MARCH OF THE VOLUNTEERS

MARCH OF THE VOLUNTEERS
(based on the national anthem of the People's Republic of China)

Arise! You who refuse to be enslaved!
Let's stand up and bond like walls out of our great flesh and blood
Facing with a world now in a greatest peril
United with a struggle and a common cry:
Arise! Arise! Arise!
All of us with one heart
Braving the enemy's fire, March on!
Braving the enemy's fire, March on!
March on! March on! On!

March on! People of different nations!
With our struggle as guide, vanguard leading in a long march,
Millions now one, united with one goal
Creating, building, protecting with our struggle:
March on! March on! March on!
We will for generations
Rise high the great red banner*, march on!
Rise high the great red banner, march on!
March on! March on! On!

*or "Rise high Mao Zedong's Banner"

This English version being made was an indirect translation of the Chinese national anthem made by Tien Han and Nie Er during the Sino-Japanese war. However, it was became famous at first for being a song in a film made since 1935, wherein people sung it while marching and carrying guns.

But during the foundation of the Chinese People's Republic, people unanimously accepted the hymn as its provisional national anthem. According to Chou Enlai, especially in the third part:
"We still have imperialist enemies in front of us. The more we progress in development, the more the imperialists will hate us, seek to undermine us, attack us. Can you say that we won't be in peril?"
In these words, Mao Zedong agreed upon to what Chou said, since some writers found contradicting regarding the third part of the song.

However,
After the cultural revolution (wherein the hymn was banned and instead "Dong Fang Hong" was being played as a semi-national anthem status), the March of the Volunteers was restored by the National People's Congress in 1978 (the era of Hua Guofeng), but with different lyrics; however, these new lyrics were never very popular and caused a great deal of confusion. For example, the last sentence of the lyrics read "inherit the thinking of Chairman Mao".

And due to the confusion regarding the lyrics, the original version was restored in 1982, followed by declaring it as the official national anthem last 2004.

In fact,
I consider that hymn a "Chinese Marseillaise", and I even think that the 1978 version would be re-adapted as the second stanza of the hymn, not because it shows how the party continues to lead the Chinese people in its long march to victory, but of continuing Mao's legacy through his thought and even contribution in Chinese history. Just like the first part wherein it shows how the Chinese stood to fight, the second shows how the Chinese continue its struggle.

OF COMPARING TWO HISTORY-LOVING MEN

OF COMPARING TWO HISTORY-LOVING MEN
(Comparing Ambeth Ocampo and Manuel Quezon III)

While reading every issue of the Inquirer both hard and softcopy (courtesy of inquirer.net), I read some of articles made by Manuel Quezon III and Ambeth Ocampo. Both of them are good writers, whose expertise is more into history-that makes the write-up long and studded with historical facts, of information coming from age-old sources and modern-day accounts.

However,
Despite similar “inclinations” and “likes”, they have different ideas and influences. Quezon is more of a liberal conservative approach, and even criticizing some progressive personalities (especially activists) and politicians, especially in this coming elections [1] while Ambeth Ocampo focused much in historical affairs, just like his obsession with Rizaliana [2] and other history related events unknown to textbooks. [3]

And as I expect, Ocampo perhaps tackle about typhoons, again in a historical-like approach using Blair and Robertson index (a 55-volume compilation of historical documents edited by Emma Helen Blair and James Alexander Robertson) just to have a reference about “meteorology and meteorological phenomena.” and according to him:

“Naturally there is mention of weather as observed by the Spanish Jesuits who set up the world famous Manila Observatory in the Walled City in 1865 just to compile and analyze typhoon and earthquake data.” [4]

How about the liberal-conservative Quezon?
He tacked much about elections, then putting some historical twists as part of comparing the present to the past, as well as of Political parties preparing most of thetime filling the posts and strategies in order to win [4] just like the announcement of Estrada-Binay tandem last Wednesday.

Somehow these two columnists tried much in emphasizing past events and comparing it to present situations around the country. And just like Ocampo’s write-up on typhoons (again, with historical basis), Quezon tackled the recent floods due to typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng, and even compared it to the floods of 1943. Well… in this typhoon prone area, he’ll simply say it and recall the past events! He even put some visuals as evidence (not posted in Inquirer, but in his blog rather) [5].

How about in politics?
I seldom see Ocampo’s write-ups and commentaries tackling about politics unlike Quezon. But despite of that, he is more into socio-economic affairs just like his write-up about globalization, and he even said that:
“History becomes relevant to our time when we realize that globalization is not new. We had it in the Galleon Trade between Mexico and the Philippines four centuries ago.”[6]
And I consider that his storytelling approach seemed good. Different from Quezon and his purely commentary approach, and purports with facts being stated (or in his blog, visuals and other further information not being mentioned in his Inquirer column.)

Quezon’s approach in politics seemed continuous. And expecting that he’ll continuously tackle politicians and their actions and comparing it to the past-related events. Just like this write-up regarding political conventions and it says:
“The closing acts of the traditional conventions took place in 1965, when the Nacionalista Party convention went to Ferdinand Marcos due to Imelda Marcos’ charm offensive to court the support of the Lopez bloc, and because Emmanuel Pelaez refused to bribe his way to victory, and in 1969, when there were allegations that the Liberals chose Sergio Osmeña Jr. as their candidate because Diosdado Macapagal wanted a candidate who’d lose (so he could make a comeback), and supposedly because of the “Marcos Liberals,” who maneuvered to select the weakest possible candidate versus the incumbent president.
Having subverted the integrity, such as it was, of the two leading parties, Marcos then devoted himself to systematically destroying them during martial law. He tried to restore the pre-war one-party system, and much as we have a theoretical multi-party system, his legacy continues, except that the shelf life of every administration party is only as long as the term of the incumbent who created it.”[7]

I simply expect that, since he tried to compare the recent events with the ones in the past that seemed to be similar, of TRAPOs (Traditional Politicans), of their tactics, of scandals, and of attempts.

Well…
I, being focused in the computer screen and reading some write-ups, tried much in reading posts made by these two men. And despite tackling with an historical approach, what I expect was and is simple: “one is a storyteller; the other is a politically inclined analyst.”


SOURCES:

[1][4][7]http://www.quezon.ph/2009/10/22/the-long-view-hi%E2%80%99s-and-hello%E2%80%99s-in-three-stages/

[2]http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20070323-56478/New_questions_about_Rizal

[3]http://opinion.inquirer.net/columnist/?colid=868

[4]http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20090930-227607/Typhoons-in-history

[5]http://www.quezon.ph/2009/10/15/blog-action-day-postmortems/

[6]http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20090925-226774/Globalization-in-the-Philippines-400-years-ago

WHY NOT BOMBARD THE STUDENT COUNCIL HEADQUARTERS?

WHY NOT BOMBARD THE STUDENT COUNCIL HEADQUARTERS?
By Katleah Iskre Ulrike

Many of students studying are trying to be enlightened both by practise and by theory. And most of them are trying hard to cope with the ideas coming not just from the four corners of the classroom but of course, from the realities happened around the community. We may think that kind of student is a progressive one, trying to use education not as a total solution but as a contributing factor in solving problems. However, Not all students are realist and progressive. Since most of the studentry are simply focused much on the "references", of "boxed-up ideas", and even the "vices" in which likely for them to be corrupted rather than enlightened due to lack of real ideas and minimal approach to information. Otherwise they become too apolitical and even asocietal towards the society itself, not caring the society and instead advocating much of the trendish parts what the gentry wanted for them; like forcing them to advocate "reckless individualism", "bogus charity", of "illiberal liberalism" instead of "collective action", of "serving one's people", and of "guided liberalism."

But then, Some students, driven by changes every year, may end up in various ideas. Some may ought to be progressive, to be moderate, to be reactionary, or remain apolitical and asocietal due to what they've seen in every event. Rallies perhaps may called them as eyesore to the streets while others call it as agitation and propaganda based on realities, Leaflets are often called as propaganda pieces or lies while others seriously tend to read it and look further in some of its sources. But the rest? Simply not caring it, and instead contenting in their contradicting dreams and vices in life.

But not all things are not just end up in a petition or in the rally, as most students simply use the electoral process as a means of change in the student council seat. I notice that for now some students simply vote groups who are "pro-student", who are using much of their popularity, scholarship than of realistic ideas which include exposing truth; as well as of having a series of short-term programs that we may call as bread and circuses to the studentry.
Well...
They may deserve to win, since most of these "pro-student" ones are using their popularity than idea most of the time, not noticing that working in the council is a serious job, especially when it comes to defending student's rights, of accelerating student welfare, as well as of making the studentry and the institution itself closer to the people. But instead? They are just mere displays, of using their position as a requirement for their jobs, of being mouthpieces of the bureaucrat administrators, and even accepting mere compromises like increasing tuition and other redundant fees for the sake of having money for themselves. For sure some students may have experience this kind of thing made by the council, of looking what's behind than contenting at the front. As well as thinking that they simply doing somewhat contrary to their plans as elected officers of the council. Worst is that some may tried much in saying their grievances to them, but they end up none.

Are all the students simply became blind, deaf and mute as they enjoy the bread and circuses made by these people? Of thinking of the entire studentry as part of the school and not as a member of a greater society? Or are they affirming that they separate themselves for goddamn sake? Quite sad isn't it? But it makes us agitate and again yearning for change! I myself may recommend not just content in the electoral process as a means of change, why not start reading Mao's work?:

炮打司令部——我的一张大字报
BOMBARD THE HEADQUARTERS!

Based in a big character poster calling the people to expose the rotten core and calling for its immediate destruction, for sure the studentry may started to create not just widespread protests, but to create widespread criticism directly against the ones who are creating such actions and ideas contrary to the dreams of the studentry! How come the council members doing most of the time acting as if as gentleman's club members than as a collective planners? Or even how come after the election the office wherein they are planning remained closed? Well... they may be good in "studies" but not in "service", they may be good in "theory" but not in "practise", but then-they are still good as sitting ducks not as barking and biting dogs! Too bad for them, for what they made is too late.

OF SEEING THE FLAG AS AN EMBLEM OF ANTI-IMPERIALIST STRUGGLE

OF SEEING THE FLAG AS AN EMBLEM OF ANTI-IMPERIALIST STRUGGLE
(Or OF SEEING THE FLAG AS AN INSPIRATION FOR THE INSURRECTION)

Flag of the Philippines with the Red on top to signify war,

but it may reinterpret again as a symbol of anti-imperialist struggle

We use to look at the TV set or in every part of our community a flag famous for its struggle against the Spaniards and the Americans, as well as a badge of patriotism inspired by every people involved in its fight.

However,

Not all things within that flag was and is well discussed. To others, it was a flag associated with freemasonry (like Andres Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo) since it's design and symbol are well connected to the Jacobin ideals of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity while some said that was connected much to the geography, especially the sun and stars wherein aligned with the provinces and other places affected by colonial oppression and native struggles against the oppressor; white, blue and red may signifies cleanliness, blood and justice or even resembles a debt of honour to the almighty United States since Aguinaldo at first supported them during the Spanish-American war, not knowing its imperialistic plans towards the nation at that time.

But despite different interpretations, the Philippine flag resembles the ideals of patriotism and of independence made by the Filipino people alongside the red flag as the banner of the revolution. Most people perhaps may say that the flag symbolizes blood and honour and at the same time land and liberty due to the revolutionary ideals of the people at that time, and not of a "for sake" stance of adding color to the flag just to show recognition as a movement. The flag somehow also shows the methaphysical side wherein it is somewhat inspired by the anting-antings and agimats worn by the Katipuneros to ward off bullets. And the stars forming the triangle in the flag may also symbolizes or substitutes the KKK (just like the stamp used by the first republic) while the sun pertains to liberty (like the original flag); and the colors may resemble martyrdom in the land (Red) and seas, skies (Blue) covering the entire nation then in revolt.

Stamp of Aguinaldo's Philippine Republic,
wherein the KKK was still featured

In addition to that,

The flag, especially with a revolutionary past, may have been a part of the 20th century struggles in Asia, or perhaps an inspiration; especially like the colors Red and Blue or even the yellow star like the flag of the Vietcong during the war in Vietnam, wherein it shows a bit similarity with our flag, but with the red on top, with a different interpretation signifying the unity of the Red north and the Blue south under patriotism, democracy and socialism. And perhaps some Filipinos may disagree upon what I have said despite seeing this flag and shows how similar it was.

Flag of the former Republic of South Vietnam,
known as the Vietcong flag

But then, Despite all events throughout the years, people may have tried much in seeking the anti-imperialist interpretation of the flag, not just the mere patriotic ones as what bourgeois-liberals may have said, but of the ones interpreted by people whose love of country includes love of people and faithfully serving them; like the Cuban flag whose roots were coming from anti-imperialist and popular-patriotic heroes like Marti-who even spoke a warning against America and its attempt to use Cuba after being liberated from Spain! But despite of that, Marti's influence were mostly of a liberal type, but then, he influenced every patriot including socialists like Commandante y Jefe Fidel; same as here like don Belong de los Reyes and Don Crisanto Evangelista. They are both Filipino revolutionaries, but they also became Marxists, or even Andres Bonifacio whose readings may include mob violence aside from Jacobin-Liberal inclined writings.

For me,
These shows that despite different interpretations especially of banners with similarities, I think that the Philippine experience may have influenced other struggles in Asia, primarily in the southeast. From the day Sun Yat-Sen supported Ponce, of Laurel tried to join the Indonesian freedom fighters to a float featuring a Viet-Cong warrior during the lantern parade in UP Diliman, all of these shows that how progressive leaning and freedom loving Filipinos are willing to support liberation struggles and even socialism, all despite countless oppression made by domestic and foreign enemies and slanderers of the people.

LITTLE MISS ACTIVIST

LITTLE MISS ACTIVIST

CULTURE FOR A SAKE?

CULTURE FOR A SAKE?

Years after I created my work about subcultural and cultural struggles, it seems that the ideas being written are likely to be considered and adjusted out of a certain condition. Perhaps, these are out of certain talks to some people coming from other genres, and despite any "drifts" likely to get erupt, I felt somewhat a sense of consideration, of accepting them and joining in "forging" to create a new culture.

In fact,
My writeup, that shows conflict between "Mainstream" and "Alternative" (underground) scenes, as well as against "For sake" ideas are likely to stop as every genre, especially being forged by realism and of trying to resist the flow, are likely to be united despite diversity in order to destroy the ones who pushed every people into the enslaving flow, or rather say "of joining into the flow" not knowing where it will stop, as well as to create a new culture from the ruins and ashes of the culture where "total cooptaton" and "total submission" involved.

As what former U.P. President Salvador Lopez hath said: "The word has soul as well as body", cultures are intended to have a real purpose in life. Especially in helping the people building a revolutionary community, a university of life that sprung from the minds of an emancipated being, and not of "dead words, dead sounds, and little or no sense at all."

I remember when I talked with my friend, former L.F.S (League of Filipino Students) member Joel Garduce, he said that "cultures must be deeply rooted and molded for people's aspirations," and thus, I may say that his idea regarding an "organic" culture may include subcultures that resisted the mainstream scene and integrating instead to a greater culture of the people, and be forged, molded with people's ideas and aspirations and not those who are creating "for a sake." of boxed up ideas coming from the enslaving mainstream scene.

Let us say that these genres, are created with the goal of showing their artistic spirit in a productive manner; a part of a culture in which man intended to preserve & to cherish, but some people, whose goal is to accumulate profit, tend to enslave every culture, genre & use as a tool of exploitation. And thus, the ones who resist are those who tend their artistic ideas & tendencies as a cultural tool of resistance & struggle whilst those who join into the flow are the ones who contribute in enslaving people's minds, of corrupting culture and of stereotyping out of it.

Well...
Let's just say that I am deeply influenced by proletarian mass struggles as well as the working class-ness of their cultures, same as the genres involved; especially through their music and art. Perhaps, let's take "Punk" and "Hiphop" for example.

We see these two genres as "overused", "stereotyped", or in case of gangsta (also a part of hiphop) "lumpenproletarian" in nature due to its music and lifestyle, particularly in fashion. Back then these two genres are tools of revolutionary struggle against the dreaded system and exploitation. From the songs of Dead Kennedys, of Crass, to Tupac Shakur and Public Enemy, they spoke of life and on how to fight within it, even to the point of advocating revolution. But now, we see of anything "Pop-fied", of becoming stereotypically bourgeois than becoming totally worker-based in its idea and appearance. Gangsta rap, fueled by mainstream interests and of for sake ideas overglorifies bourgeois culture and of lumpenproletarian lifestyles that corrupts the genre or even Hiphop culture itself. Same as those who stereotypically carrying guitars and creating songs "for sake". Perhaps, few persons, groups tend to resist and remain "working-class" than be corrupted by the flow, becoming blind in following their roots, and contenting in their orgiastic lifestyle.

That would be also possible to other genres affected by the sugar-coated promises of mainstream scene. Since mainstream culture tends to dominate much, supported by capitalistic interests and power from corrupted interests within the dreaded system. That scene manipulates anything, negating much of the genre as possible.

But then,
As time changes, cultures may diversify but the message may likely to remain or change depending on the idea given or the situation related. Hiphop for example, diverses into other sub-categories of its won kind as time changes, same as ideas regarding the trend. And that culture, as it diversifies, affects the real purpose. Like "calling for a struggle", it becomes a mere word since that culture integrate much into the mainstream scene, of commercialism, or rather say of getting used by the reaction! And as for Hiphop, it becomes too lumpen than revolutionary in stating anything according to their lyrics written; worst in interpreting ideas being said, becoming stereotypically "for sake of something". They may've listened Tupac, but they didn't know what Tupac says. Same as in other subgenres-cultures wherein music and theatre is their main forte.

Well, in general,
These problems regarding the state of culture grows worse. Sorry if I say something that may consider against some people who are thinking of "for sake", since their problem is that, they are looking for money by using their idea much, than of propagating their idea, of calling for struggle, and of life; Tupac may've spoken of emancipation of the black from the ghetto, comparing to Soulja boy whose advocacy is related to the asses of his "hoes". These two are hiphoppers, but they contradict much of their content, worst is that most listeners listen and sing, but they didn't know what content is better for them. Same as in other means like painting or plastic arts, even theatre and cinema, wherein some tend to show something, or perhaps show nothing since they are doing it "for sake", that in fact, doing it just to accumulate more profit by using their useful-useless talent.

For sure many of us see, hear, speak out of these things around us courtesy of the "for sake" mainstream scene since it is "cheaper". But then, we didn't look at the content inside every writeup, painting, movie and even the song being played since they created it "for sake", culture nowadays are propagating much of these with minimal influences from their supposed "roots", using it just to accumulate profit and fans most of the time, or I should say participating in creating boxed-up mindsets and obliging people to join in the flow. But despite of these, few or some will resist their ideas and instead calling for its immediate destruction-of destroying the "for sake" mainstream scene alongside the destruction of capitalism!

Academic freedom? Or Corporate responsibility?

Academic freedom? Or Corporate responsibility?
by Lualhati Madlangawa-Guerrero

From the days I kept on studying in school, I simply experience more of restriction of idea and of legally motivated movement than of enjoying friends and of accumulating knowledge. This problem somehow I think, seemed a part of a greater plan in a guise of "striving for academic excellence"- simply by blocking away academic freedom and progressive instruction in every academic institution, especially if it is owned by a corporate giant.

In fact,
Upon writing this, I read a post in Multiply regarding the criticism of students protesting against the proposal on banning long haired men in that school. The work seemed well, readable and more of an intellectual, however that person simply defends the corporation than the educational institution, simply by saying some words coming from the student manual. Well... that student manual was and is a tool of restrictions made by the administrators to control student's idea and of legally motivated movement, of thinking subversive as bad-contrary to the said "Academic freedom" and "progressive instruction" in that said institution. How come that person is defending the administrator's than of the student's interests?

Well...
That person, in defending, may say this academic circular as part of her defence:
Moreover, according to the Academic Circular No. 1, Revised 2005 Section 4, Paragraph 5, Male students are not allowed to wear earrings, ball caps and to sport colored or loose longhairs (Long hair should be pony-tailed and well groomed). This is the policy of the University crafted by the Administration and of course they will not create another policy that would contradict the one existing.
Okay, fine. But how come the administrators are proposing a policy against long haired male persons despite that policy? Only to end up trashed out due to opposition made by males who also sport long hairs? That person defending and saying that proposed policy is a mere "suggestion?" To them it is nothing, but to others it is a serious matter to oppose before it pass through and accepted by these puppets.

For me, I simply disagree with that academic circular, especially of not allowing to wear headgear and to sport colored hair? Why? Just because to show "Manliness" and "decency?" There's nothing wrong in going to campus wearing a cap and wandering around, but not inside the classroom especially during classes. And how about sporting long hair or colored hair? There's nothing wrong with that, especially that's his will to have so, and he even trying himself to look decent despite having a long or a colored hair. I also even think that if a member of a Sikh minority was studying there, will he pass the ordeal of having a short hair? Of not wearing a turban? School policies may disagree with the Sikh religious dogma of having uncut hair and of turbans too!

Secondly, I disagree the manual for saying this:
“Do not conduct/or join rallies, illegal assemblies and similar acts that disrupt academic functions.”

These words seemed conflicting with the ideals concerning academic and other basic freedoms man have, that includes the school as long as it has a reason and a basis in conducting a legally motivated demonstration. Another is that, that person who was looking from the door and criticizing the protesters outside the campus seemed too annoying and even saying "not to conduct rallies that disrupt academic institutions," Is she or the university include outside the campus in saying it? And how come the university was also setting a "legal hour" to conduct an activity from 12:30 to 1:00? Legal hours may include these demonstrations, especially coming from a legally recognized progressive organization.

Well...

If Foucault (RIP) lives, he would even call that institution as a "prison", and that institution is also an example of a one part of a vast network, including schools, military institutions, hospitals, and factories, which build a panoptic society for its members. This system creates “…disciplinary careers…” (Discipline and Punish, p. 300) for those locked within its corridors. It is operated under the scientific authority of medicine, psychology and criminology. As well as, it operates according to principles which ensure that it “…cannot fail to produce delinquents.” (Discipline and Punish, p. 266) Delinquency, indeed, is produced when social petty crime (such as taking wood in the lord's lands) is no longer tolerated, creating a class of specialized "delinquents" which acts as the police's proxy in surveillance of society.

Back to the topic,
The example that I have stated, somehow shows how a privately owned institution is seemly bipolar, of being an educational institution and of a corporation, of being adhere to academic freedom and of being committed to corporate social responsibility, these are quite opposing especially in ideas related to these. Just like the earlier protests against the proposed "long hair policy", and of a decree "not conducting rallies and other progressive but legally motivated events", it diminishes academic freedom and even "progressive instruction" to mere words, and also to expand further the administrator's "corporate-related ideas" that may also curb the ideas of a youth into a mere educated person motivated by profit, of becoming a peon of the ruling gentry in a backward, corrupted system.

In addition to that,
Having a commericalized, colonialized, fascist type of education, motivated and advocated by corporate minded interests tries to turn youth into peons. According to the first and second writeups I have made, it even shows how every progressive leaning youth is trying to preserve its freedoms and privileges despite the administration's attempt to curtail. The problem of every corporate minded owner of an educational institution tends to ailienate education, and even youth from the real face of the society, and even tends to "unite" education with profit in a guise of development, profit through increase in exorbitant fees and even tries to minimize student movement through creating its set of rules that contradicts academic freedom and progressive instruction.

How worrying and even agitating, especially that a student or a teacher, may say to someone that "You are studying in a private school, you must be thankful that you study so don't argue" or "You need to study your lessons, it is a key for the future". But still, you cannot underestimate the growing numbers of angry students who are trying to express their ideas, their reasons, their aspirations contrary to the ideas of the school, whether it is state or private! And not all things arguable can be pass through parliamentary procedure, especially if around is more of a reaction than of progress- that is the real way of a student, for anything around is part of a greater struggle man must pass.