THE BOOGEYMAN IS FINALLY BURIED

 

I woke up this morning and I felt strangely refreshed.  It felt as though a huge weight had been lifted off of my shoulders.  As you know, the family of Former President Ferdinand E. Marcos buried him yesterday morning in a discreet and intimate burial in the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB).  For the past 30 or so years after his death, Marcos had been kept in a refrigerated casket for all the world to see, his corpse was gawked at or venerated and defiled.  His mortal remains were used as a symbol by loyalists and pro-Aquino alike, sowing division.  It is because of this that President Duterte once and for all decided to put the issue and his mortal remains to rest.  Make no mistake about it, this was a political decision calculated to end division between the loyalists and the pro-Aquino—this does not change the past, but sets a course for our future unburdened by Boogeymen and infighting.

 

I am glad he is buried now and out of sight.  Like Mark Anthony speaking at Caesar’s funeral in Shakespeare’s play, I would simply like to say that “I have come to bury Marcos, not to praise him.  The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones…”  And so it is with Marcos.  I hope you do not think that simply because he has been buried, his sins are buried with him.

 

“The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones”

Now that he has been buried, I believe that this country can now really and truly move forward.  While his corpse was above ground, he was the Boogeyman—a legendary monster, a story to spook children from misbehaving.  During the second Aquino administration, it seemed like a running joke to talk about the ills of Martial Law all the while abuses and mismanagement continued.  Our history should never be used to cover up or justify present abuse.  Neither does it justify partisanship when all camps are guilty of mismanagement and abuse.  I sincerely hope that supporters of both sides open their eyes and see things who what it is, both the loyalist camp and the pro-Aquino camp used your hatreds for political ends and took you all for a ride. 

 

For the victims, nothing can replace what you have lost and what you have endured.  The government has recognized this as a turbulent time in our history.  Evil heathen forces carrying Mao Zedong’s ideas and Lenin’s hammer and sickle banner were at our gates.  Marcos chose to fight fire with fire.  The jury is still out on this.  History far removed from partisanship will judge him, as God surely has already.  Today Marcos is buried and worms tear at his flesh, yet the very architects of the Martial Law regime, Juan Ponce Enrile and Former President Fidel Ramos live and enjoy a pride of place in our government.  Victims, you will get more answers and closure from the living than with the dead.

 

Nor do I feel like we have “violated” our history in having him buried there.  As  I said, the jury is still out on this one.  Some groups insist that we as a people are suffering collective amnesia for allowing this, but I say that we are  suffering collective amnesia about those days when Martial Law was declared.  Why was Martial Law declared?  Was it the sensible thing to do at the time?  Was it really the ultimate evil that some groups would have us  believe?  Did we benefit from Martial Law?  The jury is still out on all of these questions.  Hopefully, history will decide with impartiality. 

 

Let us be clear here.  This was not a “hero’s burial.”  This was a plain and simple burial.  Some groups insist that what was done was a hero’s burial.  Well, if they insist.  As earlier mentioned, when a man is buried, the evil he has done lives after him, and the good is often interred with his bones, but this is not strictly correct, Marcos’s legacy spans the full spectrum of very good to the very bad.  We knew he was after the common good, and legislation in the 1970s-80s demonstrated very forward and enlightened thinking.  Contemporary Congresses are hard pressed to match his legal corpus with laws on Muslim family relations, laws on child and youth welfare, laws on labor, laws on overseas workers, laws on land reform, laws on criminal law spanning crimes, penology and procedure, commercial laws on corporations, insurance, still in active use today! Government agencies and corporations were also created to match his vision for the country.  His legacy is not only in the realm of ideas, but also infrastructure, especially in far flung areas, and the modern demography of Mindanao owes it to Marcos’ decision to promote Mindanao as an area for lowland Filipinos to settle in.  Though, I have to admit, this has had grave consequences for the Muslims and indigenous peoples living there, leading to continuous war and strife in the region.  He has made decisions good and bad, he has made contributions both good and bad—these are a given because of his office and title, as even the most enlightened of statesmen would be forced to make difficult decisions.  Marcos was a President of this country, the hard decisions were his to make and only history can judge him now.  

President, Pure Evil or “Boogeyman,” history removed from partisanship

will decide in its own good time

 

If there is anything I want justice for, it would be for the ill-gotten wealth.  With this burial, I hope the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) will find renewed drive and vigor to recover the ill-gotten wealth.  Please take heart, all is not lost, as Imee Marcos has admitted, the cases for this ill-gotten wealth remain pending with the courts, so please see these cases through. 

 

In the meantime, the country must move on, and move on we will, less one Boogeyman and less one corpse defiled and used by supporters and detractors alike.

RANT: LIBERALS ALL OVER THE WORLD HAVE TO REASSES THE SITUATION AND REEVALUATE THEMSELVES AND THEIR PRIORITIES

I am really tempted to gloat.  I dislike liberals of the American and even the Filipino variety, and it seems that 2016 is the year that their world fell apart for them.  Indeed, my Facebook feed is filled with their whining and gnashing of teeth.  But gloating is cruel and doing so tends to reduce the righteousness of one’s cause.  It is better to look and examine what happened?  Why did the Duterte and Trump victories catch them off guard, why did their efforts to discredit both of these people and their supporters fail?  It is too simplistic to call the supporters of these populist, firebrand politicians as bobo, retard or idiotic sheep.  Neither is it wrong to say that the liberal “cause” is wrong or unpopular—No, I think the problem is in the liberals themselves, and they should take the time to reflect, reassess and reevaluate themselves and their position.

The state of social media right now. 

How would I characterize a “liberal?”  I use this term loosely because “liberal” can mean many different things depending on context.  Generally speaking, I refer to this as a “political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties”  (Merriam-Webster Dictionary).  In the United States, these are usually adherents of the Democrat party.  In the Philippines, they are closely linked with the Liberal party.  In fairness to the Liberal Party, it is the closest the Philippines has to an actual political party in the cohesive, traditional and American sense of the word.  Sadly, it seems that their cohesion is due to a figurehead—the son of two so-called “heroes” who gained prominence during the Marcos regime.  The father of this figurehead was supposedly “assassinated” by then President Marcos while his mother became President of the Philippines in a bloodless coup.  This group professes to prioritize human rights, freedom of speech, are against discrimination of any sort, decent behavior and they generally have a favorable view of America and share a lot of these same beliefs with American liberals.  To be fair, a lot of these people are genuinely decent people, its just that they are misguided by their own self-righteousness.

Liberals are self-righteous and sanctimonious
Liberals are so convinced of the righteousness of their position, they welcome no opposing views and look down if not outright humiliate a person espousing a contrary view.  Right now, I dread opening my social media.  All I can see in it, as far as the eyes can see is the incessant whining and tears of Liberal Filipinos.  Its always about the same things:  the libingan ng mga bayani, Trump, Duterte, Delima, and, heck, even the Leni Robredo “tuhod” comment.  And a lot of those concerns are irrational and ad hominem, anyone who cares to point that out gets bashed and groups of liberals would band together and support one another in a circlejerk.  They are prone to superlative, such as comparing former President Ferdinand Marcos to people like Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot and Idi Amin, you know, people who have actually committed genocide as a policy of their state.  Dare to point out that you are cheapening the experience of Holocaust survivors by comparing Hitler to Marcos and you will get a faceful of hate for interrupting the circlejerk.  American liberals are hardly any different, point out the scandals that hound Hillary Clinton and you will be accused of being a misogynist.  

They have a poor grasp of the issues and arguments
To be fair, non-liberals haven’t been the best at “marketing” their position either.  Their position is one of drastic measures—great changes in policy.  They aren’t really accustomed to voicing out their discomfort and their concerns, so they won’t be masters at convincing right away.  Liberals on the other hand, are like professional “whiners” and are accustomed to having a “feel good” stance on issues.  In a way, Liberals have never tried to get our of their comfort zone.  Ask any Liberal what they think of “rape jokes” and they will tell you that “rape jokes are bad [period].”  Ask them to explain why that is the case and 9 times out of 10, you will get crickets.   

They block out contrary opinions
Another thing liberals should learn to do is to listen to contrary opinions.  Try to see where the “other guy” is coming from.  American liberals (AKA Democrats) are seemingly more prone to shutting out contrary opinion than their conservative counterparts.  Reuters reports:

Fourteen percent of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said they had blocked a family member or close friend from social media because of the election. For Democrats, this rises to 23 percent compared to 8 percent for Republicans.

This goes to show that liberal people are more likely to shut out contrary opinions and ideas from their own.  When thinking in a movement only exists in a circlejerk, critical thinking is lost and that is when the movement loses its relevance.  What better example of this behavior than the Philippine’s own Rappler, a news website with [obvious] liberal leanings, wrote a series of articles about a “propaganda war” predominantly blaming an ordinary blogger Mocha Uson for spreading propaganda thanks to her army of bots (!) hoping to put a stop to her blog.

It is also very easy to see how the liberal coastal cities of America and their wealthy residents can seem so out of touch with the rest of their countrymen.  To them, their main concern is advancing the feminist cause, gay marriage, Hollywood, legalization of Marijuana while non-liberals/Trump supporters had very different concerns:  jobs, immigration, perceived weaknesses in America’s foreign policy.  So therefore, shutting out contrary opinion and a cocooned existence don’t do wonders for liberal PR.  It just makes one seem “elitist.”

Victim Mentality
Liberals can’t seem to comprehend the idea of blaming oneself for one’s failures—they always try to portray themselves as the victim.  In Clinton’s case, she wasn’t seen as fit for the job by many democrats resulting in very low voter turnout.  I wonder if the democrats really expected an easy victory just because she was a woman running against a misogynist?  Worse was that after Trump gave his thank you speech which he tried to fill with as much hope for the future, the most memorable (and retweeted) part of Clinton’s concession speech was something about breaking the “glass ceiling.”  Are they seriously blaming their loss on the fact that she is a woman?

Its a pity that liberals played the gender card thinking that Americans will vote for a person simply on account of her gender.  I’m glad to see that meritocracy still exists in some form over there.  The same victim mentality is rampant among the liberals of the Philippines.  Best example is Senator Leila Delima who keeps bringing up her gender in her numerous press conferences with the liberal media of the Philippines.

What’s Next?
For Filipino liberals, the events of the past year should serve as a wake-up call.  Since you abhor Trump so much, perhaps it is time that you stop placing America on a pedestal and learn to think for yourselves. 

I understand and sympathize with your convictions.  In fact they are very honorable, so please don’t give up.  Learn from your shortcomings.  I will leave you with what I saw on my Facebook feed from a person that I respect has written:

I kind of just want to remind people who are blaming democracy these days that:
A) both Trump and Duterte did not grab power. Don't you just feel grateful that elections remain to be undisrupted in both countries?
B) democracy isn't suddenly wrong because things didn't go your way
C) it's democracy that will let you get up again tomorrow and start your 4 or 6 year campaign.
...
Good night!

Please be guided accordingly!

------
Note:  Please forgive the rant.  This was hastily written so I can get this out while this historic moment remains fresh.  I talk about America and the Philippines.  The near simultaneous elections we had seems to have caused a great deal of grief for many people regardless of whom you support and whatever your values are.  Also, I am no expert in American culture and politics, hence comments, suggestions and corrections are very much welcome.

WHY THE CANCELLED PHILIPPINE–AMERICAN ARMS DEAL ISN’T A BIG DEAL

 

The local and international media once again sensationalized a minor issue.  This time, the Philippine Star a story about a cancelled arms deal with the United State in its front page.  Worse, the Philippine Daily Inquirer tried to turn the image below into a meme.

“Bato saddened by scuttled arms deal of PNP with US”

Source:  inquirer.net

 

Now, whenever the media talks about guns, knowledgeable persons try not to take them seriously as their ignorance is aptly exemplified by the meme below.

 

 source: www.mojosteve.blogspot.com

Since I think that the media sensationalized a simple issue once again, let us try to make sense of it ourselves.

 

Why the deal cancellation makes no sense

The deal was ostensibly cancelled out of concern for “human rights,” the Philippine Star in the abovementioned report states that:

 

The US State Department halted the planned sale of some 26,000 assault rifles to the Philippines’ national police after Sen. Ben Cardin said he would oppose it, Senate aides told Reuters on Monday.

Aides said Cardin, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was reluctant for the United States to provide the weapons given concerns about human rights violations in the Philippines.

The relationship between the United States and the Philippines, a long-time ally, has been complicated lately by President Duterte’s angry reaction to criticism from Washington of his violent battle to rid the country of illegal drugs.

 

We know that this reasoning makes no sense because the United States has previously supplied weapons to regimes which have had questionable human rights track records previously whenever it suits them or whenever it is expedient.  Thus, proceeding from the assumption that Human Rights has absolutely nothing with this, it is safe to say therefore that our relationship was “complicated” not by human rights, but as a result of the country’s realignment or pivot to China as well as “punishment” for continued anti-US rhetoric which has confounded Obama’s own “Pivot to Asia” which many commentators have now declared a failure often citing the Philippines as an example of America’s inability to keep its allies.  This is further implied in a recent article from the Washington Post:

Reuters reported Tuesday that the State Department will stop the weapons sale because of opposition from Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.), the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a vocal critic of Duterte's "drug war."

Although the State Department did not comment to confirm or deny Reuters's reporting, the head of the Philippine National Police said in a statement that he was “saddened” by the news. Duterte, meanwhile, tried to shrug it off, dismissing the report as a U.S. “scare tactic” and saying the necessary weapons can be purchased somewhere else — like Russia.

Duterte is partly right. Stopping the sale of 26,000 guns is a small gesture, compared with the $9 million in aid that the State Department will give to counternarcotics and law enforcement programs in the Philippines in 2017 and with the $32 million that Secretary of State John F. Kerry pledged this summer for Duterte's law enforcement programs.

But it's a move that is intended to show that some U.S. funding for the Philippines can and will be cut if the president's human rights abuses and anti-U.S. rhetoric continue.

 

So, as the Americans understand it, this isn’t really about human rights, its about anti-US rhetoric.  Keep in mind that the US will have their elections coming up, the current Democrat-dominated government’s inability to keep their alliance with the Philippines has become ammunition by their Republican rivals.  This is retribution, plain and simple.

 

Duterte is not concerned though, he mentioned that if America will not sell us weapons, it is their loss, we will buy from other countries and possibly use locally produced weapons. 

 

M4 Carbines are of an outdated design and is a waste of money

This cancelled deal involves the sale of some 26,000 M4 Carbines.  The M4 Carbine is an updated and shortened version of the original M16 Assault Rifle designed by Eugene Stoner in the 1960s.  Philippine media may have made a big deal out of this because they cling to a belief in the superiority of American firearms, but this is simply not the case.  If you look at the credible militaries all over the world, you will see that very few of them are actually using M-16s or M4 carbines despite their availability.  In the ASEAN region, our neighbors are equipped with

Country	Standard Issue Assault Rifle	Comment
Indonesia	Pindad SS1; Pindad SS2; SAR 21 (special forces)	The SS1 is currently being phased out and will be replaced by the SS2.  Both are locally manufactured.  The SAR 21 is of a bullpup design and is imported from Singapore.  All are chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
Malaysia	M4 Carbine	Produced under license.  Chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
Singapore	SAR 21	Bullpup configuration, locally designed and produced.  Chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
Vietnam	Hodgepodge of Weapons, many Soviet and American leftovers from the war are still in use.  Modern weapons include IWI Tavor TAR-21; Galil ACE	TAR-21 is a bullpup design.  Both the TAR and the Galil are of Israeli origin, the Galil is license built in Vietnam using the old 7.62 x 39 mm round.
Cambodia	Variety of AK-47 and Chinese clones.  QBZ-95 (special forces)	The AK variants are chambered for 7.62 x 39 mm round.  The QBZ-95 is a bullpup design and the variant in use by the Cambodians are chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO.
Thailand	M16A1 (phase out); IWI Tavor TAR-21; SAR 21 (special forces)	The bullpup designed TAR-21 is set to replace the aging M16s in front line service.  These rifles are all chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO.
Brunei	M16A1/A2/A4; SAR 21; Pindad SS2	All are chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO.
Other reference countries
Japan	Howa Type 89	Chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
India	1B1 INSAS	Locally designed and produced, chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm NATO, standard configuration

 

As the table shows, American assault rifles are, in general, being phased out, and countries tend to be gravitating towards the “bullpup” configuration as exemplified by the TAR-21 and SAR 21.  The M4 carbine is simply a bit old fashioned, it seems bulky and front heavy compared to the SAR, TAR or even Cambodia’s QBZ imports from China.  Worse is that American built M4s are simply not as robust as other models and requires too much maintenance, this was a glaring deficiency discovered as far back as the Vietnam war.  No wonder none of our neighbors are modernizing to these guns.  Are these really the sorts of weapons we want to be equipping our police officers?  They will be fighting house to house, in cramped urban environments, in jungles, they might want a modern bullpup design.  It seems to me that the M4 was only chosen because of our familiarity with the design and because it seems that the US is treating the Philippines is a “captive market” for US arms, we never having had a real opportunity to field test the assault rifles of other nations or to develop our own.  Basically, we should just buy the best weapons for the best price, if that means buying Israeli, Indonesian or Chinese weapons, then so be it!

 

Ammunition compatibility

We may also make a big deal out of a supposed compatibility of existing ammunition with rifles not made by the United States.  This is important because it simplifies logistics and acquisition of weapons and ammunition.  But the mere fact that America refuses to sell us its rifles isn’t as big of a deal as it once was.  During the Cold War, both the West and the Soviet bloc standardized ammunition and magazines to the “NATO Standard,” likewise, the Soviet Bloc adhered to the Warsaw Pact standard.  This means that if two countries belonging to either the NATO or Warsaw standard  Ammunition is fairly standard among

 

Thus assuming we were to find other sources of arms from the Western Bloc, there would be absolutely no compatibility issues using their arms with our existing stockpiles of ammunition and magazines.  This is how we are able to supply Steyr AUG assault rifles to our elite troops with no compatibility issues because the Steyr chambers the same 5.56 x 45 mm NATO round that the M4 does in the same STANAG magazines.

 

Obviously, sourcing weapons from former Soviet Bloc and Chinese countries will cause some issues, but again, the issues are not as difficult to overcome as they may seem.  It is a well known fact that both Russia and the former Soviet republics and China are producing arms for export, that variants of their arms exists that are chambered for the NATO standard.  The government, in dealing with the Chinese or former Soviet bloc countries just has to make sure that they are getting weapons of compatible calibers.

 

A blessing in disguise to the local arms industry?

Duterte has mentioned that the Philippines has its own firearms industry.  This is true, and the fact is, given the situation, we should seriously be looking into the possibility of tapping into our local manufacturers for locally designed and produced weaponry as our Singaporean and Indonesian neighbors are currently doing.

 

Among the pro gun groups in the Philippines, many were quite worried that, in spite of the vibrant gun culture in the Philippines, local arms manufacture would soon cease.  This was because during the time of PNP Chief Alan Purisima, he implemented extremely onerous registration requirements for gun owners.  A firearms owners group, PROGUN has successfully obtained a temporary restraining order against the IRR and has taken the fight to the Senate, but nevertheless, the damage has been done.  Around 2014 – 2015, the ammunition and firearms industry chafed under this regulatory regime and thousands were laid off.  ARMSCOR, a reputable manufacturer based in Marikina City had to lay off 450 workers during this time.

Former PNP Chief Alan Purisima almost destroyed our arms manufacturing industry, for what?  Kickbacks on firearms registration from honest gun owners.

 

Will the current administration help to undo the damage that was done to our industry?  Perhaps it should.  Duterte, a self-avowed Socialist, will readily see that a government infusion of funds into industries wherein we have a competitive advantage, will reap huge dividends.  Government can advance money to possible manufacturers for the for the production of prototypes for the approval of the government.  Once a design is approved and an order is made, Government should advance some money for the construction of factories, hiring of workers and the building of a production line.  The rest of the money can be paid after the delivery of the arms.  All this can be done in 2 to 3 years through proper motivation.  None of this is wishful thinking either.  The Philippines already exports firearms to countries such as the United States and Thailand.  Most of these are sporting rifles and home-defense revolvers, but the innate capacity is already there.

 

In spite of all of his recent bluster, I believe that developing a local armaments industry is something that Former President Fidel Ramos will approve of.  After all, it was during his administration that we embarked on a [stalled] modernization of the AFP and under whom prototypes of helicopters were even produced in the hope they they would enter active service.

 

Note that the cancelled deal was actually a sale that was supposed to take place, this means that funds are actually going to be freed up to fund investments or purchases of arms from other countries, so this isn’t a big loss, and merely represents a delay in the acquisition of new assault rifles.

 

Conclusion

The cancellation of the arms deal is nothing to cry over.  This is probably just America’s way of protesting Duterte’s pivot to China.  Not that this is a big loss, better and cheaper arms can be found elsewhere.  If the United States does not want our money, there are other countries that would love to sell to us.  In the meantime, we should try and take this as an opportunity to depend too much on America, nor should we be beholden to their products, and to develop indigenous capability to produce our own weapons. 

 

 

 

Related:

 Mahindra Trucks:  The PNP Appears Satisfied

On the arms disparity between the Philippines and China

Turning the Bangsamoro region into a politico-military complex