September 16th, 2007

hitler

Wrong Information is afraid of Joma Sison

Some bored nerd was good enough to grace this journal with a comment. And the poster's "analysis" would have left me shaking in fear if not for one simple fact: the poster has not posted a single fact to prove his/her assertions. Apparently, I could as easily justify my side by inventing a few passages from the Bible and no one would be the wiser. So a word to the (un)wise, don't even try debunking me unless you've got the credibility of a thesis report to back you up.

First, there's a difference between apathy and support for one side of the issue. If apathy indeed signified direct support for the side of an issue, then it would mean the majority of UP students support alien worship, devil worship, Rizal worship and what have you. Apathy is INDIRECT support of one side of an issue, and most of the time, a non-willing kind of support.

I will give the poster this much: it is true that neoliberal economics and globalization has indeed been a major influence into the present thinking of the student culture. Thankfully, he/she was not that stupid to presume that it applied to all schools. One only has to go to state colleges like PUP and PNU, a private school like UE Recto, and the countless public high schools that are wells of dissent, to see the untruthfulness of such an assertion.

And only in the wishful delusions of the School of Economics would one find truth in the assertion that global capitalism has caused the withering of the concept of state education. He/she sounds like Emmanuel De Dios who claimed that the common Filipino supported un-subsidized tertiary education already, when in fact, his statement was part of a campaign to normalize such a concept.

If there are segments of the population that are apathetic to the issue, it has nothing to do with the idea becoming normal or acceptable to them. Most likely, it is because they are unaffected.

Take for example the mass of QCSHS tambays in the AS Lobby. In several discussions, only three to four of those tambays actually supported the idea of an unsubsidized education. The rest, though apathetic, did not like such an idea. And it is interesting to note that two of those tambays are Business Econ majors while the other two are their "barkadas".

Hmm... So Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, and.. (what the f**k) Joma is dead? Again the bored rantings of Alex Magno and Emmanuel de Dios. Why is the State (and its apparatuses) making such a show of crushing the Maoist presence in our country, namely the CPP-NPA-NDF? Why is the AFP's highest priority (supposedly) a three year plan to reduce the NPA's strength (wasn't that what the AFP promised in 2001 during the start of Oplan Bantay Laya? to destroy the NPA by 2007?)? Why do the likes of Norberto Gonzales claim that the CPP-NPA will collapse with Joma's arrest? (take note, will start with his arrest, meaning it hasn't done yet)

And why are right-wing professors in UP making it their obssession to debunk anyone they claim to be a Maoist?

Intellectually, politically, and militarily, is that how one would treat an entity that is dead? No. I seem to recall in my History subjects that when the HMB (Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan) and the old Communist Party of the Philippines was defeated during the time of Ramon Magsaysay, it was virtually out of the news and the political scene. But once there was a resurgence of non-conservative thinking in UP during the early 60s, it was immediately condemned by the State.

To the bored nerd, if such ideas were dead, you wouldn't even need trying to link me with Marxism to disprove whatever I've been saying. But then again, you wouldn't have to if there was a modicum of truth in what you just claimed.