Sulok ni Karl

Upon hearing the phrase "the July 10 walkout," your immediate reaction may be a wrinkling of the nose, or a doubtful frown. Perhaps you immediately think, Rali ng rali, wala namang nangyayari. Or even, There are other ways to settle the issue. There are other ways to participate.

But you're wrong. At the very least, you've been misled.

Mass demonstrations remain to be the strongest statement of solidarity among citizens. Yes, it is difficult to gather people, organize a program, and reach a broad unity for a particular stand on today's issues. Yes, it is tiring and seemingly impossible--but that is what makes mass actions all the more effective. Its difficulty is precisely the reason why it is the best means of registering dissent.

It is a fallacy to expect that a mass demonstration will bring about immediate and tangible change. If one holds that opinion, one is either heavily brainwashed (by parents/administrators/backward student political formations) or overly and wrongly utopian (read: ultra-left). As John Berger said in his brilliant essay The Nature of Mass Demonstrations (a must-read for the newbie rallyist), the value of a mass demonstration is symbolic. It is a demonstration of the power of the people, a "rehearsal of revolutionary awareness." It is for the participants, more than anyone else, for it heightens their sense of solidarity. As members of an oppressed class fighting for their basic rights, the demonstrators also "dramatize the the power they still lack."

Though largely symbolic in value, mass demonstrations are far from futile. Berger explains the state dilemma which a huge mobilization poses:

Either authority must abdicate and allow the crowd to do as it wishes: in which case the symbolic suddenly becomes real, and, even if the crowd’s lack of organisation and preparedness prevents it from consolidating its victory, the event demonstrates the weakness of authority. Or else authority must constrain and disperse the crowd with violence: in which case the undemocratic character of such authority is publicly displayed. The imposed dilemma is between displayed weakness and displayed authoritarianism.

Why all the friction, then? one may ask. Isn't there a safer, more quiet means to achieve social change more concretely?

That depends on the kind of change you want to achieve. For example, hindi ba pwedeng mag-donate na lang sa charity ng pera or relief goods? Or magtayo ng mga bahay through Gawad Kalinga? Yes, that's helpful to some extent, but it in no way changes the unjust social relations which brought about the need for charity organizations in the first place. Though the feeling of "unselfish" hard work (in the form of old-school carpentry and other menial jobs generally alien to the bourgeoisie) must do wonders for one's heart and conscience, well, that's the problem. It's done to placate oneself, to make one feel less guilty of being "privileged" in society.

That is the problem with (oxymorons like) corporate social responsibility. In the 2008 World Economic Forum, obscenely-rich Microsoft person Bill Gates extols corporate responsibility (or what he likes to call "creative capitalism"):

The challenge here is to design a system where market incentives, including profits and recognition, drive those principles to do more for the poor. I like to call this idea creative capitalism, an approach where governments, businesses, and nonprofits work together to stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or gain recognition, doing work that eases the world's inequities.

[Insert collective smirks and giggles here.] Gates' speech is an example of the inherent problem of capitalism, namely, it needs inequality to survive. In spite of all the corporations' pseudo-activist rhetoric, one cannot eradicate poverty in a capitalist society simply because it is its lifeline. The mere concept of private property and drive for profit is enough to illustrate this. In fact, these corporate social responsibility spectacles are merely grand PR stunts which help give companies a more humane and acceptable image, an endeavor ultimately undertaken not to uplift people from poverty, but to increase profit.

Capitalist incursion into education, in particular, also banks on this humane face. Scholarships, donations, buildings and facilities bearing the companies'/donors' names--these are the marks of education in a capitalist society. These "acts of kindness" are a smokescreen for the blunt reality that education has been commercialized and is out of reach for the majority. At the very least, recipients of corporate kindness (both students and educational institutions) are compelled to feel indebted to the companies which support them. More often than not, scholars are drawn to work for them (like, say, SM scholars).

Fine, you say. Charity work may not be the best option. What about lobbying? Or table battles with the administration?

It is a false dilemma, the choice between mass demonstrations and table battles. This is a line pseudo-progressive political formations are wont to toe. In reality, however, one must do both. The outcome of table battles without accompanying mass demonstrations are insufficient. Take for example the 2003-04 fight against Senate Bill 2587 (which is pretty much the new UP Charter). Despite the massive lobbying efforts on the part of the students, the bill's main proponent, Senator Francis Pangilinan, still challenged them to show their numbers. They did, and thanks to simultaneous mobilizing and lobbying, the bill was not passed.

Table battles, even with mass demonstrations, are generally weak. Administration officials, after all, have the densest conscience. The 2006 passage of the 300 percent tuition hike in UP is a prime example, where the repeated assertion of dissent in various fora, consultations and even Board of Regents meetings led the administration to evade table battles altogether, just to pass the damn thing.

This is where we come in. This is where our current interventions, in the form of the July walkouts, are necessary. We were strong in the past, and we have only achieved moderate success. We need not be afraid nor reluctant to participate in mass demonstrations; the current national crisis, especially in education, cannot be any more concrete and compelling. History tells us that we need to be stronger, and mass actions give us that.

Militante at Matagumpay na Pagsulong sa Demokratisasyon ng Unibersidad

^{from Prof. Judy M. Taguiwalo}

Opsyonal na adviser para sa mga organisasyon ng mga estudyante. Pamamahala at kontrol sa pondo ng Philippine Collegian, University Student Council at iba pang organisasyon ng mga estudyante. Pagbibitiw ng mga matataas na pinuno ng Unibersidad. Pagbubukas ng books of accounts ng UP. Pagpapawalang bisa sa mga kasunduan sa mga dayuhang foundations. Tenure para sa mga faculty at non-academic personnel. Dagdag na medical insurance para sa mga constituents ng UP. Ito ang ilan sa 18 kahilingang inihapag at sa kabuuan ay napagtagumpayan ng mga estudyante, kawani at mga kaguruan ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas sa pamamagitan ng pangkalahatang welgang nagparalisa sa UP noong Pebrero 4, 1969.

Ang 18 kahilingan ay:[1]

1. Pagkilala sa lahat ng organisasyon ng mga estudyante sa kampus
2. Pagpapatalsik kina Iluminada Panlilio, University Secretary, Dominador Torres,Director ng Auxillary Services, Ananias Aurelio, Director ng Personnel Services at Crisolito Pascual, Dean of Student Affairs at kahilingang magbitiw si Damiana Eugenio bilang Tagapagulo ng Departamento ng Ingles at Comparative Literature;
3. Lahat ng laboratory fees ay direktang gamiting para sa pagmamantine at pagpapahusay sa mga pasilidad at gamit panglaboratoryo;
4. Katiyakan sa trabaho, mas mahusay na pabahay at mas mataas na sahod para sa mga di pang-akademikong kawani at pagbubuo ng isang konsehong tagapayo ng di pang-akademikong kawani;
5. Ibigay ang control at pamamahala ng mga pondo ng Philippine Collegian, University Student Council, UP Woman's Club, college student councils at lahat na organisasyon ng mga estudyanteng may pondo sa sarili nilang pamamahala;
6. Gawin opsyonal ang pagkakaroon ng mga tagapayo para sa mga organisasyon at publikasyon sa kampus;
7. Lahat ng dokumento, papeles, books of accounts ng Unibersidad ay ibukas sa mga entidad na may lehitimong interes sa mga ito;
8. Espasyong pang-opisina para sa AS Student Council at isang pangkalahatang tambayan (lounge) para sa mga organisasyon sa AS;
9. Pagbibigay ng tenure sa hindi bababa sa 75% ng mga faculty;
10. Programang pang-medikal ay ibigay sa lahat ng kasapi ng komunidad ng Unibersidad;
11. Lahat ng kaguruan ng UP ay dapat magpakita ng respeto sa mga estudyante at imbestigahin ang mga incompetent at abusive na guro;
12. Pagterminate sa kontrata ng Unibersidad sa Asia Foundation; lahat ng iba pang kontrata at mga kasunduan sa mga dayuhang institusyon ay muling suriin at ang mapatunayang di mabuti para sa Unibersidad ay dapat na wakasan;
13. Maglaan ng pondo para sa pagtatayo ng CFAA at sa Univesity Arts Gallery;
14. Lahat ng external na ahensya ng pulis ay pinagbabawalang pumasok sa kampus maliban kung pinatawag ng otoridad ng Unibersidad; at pagprofessionalize sa UP security force;
15. Kagyat na pagpapalaya sa mga inarestong estudyante at pag-imbestiga sa nangyaring insidente;
16. Pagkakaroon ng negosasyon para sa pagrebisa sa UP Charter at ang pagpataas sa budget ng UP;
17. Pakikipagnegosasyon ni UP President Lopez sa kagyat na release sa pondo para sa National Science Research Center; sa IMC building at sa P3 milyong pisong ipinangako para sa PGH;
18. Pagpapaliban ng pangingibang bansa ni President Lopez hanggang hindi pa natugunan ang mga kahilingan.

Kagyat na ibinigay ang mga sumusunod na mga kahilingan sa pamamagitan ng mga Executive Orders ng kauupo pa lamang na Presidente ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas na si Salvador Lopez[2].

1. Inalis ang lahat ng mga "restraints" sa mga organisasyon ng mga estudyante at mga fraternities kabilang ang pag-alis sa suspension at abolisyon sa kondisyon na ang mga estudyante ay magtatayo ng sariling makinarya para sa sariling pamamahala at disiplina;

2. Ang University Secretary, si Iluminada Panlilio ay nag "leave of absence", tinanggap ang pagbibitiw ni Dean Crisolito Pascual ng Student Affairs at ng Tagapangulo ng Department of English na si Damiana Eugenio. Itinalaga si Dr. Elmer Ordoñez, bilang kapalit na Tagapangulo ng Departamento. Pinag-aaralan pa ang mga kaso ni Dominador Torres, Director ng Auxillary Services at ni Ananias Aurelio ng Personnel Services dahil walang kapangyarihan ang Presidente ng UP na itiwalag sila sa kalaga;yang hindi sila boluntaryong nagbitiw;

3. Tiniyak na ang mga laboratory fees ay ilalaan lamang sa mga pangangailangan sa pagpapahusay ng mga pasilidad ng mga laboratoryo at hindi pupunta sa general fund ng unibersidad;

4. Hindi maaksyunan ang pagbibigay katiyakan sa mga non-academic personnel dahil saklaw sila ng Civil Service;

5. Ang mga pondo ng Philippine Collegian,University Student Council,Women's Club, college student councils at iba pang organisasyon at publikasyon ng mga estudyante ay mapapailalim sa kanilang control;

6. Ang pagkakaroon ng mga advisers sa mga organisasyon ng mga estudyante ay opsyonal;

7. Lahat ng mga dokumento at papeles at books of accounts ng Unibersidad ay bubuksan sa mga may lehitimong interes na masuri ang mga ito;

8. Ang opisina ng AS Student Council at isang komon na "lounge" para sa mga organisasyon sa AS ay ibibigay sa pinakamaagang panahon;

9. Inihanda na ang kautusan nanawagan sa mga Dekano at mga Direktor na irekomenda ang mga kaguruang kwalipikado para sa tenure;

10. Iniutos ni Presidente Lopez sa UP Budget Director Jaime Laya na magkonsulta sa mga "medical insurance organizations" para tingnan kung paano makasapi ang mga taga UP sa ganitong insurance;

11. Ginarantiya ni Presidente Lopez na walang pagbweltang gagawin sa mga estudyanteng hihingi ng imbestigasyon sa mga faculty na inirereklamo bunga ng "discourtesy, incompetence and abuse".

12. Ang mga kontrata sa Asia Foundation ay iimbestigahan at maghahanap ng ibang pondo para sa mga may iskolarship kung wawakasan ang kontrata;

13. Ang mga pondo para sa CAFA at Art Gallery ay manggagaling sa budget sa susunod na taon;

14. May kasunduan sa pagitan ni Presidente Lopez at Mayor Amoranto ng Quezon City na walang papasok na yunit ng Quezon City police kung walang nakasulat na kahilingan mula sa Presidente ng UP;

15. Pinalaya na ang mga inarestong estudyante at titiyakin ni Lopez na lahat ng mga charges ay ipawalang bisa;

16. Pinag-aaralan ni Presidente Lopez ang pagrerebisa ng University Code at ng Charter. " Binatikos ni Lopez ang kolonyal na karakter ng Board of Regents at iminungkahi niyang ang Board ay dapat pangunahing binubuo ng mga estudyante at ng kaguruan, sa halip ng mga negosyante."[3]

17. Ang pondo para sa IMC, Natural Science Research Center at PGH ay inilabas na.

Malawak na pagkakaisa ng mga estudyante at suporta ng mga progresibong kaguruan at non-academic personnel ang mga susing salik sa tagumpay na nakamit ng pangkalahatang welga noong Pebrero 4, 1969. Paralisado ang buong Unibersidad kabilang na ang "physical plant", administrative and food services" at nagpiket ang mga estudyante sa lahat ng gusali ng UP.

Ayon sa Philippine Collegian, ang naging mitsa ng welga ay ang hindi pag aksyon ng noo'y Pangulo ng Pilipinas, Ferdinand Marcos para sa pagrelease sa P9 na milyong pondo ng Unibersidad. Noong Enero 29, naglabas ang University Student Council Committee on Public and National Affairs ng memorandum na naglaman ng 20 kahilingan. Sa sumunod na araw, naging 77 na ang mga kahilingang inihapag ng mga 70 estudyante kay Salvador Lopez. Nag-walk out ang mga estudyante sa pulong nang walang katiyakan ang tindig ni Lopez sa mga kahilingan. Noong Enero 31, Biyernes, inumpisahan na ng mga estudyante na kabilang sa Kabataang Makabayan (KM) at Student Cultural Association of the University of the Philippines (SCAUP) ang welga sa pamamagitan ng pagharang sa mga sasakyan sa University Avenue. Hinuli ang limang estudyante, kabilang ang dalawang babaeng mag-aaral, at kinasuhan ng "obstruction of traffic" at slander.

Binuo ang Council of Leaders na sumaklaw sa lahat ng tipo ng organisasyon sa Unibersidad kabilang ang mga fraternities at sororities, mga aktibistang organisasyon tulad ng Kabataang Makabayan at SCAUP, mga tradisyonal na organisasyon tulad ng Women's Club, UPSCA, Vanguard, mga organisasyong pangkolehiyo tulad ng UP Chemical Society, Economics Society Engineering Society at Broadcasting Majors Club. Ang Council of Leaders at ang University Student Council ang namuno sa pangkalahatang welga.

Nagpalabas ng manifesto ang ilan sa mga kaguruan bilang suporta sa pangkalahatang welga.

Hindi huminto ang pangkalahatang welga sa Diliman sa pagkamit sa 18 kahilingan. Natransporma itong "sympathy strike" para naman sa mga kahilingan ng mga estudyante ng sa Los Baños at Tarlac. Sa Los Baños, hiniling ang pagkaroon ng full time Dean sa kalagayan ang nakaupong Dean, si Dioscoro Umali ay may ilang mahahalagang posisyon sa pamahalaan, pag-apruba na walang anumang pagbabago sa Student Union Constitution na niratipika na ng mga estudyante, public accounting ng pondo ng College at iba pang kahilingan. Ang mga estudyante ng UP Tarlac College ay humiling ng kagyat na pagbigay ng panlalawigang pamahalaan ng Tarlac ng pondo para sa UP, mas malaking partisipasyon ng mga estudyante sa pagbalangkas ng mga patakaran ng Kolehiyo, paghinto ng pakikialam ng Dekano at ng faculty sa mga aktibidad ng mga estudyante at iba pa.

Nanatiling may katuturan ang mga kahilingan sa pangkalahatang welga ng Pebrero 1969 sa UP. Ang autonomy ng mga student organizations, ang tenure para sa mga faculty at non-academic personnel, ang pagbabawal sa pagpasok ng mga yunit ng pulis at AFP sa UP, ang mga reklamo sa mga abusadong administrador at mga guro, ang transparency sa pinansyal na katayuan ng Unibersidad at sa mga kontratang pinapasok nito ay buhay na mga isyung patuloy na ipinaglalaban ng progresibong sektor ng Unibersidad.#

<sup>[1] "Students on Strike Today, Marcos to meet leaders at 3:30 pm". Special Philippine Collegian Issue. February 4, 1969, mp. 1at 3.

[2] "Student Strike Continues, Los Baños demands cause for protest", Philippine Collegian, February 6, 1969, p. 3

[3] Ibid, p. 3</sup>


PUP students walk out of classes, demand GMA resignation
YOUTH ACT NOW to join July 10 & 18 walkouts

MANILA, Philippines - Some 3,000 students from the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) walked out of their classes Thursday and called for the resignation of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

The students said that the protest was a "dry-run" for nationwide "walkouts" in the coming weeks in preparation for the upcoming State of the Nation Address.

Anakbayan national chairperson Ken Ramos described the protest as a "testament of the youth's disgust in the Arroyo administration for continuously burdening the people with price hikes and stagnant wages."

"PUP students have proven time and again the power of collective action as means to attain their just and democratic demands," Ramos said.

Last week, the PUP administration was forced to refund the illegally collected P250 developmental fee to students after almost 2,000 student rallyists marched from the PUP campus to the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) main office in Pasig City.

In 2007, some 7,000 PUP students also prevented the PUP Board of Regents from approving a proposed 500 percent tuition fee increase.

PUP's tuition at P12 per unit remains the cheapest among state colleges and universities to this day.

Ramos, however, warned that such victories would be "empty and but temporary for as long as the educational and economic policies set by the Arroyo administration remain in place."

"In the end, we must work for the repeal of these burdensome policies and demand accountability from the mastermind, Mrs. Arroyo, herself. This can only be achieved through her immediate ouster from office," he said.

According to Ramos, the PUP walk out is only the start of similar protest actions geared up in other schools nationwide.

Anakbayan, together with other member organizations of YOUTH ACT NOW! (Youth for Accountability and Truth Now!), will spearhead nationwide walkouts on July 10 and July 18. # GMANews.TV


Why walk out?

^{Pooled editorial by the College Editors Guild of the Philippines}


As others have done before us, the youth is once again called upon to leave our mark in history's pages.

This July, we are walking out in outrage over unending and unjust price hikes. Oil prices have risen 18 times this year, and more weekly spates of increases are set to burden our countrymen for as long as this government refuses to impose and implement regulative policies to cushion the blows of soaring oil prices. Prices of food, electricity and other basic commodities likewise continue to be padded up by economic policies such as the Value Added Tax (VAT) and other burdensome taxes.

We are walking out of this administration's continuous extravagance amid scarcity and national disasters. The lavishness of Arroyo's most recent junket to the United States is a disgraceful excess in a time when the country is beset with economic hardship.

We are walking out of this administration's false promises of education reforms. We have had enough of this administration's deceitful ways. Instead of allotting more for the education budget, it thrusts school administrations towards further commercialization at the expense of students, even as President Arroyo announced a tuition hike moratorium for the present academic year.

We are walking out of this farce of a democracy. Years have passed and we are still counting the days when we see Karen Empeno, Sherlyn Cadapan and Jonas Burgos re-united with their families and friends. We condemn the unresolved and incessant extra-judicial killings of journalists, activists and civil libertarians that continue with impunity.

We are walking out of attacks on press freedom and freedom of speech and expression. We view the Philippines' election to the vice president post of the United Nations Human Rights Council as a sham and an insult to all victims of human rights violations, political repression and the Filipino public in general.

We are walking out of President Arroyo's unprecedented lust for power. We cannot muster tolerance for her continued stay until 2010.

In a time of great deceit, we choose to walkout for honor. In a time of lavish spending, we choose to walkout for austerity. In a time of apathy, we choose to walkout for social significance. In a time when the state's abandonment of the people's welfare is at its peak, the youth choose to stand steadfast against this administration's continuous neglect. In a time of greed for power, we choose to walkout for our democratic rights.

We are walking out for accountability in government and meaningful social change. Seven years of deceit, corruption, tyranny and social injustice has weighed its toll on the youth and the people. Enough is enough.

For the youth, walking out would mean entering the bigger picture and assuming our historical and significant role in society. We are asked at this point in time, 'Why walk out?' To which we reply, 'Why not?' #