makati scene...PM in action!

tanong sagot tungkol sa polikal na sitwasyon

Tanong-Sagot Hinggil sa Kasalukuyang Sitwasyong Pampulitika

Ano ang isyung pinag-ugatan ng bagong krisis ng rehimeng GMA?

Ang paglalantad ni Jun Lozada hinggil sa kickback at katiwaliang kakabit ng kontrata sa pagitan ng gobyerno ng Pilipinas at kompanyang Intsik na ZTE para ilatag ang National Broadband Network (NBN) ang nagbunsod ng panibagong bwelo ng mga pagkilos laban sa rehimeng GMA hanggang sa panawagan para sa kanyang pagbibitiw at pagpapatalsik. Si Jun Lozada ay isang consultant ng NEDA na nagsuri sa maanomalyang kontrata na ito. Consultant din siya sa iba pang proyekto tulad ng South Rail dahil pinagkakatiwalaang kaibigan siya ng dating NEDA secretary na si Neri, at aniya kahit ito ay may balot din ng anomalya. Mayroon siyang “personal knowledge” o tuwirang impormasyon tungkol sa kickback at katiwalian tungkol dito kaya’t kapani-paniwala ang kanyang paglalahad at paglalantad. Pinagtitibay naman ng paglalahad ni Jun Lozada ang nauna nang paglalantad ni Joey de Venecia (anak ng dating House Speaker Joe de Venecia) at mismo ni Neri (bago niya itinikom ang kanyang bibig sa iba pang detalye) na may natanggap na kickback si Abalos bilang broker ng kontrata at ang kanyang tangkang panunuhol para mailusot ang kontrata. Katunayan, ang pagsisikap ng rehimeng GMA na busalan ang bibig ni Jun Lozada, sa pamamagitan ng tangkang panunupol at aktwal na pagkidnap, ay patunay ng mabigat na testimonya at ebidensyang kaya niyang ilabas.

Bakit maanomalya ang kontratang NBN-ZTE?

Ani Jun Lozada, umaabot sa $130 million ang patong sa halaga ng $329 milyong kontrata. Sa madaling salita, nasa 40% ng kabuuang halaga ng kontrata ang dagdag bunga ng kickback at katiwalian. Ito ay halagang babayaran ng mamamayan subalit hindi pakikinabangan sapagkat mapupunta lang sa bulsa ng mga taong naging tagapamagitan at taga-apruba. Diumano, bilang broker ng kontrata, ang dating Comelec chairman na si Abalos at si Mike Arroyo (o Jose Pidal na matatawag) ang humihingi at tatanggap ng ganito kalaking kickback pero siyempre babahaginan nila ang ibang tao na kailangan ang pagsang-ayon para mailusot ang kontrata. Ito ang dahilan kung bakit may tangkang panunuhol kay Neri para sumang-ayon na diumano ay nag-ulat kay GMA sa bagay na ito. Ito rin ang dahilan kung bakit inaareglo nila si Joey de Venecia na kakumpitensya sa kontrata sapagkat may sariling kompanya na nais magsagawa ng proyekto. Pero bukod sa kickback at katiwalian, ang kontratang NBN-ZTE ay halimbawa ng anomalyadong proyekto na pinapasok ng gobyerno sa mga dayuhan na disbentahe para sa mamamayan. Pinautang ang Pilipinas ng China pero gagamitin lang ang pondong ito para bayaran ang ZTE na isang kompanyang Intsik. Ang utang na ito na nagkakahalaga ng $329 milyon (may 40% patong) ay sovereign guarantee o ginarantiyahan ng gobyerno na babayaran. Pero sa totoo lang, manggagaling ang pambayad sa bulsa ng mamamayan at manggagawa na pinakamalaking pinagmumulan ng buwis. Sa madaling salita, ginigisa tayo sa sariling mantika habang tumitiba ng tubo ang isang dayuhang kompanya.

Bakit nabulgar ang anomalyadong kontrata na ito?

Kung nagkaaregluhan ang lahat ng partido sa tiwaling kontrata ng NBN-ZTE ay maaring hindi na sumingaw ang baho nito. Subalit bunga ng kumpetisyon sa pagitan ng nagtutunggaling mga paksyon ng naghaharing-uri ay nalantad ang kalokohang ito. Sanhi naman ito ng pagtatangka ng pamilyang Arroyo, sa pangunguna ni Mike Arroyo, na kopohin ang malalaking kontratang mapagkakakitaan hindi lang ng tubo kundi ng kickback. Natural na pumalag si Joey de Venecia , o mas tamang sabihin, si Joe de Venecia, na naitsapwera sa kita sa bilyun-bilyon pisong kontratang ito. Kaya’t ibinulgar ni Joey de Venecia ang anomalya sa hearing sa Senado, napilitang ikumpirma ni Neri ang tangkang panunuhol sa kanya at hanggang sa hindi napigilan si Jun Lozada na tumestigo sa katotohanan. Totoo namang away sa pagitan ng mga magnanakaw ang rason kung bakit nalantad ang anomalya. Pero di man malilinis ang budhi at kamay ng mga naglalantad ngayon ng katiwalian sa rehimeng GMA, hindi ibig sabihin ay hindi ito totoo. Sapagkat sangot sila rito, mas mabigat ang impormasyong alam nila sa mga kalokohan.

Ano ang kinalaman ng mga manggagawa at maralita sa isyung ito?

Malaki ang epekto ng kontratang NBN-ZTE sa buhay ng manggagawa at maralita. Kung natuloy ang kontratang ito ay walang ibang magbabayad ng perang uutangin para ipambayad nito kundi ang mamamayan. Kung natuloy ang kontratang ito ay babayaran ng taumbayan ang buong halaga ng isang proyektong sobrang laki ang patong sa anyo ng kickback. Bilang halimbawa ng grabidad ng katiwalian sa pamahalaan at epekto nito sa mamamayan, noong 2006 ang kabuuang halaga na nakolekta mula sa withholding taxes ng manggagawa at VAT mula sa mamamayan ay nasa P270 bilyon o 42% ng kabuuang buwis. Sa kabilang banda, ang nawawaldas na pera ng gobyerno ay umaabot ng 40% sang-ayon kay Jun Lozada at sa pag-aaral ng World Bank. Malaki ang taya ng uring manggagawa sa isyung ito. Ang buwis ng manggagawa ay ninanakaw lang ng mga trapo. Pumapasok ang gobyerno sa mga kontrata kahit di ito pakikinabangan ng mamamayan pero dahil paborable ito sa iilan. Hindi man natuloy ang kontratang NBN-ZTE dahil maagang nabuking at nailantad, patunay at ehemplo ito ng kabulukan ng gobyernong GMA at ng kasalukuyang sistema. Katunayan, pinalala ito ng pagtatangka ng rehimeng GMA na pagtakpan ang katotohanan sa pamamagitan ng pagkidnap kay Jun Lozada, paghaharang ng testimonya sa Senado, at iba pa. Obligadong madinig ang boses at tindig ng uring manggagawa ang isyung ito kaysa monopolyohin lang ng isang paksyon ng naghaharing uri at ng panggitnang uri ang panawagan para sa “katotohanan.”

Ano ang katangian ng kasalukuyang krisis ng rehimeng GMA?

Hindi ito ang unang iskandalo na yumanig sa rehimeng GMA. Sapagkat sagad-sa-buto ang katiwalian, sa kabila ng katotohanang iniluklok ng isang pag-aalsa laban sa pangungurakot sa gobyerno, hindi maiiwasang sumingaw ang malansang amoy ng mga anomalya at pumukaw ng pagkundena ng mamamayan. At sapagkat, nakaantabay ang mga karibal na paksyon ng naghaharing uri, napapaypayan ang paglalantad at nagagamit para sa destabilisasyon ng rehimeng GMA. Muli, hindi porke’t ginagamit ng trapong oposisyon ang isyu ay hindi totoo ang ibinulgar na kickback at katiwalian. Natural lang na sumiklab ang ganitong krisis bunga ng likas na katiwalian ng rehimeng GMA at ng kasalukuyang sistema. Pero napag-aapoy ang isyu dahil sa maigting na pasyunal na alitan sa hanay ng naghaharing uri. Kaya naman mula sa simpleng akusasyon ng katiwalian ay humahantong ang panawagan hanggang sa pagbitiw o pagbagsak sa rehimeng GMA.

Ano na ang paninindigan ng iba’t ibang uri sa krisis na ito?

Sa simula ng pagsiklab ng panibagong krisis pampulitika, ang panawagang ibinabandila ng trapong oposisyon, mga personaheng burgis at ang kaladkad nilang uring petiburgis ay “truth and accountability” o “paglalantad ng katotohanan.” Gayong mistulang malambot ang pormulasyon, ito ay pagbanat sa mga pagtatangka ng rehimeng GMA na ikubli ang katotohanan sa lumalalang akusasyon ng katiwalian sa pamamagitan ng panunuhol, pananakot at panunupil. Tumutugma ito sa inihahaing inisyal na mga porma ng pagkilos ng burgis na oposisyon sa taumbayan—misa sa simbahan at symposium sa mga kolehiyo. Pero umigting na ito sa tuwirang panawagan nila ng pagbibitiw sa pwesto ni GMA at ng mas militanteng anyo ng protesta gaya ng noise barrage. Isang kalkuladong hakbang ito ng eskalasyon ng pakikibaka na nakasalalay sa taya nilang kahandaan ng mamamayan sa ganitong mas mapangahas na panawagan at pagkilos. Sa konkreto ito ang mga panawagang dala-dala ni Cory Aquino at ang mga grupong Black & White at Makati Business Club na kumakatawan sa isang paksyon ng burgis na oposisyon. Hindi man hayagan pang ibinabandila subalit payag sila sa constitutional succession bilang pinakamabilis na resolusyon ng krisis pampulitika at pagbabalik sa “kaayusan” matapos patalsikin si GMA. Kahawig ng paninindigan subalit may krusyal na diperensya bunga ng naiibang interes pampulitika ang panawagan ng pampulitikang oposisyon na kinakatawan ng UNO. Hindi sila sang-ayon sa pagpalit ni Kabayan bilang pangulo sapagkat hindi nila ito tao kaya’t mas ang pinalulutang nilang kahilingan ay snap election yamang nasa kanilang grupo ang mga trapong may sapat na popularidad para manalo sa isang halalan sa pagkapangulo. May kaibhan pa rin ang posisyon—bunga ng pansariling interes pampulitika—ng dalawang pangunahing kandidato sa halalan sa 2010. Kung tutuusin disbentahe para kina Roxas at Villar ang magbitiw o ma-impeach si GMA sapagkat mangangahulugan ito ng pagpalit ni Kabayan na magbibigay ng bentahe sa kanya pagdating ng eleksyong 2010. Kaya’t maingat ang dalawa sa pagbitaw ng panawagan sa resignation o impeachment, at sa halip mas interesado sa tuluy-tuloy na pag-uk-ok sa kredibilidad ni GMA para papurulin ang bisa ng basbas nito sa kandidato ng administrasyon sa 2010. May dalawang malaking suliranin ang mga paksyon ng burgis na oposisyon. Una, ito ang pagkakahati ng naghaharing uri, prinsipal na ang uring kapitalista at ang pamunuan ng simbahang katoliko, sa panawagan na patalsikin si GMA. Bukod sa hindi makatindig bilang solidong bloke ang “negosyo” at ang “simbahan”—at kung gayon napapapurol ang anumang panawagan sa taumbayan—substansyal na seksyon ng naghaharing uri ang tutol sa pagpapatalsik o ayaw pang pumosisyon gaya halimbawa ng oportunistang mga trapo sa LGU’s. Maraming dahilan subalit matimbang ang argumentong mas mahusay na “manager” ng “masiglang ekonomiya” si GMA kaysa Kabayan at ang pag-aalala sa istabilidad ng sistema kung magpapalit ng pangulo labas sa balangkas ng eleksyon. Ang imperyalismong US ay walang binibitawang pahayag kung pabor o tutol sa pagpapalit, senyales sa isang banda, ng pag-aatubili mismo ng naghaharing uri, at sa kabilang banda, ng siguristang pagtataya sa parehong kampo ng nagbabangayang mga elitista. Ikalawa, problema ng burgis na oposisyon ay ang pag-aalinlangan ng malawak na mamamayan na lumahok sa mga pagkilos at protesta upang obligahin si GMA na magbitiw sa pwesto.

7. Bakit nag-aatubili ang mamamayan sa pagsama sa mga pagkilos?

Walang dudang diskuntento ang sambayanang Pilipino sa hirap ng buhay at kabulukan ng pamahalaan kaya’t pabor sila sa pagpapatalsik sa rehimeng GMA. Subalit hindi matumbasan ng kahandaang kumilos ang kamulatang ito. Ang pagbubukas sa panawagan ng pagbibitiw ay makikita sa paulit-ulit na survey at sa pagsuporta sa mga pagkilos labas sa mismong paglahok sa protesta. Gayong maraming pinag-uugatan ang pag-aalinlangang ito na sumama sa mga pagkilos, hindi mahirap paniwalaan ang katwirang pangunahin itong nagmumula sa pagkadismaya sa naunang mga Edsa na walang inihatid na pagbabago sa buhay ng ordinaryong tao. Sa isang banda, ang pagkamulat na ito ng mamamayan sa mga kakulangan at kamalian ng naunang mga Edsa ay magandang pagbatayan ng mas sulong na paninindigan tungo sa pagbabago ng sistema sa halip na pagpapalit lang ng pangulo. Subalit bunga ng pangkalahatang demoralisasyon sa bisa ng protesta at ng karanasan ng kabiguan ng mga pakikibaka na magkamit ng tagumpay, mas paatras ang reaksyon at timpla ng mamamayan. Mas namamayani sa kanila sa ngayon ang kanya-kanyang diskarte upang iahon ang kabuhayan sa halip na sumandig sa sama-samang pagkilos bilang lunas sa kahirapan. Kahit ang burgis na oposisyon ay ramdam ang suliraning ito kaya naman mas nakatuon ang kanilang “edukasyon, propaganda at ahitasyon” sa mga kabataan, partikular sa mga istudyante ng mga elitistang paaralan. May pagtaya sila na ang seksyong ito ng populasyon ang handang magmobilisa sa kanilang burgis na alternatiba ng constitutional succession at kayang ikomand na kumilos ng mga pari at madreng administrasyon ng elitistang mga kolehiyo.

Ano ang dapat na paninindigan ng uring manggagawa?

Dapat makiisa ang uring manggagawa sa lumalaganap na kilusang protesta laban sa katiwalian at para sa pagpapatalsik kay GMA. Ang rehimen ni GMA ay kaaway ng uring manggagawa sapagkat sagad-sagarin itong promotor at implementor ng imperyalistang globalisasyon na dumedelubyo sa kabuhayan at karapatan ng masang manggagawa at maralita. Subalit ang simpleng pagpapalit ng mukha sa Malacanang ay walang idudulot na pagbabago sa buhay ng masa. Kaya naman habang nakikiisa sa panawagan para patalsikin si GMA, dapat hamunin ng uring manggagawa ang multi-sektoral na kilusang ito sa mga kahilingan ng masa para sa radikal na reporma ng sistema. At kailangang kumpitensyahin ng uring manggagawa ang burgis na oposisyon sa pamumuno sa malawak na masa sa pamamagitan ng pagbabandila ng sariling pampulitikang islogan na tangan ng sariling independyenteng kilusan. Dapat banggain ng islogan para sa pagtatayo ng “transition government” ang panawagan para sa constitutional succession o snap election. Sa panawagang ito natin dapat patindigin ang uring manggagawa at mulatin ang malawak na sambayanan. Kinakawatan ng islogang ito ang kagyat na interes ng uring manggagawa para sa pagbabago ng sistema sa yugtong ito at sa kasalukuyang balanse ng pwersa. Kumporme sa eksaktong timbangan ng lakas sa sandali ng pagbagsak kay GMA ang magiging komposisyon ng “transition government.” Madali namang itaya na sa konkretong sitwasyon ngayon hindi kayang dominahan ng uring manggagawa ang “transition government” at mas malamang substansyal ang bahagi ng burgis na oposisyon dito. Sasalaminin nito ang timbangan ng lakas ng magkakalabang mga uri at grupo na nagkaisang patalsikin si GMA. Kaya’t sa panahong ito, hindi pa importanteng tukuyin ang bubuo dito at lagyan ng mukha ang gobyernong ito. Ang mahalaga sa ngayon ay ibandila ang islogang ito para kumpitensyahin ang burgis na islogan ng constitutional succession. Ang krusyal na tungkulin ay ipaliwanag kung bakit ang isang “transition government” ang tutugon sa interes ng totohanang reporma at magbibigay daan sa makabuluhang pagbabago.

Kaya bang ibagsak si GMA at itayo ang “transition government”?

Masasagot lang ang tanong na ito sa konkretong pagdaloy ng mga pangyayari. Kung posibilidad ang pag-uusapan, hindi imposible ang bagay na ito at hindi ito suntok sa buwan. May realistikong pagkakataon na maibagsak si GMA at mabuo ang isang transition government. Subalit ang posibilidad ay magiging realidad tanging kung may malakas na kilusang masa na ipaglalaban ang panawagang ito at makakaakit ang kilusang ito ng ispontayong pagkilos ng masa. Sa sandaling matipon ang malakas na independyenteng kilusang magbabandila ng islogang ito, kahit ang isang seksyon ng burgis na oposisyon at ang mga rebeldeng sundalo ay maaring mahila na kumampi sa panawagang ito kapalit ng pwesto sa “transition government.” Ganunpaman kung walang titindig na kilusang pinamumunuan ng uring manggagawa para sa radikal na reporma, walang pag-asang makamit ang kahilingang ito. Subalit sa yugtong ito na kahit ang burgis na oposisyon ay walang maipakitang pruweba sa pamumuno sa masa at hindi nila mapasiklab ang ispontanyong pagkilos ng mamamayan, may espasyo at pagkakataon para iporma ang kilusang magdadala ng islogang ito. Hangga’t wala pa ang “final battle” sa rehimeng GMA, nasa yugto pa ng “battle for the hearts and minds” ng mamamayan. Ibig sabihin, agresibo tayong makipagkompetisyon sa burgis na oposisyon sa pagmumulat, pag-oorganisa at pagpapakilos sa masa. Katunayan, hanggang sa ngayon, wala pa sa posisyon ang burgis na oposisyon na obligahin ang pagbibitiw ni GMA at handang makipaglabanan hanggang sa dulo ang rehimen. Kung magtatagal ang tunggalian, mas mabibigyan ng pagkakataon ang uring manggagawa na tipunin ang sariling independyenteng kilusan at humamig ng impluwensya sa malawak na masa. Kung maagang matatapos ang labanan at mapapamunuan muli ng burgis na oposisyon ang pag-aalsa ng masa o maganap ang isang kudeta ng militar, magsisilbing kampanyang edukasyon at propaganda ang pagpupunyagi ng uring manggagawa sa pagpapalaganap ng islogan ng “transition government” para sa reporma ng sistema, gaya ng naging resulta ng kampanyang “Resign All” noong panahon ng pakikibakan anti-Erap. Pero kung sakaling ni hindi magtagumpay ang kampanya para patalsikin si GMA, ang pagtitipon ng independyenteng kilusan ng uring manggagawa ang pinakamahusay na preparasyon para sa anumang magaganap sa 2010.

Ano ang dapat gawin ng uring manggagawa sa ngayon?

Sa yugtong ito ng pakikibaka sa rehimeng GMA ang prinsipal na layunin ay buuin ang independyenteng kilusan ng uring manggagawa na nagdadala ng independyenteng kahilingan ng masa. Ang tampok na pampulitikang islogan ng independyenteng kilusang ito ay ang pagbubuo ng “transition government” kapalit ni GMA. Kasabay nito, kailangang patampukin ng kilusang ito ang sariling kahilingan ng masa para sa reporma ng sistema. Kahit sa usapin ng paglaban sa katiwalian na ibinabandila ng burgis na oposisyon, kailangang palamnan ito ng uring manggagawa ng sariling balangkas na nagdidiin sa pananaw at interes ng masa. Kaya naman sa ngayon, pinatatampok natin ang islogan ng “Buwis Namin, Huwag Nakawin” bilang konkretong ekspresyon ng taya ng masang manggagawa at maralita sa mainit na isyu ng pagnanakaw ng kaban ng bayan. Hindi tayo simpleng “ayaw sa katiwalian at para sa katotohanan.” Kailangang idiin ang puntong pagkakait ang katiwalian sa pamahalaan sa mga serbisyong panlipunan na dapat ibigay ng gobyerno. Paghamon ito sa sinumang nagpopusturang kapalit ni GMA na kailangang tugunan ang mga kahilingan ng manggagawa at maralita. Sa ngayon, ang kahilingang ito ay kapwa pampropaganda at pampakilos. Sa panawagang ito natin minumulat ang masa at pinakikilos ang ating base upang makiisa at lumalahok sa multi-sektoral na mga pagkilos. Pero kasabay nito, kailangan na ring ibandila ang pampulitikang islogan ng “transition government.” Ibang usapin pa kung ano ang tamang tyempo at paraan ng “launching nito.” Sa yugtong ito, walang dudang nasa antas propaganda pa lang ito. Subalit sa tamang sandali at depende sa tatakbuhin ng sitwasyon, dapat itong ibandila bilang islogang pampakilos. Pero muli, ang importanteng salik para maging isang konkretong alternatiba at seryosong kompetisyon ang islogan ng manggagawa laban sa burgis na panawagan ng constitutional succession o snap election ay matipon ang isang malakas na independyenteng kilusan. Para mabuo ang independyenteng kilusang ito, ang konsentrasyon ng pag-oorganisa at pagpapakilos ay hindi ang paglulunsad ng mga QRF na mas nagsisilbi lang sa pagrehistro ng linya sa madla subalit walang resultang pag-oorganisa sa masa. Nakakatulong itong pasikatin ang sariling grupo pero halos walang bisa ito para mabuo ang isang independyenteng kilusan. Mali rin ang kalakaran na nagpapatupok ng mga pakikibakang masa para painitin ang sitwasyong pampulitika. Sabit ito sapagkat nagiging sekundaryo sa ganitong balangkas ang pagwawagi sa totoong mga laban ng mga manggagawa o maralita. Kailangang mabilisang maisagawa ang pagpapasiklab ng mga pakikibakang masa sa isang sitwasyon ng malaganap na kahirapan at pagdarahop. Maisasakatuparan lang ito kung ito ang ating konsentrasyon ng pagkilos. Ang maipagtagumpay ang malaganap na mga pakikibakang masa na pinagliliyab ng delubyo ng globalisasyon ang landas para maibalik ang kumpyansa ng masa sa protesta at mabuo ang malakas na independyenteng kilusan. Samantalahin natin ang init ng sitwasyong pampulitika para paputukin at ipagtagumpay ang lokal na mga pakikibakang masa hanggang sektoral at pambansang mga labanan. Totooong kakailanganin ng panahon para maisagawa ito subalit sa sitwasyong wala pa sa ngayon ang sandali ng pagpapabagsak sa rehimen at nasa yugto pa ng paghahamig ng suporta kahit ang burgis na oposisyon sa malawak na masa, may pagkakataon para magkonsentra sa ganitong tungkulin sa pinakamabilis at pinakamalikhaing paraan.

this is interesting...

Class Struggle and the Radicalizing Middle Class
Working class in a changing landscape
By James Matthew Miraflor and Emmanuel M. Hizon
When political analysts ask,˜Where are the middle forces, they who triumphed at the two Edsas [people power uprisings]? I am tempted to answer: At Starbucks, drinking an iced venti latte."
-Raul Pangalangan, Starbucks and the Class Struggle
Rationale
Now that another political uprising, on the tradition of EDSA, is slowly gaining ground, brought about by the aborted ZTE NBN deal implicating once more Mrs. Arroyo, the role of what had been dubbed as the middle class or the more politically correct term middle force in such an upheaval is again slowly entering social discourses. Regardless of how we define the nature and composition of such middle class, its potent capacity to introduce change is already assumed in many progressive and reform-oriented circles, so much so that formations such as the Black and White movement (B&W) explicitly labels itself as a group which has its purpose to organize the disgruntled members of the middle class in its effort to oust the Arroyo regime.
But how do we characterize the middle class and its members? Usually, they are described as the relatively well-off, well-dressed, wielding relative economic independence and the highly educated segment of society in short, what the masa is necessarily not. As such, as if a distinct social specie in itself, the middle class as a political force is often contrasted to the more traditional proletarian and peasant class, or, with the worsening of economic destitution and unemployment, the urban poor.
How the forces of the democratic left should treat the middle class had long been subject of theoretical and strategy discourses since the NDF boycott of the 1984 snap elections, which paved the way for the 1986 EDSA people power revolution. Is the move of the left to tap into the potent force of the middle class in recent Philippine political uprisings a return to the pre-Leninist strategy of a bourgeoisie- led democratic revolution? Or is this recent epiphany of the middle class (to borrow from Mon Casiple) merely an over determination in the Althusserian sense, with a relatively autonomous and pent-up middle class temporarily taking the revolutionary role of a mal-developed working class, with the working class remaining to be the vanguard force of change in the end?
This brings us to a more urgent question: What is our exact definition and understanding of this particular group?

Defining the MF
As members of the democratic left, we hold Marxism not only as tool for social change but also equally, as a tool for social and political analysis. Our Marxist definition of social class is not based on lifestyle, money earned or simple social psychology, but rather on the relation of a specific social class on the means of production of a certain social structure.
It is not true that the left movement out rightly dismisses this group nor is its discourse gravely or consciously avoiding any debate, discussion on the role of the specific social grouping.
In fact, leftists of all shades and students of Marxism vigorously debate the exact composition of the middle class under contemporary capitalism.
Some sections calling themselves as council communists say this group is in fact a social class composed of intellectuals, technocrats, bureaucrats, and managers with its own seizure of power agenda. Others describe it as a "harmonizing class", a class that is part of the executive committee for the common affairs of the ruling class composed of the petit bourgeoisie, professionals and managers. On the other hand, some say, this group refers to the comfortable section of the broad working class population often branded as the affluent white-collar workers.
However, simply put, based on our perspectives coming from the Marxist tradition, the bourgeoisie/ capitalists are those who own the means of production, who control economic production and promote wage labor. On the other hand, the working class is the social class that do not own the means of production, and earn their living by offering their bodies, services for the capitalists to extract surplus value in exchange for inadequate wages. The middle class is defined by exception as an intermediate social class between the two, or what we usually call as the petty bourgeoisie.
The petty bourgeoisie is defined as small propertied groups of individuals, which, while contrasted with the proletarian class in as much as they do not entirely rely on the sale of their labor-power, are also differentiated from the bourgeoisie or the capitalist class who own the means of production and buy the labor-power of others to earn profit. Mostly, this includes corporate managers, small property owners and small-scale entrepreneurs, who, while having a degree of control on their income by the virtue of their role in the process of production, are still entirely vulnerable to the dictates of the capitalist controllers of the forces of production.
Therefore, being branded as a member of the middle class is a matter of relation of the individual to commodity, a matter of social relations and a matter of the person’s position in the overall mode of production. You do not classify a person as middle class, for example, just because she or he is usually seen in plush coffee shops, at the Embassy Club or because she or he speaks English. You do not de-class yourself from your true class origins and interests by simply speaking good English, by sheer lifestyle or chic fashion sense.
But unfortunately, the brand middle class became a colloquial term which seems to encompass exactly such, the (eloquent, straight) English-speaking minority in contrast with the majority capable at most only of crooked English. In that case, the term middle class is used as a substitute for middle-income a very wrong substitution indeed.
So how do we characterize the real Filipino middle class? The Philippine petit-bourgeoisie in the traditional sense is not even that developed. Mostly coming from the displaced old elite, the real middle class is but a small sub-section of the perceived to be the middle class.
Why didn’t our real middle class grow in the first place? The reason can be traced to the failure of our redistribution strategy. Our agrarian reform program, for example, which is supposed to break feudalism and promote a new and strong middle class through establishing owner-cultivators of economic-sized farms instead, converted the feudal elite into a nascent capitalist elite, with land and agricultural labor as their base.
So was EDSA I and EDSA II people power uprising really led by the middle class? In practice, neither EDSA I nor EDSA II are middle class events. They were both powered by the working class, only that factions of the ruling class was able to hijack both: on the first instance because the progressive forces by-and-large boycotted it, with the leadership being stolen by the liberal-democratic faction of the elite; on the second instance because the progressive forces are not strong enough to maintain leadership up to the end.
Can it then be perhaps, in our particular case, there is really no third way, no specific middle strata, only an illusory social stratification imposed to us to keep the working class divided, to de-class them and in the end muddle their true class interests? With the real middle class defined, where do we fit in this particular group of people who are not necessarily corporate managers, small property owners and small-scale entrepreneurs but are labeled as middle class or middle force?
If we follow this line of thought, what is therefore presented to us is a social grouping wrongly called middle class that can either be seen as lesser than the average capitalists or better off than the average worker.
In this case, we go with the latter proposition.


Worker of a New-Type
In actuality, the slow yet determined radicalization of the middle class we are witnessing in this particular juncture is in fact the radicalization and participation of an important section of the working class itself. As a consequence of the growing services sector and gradual de-industrialization of the Philippine economy, we are, in fact, witnessing the rise of a new working class whose social definition is not limited to the industrial-factory characterization we in the progressive movement often romanticize.
What we are witnessing is the growing political action of Makati employees, public servants, call center agents, doctors and university professors and teachers agitated by an equally agitated student body. These people are often described as middle class but are in fact so politically and economically ingrained with the system means of production. Their actions are in fact the actions of the working class.
However, unlike their industrial counterparts, on their own, they wield substantial, albeit latent, political power. There are many reasons for this, but revealing only two will suffice.
First, it is perceived that a large chunk of our country’s revenue comes from such middle-income (which is, by and large, above average) middle class members, and ever increasingly so. Just look at the taxes levied against professionals, or the high income taxes burdening the highly paid skilled workers. They have the right of claim of the government, since they are responsible for a large part of its financing.
Consequently, it is for this reason that they are mostly latent at best as a political force partly because their social mobility aspiration is in loggerhead with their patriotic and progressive values. They are the most reluctant to decide between change and the status quo because they perceived themselves losing their current social status, of being proletarianized in the eventuality of joining a political upheaval. Nonetheless, with proper persuasion, they can become a formidable force for progress, political modernity or of conservatism.
The second source of their political power is their high degree of credibility and objectivity, which stems mainly because of their long exposure in the universities, academic circles and different layers of the government.
In a stratified society such as ours, the ruling class, which in this case is the capitalist class, is the natural subject of criticism. Thus, the rhetoric coming from the ruling capitalist class is received with little appreciation from the working class whose traditional base are the industrial workers. Their class interests are necessarily in contradiction with each other.

Thus, more often than not, this specific layer of the working class often described as middle force serves as the objective fulcrum of change or conservation the determinant of political direction because their rhetoric are not perceived as necessarily representative of either the ruling or oppressed class. This is the reason why middle class support is highly coveted by both opposing camps, for different purposes. Either for the purpose of demobilizing their ranks, bending them to conservatism or radicalizing them.

Revolution of a New-Type
Truly, the middle force is proletariat. They may be wielding P180 worth of Starbucks coffee instead of the usual hammer which so symbolized the working class in all recorded history, but nonetheless, they are workers in their own right and are legitimate members of the proletarian movement.
With their entry also comes a plethora of new protest strategies they are introducing, owing much to their exposure to different and often non-traditional faces of production. In the time when the political struggle is more and more becoming a Gramscian battle for position, political blogging, cyber-activism, and other forms of anti-establishment communication which heavily utilize Third Wave technologies (Toffler) are gradually becoming indispensable as tools of mass propaganda to convince and organize.
These new forms of struggle must complement and even amplify existing efforts by the traditional industrial working class to undermine the capitalist state which foundations are anchored not only on political-economic apparatuses of repression but also on the ruling liberal-democratic consensus. The political struggle for democratic space must be complemented with a perception struggle for moral ascendancy, an arena where our middle force proletariat thrives.
At the end of the day, the struggle remains to be proletariat in its deepest sense with the real forces behind of the societal system capturing control of the system itself. The traditional base of the working class that is the trade unions must welcome them not with doubt or hesitation but with pride and recognition.

getting it out....

lets get done with this evil!

some photos of our mob

she's evil

this is how greedy our goverment is...

Transcript of Lozada's exposé: 'Halika tawagan natin si FG'
02/07/2008 01:12 PM


I'd like to start by thanking a lot of people who expressed their sincere sympathy for the family. I'd like to thank them first, so many of them. And in Tagalog, nagpapasalamt po ako sa lahat ng nagpahayag ng pag-aalala sa akin at sa sampu ng aking pamilya.

Ako po'y nagtawag sa pagpupulong na ito upang mabigayan ng liwanag. Madami kasing mga katanungan ang bayan ukol sa proyekto ng NBN-ZTE na ito.

At upang huwag na sanang mapilitan pa yung iba, marami nang mabubuting taong napilitan pang magsinungaling dahil sa akin. Hindi naman sila kasama rito, napipilitan pa silang magsinungaling. Ayokong maging dahilan na magkasala sa Diyos at sa bayan kahit sinoman. Ayoko ho iyon.

Mabigat po sa aking damdamin ito at isipan, ang aking gagawin. Ngunit kailangan kong gawin ito para sa kaunawaan, para maliwanag na ang isipan ng bayan, tungkol sa mga bayan na ito na lubhang makaka-apekto doon sa kinabukasan nila.

Ang aking ilalahad na mga salaysay ngayon tungkol sa ZTE-NBN ay yung mga bagay na ako'y may personal na ginampanan, the things that I'm involved with. And I'm going to say this with malice to no one.

Wala ho akong malisya kahit kanino man. Ang sasabihin ko ay kung ano lang ginawa namin, at kung ano ang nangyari.

Introduced to Abalos

To my recollection of events, I'll start off the first time I was introduced to this project by Secretary Neri, monitored action to Chairman Ben Abalos. I guess if it was not late September, early October I was introduced by Secretary Neri to Chairman Ben Abalos in Wack-Wack together with his entourage sina Ruben Reyes…and the ZTE president Yu Yong and Fan Yang. We had lunch in Wack-Wack wherein we talked about the NBN-ZTE.

I remember that the Secretary told Chairman Abalos to course his project proposal to the proper channel. NEDA received the first copy sometime in October…prepared by…All questions were referred back to Asec Formoso.

When the Secretary gave me a copy for me to review, the first three that really caught my attention, when I was reviewing the financial cost, the financial projection were based on… September 20, 2006 issue wherein they were quoting how much government was spending for telecom expenses…

…So, I told the Abalos group, through their guy Leo San Miguel, that they should revise their proposal. They should fix it and try to avoid the education part of it, because there's already a cyber-education project.

Abalos wanted $130 million

Sometime in November, that was the time that I also met Joey de Venecia, to see the presentation on a similar project but on a BOT basis. And at that time, the Secretary asked me if the project was appropriate for NBN.

Until we presented the project proposal for the NBN, And the Secretary asked If I think it was appropriate and I said yes, so he encouraged Joey to push through the project development further.

And when the Secretary asked me if there was a synergy between the two projects I said, yes. But both of them were pitching for the same project. The Secretary told me to reconcile the two proponents. And at that point, it was really a good project.

At that point, when the Secretary told me to reconcile the two proponents, I immediately went to work and proposed one tool for the two proponents wherein both of them can achieve both of their objectives. Joey's objective was to do a BOT with government, which was completely above board, and then Chairman Abalos's objective was to do a loan, a project on a loan basis.

So the project structure that I proposed was that Joey becomes the lead contracting party to the government, it's on a BOT basis anyway. And that Abalos, to achieve his objective of supplying, becomes supplier to Joey's project.

I thought at that point it was already a win-win situation for everyone involved. The government gets its NBN project, Joey gets his BOT project, and then Abalos gets his supply comes up.

So, at one point I got them already to do their own thing. It's finished. But I guess the trouble started when Chairman Abalos wanted to protect his $130-million… how shall I put this…commission on the project. So dapat daw proteksyonan 'yong $130 million, (before) we agree that Joey become the main proponent.

'Bubukol po ito'

At that point, I just felt that…it might be a little too big, in the vernacular sabi ko bubukol po ito, sabi ko siguro kalahati pupuwede. But nonetheless I relayed the information to Joey, because it's going to be Joey's project anyway.

And Joey's reaction was really like ballistic, parang he was worried, saan n'ya kukunin itong $130 million na 'to, because the project cost is $262 million, and Abalos wanted $130 million na komisyon. So sabi ko sa kanila, hindi ko problema 'yan, that's your problem.

So at that point, I don't know if the listener can realize how much money all of these are na pinag-uusapan… $130 million…At that point, I was telling them na problema n'yo na ito basta you make sure you'll get this thing together because we don't want another Atong Ang or Chavit Singson scandal to rock this country. I also made it very clear...na basta maayos lang.

ZTE's advances to Abalos

Sometime in December, the ZTE rep, si Yu Yong at saka si Fan Yang, who get quite close to me, along the progress of the work, were already getting frantic and talking to me about developments in the project, because they'd already gave enough advances daw to Chairman Abalos. So, sabi ko sa kanila, the project is moving along, they should not be alarmed.

So, it was also at this point because of Joey's hesitance to agree on the $130-million commission, that Chairman Abalos started considering doing the project on his own, derecho na siya.

Ang sabi ko ho sa kanya na hindi ho puwedeng de-deretcho kayo, kasi ang kabilin-bilinan ni Secretray Neri, na yun din ata ang utos ng Presidente, na this project can only be done through a BOT basis, hindi puwedeng utang.

'Tawagan natin si FG'

So I was standing firm on that, na hindi talaga pupuwede. At that point, that was the time that Chairman Abalos said, halika, tawagan natin si FG. So, sabi niya, nung tinawagan niya, pare nandito yung taga NEDA sa tabi ko, hindi raw puwedeng i-utang yung project ko.

I cannot hear the voice from the other end, pero sabi n'ya, kung ganyan kayong kausap, and the Chairman continues, kung ganyan kayong kausap, ang hirap n'yo palang kausap, kalimutan n'yo na lang ang usapan natin.

I don't know what that meant. But the following day, totoo nga, a letter from the Chinese ambassador came addressed to the government, and… with Mike, stating that this is already December.

'Moderate their greed'

You can check this with the records. I'm just doing this through my own recollection. But if you can check sometime December, a letter addressed to Mike yata, came in from the Chinese ambassador saying that there is now money available for a loan, for the NBN project, independent of the cyber-education project.

Kasi yung cyber-education yun ang napag-agree- han na ilo-loan na. Ngayon there's another loan na naman na puwede na rin yung NBN i-loan, it was sometime early December.

So, I told the Secretary about it, Secretary Neri. And his instruction to me was very clear, sabi nya, Jun, you moderate their greed. I was naive to accept that order. I do not know what moderating greed means, but I followed Secretary Neri.

'Pare, okay na kami sa NEDA'

And due to the insistence naman nitong mga taga ZTE that the project gets going, Chairman Abalos invited us sometime on the third week of December, I'm pretty sure of the timing, over dinner in Makati Shang-rila. He asked to invite Joey as well, kasi si FG will be there with us.

Actually the First Gentlemen did not say much, except that Chairman Abalos told him na pare okay na kami nina Joey, ok na kami sa NEDA. (and the FG answered) Ah, ganon, mabuti naman, okay na , okay na.

So, I'm just narrating to you with no malice intended. Whatever that means, kayo na po ang bahalang umano.

And on their trip to China, I did not join them anymore, and I guess Joey can speak omn what happened in China.

Like the North Rail

Sometime in early January naman, Secretray Neri again invited us for lunch with Abalos in Edsa, in Makati-Shangrila in a Chinese restaurant together with Yu Yong and Fan Yang, the ZTE, and the Chinese commercial councilor. At that point, the Chairman again was making the impression that the project is already a go. May be there was parallel trust…because… (but) it was not yet a go.

So there was some negative reaction from the ZTE person, and the Secretary noticed some awkward moments there, and then he immediately ask a leave, and said that he had to go, and asked me to stay behind.

Chairman Abalos and the ZTE guy were in curious exchange of words, because the ZTE people were like demanding from Chairman Abalos that he promised that the ZTE deal will be done on a loan project under the North Rail. I don't know why they speak about the North Rail. I don't know why they speak about the North Rail. They keep on mentioning ala North Rail terms loan agreement.

'Alam mo bang…?'

So, that was last meeting I had with the Chairman. And on January 18, I remember the date very well. This is the only date that I can remember because this was the date I said bye to the project.

I was then in Dumaguete in Negros, together with Henry Teves, when Chairman Abalos called me up, to some like early evening, and asked me questions like, "Alam ba ni Neri yung ginagawa mo, (I said) Opo. Alam ba ni Neri yung ginawa mo. Opo. Alam mo bang malapit ako sa military. Opo. Alam mong malapit ako sa intelligence. Opo. Alam mo namang malapit ako…

And then he started cursing. Mura siya nang mura in Tagalog, lahat-lahat. At ang sabi niya, nandito sa akin yung CD lahat ng phone conversations ninyo nina Joey, mga hayop kayo, tina-traydor n'yo ko.

I don't know what gave him that impression.. but the fact, that they said I know the week 17 in ISAPF can do that, which Chairman Abalos and Ruben Reyes are …close to, I was not surprised.

So, I just took with a grain, and then Chairman Abalos ended up…his words with, "Huwag kang magpapakita sa aking hayop ka sa Wack –Wack o sa Mandaluyong at ipapapatay kita."

From $262M to $329M

That's when all my troubles started. So, I quit the project. I told the Secretary that I don;lt think this project is worth risking my life for. All I did was trying to help the Secretary understand it.

So on February 2007, the executive order was issued. So this is now my personal participation ended and where it ended for the project concept.

In February 2007, an EO was issued by the Office of the President, transferring the telos, the implementing agency to DOTC. And on April, the project… the NBN was approved…at $329 million.

When I quit the project, the project cost was $262 million. So it was approved. I don't know what happened then. I'm not imputing anything now. But when it was approved, it was already approved at $329 million. And the day after it was approved, the President together with PagCor officials, went to China to witness the signing of the agreement.

This project for me is one transactional example of a dysfunctional government procurement, a systemic dysfunction on how we procure projects. There are other more that have escaped scrutiny, but ganun din ang sistema. And I have agonized over this decision...

Ang dasal ko lang sana maintindihan n'yo yung dusang dinananas ng pamilya ko ngayon. Ang dasal ko lang sana matutunan na natin after nito na ang salitang Pilpino ay hindi lang tumutkoy sa isang pamilya. Ang salitang Pilipino ay tumutukoy sa isang bansa, ang bansang Pilipino. And sometimes, it's worth taking a risk for this country.