According to the NSCB, one of every three families in Eastern Visayas are poor. There’s a 43.3% poverty incidence in Southern Leyte in 2009. Just where exactly did this disaster take place again? Yup.
The provinces and communities that experienced Yolanda’s wrath the most are also those that are frequently at the mercy of typhoons and natural disasters. With that also came decades - generations - of underdevelopment. It should also be pointed out that those who suffered the most - and lost the most - are those who do not have access to the things that can aid in both development and disaster.
Things like ports and depots and runways. Well-built roads and fast, convenient access to other communities.
The havoc caused by Yolanda is immeasurable, perhaps even incomprehensible. It’s hard to wrap your head around it. It’s also hard to wrap your head around the scale of poverty and underdevelopment in these vulnerable areas, and the sense of loss and misery among our most vulnerable people.
Watching the story unfold, it’s easy to see why the criticisms of “lack of preparedness” echo from all fronts. Preparation does not come from mere evacuation procedures, but sustainable development where roads, hospitals, schools, markets, and government facilities, etc. are accessible to all. Preparedness by development, and vice versa.
You cannot prepare for evacuation without strong roads that can withstand the worst weather conditions, much less the weight of the very trucks that build it. You cannot assure ample healthcare - disaster or no disaster - when the health budget is at less than P10 per person. You cannot educate people on disaster preparedness when kids have to traverse dirt roads to go to into a cramped school room, and the underpaid teacher doesn’t even have chalk. You cannot build depots or stock up on supplies, without a market stocked and supplied with goods that people can afford.
You cannot have a functional government on the ground when it is susceptible not only to disaster, but to greed.
When your community is underdeveloped - when your people lack access to things like good roads, hospitals, and connections with other communities, and when poverty is forced upon you by everything from graft to dependency and everything else in between - you become vulnerable and susceptible to the worst things a disaster can bring. We’ve seen it happen.
The aid will be brought in. Life will go on. But as these communities are rebuilt from the waste and debris, we all have to keep a watchful eye open toward this rebuilding.
Let it not be said that the poorest and most vulnerable among us lived on the crumbs that fell from the table of the wealthy and the powerful.
The immediate justice of aid and relief is absolutely necessary. The sustained justice of equitable development that uplifts the lives of the poor and vulnerable is essential.
On the Job is too preoccupied with Pinoy action film techniques. It doesn’t even work as a police report from CCTV. While recent cinema is entitled to “critiques” of what it considers as the “establishment,” this is a badly-written commentary.
The film is the story of Mario Maghari (Joel Torre) in his last days as an assassin. However, he comes across as somewhat a heroic character, eliminating the enemies of a military general whose grand ambitions end at the Philippine Senate. Yet he has been granted his date of release. Two documents bear the meaning of freedom: first, the photograph of the target that orders an occasional foray to the “outside.” Second, the parole that sends Mario back to his wife and daughter, and to be finally free from the life he has somewhat identified with.
Without a doubt, there is thrill in what Mario believes in: his deliverance. There’s the date of release, but it becomes a drama particularly for those considered the scum of the earth. And then, there’s the coming of age of the apprentice, Daniel (Gerald Anderson). The film could have just concentrated on Mario training Daniel into becoming a death machine. Or on the sequences that drive Mario to meet his “end” at his parole. But then there’s the “good guy” story to this anti-hero film, dramatized by Atty. Francis Coronel, Jr. (Piolo Pascual). Then the thrill becomes cheap, a lot like the action films of days gone by. Coronel’s becomes the redeemer, only fulfilled after seeing the light of the things that go on around him, his skills forcing him to self-destruct.
Pascual, I think, ruined this movie. He tries too hard to fulfill his role, resorting to his muscles, his clothes, his hairstyles, his gadgets, his stances, and everything else forced into him by the studio for him to play the role of the suave hero. The gifts of Jay Halili as editor, Erwin Romulo as musical scorer, and Ricardo Buhay III are wasted here. Their skills somehow hide Michiko Yamamoto’s bad writing, Erik Matti’s bad direction, and Piolo’s bad acting.
As far as technique is concerned, On the Job proves that cinema has come a long way. But technique can only do so much. Too many times, the “hyper-realistic” take of this movie is just smoke and mirrors; Ishmael Bernal turns over in his grave.
The supporting actors should also take the blame. Leo Martinez’s comedic timing was off in this film. Michael de Mesa doesn’t work well as a Senator; he just lacks the “politician” character. Shaina Magdayao’s exposures are a lot like Vina Morales’s bad attempts to create good acting in obscure films by Viva. Angel Aquino’s banshee-like shrieking was terrible. Gerald Anderson still reveals a stereotypical Filipino-American conyo personality that’s out of place in this “realistic” film. Joey Marquez doesn’t make for a good “impartial” policeman, but he makes a very good “dumb” policeman impression. And Vivian Velez’s acting is shallow; she relies on her tone of voice and wardrobe too much.
Lito Pimentel’s portrayal of fear is good, and acts as a good counterpoint to Joel Torre’s performance. The story he tells is simple: freedom can never be taken back once he commits to violence. And all hope is eaten away from him.
I do not understand why this film was selected at the Director’s Fortnight in Cannes. Can sheer technical skill give meaning to crime and punishment: something that’s so suppressed in the Philippines? It’s a nice, slick-looking movie, but only because there are too many jumps and inconsistencies in the story.
#And #lay #he #down #the #golden #father
(#Genesis’ #fist #all #gentle #now)
between #the #Wall #of #China #and
#The #tiger #tree (#his #centuries #his
#Aerials #of #light
#Anchored #entire #angel!
#He #in #his #estate #miracle #and #living #dew
#His #fuses #gold #his #cobalts #love
#And #in #his #eyepits
#O #under #the #liontelling #sun
#The #zeta #truth #the #swift #red @Christ
The main idea is that when a number of persons engage in a mutually advantageous cooperative venture according to rules, and thus restrict their liberty in ways necessary to yield advantages for all, those who have submitted to these restrictions have a right to a similar acquiescence on the part of those who have benefited from their submission. We are not to gain from the cooperative labors of others without doing our fair share.
— John Rawls
"A Theory of Justice"
Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
My dear graduates,
Today, we celebrate a momentous accomplishment. Today, you realized your dreams; your diploma is not only a concrete proof that you’re a graduate of this school, but it also tells the story of the ups and downs of your journey as students.
Graduation Day is just a part of a very long preparation. The investment you and your parents took for you to finish school is significant: I believe that if one is not prepared by education to face the challenges of life, one wastes time and energy. More than that, I believe that if one is not primed to face life through a proper education, our young men and women would be crippled in facing the problems of the nation, especially as our future leaders.
The theme of this graduation ceremony is, “BUILDING THE NATION’S FUTURE LEADERS THROUGH THE K TO 12 BASIC EDUCATION PROGRAM.” I believe that this is a step in preparing a complete educational program for our young people. Education is one of the key challenges of modern living today. All the conveniences and improvements we have in our daily lives should be complemented by educational programs of government and policy makers.
We should not strive for excellence for its own sake, but strive for higher causes. Excellence makes us globally competitive. More importantly, excellence sets the course of our nation’s destiny.
I’d like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Dear graduates, and your parents and teachers. All of you should share in the accolades and accomplishments that we celebrate in this occasion. This is the moment for you to ignite new sparks of hope to light your way, as you negotiate the challenges that stand in the way of your dreams and aspirations.
Dear Graduates, I appeal to each and every one of you to treasure, cherish, and use to its fullest extent, this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. This is your vehicle for the future. With God’s grace and the guidance brought to you by what you learned in this school, you will reach the pinnacle of success. Succeed not only for yourself, but succeed for your community as well. Remember that you are this nation’s future leaders, and the hope of the Motherland. Hold on to everything you have learned, and take care to make all the best things possible. "Education is the only inheritance that cannot be taken away." Ang edukasyon ay ang tanging yaman na hindi kayang nakawin ninuman.
Hold on to your education. Treasure it, cherish it. One day, at the right time, you will reap the rewards of learning; the greatest of which is when you yourselves contribute to that wonderful vision. A wonderful vision for Bagong Paranaque.
Congratulations, and may God bless us all.
Yours in Public Service,
Edwin I. Olivarez
Let’s see how far we can go with this one.
"Dalawang matatalim na ulos ang isinunod ni Christian. Siya’y nanigas, at ibinuhos ang kanyang sarili sa akin nang siya’y lumabas na."
"Sipsipin mo ako." Ang kanyang hinlalaki ay idiniin niya sa aking dila, at nagsara ang aking mga labi sa kanyang daliri, walang taros ang aking pagsuso. Hay, punyeta. Alam kong mali, ngunit tangina lang, ang landi."
"Ang kanyang hintuturo ay umiikot sa aking ngiwing yungib ng pag-ibig. "Handa ka na ba?" tila pusa ang kanyang pangnguyaw, nakangisi sa akin na tila inang ardilya na handang kainin ang kanyang mga anak na tatatlo lamang ang paa.
"Bigla na lamang siyang napatayo, at hinubad ang aking panty at tinapon sa sahig. Hinubad niya na rin ang kanyang short, at umigkas ang kanyang umaalburotong titi. "Banal na baka!""
"Linamon ko pa ang kanyang sandata, maramdaman lamang siya sa likod ng aking lalamunan, at muli sa aking bunganga. Paikot-ikot ang aking dila… siya ay aking pinipig crunch na lasang Christian Grey. Patuloy pa ang aking marahang pagchuchupa. Hay. Ang aking lihim na diwata ay pawang umo-otso otso, na uma-Angelina pa."
The argument for the Cybercrime Law is almost always predicated on a catchphrase from the Spider-Man movies: “With great power comes great responsibility.”
That is a notion that is perfectly valid in a world with superpowers, where we can leap across buildings and where we can sling webs from our wrists to save damsels in distress from the clutches of evil.
When what you have in lieu of a superpower is the Internet, and the very human ability to express your views, that argument is problematic.
The Internet – the Internet in the Philippines, for that matter – is not a “great power.” The “great power” comes from Internet service providers, and whether or not they can deliver Internet services at the speed of an opinion; which they often don’t.
The “great power” comes from the people who legislate about technology and services which they can barely understand, and have the social superpower of abridging rights in the first place.
The “great power” comes from the people who will benefit from public discourse that’s shaped and molded to protect the rich and famous and powerful: not you and me. We have to “think before you click.”
Whatever “great power” that there is in a Constitutionally-enshrined “free speech” doctrine is already diluted by perfectly legal contradictions that abridge it. Libel is a crime. We don’t have a Freedom of Information Law. We have strong clamors for right of reply from the rich and famous and powerful few.
That’s the reality of free speech here: some “great power” that is. You cannot expect “great responsibilities” from powers that aren’t great. Or powers that are abridged.
Those who invoke Uncle Ben Parker’s (disputable) exhortations are clearly mistaken about what “great power” is. As such, for us to be subjected by the “great responsibility” of ascribing to - or following - a Cybercrime Law is essentially a surrender of what little rights we already have, instead of a defense of it.
Yes, the fences that we help build may one day become the walls of our prison.
Our “great responsibility” is to fight for our freedoms and protect what we have. Not to bow to the will of powerful people who already have instruments of power in the first place. Our great responsibility is Internet freedom, better Internet, the decriminalization of libel, and the open access to information.