PDSP choosing own 2010 presidential bet

NATIONAL Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales regards the administration coalition organized by President Macapagal-Arroyo as practically dissolved, thus his political party, the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP), is now pursuing its own track.

PDSP will be choosing its own presidential candidate in 2010, Gonzales, the party chair, yesterday said.

As of now, PDSP is considering supporting one from among some of the declared presidentiables. But it is also open to the possibility that new presidential aspirants may still emerge.

Gonzales said PDSP will be conducting consultations with its people and will finalize its choice in a party convention in October. He added that his party would try to duplicate what it did for the 1992 elections in which it organized nationwide consultations of President Aquino with the basic sectors to help her choose whom to anoint.

The process led to President Aquino’s endorsement of then Defense Secretary Fidel Ramos over Speaker Ramon Mitra, the standard bearer of the party built for her.

Gonzales said his party remains steadfast in its advocacy of fundamental political reforms that will make elections in the country meaningful, but he conceded that they are now very difficult to accomplish before the 2010 elections.

Topping these fundamental political reforms are Charter change and measures to really restore the credibility of elections. Gonzales said these reforms will be the content of his party’s electoral campaign and his party will continue to push for them in the next administration.

(30)

Authentic Change means a First World Philippines

Authentic Change means a First World Philippines

The Political Path of Charity

by Charles Avila

(July13, 2009)

Culture and Underdevelopment

More than twenty years ago an Atlantic Monthly article became the subject of controversy and attention here by its very title – “A DAMAGED CULTURE: A NEW PHILIPPINES?”

It was a time, right after Edsa I, when people thought a New Philippines had dropped down on them from heaven, or, in the very least, weren’t they now building one? The evil Marcos was out, the saintly Cory was in, and democracy marched on worldwide, right? The bloodless dethroning of the almighty Marcos gave Filipinos new dignity and pride and worse amnesia than they had ever had. The smug unconscious merrily whistled the simplistic line: take away Marcos and everything would be fine.

We forgot that most of the things that now seemed wrong with the economy and society –grotesque extremes of wealth and poverty, land-ownership disputes, monopolistic industries in cahoots with the government — had been wrong for decades, before there was a Marcos in Malacanang.

“Here is a land in which a few are spectacularly rich while the masses remain abjectly poor. . . . Here is a land consecrated to democracy but run by an entrenched plutocracy. Here, too, are a people whose ambitions run high, but whose fulfillment is low and mainly restricted to the self-perpetuating elite.” The words were Ninoy Aquino’s, uttered long before Marcos’ martial rule.

Many Filipinos just didn’t like it when this Atlantic Monthly article of James Fallows said that “in a sociological sense the elevation of Corazon Aquino through the EDSA revolution should probably be seen not as a revolution but as the restoration of the old order.”

Of course he did not deny that Edsa’s four days of courage “demonstrated a brave, national-minded spirit”, and “revealed the country’s spiritual essence.” But to him, nonetheless, the episode seemed “an exception, even an aberration.” He heard in Manila what Pandit Nehru much earlier heard in Delhi: the more we change the more we remain the same; we run twenty times faster just to stay in place.

Deeper in the Philippine reality was the damaged culture that led to a “tradition of political corruption and cronyism, the extremes of wealth and poverty, the tribal fragmentation, the local elite’s willingness to make a separate profitable peace with colonial powers”, old and new — all reflecting a feeble sense of national identity and a contempt for the common good.

By contrast, the countries that surrounded the Philippines became the world’s most famous showcases for the impact of culture on economic development. Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore–all short on natural resources– all had inched their way up through hard study and hard work. The Philippines, for its part, illustrated the opposite: culture could make a naturally rich country poor.

Twenty Years Later

Liberal Democracy returned to the Philippines in a big way. As if to make up for all the years when they could not vote, Filipinos got into one election after another and prepared for yet another almost nonstop. Election disputes returned as well and long recounts dragged on.

Yes, there will be an election next year. Do voters know what they’re doing? Many say, “No, but it doesn’t matter.” How could it not matter? Well, it is argued, the public’s errors cancel out with some sectors overestimating and others underestimating the bad or good effects of any given policy or personality, to the point that one can say the average voter’s beliefs is right and true – on the average.

This is not bad if one’s ideal is a society of mediocrity, but certainly not comforting if you look at the body of historical evidence showing that voters, like moths to the flame, gravitate to the same mistakes. Their mistakes do not cancel each other out; they, in fact, compound.

Thus we again find ourselves irked by the obligatory belief that elections are crucial to a “democracy” when they are but the number one sign of the “mock” in that English term. Does the ballot box automatically ensure democracy? Not necessarily, for it can be used as a tool to defeat the will of the majority – in other words, to kill democracy. This is why you cannot be lukewarm to the advocates of an Open Electoral System or OES with the COMELEC now.

In some countries today including the Philippines, democracy still does not reflect the will of the bottom majority. Or is anyone both naive and absurd to assume that the bottom 90% voluntarily choose to have tiny minorities own more wealth and power than the majority populace? Obviously, this “democratic situation” does not reflect the will of the bottom 90%.

In the first place, getting elected is costly business. “Don’t buy a single vote more than necessary. I’ll be damned if I am going to pay for a landslide,” Joseph P. Kennedy quipped, as quoted by his son John F. Kennedy.

Before elections, moneyed liberal democrats – the elite – can subject the entire population to months of intense political conditioning in which individuals and policies that pose a threat to their power are systematically discredited. Of course when all else fails, bodily killing can be resorted to. Anyway we will always have enough church people to order an oratio imperata or mandatory prayer – for “clean, honest, violence-free and credible elections.”

Access and conscience

Violence is, more often than not, local and localized. Taking office has become such big business. Our elections have increasingly become more about who – which families – get to occupy the lucrative “positions of service”. Who will corner how much of the “national capital” in a given local area?

Of course ordinary people know this truth quite instinctively. Never is their concern about programs and policies, for, rightly or wrongly, most people believe that the various parties do not even contemplate change along those lines. The main concern, rather, is about access. Is the prospective voter convinced he can still approach the candidate after electoral victory? How can he be sure of that? Is his immediate “leader” close enough to the candidate so that when the time should ever come for a politician’s intervention in his personal problems –there will be no hassle: they will be recognized?

And so, just to make sure – he submits his name to the leader. He takes the money for electoral services rendered and votes. He votes according to his conscience. That conscience, mind you, has been formed not to betray the giver of money and gifts.

Many moral leaders who urge people to vote according to their conscience are often disappointed. The fulminations of a Bishop Cruz are simply no match to the humble stubbornness of Juan de la Cruz. The latter, in going against the Prelate’s instructions, was only following his conscience.

Massive stultification

The last elections, year 2007, with a little more than a hundred fatalities, was not the bloodiest in recent history. There was also much less spending than usual – because it was not a presidential election. There were definitely fewer rallies. But the real winner was TV – indubitably. The channels were raking it in. The multi-million peso smile characterized the anchors and the actors, some of whom have now joined the rest of their colleagues as the new trapos.

As a result of electronic media hegemony, there are now no brakes on the massive stultification of the Filipino voter – making it harder to distinguish between real and reel. Of course, even this will also peter out later, but for now we will fast become mere objects and not really the subjects of history-in-the-making.

Many continue to blame abiding poverty for the vote-buying electoral institution. In the past they were shocked with the revelation of “dagdag-bawas” tactics which were worse than vote-buying. They were election-results buying. In the former, many voters became hand-out “beneficiaries” but in the latter only election officials did.

The impotence of electoral power

The Philippines is a country where no candidate ever loses but merely believes he got cheated of victory. Among serious agents of change, whether of the electoral or armed variety, it is the idea of “capturing state power” which motivates tenacious struggle. Unfortunately, the same idea often merely maintains the illusion that the state is the repository of sovereignty and autonomy and all power when, in fact, as the song goes, “It ain’t necessarily so.”

More people know better, namely, that in the networked world of global and domestic capital, the state is “merely a node in a web of power”, woven between all kinds of agencies, banks, exchanges, corporate headquarters and multilateral institutions.

But you can’t put change agents down. As they witness the destruction and despair wrought by a money system that engulfs every area of people’s lives, all the more urgently do they desire change to come about.

What people rage against-what they want changed

People acutely feel that our social conditions are distressful. Poverty and outright destitution are prevalent and widespread. At least a third of our labor force is unemployed or underemployed. Hunger, malnutrition and diseases stalk the land.

There is grave loss of the value of life forms and ecosystems. Unchecked degradation is the fate of our water, air, and land, of mountains, plains and coasts, of both city and countryside.

Our culture is terribly damaged. Deleterious traits ranging from personal individualism to family-centered exclusivism hinder the attainment of the common good.

And at the core of our multi-systemic malaise is the political system of our present world that has become extremely dysfunctional. Seemingly unchangeable on account of its being the tradition of the decades, this “traditional politics” of our particular world merely worsens our economic, social, cultural and environmental ills.

But it has been the same down the decades the past century: the wealthy and socially influential always end up gaining direct or indirect control of state power and holding captive the branches and agencies of government to further their private individual or family interests with very little or no regard for the common good. Often they do this with effective collaboration and assistance of merely profiteering foreign interests.

Caritas in Veritate

The latest social encyclical understands the situation of countries like the Philippines: “Life in many poor countries is still extremely insecure … and the situation could become worse: hunger still reaps enormous numbers of victims among those who, like Lazarus, are not permitted to take their place at the rich man’s table…What is missing, in other words, is a network of economic institutions capable of guaranteeing regular access to sufficient food and water for nutritional needs, and also capable of addressing the primary needs and necessities ensuing from genuine food crises, whether due to natural causes or political irresponsibility, nationally and internationally. The problem of food insecurity needs to be addressed within a long-term perspective, eliminating the structural causes that give rise to it…” (CIV, 27)

The encyclical then underscores the fact that you cannot say you love your neighbor truly if you do not love your neighbor “politically”. These days you have to be politically involved to show effective love: “To take a stand for the common good is on the one hand to be solicitous for, and on the other hand to avail oneself of, that complex of institutions that give structure to the life of society, juridically, civilly, politically and culturally, making it the pólis, or ‘city’. The more we strive to secure a common good corresponding to the real needs of our neighbors, the more effectively we love them. Every Christian is called to practice this charity, in a manner corresponding to his vocation and according to the degree of influence he wields in the pólis. This is the institutional path — we might also call it the political path — of charity.” (CIV, 7)

Quo vadis, Philippines? We can’t go on in the same direction where each time we need political change we have to either shoot our self in the foot with protracted parliaments of the street or wait even longer for the next election – when most other countries simply make a motion of no confidence and bring about the needed change – as often as possible, if need be.

Public trust in both administration and opposition has hit rock bottom. How, then, can Tweedledum or Tweedledee ever hope for real public support? What a problem we’ve got, and we wonder why we become the butt of jokes and contempt just about everywhere abroad simply because we are a country that cannot get its act together.

“Well, we can get our act together,” more and more people say, “and this is how we’ll do it.”

A Revolutionary Situation

First is to recognize the people’s mood today. Whether we use the term or not, whether we know it or not, the majority of Filipinos are already in what is called a revolutionary mood. This simply means that, given our appalling situation, an ever greater majority of us, from all walks of life, desire radical changes and thorough-going reform in our world. It is a widespread desire to move urgently from Third World status to a First World level of our own type. We cannot accept “more of the same”. We want authentic change.

This widespread desire for real change is increasingly being taken up by more and more organized groups struggling not anymore for a mere change of leaders, but for a change of systems, a change of worlds – from Third to First. If we open our eyes not only to the usual signs but also to the out-of-the-ordinary and the extra-routinary we may see this widespread desire for change embodied in significant groups representing majorities who will no longer consent to be governed the usual trapo way. More and more of us, therefore, are now moving precisely to stop the trapo madness. In that case this is no longer just a revolutionary mood but a revolutionary situation.

If the aspirations of those working for change are not adequately met, a revolutionary crisis will surely come to pass, resulting in a change of systems for better or for worse.

A Typical Third World Country

A country characterized by a backward economy, an unjust society, a damaged culture, a degraded natural environment, and a dysfunctional politics – was often referred to as a typical Third World country. These days, after the Cold War, we see more and more the term “less developed” or “underdeveloped” country, in contrast to the countries of the “developed” world. But “Third World” remains and the Philippines today is one such country in contrast to the more developed countries of the “First World”.

Our inability during our colonial past to put up the required physical and economic infrastructure left us with a backward and impoverishing agriculture and a failure to enter the industrial mode of wealth creation – two features the presence or absence of which determine whether a given economy is still “Third” or already “First” world. For instance, we adopted the kind of land distribution that often led to land destruction and never bothered to go for rural development and rural industrialization.

Quite honestly, many Third Worlders, by and large, suffer from historical amnesia and consequently lack historical sense. In a damaged culture, indolence and contentment with mediocrity are characteristics as common as disregard for law and an attitude of entitlement and impunity.

An aversion to efforts to learn comes side by side with inability to focus, with distractedness, with having a short attention span, and an ability to address tasks mainly in fitful and sporadic styles. The mindset is pre-scientific and consequently impressionistic, imprecise, and impatient with systems and theory and the details that these entail. The attitude is imitative and derivative and often tendentious to extreme subjectivism and relativism. And the “social intentions” from top to bottom are often unabashedly self-centered with very little concern for the country or the common good.

Democracy is nothing if the many do not assert themselves. Of course. The ruling and rich few never part with their privileges voluntarily. Whenever they’ve done so, they did so because of pressures coming from the power of the many – from social democracy.

Therefore, to replace elite democracy with social democracy, and abrogate any semblance of a master-slave relationship in a given society and thus eliminate oligarchy and mass poverty, it is not the exploiters but, rather the exploited, the poor and the disadvantaged who, ironically, must bear the greater challenge for the liberation of both sides from the existing unjust structures. To achieve a new order from out of the old, it is the power of the poor which is the bearer of the new. Hence, the tested formula: organize!

The myriad numbers of small farmers and laborers have one clear advantage in the society’s power equation – there are so many of them. In society which is founded on and maintained by the principle of democracy, the social sector which has the most numbers should be the most heard and followed. But is it? Not necessarily – because the advantage of numbers is clearly a conditional advantage. And the condition is social organization. If the many remain divided, isolated from one another, and disorganized, the following will continue to happen: the ruling few will dominate the many, use them as cheap labor, exploit them in benefits-sharing, transmute them into a bought army of voters who constitute the silenced majority of an elite democracy, systematically deny them access to the capital and patrimony of the nation, and then mis-represent them in all the affairs of state, effectively to pursue policies and programs which militate against their welfare and interests.

Needed: a First World Philippines Initiative

We need a social initiative, a team of leaders, and a program that concretely expresses and pursues the vision of a morally upright, frugally prosperous, healthy and educated country.

This initiative must draw out participants from all parts of the country and from all sectors of the population: the Christian churches, the Islamic communities, other faith communities, the indigenous peoples, the democratic political and social groups and movements, government bureaucracy, academia, the scientific community, business, the professions, civic organizations, the media, artists, the military and police forces.

We do not only need a new leader but a team of leaders of a new kind, who will embody and elicit the conscience, character and competence of our people and facilitate their consensus to pursue a common vision and program. We need a team of leaders who will help us overcome our weaknesses and build up and apply our strengths.

This new breed of leaders should be rooted in the life and aspirations of our people, particularly of the farmer, fisher folk and worker masses, the middle class, patriotic businesspersons, bureaucrats and the uniformed services.

They should be committed to the defense of democracy and be mindful of the basic securities for the survival of our nation. They must seek to imbue people with love of country as shown in their proven readiness to risk life, health, and property so that our nation may survive and our people may enjoy freedom, justice, security and prosperity.

They will be guided and inspired by an authentically humanist world view and embody the religiously plural character of Philippine society.

Over the years we have allowed our politics to degenerate into its present despicable state. We can either let the present situation prevail, or we can take the challenge of creating a new political order to effect fundamental societal transformation.

Building a First World Philippines requires that most if not all citizens join in carrying out specific tasks for nation-building, the more important of which can be grouped into the following six points:

* Reforming, renewing and strengthening the state
* Effecting fundamental political reforms in the political system and structure of government
* Promoting our basic securities as a nation, namely, defence, internal security, food security, water, energy, environmental security
* Alleviating and eventually eliminating poverty
* Protecting the welfare and advancing the interests of overseas Filipinos worldwide
* Carrying out a foreign policy that integrates the promotion of both national interest and the universal common good.

A new global economic context

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Australia’s social democratic leader recently said: “From time to time in human history there occur events of a truly seismic significance, events that mark a turning point between one epoch and the next, when one orthodoxy is overthrown and another takes its place. The significance of these events is rarely apparent as they unfold: it becomes clear only in retrospect, when observed from the commanding heights of history. By such time it is often too late to act to shape the course of such events and their effects on the day-to-day working lives of men and women and the families they support. There is a sense that we are now living through just such a time.”

In Rudd’s view, which has become that of many, the global financial crisis has demonstrated already that it is no respecter of persons, or of particular industries, or of national boundaries. “It is a crisis which is simultaneously individual, national and global. It is a crisis of both the developed and the developing world. It is a crisis which is at once institutional, intellectual and ideological.”

George Soros had said that “the salient feature of the current financial crisis is that it was not caused by some external shock … the crisis was generated by the system itself”.

Now comes Benedict XVI, in his great social encyclical, who said: “Business management cannot concern itself only with the interests of the proprietors, but must also assume responsibility for all the other stakeholders who contribute to the life of the business: the workers, the clients, the suppliers of various elements of production, the community of reference. In recent years a new cosmopolitan class of managers has emerged, who are often answerable only to the shareholders generally consisting of anonymous funds which de facto determine their remuneration.” (CIV, 40)

“The time has come,” to go back to Prime Minister Rudd, “off the back of the current crisis, to proclaim that the great neo-liberal experiment of the past 30 years has failed, that the emperor has no clothes.”

Given all this on a global scale, why is the Philippine economy still surviving – or is it? In the current crisis, it may seem only tall buildings collapse. The Philippine economy, admittedly underdeveloped, is not one such tall building. We certainly do not export as much of our production as our erstwhile more dynamic neighbors have been doing. What we’ve been exporting are warm bodies that sends back to us billions upon billions of precious foreign exchange that fund the SM malling of the nation.

We can yet be the best Third World country around. But is that all we really want? “More than forty years after Populorum Progressio

,” Pope Benedict laments, some areas of the world are “still living in a situation of deprivation comparable to that which existed at the time of Paul VI, and in some cases one can even speak of deterioration… More than forty years later, we must acknowledge how difficult this journey has been, both because of new forms of colonialism and continued dependence on old and new foreign powers and because of grave irresponsibility within the very countries [concerned]”. (CIV, 33)

Change is inevitable. But the more we change, the more we stay the same unless we go for authentic change and build in earnest a truly developed First World Philippines? Should we not give our people a chance? Magaling ang Pilipino: well, then, let’s move together as one Kilos Galíng Pilipinas now!

A Philippine Economic Review

The original article had the title “A Philippine Economic Review”. This same article was published by Impact but with a new title : “How bad really is the Philippine economy?” Vol. 43, No. 7 (July 2009).

A Philippine Economic Review

By

Charles Avila

The Lost Decades

At a U.N. Conference on Financing for Development last December in Doha, Qatar, Member States requested the General Assembly to organize a meeting “at the highest level” – a United Nations summit- which they scheduled for 23-26 June 2009 in London (UK).

The aim was to identify both emergency and long-term responses to mitigate the impact of the crisis – increasingly perceived to be the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression – especially on vulnerable populations. The hope thereafter was to initiate a needed dialogue on the transformation of the international financial architecture, taking into account the needs and concerns of all countries of the world.

Assessments of the impact on the ongoing economic crisis highlighted the deteriorating social and political fallout in the least developed countries and middle-income countries as well. Prospects for an early recovery have faded, forcing countries to prepare for a prolonged downturn in trade, investment and employment.

The stark reality is that the situation in the world’s developing countries – which contributed least to the crisis and yet are the ones most severely affected – has led some economists to warn of “lost decades for development” which could have catastrophic consequences for rich and poor countries alike. It seems to be bad news all around.

Filipinos still upbeat on the economy ?

Given all this, many UN Summiteers were incredulously surprised, if not shocked, when told that 44 percent of Filipinos nationwide believed that while the economy was still weak, it would soon start to recover. In the most recent 2,000-people survey by global market research firm Synovate forty-three percent of respondents even said that they had earned more in the last six months! And twelve percent of Metro Manila respondents said they were actually spending more on luxury items. In fact, the “Malling” of the country goes on unabated.

This is not to say that the current economic situation has not impacted the lives of everyday Filipinos. All across the Philippines, according to the same survey, people have become more conscious when it comes to spending, with close to two-thirds (or 59 percent) paying more attention to prices of food items before making a purchase. In addition, high-tech gadgets and branded goods topped the list of items that people from Metro Manila avoided, while over a quarter (28 percent) from Mindanao said they were giving up on outside meals with friends, choosing cheaper dining options instead. People are definitely making changes to their spending habits.

Despite the worrying trend, however, the survey interpreted the majority of people to be generally upbeat, with over three quarters (86 percent) agreeing that they will always find a way to afford some items that make them feel good.

But aren’t more people losing their jobs?

How many people do you know who have not lost their jobs? How many do you know who have? Some private survey groups say one thing. The official statisticians of the State say another. Being in some measure part of a globalized economy, let us hear from the ILO, the United Nations’ International Labor Office. The ILO puts out an annual Global Employment Trends report (GET).

The report says global unemployment in 2009 could increase over 2008 by a range of 18 million to 30 million workers, and more than 50 million if the situation continues to deteriorate. Giving a report it called “realistic, not alarmist” the ILO said that last scenario of 50 million unemployed would easily mean some 200 million workers, mostly in developing economies, could be pushed into extreme poverty.

The number of working poor – people who are unable to earn enough to lift themselves and their families above the US$2 per person, per day, poverty line, may rise up to 1.4 billion, or 45 % of all the world’s employed.

“In 2009, the proportion of people in vulnerable employment – either contributing family workers or own-account workers who are less likely to benefit from safety nets that guard against loss of incomes during economic hardship – could rise considerably in the worst case scenario to reach a level of 53 % of the employed population,” the report said realistically, not trying to be alarmist.

Meanwhile in the Philippines, in its latest survey, the Social Weather Stations (SWS) reported last May that unemployment among Filipinos has risen to a record high of 34.2 percent. This would translate into 14 million Filipinos who had no jobs during the first three months of the year. Of that number, some 2.9 million had lost their jobs within the previous three months. Of these 2.9 million, 13 percent voluntarily left their old jobs, while 12 percent were retrenched—9 percent were laid off and 3 percent had unrenewed previous contracts.

On the other hand, for contrasts, the National Statistics Office (NSO) survey showed that the unemployment rate rose by only 7 percent. Although a state agency, the integrity and independence of the NSO has yet to be seriously impugned.

The SWS survey on unemployment was conducted from February 20 to 23 using face-to-face interviews of 1,200 adults in Metro Manila, with the balance spread in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. Margins of error are plus or minus 2.5 percent for national percentages and plus or minus 6 percent for area percentages. The NSO, for its part, had a much bigger number of respondents at 50,000 individuals.

A third think-tank voice, IBON foundation, said that “the real unemployment rate is not 7.7 percent as officially reported but likely to be at least 11.2 percent.” IBON estimates that some 2.5% of the working age population 15 years and over should still be considered part of the labor force, which implies an additional 1.5 million jobless on top of the 2.9 million officially reported– for a total of roughly 4.3 million. The officially-released figures already show an increase of 180,000 jobless Filipinos, which was reported to have reached 2.9 million in the latest labor force survey. Combined with the 6.2 million underemployed, it means that there were at least 10.6 million Filipinos jobless or otherwise looking for more work and pay in early 2009, per IBON interpretation.

As many Filipinos are fond of saying these days, “whaaatever…” Between NSO and IBON, it may be merely a matter of definition. Whom do you include in “unemployed” and “underemployed”? Between NSO and SWS it could be additionally a matter of respondent coverage. Among all of them, there is no question: a good number of Filipinos are looking for jobs, have been out of a job, have given up looking, or are precariously hanging on to a dear job by their very finger prints.

Is work in the First World drying up?

Quite relevant to our job situation is overseas opportunity. A team of writers for the Wall Street Journal recently remarked that full migration numbers for most countries are only available after a long lag, and so don’t yet capture all the effects of today’s economic crisis. But anecdotal reports and data from government ministries and outside organizations already indicate that “the flow of immigrants from poor to wealthier countries is slowing significantly for the first time in decades while more people are returning home.” Any significant number of Filipinos with these returnees – it would be quite relevant to ask. The answer is not yet clear.

Generally, however, it seems to be a fact that the biggest turnaround in migration flows since the Great Depression has now begun. Unemployment is rising in the First World, and backlashes against foreign workers are mounting. Of course, these migratory shifts will have to have profound consequences for First World nations as well, especially in places where domestic populations aren’t growing fast enough to fill jobs or pay for social needs. And in the Third World countries of migrant origin, remittances sent home by workers are also slowing, meaning less income — and potentially, less growth.

The World Bank foresees worker remittances declining by up to 8% this year, after rising to $305 billion in 2008, or more than double the level of 2002. In this area, the Philippine share has always been quite significant and it is still unsettled whether our remittances will also decline, following world trends.

Was it not only recently when economists and policymakers eloquently argued that widespread labor movement is a win-win because it boosts opportunities for people from Third World countries while giving First World employers more options for labor, allowing them to increase efficiency and keep costs low? That, in turn, can keep inflation in check and contribute to higher standards of living. Can these economists keep up the argument when unemployment surges, income gaps widen and home-grown workers increasingly view foreigners as competitors for scarce jobs?

Given all these, is then the Overseas Filipino Worker unique – uniquely skillful and charming? It is an egoist observation based on the fact that last year did not see his deployment decline or his remittances diminish.

According to the BSP Governor: “Robust remittance flows have been shored up by strong overseas demand for Filipino skills, and the greater availability of expanded money transfer services to overseas Filipinos and their beneficiaries.” The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) also said that the number of Filipinos deployed abroad grew by 25.9 percent to 1.005 million last year compared with 798,731 the year before. And last year they sent home $14.4 billion, equivalent to 10 percent of gross domestic product. This year Manila is projecting remittances to exceed $16.4 billion, despite the crisis which could make the figure difficult to achieve.

What about FOREX reserves?

The measure of a country’s ability to service obligations and engage in commercial transactions with the rest of the world is called its Gross International Reserves. The Philippines’ GIR registered a new historic high in May: $39.5 billion – keeping the Philippines sufficiently liquid despite the lingering global economic crunch.

Third World nations like ours have been urged to tap the international credit market to borrow and support their BOP and GIR as the lingering global turmoil is seen creating pressure on their liquidity positions. The BSP, however, said the Philippines need not borrow, noting that the country’s foreign exchange liquidity was still relatively healthy. The GIR in May was estimated to cover at least six months’ worth of imports.

The BSP said the gradual revival of market confidence in the Philippines was helping increase the amount of foreign portfolio investments entering the country. Increasing inflow of investments in securities and equities to the Philippines was partly a reason the peso has strengthened somewhat in May than the previous month. After hovering mostly in the 48 level, the peso moved into the 47-to-a-dollar territory last month.

What about inflation?

Are we in great danger of having more and more money chasing fewer and fewer goods? What the monetary authorities have said is they expect inflation to hit bottom in the third quarter this year and slightly pick up in the following months to hit an average of 3.4 percent by the end of the year, within the government’s 2.5-4.5 percent target in 2009.

Consumer price index rose 3.7 percent in May from a year earlier, a Reuters poll of 12 economists showed, marking the slowest annual rise since November 2007 when inflation was at 3.2 percent. The central bank had forecast May annual inflation to come in between 3.3-4.2 percent from 4.8 percent in April.

Economists said the inflation drop was due to a stronger currency and base effects from rapid increases in commodity prices in the same period in 2008.They logically expect the central bank to deliver its sixth consecutive interest rate cut at its next policy meeting on July 9 to lift economic growth, and probably mark the end of its current rate easing cycle that began in December.

The BSP policy was to bolster the banking system, instituting measures to provide liquidity where needed to support the functioning of the credit markets. Banks were exhorted to continue lending freely and boldly – to show the public that there’s money in our system. It does seem true that the impact of the global financial crisis on the Philippine banking system was muted due to its relatively minimal exposure to the affected financial institutions abroad – a statement that may not have been taken as a compliment a year and a half ago!

What about the real economy?

If the news in the banking system is not all that bad, how bad is it in the real economy? Are monetary policy responses to restore confidence in credit markets ever enough to mitigate the effects of the crisis on the economy? The sum of the value of goods produced and services rendered within an economy in a given period is generally considered the most common measure of an economy and it is called the GDP or Gross Domestic Product. Economists cite the drop in our GDP growth from 7.2 percent to 4.6 percent in 2008.

Moody’s Economy.com

, the research unit of credit-rating firm Moody’s Investors Service, said the Philippine economy most likely shrank 1.2 percent in the first three months of the year from the last quarter of 2008. They see the full-year growth at only 2.9 percent – slower than the government’s official economic growth target of between 3.1 and 4.1 percent. The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) said earlier the economy needed to grow by at least 7 percent over several years in order to reduce poverty incidence.

Weak external conditions such as the steep decline in exports outweighed whatever positive factors the domestic economy had during the first three months. In the first quarter, exports plunged 36.8 percent to $7.92 billion year-on-year. This was due largely to the decline in exports of electronics, the country’s major dollar earner accounting for about half of total export revenues.

Coconut oil exports slid 72.6 percent in April from a year earlier, marking its 10th consecutive month of decline. The Philippines expects exports of coconut oil, which is used in food, cosmetics and biodiesel, to dip to 835,000 tons this year from 847,626 tons in 2008, on soft global demand as well as its increasing use as feedstock by local biodiesel producers. Actual shipments slumped to 31,638 tons last April from 115,632 tons in April 2008.

Besides the drop in exports, the move of some producers to cut output signaled a contraction of the economy on a quarterly basis. Fearful that weak demand will persist, producers rapidly cut back on staffing and investment. If inventory levels have not fallen sharply, further production and investment cutbacks may be forthcoming. The National Statistics Office reported recently that factory output, measured in terms of volume of production, fell at an annual rate of 12.7 percent in March and 20.1 percent in February.

What about our debt burden?

It is almost settled doctrine that the current crisis demands unabashed government spending. But the Philippine government may not have enough flexibility to shore up spending to a level necessary to achieve its economic-growth target for the year, set at between 3.1 and 4.1 percent. Fitch Ratings, the credit ratings agency, has already said the government debt, at nearly P4 trillion, was still high and a drastic increase in public spending could lead to a worrisome fiscal condition.

The latest is that the economy plunged to a decade-low growth of 0.4 percent in the first quarter despite the expansion in bank lending, and notwithstanding the fact that remittance flows have held up reasonably well so far. A steady rise in bank lending should sustain, if not accelerate, the growth of the economy. Through all that, it seems it is the high debt burden, along with possible inflationary pressures, that’s weighing down the fiscal and monetary policies of the government and affecting the country’s growth.

Systemic Collapse

The radical economist, Paul L. Quintos, quite perceptively wrote last year that the current global financial crisis — with the US economy at its epicenter — is merely the latest and so far most severe in a series of financial crises that have erupted since the 1970s.

At the most basic one finds the capitalist system itself to be in fundamental contradiction between social production which enables great strides in productivity on one hand, and the private ownership of the means of production which ensures that only a few profit from production by exploiting the many. The contradiction inevitably leads to crises of overproduction relative to the capacity of people to buy the productive system’s commodities and products. Before long, real production that cannot realize enough profits gives rise to shadow financial products that enables some to make tons of moneys until reality catches up with the shadows, derivatives and other profitable mental figments and thereby manifest real crisis.

Said Quintos: In 1980, the value of the world’s financial stock was roughly equal to world GDP, itself bloated. By 1993, it was double the size, and by the end of 2005, it had risen to 316% — more than three times world GDP. Government and private debt securities accounted for more than half of the overall growth in the global financial assets from 2000-2004 – which indicated the role of leverage or debt in driving this process. In 2004, daily derivatives trading amounted to $5.7 trillion while the daily turnover in the foreign exchange market was $1.9 trillion. Together they added up to $7.6 trillion in daily turnover of just two types of portfolio capital flows, exceeding the annual value of global merchandise exports by $300 billion.

“While the value of financial assets is ultimately grounded in the value created by the working class in the process of production in the real economy and cannot [should not]diverge too far from it, asset bubbles can form for a period of time driven by ‘irrational exuberance’ (in the words of Alan Greenspan). The positive expectations of financial speculators feed on each other, bidding up asset prices in a seemingly endless virtuous cycle. But like all ponzi schemes, reality eventually takes over and all it takes is one negative development, e.g. rising home foreclosures, to reverse expectations and send the entire house of cards crashing down.” And we are told that is what happened. The capitalist system collapsed.

Yes, capitalism became dysfunctional but capitalists now want socialism for themselves and dump capitalism on the poor. In short, said Quintos, monopoly capital is using the present crisis to appropriate more of the people’s (real) wealth, erode and press down on wages and social spending, lay off workers, promote precarious employment, tear up workers rights, clamp down on workers concerted actions and intensify the exploitation of the working class.

And it affected the Philippines as early as last year, said U.P.Professor B. Diokno: “In 2007, 924,000 new jobs were created; in 2008, the number was down to 530,000. This level of job generation is unacceptable for an economy that is expected to generate between 1.0 to 1.5 million new jobs every year.”

According to Diokno, a responsive jobs creation program should address five sets of unemployed and underemployed workers: those who are currently unemployed (2.7 million), those who are underemployed (6.6 million), those entering the labor force (1 to 1.5 million), those who will lose their jobs at home, and finally, Filipino overseas workers who will lose their jobs abroad.

The government, for its part, unveiled a broad spending program called Philippine Economic Resiliency Plan (PERP) worth PhP330 billion. It consists of the following:

* PhP160 billion in incremental government allocations;
* PhP100 billion for government corporations, financial institutions and the private sector;
* PhP40 billion for corporate and individual income tax breaks; and
* PhP30 billion for temporary additional benefits from the social security institutions – Government Service Insurance System and Social Security System – and Philhealth.

Some say this stimulus package may not be large enough to reverse the anticipated sharp slowdown of the Philippine economy. Others say it may even be grossly overstated. To be sure, unless people-powered participation is organized by change agents of all persuasions, the plan will be short of details and long in sub rosaappropriations and last minute looting leading to worse economic misery and heightened social unrest – or, maybe, at last, to real change.

-30-

What the Life and Death of Danny Yang Mean to Us

What the Life and Death of Danny Yang Mean to Us

by Comrade Romeo E. Caylo, Jr.

29 June 2009

Danny Yang DEDICATED HIS LIFE AND DEATH FOR OTHER POLITICAL AND COMMUNITY LEADERS AND FOR THE COMMON TAO—for you and for me.

He showed us how to live and die: That is the social meaning of his life and death.

At one time in 2006, in a meeting with comrades in the Partido Demokratiko-Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP), his political party, he said, “Kailangan ng kilusan natin ang taong di natatakot magbuwis ng buhay.” At the time of his death, he was the General Secretary of the PDSP, the Party of the social democrats.

Danny was a social democrat. Social democracy, according to Sheri Berman, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Columbia University, “represented a full-fledged alternative to both Marxism and liberalism that had at its core a distinctive belief in the primacy of politics and communitarianism”.

Marxism-Leninism is the kind of communism prevalent in the Philippines. This kind of communists say that when they control the lives of the people, the workers can have more food, medical care, and shelter. In other words, the workers can satisfy their material needs at the expense of the individual’s and society’s freedom.

Danny Yang believed that you can’t sacrifice freedom for material wealth, for in doing so, you end up with neither freedom nor wealth. He also didn’t believe that in a democratic society, you have to resort to violence to achieve your ends. So he organized free communities in the whole of Laguna, even going to parts of Batangas and other adjacent provinces. He made the world of the communists smaller in those areas

He was so convincing that he even converted communists or communist supporters to become social democrats. One of them was Fatima Abubakar-Sevilla, a former leader of BAYAN. But when you block the communist path, you may end up dead. Killers strongly suspected to be a New People’s Army liquidation group killed Fatima in June 2007.

Liberal capitalism in the Philippines dresses itself politically as traditional politics to maintain the status quo. Traditional politicians use money and influence and power to get the loyalty of political liders and to buy votes. Traditional politicians use money and influence and power for more money and influence and power for themselves, for their families, and for their clans.

But Danny Yang used the small amount of money, but the deep respect and influence that he commanded and the great persuasive power that he had, for the welfare of his friends, of his supporters, and most of all, of the people—who are actually one and the same. That is what “primacy of politics and communitarianism” means. It means using political power to transform for the better the living conditions of communities, which is the same as pursuing the common good.

Two instances prove this. In one instance, he used his power to continuously advocate against illegal drugs and gambling. These drugs and this gambling not only destroy the bodies of the young and the spirit of the weak. These drugs and this gambling also destroy the lives of people around. Danny Yang went against the drug lords and the gambling lords, the destroyers of society. Drug lords and gambling lords are also known to kill people who block their path.

In another instance, he used his power to prevent the dislocation of urban settlers. These settlers were being evicted without proper resettlement, to pave the way for a commercial building. It was easy to succumb to the wishes of the rich, but Danny Yang did not succumb because he loved the poor and marginalized.

Were Danny still living this earthly and passing form of life, and were he the mayor of San Pablo City or governor of Laguna, no doubt he would use his power so that the people could have more and better food, health care, housing, education, roads and other infrastructure., and so that they would be free to do what they want within the ample limits of the common good—freedom that is limited only by the freedom and rights of others.

But the killers snapped short the fulfillment of his potentials, or so they thought that they did. These killers could be the communists, or the politicians threatened by his popularity, or the drug lords or the gambling lords. These killers could also be at the service of the collusion of any of these socially destructive forces.

Along with Danny, there also died Brando de los Santos and Romulo Barcenas, PDSP members too, who shared in his vision and work for the people.

The killers pumped a bullet into Danny’s right leg so he could no longer go to the houses of his constituents or go up the stage to advocate his life-giving programs. They pumped a bullet into his side straight through his guts, thinking that his courage to organize against them would die with him. They pumped a bullet through his head so he could no longer smile to his friends, hug his children, kiss his wife, and think of freedom and a better life for his country.

The killers didn’t just kill a man. They killed a courageous leader, a dear friend, a loving father and husband, a dedicated patriot.

Danny Yang often raised a rose with his clenched fist. All over the world, the fist-rose is the symbol of social democrats for the fight for freedom and progress. The rose of Danny Yang has fallen. His wife Angie is picking it up.

The death of Danny screams for justice. It also screams for freedom and progress, his causes. Let social democrats all over the country raise thousands of clenched fists and roses, and follow this through with persevering work for the people, who long for freedom and progress, for a better life for themselves and their descendants.

Since the time of Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio, the people have longed for freedom—this longing is not for social democrats alone. Since the time of Rizal and Bonifacio, the people have longed for progress—this longing is not for social democrats alone.

John Donne writes, “…any man’s death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.” You have your choice; I have mine. You may shrug your shoulders and leave. Or you may weep for your beloved country. Or you may gnash your teeth, clench and raise your left fist, and resume the work of life-giving social transformation! ONWARD TO FREEDOM AND PROGRESS!

KR/29 June 2009

Quezon City