More Edsa "revolution" moronisms coming from the Inquirer.net mob!

The Inquirer.net editor really gets into gear in the race to evacuate the minds of a population already reeling from an emptiness-induced headache. Standing on that lofty soapbox today, he (or she — who the hell cares?) makes the sort of bleeding-heart citation that we have come to expect of minds imprisoned in so-last-Century emo politics:

Our Constitution enshrines People Power in the manner eloquently put forward by our founding chair, Eugenia Apostol: “Vigilance and active involvement on our part are the best way to level the playing field so to speak. In so many words, the 1987 Constitution says that People Power is the hallmark of good citizenship.”

The only thing that is enshrined in the vacuous chatter that we call the Philippine National “Debate” is what is encapsulated in the above moronism — that “People Power” or whatever the hell that 1986 phenomenon was labelled or branded by the Philippine Media back then (and so shrewdly turned into a lucrative Aquino franchise) is being misconstrued on a massive scale as some sort of perverse license to rule the country with a lynch mob. Last I heard “good citizenship” involved upholding the Law and contibuting to the strengthening of legitimate state insitutions. But that’s just me.

Nonetheless, moronisms have all but engulfed the venerable rag…

From Neal Cruz in “Cardinal Rosales is no Cardinal Sin“, Inquirer.net

Had the people not followed Jaime Cardinal Sin’s call for People Power in l986, we would still be reeling under the dictatorship of the Marcoses, and Cory Aquino could not have been President. If People Power was correct under Cardinal Sin, why is it not correct under Cardinal Rosales?

Jeez, that is just one massive logical fallacy there. How exactly are the circumstances in 1986 similar enough to those of 2010 to warrant an assertion that “People Power” (a.k.a. Ocho-ocho “revolutions”) are applicable NOW as they were THEN?

And if you think THAT is stoopid, check out this ululation:

From Conrado de Quiros in “Differences“, Inquirer.net

Then Marcos didn’t just steal the country’s money, he stole the country’s light, the country’s hope, the country’s possibility, the country’s life, the country’s soul, the country’s future. Not a single institution of society was left unsullied, least of it the military, which suffered the greatest perversion of all. Here was a rule hated beyond measure, the people wondering when it would ever end.

Now Arroyo hasn’t just stolen the country’s money, she has stolen the country’s light, the country’s hope, the country’s possibility, the country’s life, the country’s soul, the country’s future. Not a single institution of society has been left unsullied, least of all the Catholic Church, which has suffered the greatest perversion of all. Here is a rule hated beyond measure, the people wondering when it will ever end.

Cruz’s reverse-contribution to the national “debate” can be considered to be quaintly hollow-headed. But de Quiros’s is quite simply downright nefarious.

He forgot (or, more likely neglected) to mention that during Marcos’s time, the press and just about every other personal freedom was suppressed. Compare that to the freedoms enjoyed by everyone (including a legislative body whose officers are all duly elected by popular vote) during Arroyo’s administration. An exercise of even just a tenth of the freedom we exercised under Arroyo’s rule would’ve gotten us thrown into jail during Marcos’s time.

People like Conrado de Quiros do UNSPEAKABLE damage to Philippine society through the dimwitted and moronic ideas he publishes on a newspaper and news site that exerts powerful influence over the minds that constitute an already intellectually-bankrupt society such as ours.

Conrado de Quiros rather than contribute to the collective intellect of humanity actually SUBTRACTS from it with every word he writes.

When the people hit the streets post May of this year in response to all of the above in-your-face inciting of ocho-ocho rebellion, the world will be watching (albeit most likely in bemused silence — another difference between this year and 1986, by the way).

Even back in 2001, The New York Times already had something really insightful to say about Pinoy-style people power “revolutions”:

Filipinos were thrilled at the peaceful ouster of a president who had become an embarrassment — a lazy, hard-drinking womanizer who had allowed the economy to collapse and had, according to testimony in the Senate, engaged in systematic corruption.

But if they expected cheers once again from around the world, they were instead hurt and infuriated when People Power II was met with doubt and criticism, described by foreign commentators as “a defeat for due process,” as “mob rule,” as “a de facto coup.”

This is the one time that our renowned colonial mentality may actually be of benefit to us. Rather than heed the words of the local talent in our Media industry, perhaps it is time that we take a more outward perspective and start listening to the collective voice of the world out there that had always been around to show us the better way.

Advertisements

About benign0

benign0 is the Web master of GetRealPhilippines.com
This entry was posted in Civics, Elections and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to More Edsa "revolution" moronisms coming from the Inquirer.net mob!

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention More Edsa “revolution” moronisms coming from the Inquirer.net mob! | Anti-Pinoy :) -- Topsy.com

  2. ChinoF says:

    Here comes the march of the Idiots as the elections draw near.

  3. Jon Abaca says:

    “The reason we have not matured as a nation is not that we are always in a hurry, it is that we have always had the patience of carabaos. There’s proof right there:

    We’ve tolerated clowns like Rosales for far too long.”

    Wow. Conrado de Quiros is beginning to test MY patience.

    Mr de Quiros apparently doesn’t ride enough jeeps which counterflow and cause more traffic.

    Mr de Quiros apparently doesn’t ride the MRT, where people try to squeeze in without letting others disembark first.

    Mr de Quiros, for a journalist, you apparently don’t know your own countrymen.

    Patience? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

  4. helios says:

    i was part of the so called EDSA II… i regret havng done that… i feel like i was used by the so called civil society (willingly much to my dismay) to topple the most popularly elected president… i have a feeling that the people who were at that “revolution” were the ones who did not vote for Mr. Estrada…. isnt that disenfranchising the millions that did vote for him? I am not sorry that Mr. Estrada was removed from Malacanang, I am sorry though for the way it was done.

    • benign0 says:

      Yeah, I saw that article actually. It was already on an open tab when I was writing this piece but forgot to mention it. I should have. Doronila makes a very sensible reality check on the thoughts of his “esteemed” colleagues. I wish there were more like him. Come to think of it, you’d think that people who have the kind of education (or articulation skills) found in journalists would be a bit more cluey.

      • Arvin Q says:

        They’ll blame the deadline for the bad outputs haha. Some journalists are way too focused with their rights that they tend to neglect the responsibilities that come with it.

  5. Rob' Ramos says:

    de Quiros long ago stopped being a sensible source of opinion.

    Unfortunately, he’s what is called in PR a “Strategic Constituent.” People actually LISTEN to the guy. And the really sad part of this is a good portion of those who DO listen to de Quiros are supposedly intelligent people, those who should know better or should at least exercise a measure of… discernment.

    I actually wonder whether Conrad ever stops to think of the consequences of his demagoguery. Or does he just spew his drivel in the mistaken belief that Freedom of Expression has no corresponding responsibilities?

    Conrad, mag-isip ka naman, o. Nakakinis ka na eh. Maraming taong nakikinig sayo, sana ginagamit mo sa wastong paraan yang impluwensya mo.

    Or maybe he’s overcompensating for the time he spent as one of the leading scribes of the Marcos regime. Remember that group he was a part of?

    Maybe, he thinks, by LOUDLY professing his defense of the Freedoms of the post-EDSA I society, he can drown out that accusatory whispering of his soul that reminds him he was an instrument of oppression in one of the the worst periods of Philippine history.

    The LOUDER and more PROVOCATIVE, the better, for isn’t Freedom of the Press and Expression supposed to run, well, free and unfettered? Regardless of the cost both to the people and the institutions that are supposed to work in a truly democratic republic.

    • ilda says:

      Or maybe he’s overcompensating for the time he spent as one of the leading scribes of the Marcos regime. Remember that group he was a part of?

      Maybe, he thinks, by LOUDLY professing his defense of the Freedoms of the post-EDSA I society, he can drown out that accusatory whispering of his soul that reminds him he was an instrument of oppression in one of the the worst periods of Philippine history.

      Hmmm…this does make a lot of sense. He might be trying to emphasize his allegiance to whoever is going to be in power.

    • J.B. says:

      If I’m not mistaken, CDQ was a leftist and the late Adrian Cristobal who also wrote for inquirer was one the scribes. He was never part of Marcos. Unless of course your consider leftist oppressive at the time of Marcos that would make the statement sensible.

      As to his choosing of Noynoy, it maybe because of his hate to GMA he needs someone to bring the lady to jail. And he can’t choose Gordon either, the one who favours US policy which he loathed all his life.

  6. Captain Barbell says:

    This is just another ploy by these morons to cover up the defeat of their preferred candidate/s.
    Kung sino ang makinig dito…talagang bobo!
    Hindi pa ba kayo nagsawa?
    We have enough problems…EDSA hindi solusyon sa problema.

  7. Toons, puns and solds says:

    “The mere fact that you cannot understand why there are more ignorance than intelligence is already a fact that you are an ignorant.” – a frustrated thinker..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s