC was half-won. This was also after the party I helped establish in CS was broken up on purpose. Which flows to the next number...

So there's the story of my being STAND-UP. I was viewed as a sort of maverick, I think, due maybe because I wasn't going to Vinzon's much during some periods, especially some meetings . But truth be told, I was spending half my free time doing things for the alliance (the other for studies and tambay). Even when I wasn't on official alliance or org business, I was still on the go doing organising activities, especially in my college.

All in all, however, the closest people I met were in the alliance and I remained steadfast and true to it. STAND-UP had a variety of colour and characters, and I especially cherish my times being a member. I honour the dedication of these people, more often than not you'd find them constantly putting their time, intellect, artistry, creativity, muscles, lack of sleep, to the cause of advancing students' rights and welfare, as well as commitment to an improved education and a progressive country. Even in times of reaction both inside the campus and outside, STAND-UP remained a beacon of militant assertiveness and shines as an example to many youth and students not just in UP but the entire country.



Next:

2) SPACE, CS-SC/Scientia

3) Continuation of UP Anido

4) Recovery of OSR, KASAMA years

5) Establishment of Solidaridad, UP Alliance of Student Publications and Writers' Organizations -

Some points on ‘globalisation’ provoked by this financial/economic crisis: Contrary to what it may suggest, ‘globalisation’ in principle is not disagreeble. In fact, the first attempt to integrate globally was a workers’ international. What should be rejected is the fact that more powerful economies tend to trump less powerful ones in the way the system is set up. - The other side is movements that, because of their historical and social circumstances, may opt for economic nationalism to enable them to stand up as an equal in the community of nations, should be supported. - In the present version of globalisation, capital is freed, but labour (read: real people) are still in chains. - The freed market only brings instability, as demonstrated by the last few decades of its reign, highlighted moreover by the latest of its crises today. - ‘Globalisation’ has resulted in an increasing shift of world GDP from wages to profits and has tended to undermine the barganing power of trade unions. It also results in under-consumption, and more debt and a debt-driven economy because people still have to consume. - Labour bargaining power has also been undermined because companies can easily move production elsewhere. - The correlation to this is there should be an attempt to flatten out wages across nations. This would decrease the ability of companies to relocate when they want to because of the arbitrary differences in taxes, wages, currency vaues and other costs across nations. It would also make it easier to govern and would be beneficial to economies with the stability. - There is no political accountability on a global scale despite the world-wide operations of this type of economy. - ‘External’ problems like pollution tended to be ignored. Because they weren’t exactly useful for production, many cities blot out their skies with toxic fog. - It may be that growth for its own sake may not be the best basis for an economy, as we increasingly realise with the ecological crisis. Communal and urban organic gardens, recycling, more environmental consciousness point to alternative lifestyles that may yet save the few natural joys of life. - Public ownership of big sectors of the economy remains a choice. This, however, also requires democratic, social direction from the population as a whole. It cannot just be for the benefit of the financially-endowed. - We must constantly think of the world as one unit; one society and economy affects the other, so we are responsible for every bit of our actions. Like that blurb, we must think globally, act locally.

A fitting finale, finally saw ‘Australia’, the movie, at the same place where it world-premiered. It’s the love story of Lady Ashey (Nicole Kidman) and the Drover (Hugh Jackman). It’s also about Aboriginal customs, including the Dreamtime and Walkabout (Sometimes when you get lost, you find yourself). In the movie, the Drover and Nullah, the half-caste boy, mention that when you die, you leave everything but your story. The intro also mentions the ‘lost generation’, when half-breed children (between white Australians and Aboriginal women) were forced to serve white communities, schooled by the churches, with science used as justification for genetic cleansing ‘to breed out the black’. According to PM Kevin Rudd in his apology to the Aborigines this year, the complex problems of post-reformation theology were resolved this way. Children were told to stand up in lines. Line 1: Methodist; Line 2: Baptist; Line 3: Catholic. (Some of the dialogues in the party scene were taken verbatim from the PM’s speech). Some nitpicking: - Perhaps the greatest ironic movie death: Nullah’s mother dies in a very dry place - nearly a desert - by, among other things, drowning, in a water tank several feet in the air. This is while trying to save her son from being taken by the coppers who would take him to the missions to be ‘civilised.’ - Too many deaths of the supporting characters. - I thought the movie peaked when the cattle were taken to the ship’s hold, but then the movie drags on just to show the Japanese bombing Darwin. === The apology was one of the greatest events I have witnessed. It counts as one score victory for progressive forces. Having imbibed an ethnic identity myself makes it significant, and I am proud to have been at the same time and place when it was sincerely offered. It is, of course, a product of the marches of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people fighting for recognition of rights, and is a testament to the power of collective struggle to change things. It gives hope that change can be achieved if people raise their voices enough. As said in the movie, just because it is, doesn’t mean it should be. Some other world-shaking events I have witnessed and participated in. - EDSA II for obvious reasons. - This economic nosedive at present confirms”ED’s” we had about booms and busts during college days. Then, it was just abstract, but now they come into realisation makes you wake up. That theory comes alive, and the conclusions from them are not only true, but imperative. If this is the best economic system we can have, woe to us indeed. If this is the optimal way we can organise society, at the immiseration of millions, while the rich few (who also caused the financial crisis) get suckled with public money, then stuff it. We can create a new way. The latest events offer a glimpse of other possibilities.

The Australian government's plan to censor the Internet is absurd and irrational. The Australian Electronic Frontier Group (EFA) has come up with the following points:


1. The Government has failed to identify a need for this policy.
2. Even if there was a need, the Government has failed to demonstrate that its solution is wanted by the public.
3. Even if the public wanted this solution, it won't work.
4. Even if it could work, it's too expensive.
5. Even if it wasn't too expensive, it'll be implemented poorly.
6. In the unlikely event that it's implemented perfectly, it will enable child abuse.

The last point is predicated on Newton's assertion that a leak of the blacklist itself is inevitable, and once that happens it will spread among pedophile groups helping unscrupulous individuals locate child pornography web sites that are up and online.

The filter technology has also been shown to slow down Internet speeds.

If you're Aussie, sign the petition against Net censorship:
here

Went to the red carpet world premiere of 'Australia.' Managed to get a picture of Nicole Kidman. And I think I saw Hugh Jackman from a distance.

Alright, it's time to prepare for another round of market panic.

Here are a few warning signs:
- Despite a $25Bn bailout on the way from the US House of Representatives spearheaded by Nancy Pelosi, General Motors needs another $50Bn. This, inspite of the company admitting cash reserves bleeding at $2.5 Bn a month.
- AIG's total rescue package is a walloping $150 Bn
- Despite $100Bn in bailouts, Fannie Mae lost $29 Bn in the third quarter.
- Other bailouts.

Take note, the financial crisis was preceded by a hit in the real economy. The bailout in the automotive sector might have some value, as the jobs of 1.4 million auto workers are in line, in contrast to the financial sector where traders are just shuffling papers around. But again, this could be a losing proposition in the long-run, it is unsustainable.


In light of these, one question needs to be asked: Where will Washington get at least $2 Trillion to fund the bailouts? Answer: They will borrow that money. Just recently, the US Treasury announced borrowings of $550 Bn - which is more than the 2008 fiscal deficit. What this means: This would mean plunging bond prices.

Previously, traders weren't allowed to sell bonds short. But now, vultures in the form of speculators would be waiting to profit from this fallout, so the entire outcome would be interesting to see. Now the empire is really taking a hit.


In another system where social needs dictate the economy, bailouts might have worked, but in a system dominated by capital and markets, the bailouts only lead to further speculation and panic. As noted by Ibon economist Rose Guzman, it is not profit that is taking a hit, it is the rate of profit, unacceptable to the capitalists.

Productive capacity is still the same, the technologies are there, but because it is profit-motivated, a crisis erupts.

--- In other news, China introduced a $586bn economic stimulus. Would be interesting where that goes.

That's it. Barack Obama wins to become the first black president of the United States, breaking one of the most brittle glass ceilings- race.

Now he has to handle a nosediving economy and two wars.

Now, on to the greater tasks of Change. Next on the agenda should include class, women, indigenous people, community and the environment. This opens a new opportunity, as nations around the world are going centre-left in protest of right-wing policies that have damaged our very core as people of the world. The key is more lobbying and pressure from progressive groups and to remove all other right-wing governments, especially the murderous ones.

On a lighter note, kasalanan ito nina Morgan Freeman and shows like 24 na may mga African-American presidents.

Defying the crunch, Melbourne Cup bets was the biggest this year. All that hoopla for one race. Viewed won, with Bauer coming second and C'est La Guerre 3rd.

2008 MELBOURNE CUP -  VIEWED



More Videos & Games at New Free Media

There are a few ways that a government or ruling elite can do to make people subjugated, and thus, to undermine democracy.

One of them is to frighten them. An enemy has to be produced, real or fabricated, so that the the public will stand behind the backs of their rulers. So, for example, the GMA Administration can drum up the chaos supposedly started by the MILF. And being forceful, the Arroyo government can present itself as a gallant defender of the people, effectively distracting the people to the real enemy, namely, itself.

It helps that the mass organisations of the very critics have been decimated or at least crippled to a certain degree. So the political killings of leftists and journalists had their use - and though the benefits may just be tactical and may not be viable in the long run - it buys time. It also helps that enough of the intelligentsia, which helps shape opinion, tacitly or by silence, supports the atrocities.

The more people are atomised, the less they act in a collective manner, then 'strong leaders' can have their way. It is hard to govern people when there is a real working democracy. People usually protest when their fundamental interests are threatened. Ask the French, for example, when their social benefits are being scrapped.

Another way to undermine democracy is to make people demoralised. So when an attempt is made to impeach an unpopular leader like Arroyo, it can be quelled by her allies. Thus, a legal way to fix a fault in a democracy is effectively blocked. Those who attempted the impeachment can be reviled as idiots, and can be accused of 'politicking' in a time of economic crisis.

It helps that people are demoralised or too weak to take action, by the simple fact that the confidence they need to speak out is overwhelmed by the need to survive on a daily basis, when the living wage is so low, when prices are high, when fees for health and education are nearly unaffordable, due to the fact of economic policies that socialise the rich while keeping the population just alive enough to be in line.

The government can again present itself as an economic saviour, even though it is its own policies that have contributed to increasing the people's misery and also increasing the social gap. It is never mentioned that especially when the fundamental evil remains to be the prolongation of GMA's misrule, it is precisely in politics where people have their only chance of removing a great and horrible mistake.

To paraphrase Alexis de Tocqueville, the greatness of a nation lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather her ability to repair her faults. It is time for the Philippines to correct its fault.