Polarizartion vs. critical collaboration

INFOWARS
Herman Tiu Laurel
1/31/2008



Last January 27 the Catholic Bishop’s Conference of the Philippines met and issued a statement, lashing out at corruption in Philippine society but blaming the people for it. The bishops also declared that it would not work for the early removal of the corrupt regime, opting to engage it in “critical collaboration”. Does that mean the CBCP accepts the rampant corruption prevailing and will only act to “criticize” rather than demand tangible clean up? The bishops will protest this interpretation of their statement, but it is a logical and inescapable interpretation. Can there be “critical collaboration” with corruption? Then it should be called “hypo-critical collaboration”?

The media play up of the year 2000 Vatican admonition to Cardinal Sin in the week before the CBCP conference, reporting the Vatican’s instruction to Sin not to interfere in Edsa Dos and headlined by the Inquirer (the unofficial official barker of the Establishment) is now explicable: it was to prepare the basis for dampening the clamor for radical change and reforms from progressive sectors and softening the public for the “critical collaboration” line. The ruling cliques do work hard. The public, is taught to believe that religion should be uncompromising with corruption, is skeptical. Is there compromise with the devil? What then are the Ten Commandments for?

Church “critical collaboration” is not new. Cardinal Sin wasn’t adverse to collaboration with the devil when he said in 1998 defending his Pagcor share that he would accept money even from the devil if it were for the poor; but the poor always remains poor while the Catholic Church continues to get richer. The Inquirer headline tries to impress the thought that Vatican does not desire the Church to be mired in politics, but it only serves to provide deniability because the Catholic Church has never been shy to intervene politically: Cardinal Wojtyla worked with the CIA in Poland to install its puppet Solidarity movement.

The Catholic Church allied with the Spanish fascist dictator Franco whose inhumanity is captured by Picasso’s Guernica. Rare are the periods in history where Church leaders attempt to really work with the poor like in Latin America in the 1960’s, but that was eventually suppressed by the Vatican. In the Philippines the Catholic Church as an institution is always allied with the local aristocracy or oligarchy from the Spanish to the American period, then at Edsa I and II. Who benefitted from those two “people power” exercises? Edsa I started privatization of public or socialized assets such as the power and water utilities, Edsa II accelerated it.

Edsa I and II heaped unimaginable profits for the global and local oligarchs while the people and the middle class rapidly declined economically. Cardinal Sin and the CBCP expressed no sympathy for over a dozen killed in Edsa III I May 2001, the real exercise of “poor people” power the numbers of which dwarfed the organized crowds of Edsa I and II – and to this day, they are still trying to suppress that historical fact with constant silence or denials of its occurrence. In GMA’s time, the hypocrisy of the CBCP’s “critical collaboration” with a corrupt regime become even more apparent in light of evidence that many conservative bishops, especially those from Mindanao, accept “envelopes”.

Led by the influential arch-Gloria supporter Bishop Capalla, mainstream Catholic bishops have been recipients of Malacañang’s “good will” particularly during the GMA-impeachment debates in July 2006. Catholic religious leaders were called to Malacañang. CBCP leaders said they thought the “envelopes” were for the poor. These have lead to cynicism amongst the flock that growing numbers leave it, as CBCP’s Bishop Tagle publicly admitted in 2005. When we discussed this over our radio program, listener Kabansang Oliver texted:

“Ang Fordham University run by the Jesuits in New York pay taxes for all their taxable activities. Ang Ateneo ata di ganoon.” The Philippine Catholic Church reaps huge amounts from it tax free status, remitting large amounts to the Vatican. It is plain to see how the local Catholic Church has corruptly used its historically rooted political clout to maintain its economic and financial leverage. Cardinal Sin was the master in abusing this power. Due to this, progressive secular policies never prospered and the only Catholic country in Asia is also becoming the poorest in the region. To be complete, however, we must say “hypo-critical collaboration” permeates Philippine society.

From Leftists to the so-called political opposition, to the “civil society”; from NDF fronts’ collaboration with GMA and the oligarchs in Edsa Dos, to “her majesty’s loyal opposition” as a political opposition figure tried to posture last year, to GO candidates taking money from GMA cronies, together with Big Business and some members of Academe all pretending to be “critical” too – “hypo-critical collaboration” is the rule, but all are actually wholly in complete collaboration with the corrupt system and its exploitation and oppression, hence the five decades continuous decline of Philippine society and it socio-economic conditions.

Only strong, clear and principled stands can polarize the good from the corrupt, exceptionalism from mediocrity - as they did at Manila Pen where the stand off reverberated the call to oppose compromise with exploitation, oppression and tyranny. Then we take action again and again until final, the comprehensive and visionary change come true.

(Tune in to 1098AM, Mon. to Fri. 8:30 to 9am)