Golpe de Duterte

    I AM not religious but for the love of God, please enlighten me how some people, especially from progressive, liberal and leftist backgrounds in the Philippines, can be livid at Trump’s ineptitude and stupidity yet support the same sick values championed by Duterte (no need to explain anymore to non-Filipino friends who Duterte is as he is now a household word in progressive circles here in the US for the wrong and f–ing embarrassing reasons)?

    Do not make it a competition please on who is worse, as Filipino culture is wont to do (like, eh si Trump ganito, buti pa si Duterte ganito because that is motherf–ing bullshit). Both are a disgrace to humanity. Am I missing something?

    Posted on Facebook our former colleague in local journalism, the then very young S. Chandler Ramas III, now well-established in the US of A as labor union organizer, political strategist and social activist.

    Even as he pulled no punches, Chandler ceded some benefi t-of-the-doubt objectivity: I try to see the light in this twisted position, maybe disliking Trump and supporting Duterte is better than supporting Trump and Duterte altogether?

    To no avail: Now, that is f–ed up, lol.

    Conflicted values, somebody made a shout out at this same-same-but-love-one-andhate- the-other complexity. Or should that be dichotomy?

    Mindful inconsistency – whatever that means – cried another.

    Deviant intellection – whatever that is – howled one more.

    Whatever. As they flock together, birds of a feather get to be plucked just the same way. Falsity goes the truism embedded in that oftcited idiom as instanced here: Trump and Duterte posited as one of a kind, but totally different just the same. Oxymoron played out there too.

    Harrumphed Chandler: Kung makatuligsa ke Trump, wagas, which the orange buffoon deserves I know. Pero pag makapuri at magdepensa sa kabulastugan ng a–mal at hay-p na Duterte, daig pa sa wagas. Lalu na ang mga pulitiko na dating lumaban sa diktadurang Marcos, ano kaya, nakulam ba (ang) mga ito?

    No, Chandler. Neither kulam nor barang, not even the most potent voodoo spell, might have been cast on these politicians self-aggrandized as having been “forged in the crucible of the Marcos dictatorship,” arrogating unto themselves the honorifi c “champion of human rights,” bequeathing to them and them alone the monopoly of the people’s struggle against martial law, and gaining for themselves and for their extended kin more than enough political capital stock to both rule and reign in the public domain.

    They are those the unrepentant, unrecognized aktibista of the old order spit at as queso de bola – as much for the color: bloody red on the outside, royal, if craven, yellow inside, as for their propensity for beguiling the masa with their…what else, pambobola. Cheesy as they can get, and stinking too.

    Yes, they are the first and noisiest to cry Nunquam Iterum! – Never Again! – clenched fist up in the air, every September 21, in somber remembrance of the day Marcos snuff ed out democracy in the country, ever reminding their audience of their role in the struggle which gets ever bigger through the years.

    Conversely, theirs too were the first and loudest shouts of “Yes, Yes Yes” last May 23, the day Duterte put terror-besieged Mindanao under martial law, if only to please their current patron.

    So, ferociously they fought Marcos’ martial law.

    So, totally they support Duterte’s martial law.

    Glaring inconsistency glossed over, unreasoningly, as “different stand for different fellas in different times.” The irrationality all too conspicuous in Duterte himself proclaiming affinity of his military diktat to the Marcosian martial misrule: “So kayong mga kababayan ko, you have experienced martial law it will not be any different from what President Marcos did. I’ll be harsh.”

    Harshness, Duterte justified thus: “I have to do it to preserve the Republic of the Philippines.”

    Instantly evoking the Dictator’s similar justification for his: “I did not become President to preside over the death of the Republic.”

    Indeed, as Marcos’ martial law was grounded “as a last defense against two grave dangers to the state. One was a rebellion mounted by a strange conspiracy of leftist and rightist radicals. The other was a secessionist movement supported by foreign groups,” so is Duterte’s against the strangest conspiracy of drug lords founding a terrorist group backed up by right-wing coup pals and supported by foreign Islamists. And that is but the most recent permutation of Duterte’s casus belli for his martial (mis)adventure.

    Still, the red-once unceasing in their hallelujahs to Duterte’s golpe de gulat. Proving not so much the depth of their supposed immersion in dialectical materialism as the obvious perversion in their diametrical contradiction. Indeed, their corruption of historical materialism most manifest in their acquiescence to the revision of Philippine history, and their reduction of a Marxist philosophy to plain human greed. Ay, the much heralded conscientization of their youth ageing most disgracefully to unconscionability. Anyare, kasama?

    Marcos is dead!
    Marcos is buried!
    Marcos is resurrected,
    Duterte, long live!

    Unlearned of our past, we are a people dumbed. We are a nation damned.

    Santayana, alas!


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here