TEAM UNITY FILES CANDIDACY

The administration senatorial line-up under the banner Team Unity filed their Certificates of Candidacies before the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) today, February 12.

Team Unity includes Senators Edgardo Angara, Joker Arroyo, Tessie Aquino-Oreta, Ralph Recto, Tito Sotto, Representatives Juan Miguel Zubiri and Prospero Pichay, Governors Vic Magsaysay, Jericho Petilla and Chavit Singson, former Presidential Chief of Staff Mike Defensor and Sultan Jamalul Kiram III. Team Unity, which stands for Together Everyone Achieves More Unity emphasized on the importance of local government units (LGUs) in the development of economy.

Their slogan, “tulong tulong sa pagsulong” stressed on working together to achieve reconciliation and peace in the government. Before proceeding to the COMELEC, the Team Unity attended a mass at the Manila Cathedral and held a press conference at Villa Immaculada where they had their first campaign speech.

After the press conference, the candidates proceeded to the COMELEC. Outside the commission, the crowd was a festivity of supporters waving their placards, wearing t-shirts provided by their senatorial bets and accompanied by an ati-atihan band. Among them are various housing organizations who benefited from Mike Defensor’s housing projects, supporters of Vic Magsaysay, Miguel Zubiri and Chavit Singson, and the Kabataang Liberal ng Pilipinas.

EDGARDO ANGARA
Supporters of Sen. Ed Angara were dressed in yellow and blue printed with “Ang Gara ng Buhay” and Philhealth. In his speech, Angara stressed the importance of health insurance for young Filipinos. He believes that our country should move for decentralization to achieve better service. He also said that the Team Unity is powered by LGU-masters who are armed with youth and vigor.

JOKER ARROYO
Sen. Joker Arroyo may have the shortest speech among the candidates but his views encapsulated the whole agenda of Team Unity. He ensures that their group will not overthrow the administration and destabilize the government. He believes that everything should be based on the constitution. He points out that the Team Unity’s perspective is for economic progress for the common good. In the end, the challenged the opposition to come up with their agenda.

MIKE “TOL” DEFENSOR
Sec. Mike Defensor has the most number of supporters and placards during the activity. His posters showed the masa aspects of Mike: “fighting tol”, “standing tol” and “walking tol”. In his speach, he reiterated his effort to strengthen the government and continue the reconciliation. He sighted the decreasing number of laws passed by Senate due to the disunity in the government. In the end, Mike made women squeal from the back when he promised to provide housing to Filipinos by saying “ibabahay to kayo”.

SULTAN JAMALUL KIRAM III
Seeming to be the only Muslim in the whole Senatorial candidates, Sultan Kiram provided a way for Muslims to have a representative in the Senate. Joining the unity stance of his ticket, he promised to focus on the needs of muslims to gain peace in Mindanao.

VIC MAGSAYSAY
Working as a public official for almost 30 years proves that Zambales Governor Vic Magsaysay is indeed a veteran politician in the local government. As such, he said that he will be a yardstick or measure for public service. He holds the legacy of Magsaysay public officials and vows to strengthen local governments.

TESSIE AQUINO-ORETA
A prominent ally of Erap, Senator Tessie Oreta explained why she joined the unity ticket. She said that there comes a time in the life of a politician that she needs to move forward and address the more pressing needs of the country. Thus, she vows to advocate in the modernization of education.

JERICHO “ICOT” PETILLA
Leyte Governor Icot Petilla may be new name in national politics and that is what he stressed – we need new politicians to run the government. He said that as a governor, he knows and understands the needs of the people because he deals with them directly. Thus, he points out the need to envigorate LGUs for them to provide more local services.

PROSPERO “BUTCH” PICHAY
Pro-Pinoy is the campaign slogan of Surigao del Sur Representative Prospero Pichay. He says that he is neither administration nor opposition. What is important is the welfare of the Filipinos.

RALPH RECTO
Still bringing up the Vilmanian effect, Ralph Recto first greeted his fellow Vilmanians. He also said that politics now should go beyond the Erap and GMA struggle; instead, he insists on having a 20/20 vision of the future. He said that the population is growing, thus, the number of hospitals, educational facilities and social services should be doubled. His projects would center on HEARTS (health, education, agriculture, roads, technology and security).

CHAVIT SINGSON
Although Governor Singson was not present in the press conference since he was on his way from the hospital, his banner was distint in the area; it tells that he is the champion of truth. Many of his supporters dressed in green were present.

TITO SOTTO
Senator Tito Sotto, a re-electionist, claims that he still has unfinished businesses in the Senate and he vows to help unite the country.

JUAN MIGUEL “MIGZ” ZUBIRI
Amigo ng bayan, kampeon ng kalikasan is the campaign slogan of Rep. Zubiri. He said that he is a son of Negros and grew up in Mindanao. He said he may look like Magellan but he has the heart of Lapu-Lapu. He tells that he himself is exhausted with the political struggles in the country so he want to achieve unity within the government. A proponent of the Biofuels Act, he vows to protect the environment.

Note: First time ko magsulat ng news so please please bear with my writing. Hehe.

GLOBAL HEGEMONY IN THE FACE OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS

A Review of the Book “Unholy Trinity: IMF, World Bank and WTO” by Richard Peet

Richard Peet’s Unholy Trinity uses the historical approach to critically examine the three powerful “global governance institutions” which are the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which is specialized in currency and international stabilization; the World Bank (WB) which is focused on structural adjustment; and the World Trade Organization (WTO) which is advocating trade liberalization – all of which regulates the financial, economic and trade facets of member nations.

We should first consider that we are reading in the context of radical activists – those who are involved in NGOs and social movements. Peet is a radical activist and so are his fellow researchers. Socialists are foremost concerned in the distribution of national wealth. Therefore, any means of capitalistic behavior applied on social policies is met with great opposition.

In Chapter 1, Peet coursed through the ideological thoughts that led to focal ideological trail that the three institutions share – that is global neoliberalism. He identified that the main objective for the conception of the three global institutions is the global hegemony or international supremacy of the industrially dominant nations or the capitalist nations – that is, the United States of America and United Kingdom. To prove this notion, the book traces back to a detailed narration of the Bretton Woods Conference and the conspiracies behind it in Chapter 2. The two nations used theoretically-backed, politically and economically good discourses (p. 16) to encourage participating nations to sign the Bretton Woods Agreement – an agreement that formalized the US and UK dominance through the establishment of the IMF and WB.

Chapter 3 characterized the IMF as an imposing institution whose basic duties has been extended from merely regulating the currency exchange rates and providing loans to countries in times of crisis (p. 56) – to enforcing economic changes to nations by the conditionality that the IMF does not grant loans to countries who won’t apply their imposed policies (p. 61 & p. 73). They also depicted the IMF as meddlesome which is shown by the explanation of its “surveillance” function (p. 63). The chapter also explained that there has been no relative growth with respect to the member countries’ economies as a result of the economic policies imposed by the IMF (p. 102). Instead, they only created a long-term indebtedness that seemingly never got paid off. This chapter, however failed to quantitatively prove that the structural changes that the IMF imposed unto countries are solely to be blamed for the economic shortfalls of the nations’ economies. Instead, the author based his assessments in the number of rallies and demonstrations that occurred in member nations. Their assessment would have been more convincing if they clearly showed the correlation that points to the IMF’s policies as the cause of the economic failures. In Mohsin Khan’s study (p. 102), it “shows that IMF conditionality may have a positive effect on balances of payments and current accounts, its immediate targets, but tends to have negative effects on inflation and growth… On the basis of existing studies, one certainly cannot say whether the adoption of programs supported by the Fund led to improvement of inflation and growth performance.” From this statement, it must be noted that neither can we also say that the IMF led to the worsening of inflation and growth. Thus, Peet failed to prove in quantifiable terms that the IMF’s conditionalities are solely to be blamed. Of course, there are lots of factors for one’s economy’s growth; not only does it rely on IMF’s policies but also in the execution of the policies.

In Chapter 4, Peet tries to discredit the World Bank by (1) its inception was only for the purpose of financing post-war reconstruction in Europe (p. 111) (2) when it was established, there was little mentioning of the poor countries as beneficiaries of this institution (p. 111) (3) its function has evolved as a development agency focused on the reconstruction and development of members and on the promotion of private and international investments because it was an investment in peace (p. 115). They pointed out that the big turn in the Bank’s functions only came about because of the Cold War between US and USSR. If so, why then is it taken up negatively? The motive may be true but who doesn’t want peace? Another point in the criticism of the Bank is that the projects it undertakes collided head on with environmentalists and socialists. Thus emerged the failed attempt of the socialists to influence WB policies through the Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) where the NGO networks suggested on placing the Bank’s funds in social needs rather than in infrastructures that facilitate private investments or economic activity. Though it is true that a country’s resources may be depleted in the event that they pursue economic reforms and agenda, we should still consider the long-term benefits that we can acquire from infrastructure financing. Financing social needs is just a short-term agenda; what is more important is how a country can create jobs so people can work to satisfy their own needs in the future. The problem with the socialists is that their emotions are often aroused in the present clamor of the poor. What they fail to see is the long-term sustainability of development. This may be the reason why the SAPRI failed. Again, in this context, the socialists were defeated.

The WTO, in chapter 5, is depicted as an institution that thrives with economic biases. Instead of providing a neutral forum for countries to solve international disputes, they insist on deciding issues based on trade liberalization (pp. 160-161). The “sound economic policy” therefore is attributed to liberalized trade. The issues against WTO lies in the formation of the trade agreements and resolution of trade disputes; which, according to Wachtel, has no written bylaws, makes decisions by consensus, has never taken a vote on any issue and holds no public hearings (p. 158). How can one institution show that there is fairness in its adjudications when there is no transparency? In addition to the democratic absence in the institution, the WTO was also opposed by labor organizations. We should understand that when a nation engages in a globalized market, the labor market suffers first because it opens itself up to labor cost competition. Therefore, it is understandable that socialist movements are in great opposition to the WTO agreements since they are basically fair labor advocates. The chapter ended with  the author contending that the WTO has to be abolished because trade should be democratic and that social movements should be present in forging the agreements. Again, this is another desperate statement by a socialist battling to enter into a system created by capitalists.

In his conclusion, the author still recognized the three institutions as possible agents of global economic balance but they insist that the poor and advocates of the development of the poor which are the NGO’s and socialist organizations, should be involved in policy-making (p. 223). They insist on the three institutions to listen to the economic propositions of the NGOs. This book clearly demonstrates the grapple between the capitalists and the socialists contending which of them owns the best economic policies to achieve global economic balance. As of today, the elite minority is holding the reigns of global power and they seem unwilling to pass them over to the socialists. The socialists on the other hand, do all means to create distrust to the current system.

If the author of this book aims on creating suspicion in the motives of the three institutions, so the public and governments consider a review of the economic impositions of institutions, it has succeeded in its task. The book provided facts and narratives on the economic and political factors that brought the emergence of the three institutions. They have provided tons of empirical evidence to contend their findings. However, the book lacked quantitative evidence such as macroeconomic figures that might even prove their contentions.

Nevertheless, the book proved that the concepts in which the very existence of the three institutions are founded on are contradicting. The liberalistic belief that in achieving economic growth, there should be less state intervention proves ironic since the three institutions seem to be the global governments that keeps on intervening in member countries’ economic and development plans. The IMF, WB and WTO all seem to work in the context that they believe they have the supreme knowledge on how to develop national economies. They have used the de facto influence that they have earned by providing monetary aid to desperate economies as a means to manipulate national economies and enforce neo-liberal policies.

Indeed, the IMF, WB and WTO leads the way of global hegemony of the industrially advanced countries. The conspirators of the Bretton Woods agreement, which are US and UK know that their competitive advantage lies on their industrial efficiency but the resources are found in the Third World countries. Realizing that the government protectionist measures of Third World countries intervene with their economic agenda, they have used the IMF, WB and WTO to remove state intervention and coining it as “free trade”. They used the three global institutions to integrate the different resource-generating nations in their “globalized market”. They made other nations believe that the only way to economic development is through trade liberalization. But some nations have not yet improved their production efficiencies resulting to internationally incompetent products which eventually lead to giving a competitive advantage to imported goods and thus, damaging local infant industries. If local industries are booted out from the market, more locals will be unemployed. In the end, the poor countries will become poorer. Thus, widening the gap between First World and Third World countries.

It is true that the three institutions are imposing and undemocratic in nature. But what option do we have? They are the ones who created the institution so expectedly, they will keep the reigns for so long as they benefit from it.

Therefore, nations should first and foremost assess their industrial competency if not, their competitive advantages before entering into agreements with other nations. Although trade agreements really provide mutual benefits to both parties, somehow, along the way, there will still be an inequality. It now depends on the participating countries on which aspects of inequality are they willing to subject their countries into so as to acquire the foreseeable benefits of the trade agreements.

Surely, the three institutions will be there to stay as long as the dominating forces are present. The institutions were created by capitalists so there will be no way for the socialists to penetrate the institution. Our advice, therefore is for the socialists to create their own global developmental institutions that will equal the impact of the IMF, WB and WTO; in which they can freely institute their reforms.

May The Fork Be With You!

Kahit noong bata pa ako, gustung-gusto ko na talaga si Yoda. Unang una, dahil “super cute” niya. Dagdagan pa ng kanyang taglay na katalinuhan, sino ba naman ang hindi bibilib sa bansot na ito?

Napag-alaman ko rin, na kung babaliktarin mo lang ang iyong pangungusap, magtutunog matalino ka na. Sabi niya kay Anakin Skywalker, “Conquer your fear, you must.” Oh di ba, binabaliktad lang, may wisdom na.

Naaalala ko tuloy yung maliit na pencil topper ko na Yoda. Binigay sa akin yon ng kasintahan ko. Dati, nilalagay ko yon sa tuktok ng aking computer saan mang trabaho ako mapadpad. Kapag nahihirapan akong mag-isip, hinahawakan ko lang ang noo niya, gumagaling na ako. Iba talaga ang impluwensiya sa buhay ko nito. Ngunit di naglaon ay tinigil ko na rin siyang ilagay sa aking computer. Kahit naman wala siya, basta kapag nasa akin ang fork, ok na ‘ko. Busog na sa isang order lang ng siomai.

Naalala nyo pa ba yung nauso dati, yung tayu-tayo ang buhok, exaggerated sa laki ng mata at mukhang duwendeng mga laruan. Troll yon. Ang papangit pero cute daw, parang yoda effect lang naman. Sabi nila may magic daw yon. Yung valedictorian nga ng batch na nauna sa amin, kapag daw nag-eexam yon, may troll daw na nakatayo sa harapan niya. Yon daw ang dahilan kaya daw sya naging valedictorian. Tingnan mo nga naman at pati laruan ginawan ng isyu.

Kapag bata ka pa, ang bilis gumawa ng isyu. Naaalala ko pa non, kapag may nagkakaroon na ng menstruation sa kaklase namin, aba, ang laking tsismax non! Tapos, parang pinandidirihan pa namin yon. Kapag nagiging makintab na yung mukha ng kaklase namin, iisipin namin, kasi nagmamantika na siya dahil may mense na siya… Eee… Kadiri talaga.

Naman, parang hindi naman kami tutuntong sa ganon. Kapag bata ka nga naman.

Nung elementary ako, presidente ako ng klase namin. Iyakin ako noon. Uso kasi Mara Clara non kaya kapag umiiyak ako, feeling istariray ako. Loka loka no? Isang beses, di ko na nakayanan yung pressure kasi ang ingay ng klase namin at hindi ko mapatahimik tapos ako naman sinisisi ng adviser namin. Tapos may mga nakakaaway pa kong mga kaklase. Ang totoo, hindi ko na nga maalala kung bakit ako umiiyak non. Isang beses, ang lola mo, nagdrama. Tumakbo sa may malapit sa CR. Sinundan ng crush at ng kaibigan. Mega punas pa sila sa luha ko. Ang linya ko, “Gusto ko nang mamatay! Hindi ko na kaya!” Sabi naman ng crush ko, “Huwag. Tama na yan. Wag ka nang umiyak.” Biruin mo, gusto kong tumalon sa terrace. Aba! Apat na floors yon, siguradong lalabas brain ko don. Ewan ko kung anong pumasok sa isip ko non at kung saang linya ni Juday ko nakuha yon.

Ang ending, eto, luka luka pa rin. Iyakin pa rin sa bupra. Namimiss ko na nga yung crush ko noon. Haayy…

Ang gulo ko no, nagsimula kay Yoda, nauwi kay Juday. Anyways, nainspire ulit tuloy ako.

Yung tungkol sa mga nabigo kong pag-ibig, abangan nyo… Malay nyo, kayo pala iyon. Etsus!

Namimiss

Ano nga bang tagalog ng namimiss?

Namimiss ko na kasing mag-tagalog. Sa iba kong mga blog, panay ingles ang ginagamit kong bernakulo. Marahil ay marami pa rin akong salita na hindi ko alam sa Filipino kaya’t mas nahihirapan akong magsulat sa Filipino. Hindi pa naman huli ang lahat para magsanay akong muli hindi ba?

Kakahiya, kahit yung mga kategorya ko sa blog na ito ay ingles; pati ang titulo.

Nitong linggong ito, binabagabag ako ng isang bagay na dapat kong pagdesisyunan sa lalong madaling panahon. Mayroon kasing ino-offer na Mandarin classes ang Dela Salle na magsisimula na sa darating na Sabado. Wala akong pera pero maaari akong mangutang. Apat na libo. Tsk! Tsk! Kanina, dinasal ko na sana magbigay si Lord ng senyales kung dapat ko nga ba itong kunin. Ilang minuto lamang ang lumipas, pinakita na agad sa akin ang kasagutan. Napapunta ako sa blog na You Die Hard. Haha, galit na galit sa mga intsik sapagkat sinasakop na raw nila ang lahat lahat. Hindi ko maipaliwanag ang galit nya kaya’t subukan nyo na lang tingnan sa site nya.

Kaya’t eto, ibubulsa ko na lang ang ipon ko at patuloy na magpapagaling sa pagsulat sa Filipino. Kasi, nakakamiss…