"Which weighs heavier in thou heart, the power of thy love or thy love for power???"
"I think what the Philippines needs is not a new beginning but an end. An end to all the corruption and greed and misconceptions on freedom and market economy that we have. We should be willing first to die before we can be truly reborn. We never had a chance to fully develop into a democratic nation. We were rushed into democracy by the Americans after 300 or so years of colonial rule. That’s just too much too fast and today is the result of yesterday’s mistakes."
The above example is fairly clear cut but the evolutionary underpinnings of other behaviors are a good deal more difficult to pin down so I will refrain from taking up too much space presenting what are at best difficult to test hypotheses. The point is, that there is such a thing as human nature, that we have a certain set of drives and needs and most methods for the pursuit of happiness focus on the satisfaction of one or more of these drives and needs.
We need food and water and we desire a variety of food that tastes good.
We need shelter and we desire comfort.
We desire sex with attractive members of the opposite sex (subject to a variety of well known exceptions).
We desire to be members of a group in which we feel that we belong i.e. friendship and a sense of community
Within our groups we desire status and power and we desire status and power for our group over other groups.
We seek to avoid hunger, pain, discomfort and for as long as is reasonably possible, death.
We desire for the world and our lives to make sense and to have control over our lives and our surroundings.
We desire and seek to maintain a sense of self-worth
How happy we are relates not only to where we stand in relation to the satisfaction of our inbuilt goals, but also to whether our circumstances are getting better or worse. The same man could at one moment be miserable because he is living in an uncomfortable mud hut, with a plain looking woman who neither respects nor likes him and who seldom if ever feels like having sex with him, because his food is bland, because he is at the bottom of the village hierarchy and because he has no way of making sense of his circumstances or forming a plan for changing them. Later after spending a half hour of terror being hunted (unsuccessfully) by a tiger, he feels very happy just to be alive, because no matter how bad your circumstances are, no longer being hunted by a tiger is a huge improvement. Or consider how a hamburger could be either utterly mundane and uninteresting or a great treat depending on whether the previous week was spent dining in fine restaurants or being served bread and water in prison.
If improvements in circumstances are associated with happiness, worsening of circumstances (even if things still really aren't that bad) is associated with unhappiness or even outright misery. Imagine how much happiness you might feel if you won a competition that allowed you to have a maid to do your housework for you for year. You would probably be happy at first but after a while you would get used to this privilege and probably not be much happier than you were before. Now imagine how you would feel when the year was over and you had to go back to washing dishes or ironing shirts or doing whatever other chores you dislike. Experience and a wealth of scientific evidence suggests that the loss is felt much more keenly than the original gain even though that which is lost or gained is identical, an effect known as Loss Aversion.
By this point you are probably asking what any of this has to do with consumerism and economic policy. The basic mechanism by which the consumer seeks happiness is by making sure that he or she always has a little bit more than they had before, allowing them not only to reap the psychological rewards of living in a safe and comfortable environment but also those associated with improvements in living conditions, in particular the rewards associated with having more, bigger, faster and shinier stuff. This drive for more is driven not only by the desire for constant improvements in conditions (which we perceive as rewarding) but also by the desire for status. Its not just about having more than you had before, its about having more than the neighbors. This status part of the happiness equation functions just as well at lower average incomes as it does at higher ones, in the poorest villages of Africa the man with the most head of cattle is still happier than the man with the least and more importantly he is likely to be happier than a person at the bottom of the income distribution of a richer society even though his absolute living standard is poorer.
In fact, above a certain level of wealth/standard of living, happiness depends only very weakly on the absolute standard of living, having more to do with the direction of change, status and myriad social factors.
Most of us have a least a passing familiarity with the problems that consumerism, especially when combined with easy access to credit, can cause. You get used to the happy feelings associated with having recently purchased something new, maybe it's a better mobile phone, a bigger car, a better digital camera. When it has been too long since the latest purchase and the happy feeling starts to taper off the temptation to go out and buy something else is like a mild version of what a coke-head must feel when his/her buzz is starting to taper and its time to go in search of the next line or bump.
So long as the coke head has more coke, or the consumer has sufficient income to be able to buy newer and better things all seems to be well. However, if the economy isn't great and the consumer's income stagnates, or other costs (e.g. healthcare) rise, or the neighbors are buying shiny new things at a rate that is hard to keep up with, then the consumer starts to feel unhappy and under pressure. They can respond to this in one of a handful of ways, either by working more hours, by taking on more risk (canceling insurance), by running down their savings or by borrowing money. At first you might try to live within your means, resist the temptation to work more overtime (if you are fortunate enough for it to be voluntary) and spend more time with the kids. But those damn neighbors and their neighbors just got a second mortgage and are working all the hours, they have a BIG shiny new car, they are getting a pool put in and you have a sneaking suspicion they have been getting cosmetic surgery too. You could have dealt with having to tighten the belt a bit if everyone else did it too, but the way things are going your pride can't take having the oldest car and the shabbiest clothes on the block so you pull the trigger and do it.
You work the extra hours or maybe change to a higher-pressure but higher-wage job, you take out a second mortgage to get access to the equity on your home and hope to God that house prices keep rising. You get a newer car, stone worktops in the kitchen, newer clothes and better gadgets and for a while you feel like you are winning. But after a while you notice that you hardly have time for to spend with you wife/husband/children/friends, and most of time you spend in your beautiful house, is spent sleeping. You start to wonder if it is all worth it, but you try to push the thought away because if the way you were living before was hard then, it would be so much harder now to give it all up and go back to how it was. Loss aversion and the need to service your many debts have you trapped in your new high-stress life. Even though you now realize you would happily give up a good deal of wealth and status in order to live at a slower pace and have time for your husband/wife/children/friends and to pursue personal projects be they brewing, political activism, car customization or music, you are in a position which is very hard to get back from and that's even before the bottom drops out of the housing bubble leaving you with mortgage debts bigger than the value of your house. 
If the pursuit of more, bigger, faster and shinier is problematic for individual consumers, it is that much more so at a planetary scale. The problem with this method for the pursuit of happiness is sustainability. Economic growth is derived from one of two things namely efficiency gains i.e. increases in the amount or value of products which can be generated from a given set of inputs (labour and materials/capital) or increases in economic throughput (the amount of materials consumed and wastes produced and the number of man/woman-hours worked). Thus the drive to always have a bit more today than we did yesterday, the drive for growth, leads us to increase the efficiency of our economies but also to increase economic throughput. While it would in principle, be possible to attain economic growth with constant levels of economic throughput (materials and labour in, wastes out) in practice this doesn't happen. The use of labor saving devices which allow one worker to produce more goods and services generally results in increased energy use. This is true for the introduction of tractors in agriculture, jackhammers for digging up the street etc. Indeed these labor-saving innovations also result in the increased use of physical resources, it takes a lot more steel to make a jackhammer and compressor than it does to make a few pickaxe heads. The ultimate problem then, is that at present economic growth is reliant on continuously increasing inputs, and the world is a finite and with respect at least to mass, essentially a closed system. The planet contains a finite amount of the materials on which economic growth relies copper, platinum, rare earth metals etc.
It isn't fashionable these days to point out that the earth's resources are limited. Dire predictions were made in the 1970's about likely food shortages and technology in the form of the green revolution (mechanization, fertilizers and agrochemicals) ensured that the dire predictions were proved dramatically wrong. Instead of worldwide famine, we have an epidemic of obesity and diabetes in the West. Many people remain hungry worldwide, but the problem is one of distribution rather than scale of production.
Historically we have always been able avoid the consequences of shortages either by through technical innovation or through substitution. When wood became scarce in the UK the people didn't freeze to death, they shifted to coal. It is commonly argued that his process of innovation and substitution is self-regulating and that it will allow economic growth to continue indefinitely and any suggestion that maybe we shouldn't be pushing so hard for growth (more, bigger, faster, shinier) is economic heresy. On closer examination this Cornucopian worldview (it'll all be OK don't worry about it and just keep shopping) seems hopelessly naive. While it seems unlikely that we will ever run into an absolute scarcity of some necessary raw material (e.g. copper, it is an element after all and hence in practical terms indestructible) so called Ricardian scarcity is definitely to be expected. That is to say we are being/will be forced to mine ores with progressively lower copper contents in smaller deposits in more remote locations. Now technically this is doable, but even allowing for efficiency gains the likely result is higher costs particularly in the form of energy.
We can deal relatively easily with an increase in the scarcity of one or more raw materials by using more of some other input, especially if this input is energy. With enough energy you could "mine" seawater for almost any metal, it isn't done simply because of the horrendous inefficiency. The real problem arises when a range of material inputs become scarcer at the same time as energy becomes scarce. Oil prices are have been high for a long time and nobody expects them to fall significantly in the foreseeable future. Gas prices are rising. Oil is already being extracted from tar sands despite the punitive energy costs involved and the synthesis of liquid fuels from coal is for the first time being considered in countries not subject to an embargo (south Africa) or a wartime blockade (WW II Germany). On top of all this the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is higher than it has been for about 3 million years and nobody is quite sure how severe the effects of global warming are likely to be. Even raising the populations of India and china up to the living standards and therefore rates of resource use currently experienced in the west could be more than the planet will stand. To continue to pursue growth as the be all and end all in western societies which have already reached the saturation point on the wealth-happiness curve is foolish in the extreme.
Consumerism and the pursuit of growth as the sole goal of economic policy are costing us in terms of human happiness and putting an unsustainable strain on the planet. A solution to the societal and environmental challenges we face will require us not only to invest in and implement new technologies but also to reconsider our priorities, in short to find other ways to be happy.
It would be daft to expect human nature, after being essentially constant over millennia to suddenly change constantly. People are going to continue wanting status and power and friends and good food and comfort and a sense of purpose. Whatever happens we will still be happiest when things are getting better over time with respect to our inbuilt goals. Humans are tremendously flexible and it is possible to reshape our minds to the extent that we transcend these inbuilt goals, but of those that attempt this very few actually succeed. Thus for most of us it is a question of how we can pursue our inbuilt goals in a way that is environmentally and emotionally sustainable (get happy, stay happy).
The pursuit of status is intrinsic to our nature, it isn't going away, but we need not pursue status by trying to own more and better things than our neighbors. Our drive to compete can be expressed through a number of different outlets; sports, creative pursuits (my homebrew is better than yours...) etc. it is down to us to choose outlets which don't cause us problems in the long run. The flexibility of humanity means that it is entirely possible to imagine a world where conspicuous consumption is frowned upon rather than celebrated, but it will only appear if people decide to lead by example.
Our desire for continuous improvement of one kind or another can again be satisfied through creative pursuits, for example there is no absolute limit on how good a person might get a playing the guitar. A lifetime of improvement and satisfaction is possible without the consumption of significant amounts of additional resources.
In the final analysis the behavior of the economy is nothing more or less than the sum of all the actors in it. As individual actors redefine their priorities, the behavior of the whole system changes. One reason that the growth rate of the French economy has typically been lower than that of the American economy is that French workers/voters have generally decided that they would rather have more holidays and shorter working hours than they would have more money. The problem that we face today is that globalization has reduced the ability of the majority of people to make these kind of choices for themselves.
The balance of power between capital and labor has shifted to the extent that workers often have little choice as to many hours they work or how much annual leave they take. Employment contracts are typically presented in as follows: These are the conditions, take it or leave it. Competition between companies and the obligation to maximize profit for shareholders means that working conditions often vary little between employers in the same sector (pay and working conditions at Burger King are similar to those at McDonalds) and wages for non-managers often stagnate even in the face of record profits. Under these conditions workers seldom have the choice to work less hours and take more leave in order to make more time for other priorities. In the USA at least regardless of whether a job is high powered or minimum wage, annual leave is minimal and long hours are commonly required. For those making just enough to get by the idea of scaling back on economic activity to make time for other things seems like a cruel joke.
For these reasons changing the structure of society in favor of sustainability almost certainly requires a shift in the balance of power between capital and labor and in favor of labor. Of the many different policies which could be implemented to achieve this the removal of barriers to the formation of unions and the taxation of share dividends at a rate similar to that of wages would be a good start. The introduction of these kinds of changes may also require other changes in the structure of society, concentration of media ownership has an innate tendency to distort national policy debate against policies which will empower the majority at the expense of the wealthy. De-mergers in the realms of media and a return of the fairness doctrine could well be a good start. When considering how to vote, consider which party and which policies will empower you the most. Make sure when politicians claim to offer you choices, that the choices on offer are not only open to those with more wealth than you have, or are realistically likely to have in the near future. It is important to look at details rather than the often misleading rhetoric.
At the personal level we should consider carefully before making new purchases and before increasing our expenditures. Debts make us slaves, but savings are power and freedom. While we may fight for a fairer balance between capital and labor, we also need to recognize where the power currently lies and make sure that we each have a least some capital to invest and invest it wisely and ethically. Resist the temptation to move into a bigger place than is necessary, once you get used to the larger house it will cease to be a significant source of happiness, but loss aversion will keep you from going back to old ways and the increased rent/mortgage will limit your ability to save. Learn to recognize quality goods and when you have to buy something new, buy something that will last. Already here living within your means in terms of rent means that you won't be forced by poverty into buying cheap crap which will break and cost you more in the long run, or into buying even relatively small purchases (computers, hi-fi) on credit and thus limiting your freedom and wasting wealth on paying interest to someone else.
In short, think hard about what will really make you happy in the long run, remember that you will get used to any new comfort and it will in turn become a necessity which you have to work to maintain. Better to concentrate on your own development and in the practice of interesting work and pleasurable pastimes that to accumulate things which will bring no more lasting happiness than a child's toys do, two months after Christmas.
Examine your social environment and how tight or loose it is. When your environment presses upon you restrictions and limitations for example, curfews, you feel it all of the time, and you have this instict to respond in some way. That tightness makes you hunger for more, to break beyond the set limit. This afflicts especially people who are poor, who start with nothing but numerous restrictions in their lives. Machiavelli has what he calls Neo-Princes, those who rise to the top from the very bottom, what we now like to call "rags to riches". The Princes are backward and regressive.They are those born to privilege. They find themselves in an environment that is loose, surrounded by excessive luxuries, and have few constrictions all. Most Princes have no urge to progress beyond their limits and often create nothing worthwhile in this world; they are good at squandering what others have accumulated.
This pressure from the environment does not have to be material poverty. It can sometimes be psychological. You feel unhappy with the world around you and compelled to change something about it or yourself. This dissatisfaction is constant, it gives you direction. and it focuses your energy. I would fall into this category. I must constantly create challenges for myself, find some way of feeling limited and pressured, never resting on what I have done in the past. I see myself as constantly starting with nothing, and compelled to outdo what I have done before.
It matters not what I've succeded in. All that matters is what I'm failing at.
Some people come to rely on others to give them what they want and need. They wait....and complain. Others learn early on that the only thing that is worthwhile is that which you get for yourself, that you make your own in some way. Such types don't like the feeling of dependence or waiting for others to help them.
When I look at our country I see a lot of people who feel no necessity, who have lost the sense of limitations, of their days being numbered, of feeling compelled to move in a particular direction. Too many Princes, not enough Neo-Princes. In countries like China and Russia, it is much different, where almost a national inferiority conflex is taking place.. All nations rise and fall in patterns, and to Machiavelli the fall of the Roman Empire happened when it had become so vast and powerful that it lost the necessity to create and expand. It became a nation of fat, privileged princes...that fell in the end.
When I look at the insurgency in the hills of the communist controlled countries, I see one side compelled by necessity to adapt and be creative. It is either that or die. The other side does not feel such compulsion. To the government , it is not a matter of life or death. To them, they can let the communists slowly grow in power and influence without being a direct threat to their lives. As Napoleon says, the moral to the physical is three to one, and in that area, we are at a disadvantage.
How many times in sports do we see one side fall behind; this acts as an incredible spur to their morale, and they respond by ratcheting up their effort.
Why is it that the Democrats and Obama finally had success while the Republicans and McCain went into free fall for several years?
Necessity, born out of a lack of power.
Anything that is created out of necessity has a power and force. This could be a state like ancient Rome. The ideas and principles that stood at this origin turn into dead forms and conventions over time. People drift away from the beginning and lose a sense of why certain things were created. They become like zombies. A nation or individual must either find a way to return to their origins, to what sparked their creation, or start over and create a new order of things.
Out of power for many years and wandering in the wilderness, the Nazi Party created a new ideology in the 1930s to hang their hats on and remained incredibly focused on this. Slowly they came to power and a position of political dominance with the focus of national security and progress. But growing soft and overconfident with power, they moved away from this origin, lost their sense of original purpose and lost power (and in the end, their lives!).
I find that in my own youth, I hit upon certain ideals and values that related to my individuality, to what separates me from others. Some of this was false rebellion, but some of it was very real and very related to my nature. When I return to those values, to that faith in my peculiarity, I have power. When I conform, when I go astray from that, I wander without purpose. That is why I return to Machiavelli's works, time after time, I return to read and re-read.
The origin of anything is like a root ball for a great tree. When those roots wither or rot, it can take years to notice, but the whole tree slowly dies.
Jaeyoun Kim
September 2003
Filipinos always complain about the corruption in the Philippines. Do you really think the corruption is the problem of the Philippines? I do not think so. I strongly believe that the problem is the lack of love for the Philippines. Let me first talk about my country, Korea. It might help you understand my point. After the Korean War, South Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world. Koreans had to start from scratch because entire country was destroyed completely after the Korean War, and we had no natural resources. Koreans used to talk about the Philippines, for Filipinos were very rich in Asia. We envy Filipinos. Koreans really wanted to be well off like Filipinos. Many Koreans died of famine. My father's brother also died because of famine. Korean government was awfully corrupt and is still very corrupt beyond your imagination, but Korea was able to develop dramatically because Koreans really did their best for the common good with their heart burning with patriotism. Koreans did not work just for themselves but also for their neighborhood and country. Education inspired young men with the spirit of patriotism.
40 years ago, President Park took over the government to reform Korea. He tried to borrow money from other countries, but it was not possible to get a loan and attract a foreign investment because the economy situation of South Korea was so bad. Korea had only three factories. So, President Park sent many mine workers and nurses to Germany so that they could send money to Korea to build a factory. They had to go through a horrible experience. In 1964, President Park visited Germany to borrow money. Hundred of Koreans in Germany came to the airport to welcome him and cried there as they saw the President Park. They asked to him, "President, when can we be well off?" That was the only question everyone asked to him. President Park cried with them and promised them that Korea would be well off if everyone works hard for Korea, and the President of Germany got the strong impression on them and lent money to Korea. So, President Park was able to build many factories in Korea. He always asked Koreans to love their country from their heart. Many Korean scientists and engineers in the USA came back to Korea to help developing country because they wanted their country to be well off. Though they received very small salary, they did their best for Korea. They always hoped that their children would live in well off country.
My parents always brought me to the places where poor and physically handicapped people live. They wanted me to understand their life and help them. I also worked for Catholic Church when I was in the army. The only thing I learned from Catholic Church was that we have to love our neighborhood. And I have loved my neighborhood. Have you cried for the Philippines? I have cried for my country several times. I also cried for the Philippines because of so many poor people. I have been to the New Bilibid prison. What made me sad in the prison were the prisoners who do not have any love for their country. They go to mass and work for Church. They pray everyday. However, they do not love the Philippines. I talked to two prisoners at the maximum security compound, and both of them said that they would leave the Philippines right after they are released from the prison. They said that they would start a new life in other countries and never come back to the Philippines. Many Koreans have a great love for Korea so that we were able to share our wealth with our neighborhood. The owners of factory and company were distributed their profit to their employees fairly so that employees could buy what they needed and saved money for the future and their children.
When I was in Korea, I had a very strong faith and wanted to be a priest. However, when I came to the Philippines, I completely lost my faith. I was very confused when I saw many unbelievable situations in the Philippines. Street kids always make me sad, and I see them everyday. The Philippines is the only Catholic country in Asia, but there are too many poor people here. People go to church every Sunday to pray, but nothing has been changed. My parents came to the Philippines last week and saw this situation. They told me that Korea was much poorer than the present Philippines when they were young. They are so sorry that there so many beggars and street kids. When we went to Pasangjan, I forced my parents to take a boat because it would fun. However, they were not happy after taking a boat. They said that they would not take the boat again because they were sympathized the boat men, for the boat men were very poor and had a small frame. Most of people just took a boat and enjoyed it. But my parents did not enjoy it because of love for them. My mother who has been working for Catholic Church since I was very young told me that if we just go to mass without changing ourselves, we are not Catholic indeed. Faith should come with action. She added that I have to love Filipinos and do good things for them because all of us are same and have received a great love from God. I want Filipinos love their neighborhood and country as much as they love God so that the Philippines will be well off. I am sure that love is the keyword which Filipinos should remember. We cannot change the sinful structure at once. It should start from person. Love must start in everybody in a small scale and have to grow. A lot of things happen if we open up to love. Let's put away our prejudices and look at our worries with our new eyes. I discover that every person is worthy to be loved. Trust in love, because it makes changes possible. Love changes you and me. It changes people, contexts and relationships. It changes the world. Please love your neighborhood and country. Jesus Christ said that whatever we do to others we do to Him. In the Philippines, there is God who are abused and abandoned. There is God who is crying for love.
If you have a child, teach them how to love the Philippines. Teach them why they have to love their neighborhood and country. You already know that God also will be very happy if you love others.
That's all I really want to ask you Filipinos.
After once having an NGO girlfriend who worked for the protection of the environment, I have come to learn a lot from her. Most of our lunch conversations would revolve mainly about the adverse effects on the environment of the reckless exploitation of the country's mineral resources and our dinner chatter would be about her frustrations about the implementation of RA 7942 liberalizing the mining industry in the country and the recent adopted government policy that encourages both local and foreign investors to engage in the mining industry. We all know for a fact that indiscriminate mining exploration and its accompanying destruction of the environment will trigger environmental disasters including deforestation, soil erosion, massive floods, landslides, pollution and other destructive effects of the disruption of ecological balance.
She mentioned, that when her NGO group learned that the CPP/NPA is also opposing the exploration of the country's mineral resources by mining firms, they found in the NPAs strange bedfellows in their campaign to protect the environment. The CPP claimed that they had been given orders to stop the plundering of the country's mineral resources detrimental to environment and to the economic interest of the nation. They pledged to do their utmost to stop especially foreign mining companies and their cahoots in the government from plundering our natural resources. Naturally, my ex-girlfiriend and her friends were somewhat elated to hear from them such unusual concern to the preservation of environmental integrity.
It did not, however, happen that way. She says her group was greatly disappointed to learn later on that the NPAs have turned their anti-mining drive into a lucrative protection racket. Through threats, coercion and intimidation, they extort protection money in staggering amounts form mining firms and operators. Even small time mining operators including the poor gold fanners in the hinterlands have been obliged to give to the NPAs protection money euphemistically called "revolutionary tax". Sometimes they call it for "payment for social obligations" to the host communities and the indigenous people affected by the mining operations. But just the same, those who give in to their extortionist demands are allowed to continue their mining operations, no matter how destructive these are to the environment. Those who refuse to pay are severely punished by destroying their mining equipment and facilities and confiscating their other belongings.
According to the PNP records, last year the NPA raided/attacked a number of both local and foreign mining companies operating in different parts of the country mainly for failure to meet the rebels' extortionist demands. Millions of pesos worth of heavy equipment, facilities and other assets were destroyed. Security details who resisted the attacks were disarmed by the marauders who carted away their firearms together with other items worth carrying. A number of people including security guards and company personnel were injured during the raid; some were abducted or held hostage and used as human shields or leverage for demanding ransom money.
Among the recent victims of such dastardly act was the Sagittarius Mines, Inc. which the NPAs burned down on January 1, 2008 in Tampakan, South Cotabato. They destroyed mining equipment and disarmed the eight security guards and carted away their firearms. One SMI employee was held hostage and later on killed by the NPAs. Five days later, the insurgents burned a bulldozer owned by the said company in Brgy Kimlawis, Kiblawan, Davao del Sur. The rebels demanded P1M from the company as protection money.
In ComVal Province, the NPAs raided the Apex Mining Company in Masara, Maco on March 6, 2008, disarmed the security guards and burned 1 pay loader, 1 jumbo drill and 1 low profile truck. They carted away assorted firearms. No casualty as reported but damage to property was placed at P15M.
On April 8, the NPAs attacked the Platinum Gold Mining Corporation in Dinapigue, Isabela for refusing to give protection money. Outnumbered and outgunned, the security details could do nothing but to surrender their firearms as demanded by the raiders. The attacking forces held hostage the company personnel for three hours.
In Bulacan, another group of NPAs attacked/raided the Oro Metal Mining Corporation in Brgy Camachin, Dona Remedios Trinidad on July 21. One security guard was killed during the exchange of fire. Earlier, on July 14, a big number of NPAs attacked the El Dore Mining Corporation in Brgy Dumagmang, Labo, Camarines Norte. Defending government security forces suffered 1 killed and 2 wounded. The rebels carted away 16 assorted firearms. On July 23, around 20 NPAs raided the Philex Mining Company in Sipalay City, Negros occidental and destroyed P1.5M worth of equipment and facilities for refusing to give in the NPA extortionist demands. The raiders carted away several assorted firearms, office supplies and communication equipment.
A large group of NPAs ransacked the DMC Mining Co. on August 23 in Brgy Calapagan, Lupon, Davao Oriental and carted away assorted firearms and communications equipment. No casualty was reported. On October 28, the NPAs raided the Philco Mining and Batoto Resource Corporation in Brgy Camanlangan, New Bataan, ComVal Povince and burned 1 bulldozer. Shortly before the end of the year, on December 22, some 50 NPAs attacked the San Roque Mining Industry in Brgy La Fraternidad, tubay, Agusan del Norte. The raiders burned down 1 volvo mining equipment and carted away 14 assorted firearms.
These are only some selected samples of the way the NPAs exploit for their own advantage the mining industry. There are more in the official police records. Whatever, it clearly shows that the movement is just using its pro-environmental advocacy to give a semblance of legitimacy to its coercive fund raising activities among mining operators. The desire for material gains, specifically for fast money in the name of revolution, has indeed, completely obliterated the movement's pretensions to the worthy cause of environmental conservation.
Oh, and the reason, why she became my ex-girlfriend, was because she got so traumatized by one raid from the Reds, she moved away to work in Qatar. So I'm blaming that failed relationship on them...
End to communist insurgency foreseen by 2010, says PGMA
THURSDAY, JANUARY 8, 2009 | NATIONAL DEFENSE
http://www.gov.ph/news/default.asp?i=23246
MANOLO FORTICH, Bukidnon - With the recent successive surrenders of some members of the New People’s Army (NPA), President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo today expressed confidence that the government is on track in solving the three-decade long communist insurgency by 2010.
“This clearly indicates that the national internal security plan is gaining much headway,” the President said in a one-on-one interview with DXIF Bombo Radyo at Del Monte Lodge here.
Data from the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process showed that a total of 225 NPA rebels returned to the fold of the law during the second half of 2008.
Ninety-nine of the returnees came from Mindanao, 68 from Luzon and 58 from the Visayas.
Each of the 225 rebel returnees were given P20,000 cash assistance upon their surrender for a total of P4.5 million.
The government disbursed another P3.163 million for the 149 firearms surrendered by the rebels.
A total of P18.813 million has been given by the government as livelihood assistance to the rebel returnees.
The livelihood assistance and cash grants to rebel returnees are part of the Social Integration Program (SIP) implemented by the government to reintegrate former rebels into the mainstream of society pursuant to Administrative Order no. 172 issued by the President on March 23, 2007.
Earlier, the President stressed the need to get rid of the communist rebels who impeded progress and development in some of the country’s rural areas.
“If we are to become a first world country in 20 years, meaning , we have to put a stop to their ideological nonsense once and for all,” she said earlier.
I am deeply concerned as to whether the Philippine Government is keeping track of these "surrendering" rebels...
Instantly receiving cash of P20,000 will not assure their loyalty to the state...
The commie's are not stupid. They are shrewd, cunning, and will use any tactic they see fit to gain an advantage.
These returnees might just be in a way "retiring" from guerrilla life and simply using the "livelihood assistance" as a retirement fund...
Worse, it is possible that that as soon they secure the funds, they go back to the enemy camp P20,000 richer...
Worst of all, it is possible that these returnees are nothing more but infiltrators who are merely using their "surrender" as a cover to safely move around the country and acquire the funds to let them do so...
It is strongly recommended for Army Intelligence to determine if these 99 former rebels have truly been enlightened and have seen the errors of rebellion.
My other suggestion is to make archived profiles of these people. If any of them is a double-crosser, we will have the information needed to follow him.
Besides, 99 rebels AT MOST gone at the cost of P18.813 is not worth it. This type of strategy is tactically ineffective. The only advantage I see is the political and strategic effects. It portrays the government as willing to forgive-and-forget causing some of them to have second-thoughts.
However, such methods will not be effective at all against their high command nor their veterans.
Still, I support this program but I STRONGLY URGE THAT ARMY INTELLIGENCE REMAIN VIGILANT IN MONITORING THESE PEOPLE!!!
Hanggang sa susunod...ang mga comments galing sa aking mga kababayan ay aking inaasahan...
