In the last week or so, representatives of farmers from the hacienda have asked the Supreme Court to lift a TRO (temporary restraining order) that has prevented the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) from distributing the land to the farmers, and have also staged protests against the Cojuangco family. Student groups joined the ruckus.
The question is – do these political leaders, the farmer representatives, and the students, give justice to what is stirring in the heart and minds of those inside Hacienda Luisita?
Last month, I wrote against a series by GMA News on their treatment reporting the Hacienda Luisita saga, arguing that one farm-worker’s version of events does not do justice to a complex – even convoluted – legal, corporate and social dispute that necessarily has multiple sides to the story.
The parties accused of wrongdoing were hardly given an opportunity to respond, and the series’ editor defended the treatment by saying that court documents are primary sources indeed, and presumably, should suffice.
I think he’s wrong.
While documents are indisputably important, I am of the persuasion that even these can be fudged, or lost/destroyed. The human voice is the most powerful testimony to any human experience.
With this in mind, I went to Hacienda Luisita in mid-March with a camera to ask the residents of Hacienda Luisita – those whose fates hang in the balance – what they really thought. I sought out those who, as a result of the 2004 protests, were left unemployed.
This 5-minute video highlights what the farmers told me at Hacienda Luisita. I did not include the two farmers I interviewed in Manila, but their stories are corroborated by the voices you will hear in this video.
I also did not include any portion of my 45-minute interview with Lito Bais, current ULWU (United Luisita Workers Union) leader appointed (not elected) by Rene Galang, the ULWU leader tagged in the 2004 strike and who, according to witnesses, disappeared into thin air at the height of the protests, and who is now, according to Bais, in hiding within the hacienda in a place Bais nicknames “Texas.”
I did not include Bais’ interview because he’s had his time on print and in the airwaves. (If you care to know what he has said, the GMA News series quotes him substantially; also, here are the latest news naming him as spidered by a quick Google News search.) I did include portions of my interview with Lito’s brother Manuel.
When I met Lito, he had just finished an interview with what he told me was Bulatlat. He also told me that he just spoke to a local foreign-paper correspondent (which I confirmed by having a brief word with the said correspondent outside Lito's house that day). Lito was also on the phone with another publication who was seeking his response to an issue before we started our interview. At one point during our interview, he also told me of the many calls he gets from the media requesting a statement from him. In a way, he has become the media's default source.
If any legitimate party is interested in seeing my interview with Lito Bais (or any of the farmers I interviewed) or transcripts thereof, tweet me. I've already furnished copies, full and partial, to some members of the media and other interest groups.
I will leave the comments portion of this blog open and un-moderated. I apologize that I will probably be unable to comment back (events like our elections are of high interest for foreign media... means more work, and way too much coffee, for me).
As a final note, I ask you to keep an open mind. I thank you in advance for keeping the discussion aboveboard, within context, and respectful of others.
Without further ado: the voices from Hacienda Luisita that deserve to be heard, too.
Res ipsa loquitur.
90 comments:
Maybe GMA News did interview these people, only they didn't like what they heard.
The late journalist Teodoro “Teddy" Benigno was a long-time friend of Ninoy and Cory Aquino. He served as Cory Aquino’s Press Secretary from 1986 to 1989. On November 19, 2004, Teddy Benigno wrote about the Luisita massacre in his column in the Philippine Star:
“I would have wished that Ninoy’s son, Rep. Benigno (Noynoy) Aquino and brother-in-law Jose (Peping) Cojuangco just kept quiet. As it was they sort of blamed the dispersal and massacre on trouble-making outsiders—agents provocateurs—who had nothing to do with Luisita. Noynoy, you’re not Ninoy and you should have kept to yourself. Ditto for Peping. Those were self-serving statements and you knew it."
Hi Marco,
Self-serving or not, what they did say has at least a kernel of truth, if you believe the farmers. And the truth, above all, is what matters.
Thanks!
cguro gusto nilang magsaka ng hindi nilang sariling lupa habang buhay..
on a lighter note: look at what all that sugarcane did to their teeth?! http://guavascowsandcrocodiles.blogspot.com
hi felicity! i'm gonna re-post this to my FB account ha and blogspot ha?? thanks! :)
Thank you so much Felicity. I also got a chance to visit Hacienda Luisita a few days ago and everything coincides. This other side of the story should have been shown or should be shown very very soon.
great post.. should give people the other side of the story and let them be the judge..
Thank you Felicity. Sad to see how the farmers are being used by politicians and Leftists. I agree with what one farmer said; what's so great about having land that you can't afford to till, much less pay the taxes on??
It erased my doubts. thank you!
Hi. I am sharing this on my FB so that more people will know what the real farmers wanted. Thank you. Great info.
"cguro gusto nilang magsaka ng hindi nilang sariling lupa habang buhay.."
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's a good, honest living. You leave the financial investments to those who can risk it. You have a steady source of income. I've been to farms where people own their small plot of land. It is much harder work than industrial agriculture.
They do need to unionize, but not to get land reform, but (as was said in the video) to make their wages competitive, to ensure that they get proper benefits (such as health care and bonuses, as was again said in the video).
In studies about land reform in our country and others, it has been seen time and again that it decreases productivity and output. What's so different with working for a landlord vs. working in corporate Makati? You work for someone, you get paid. Not everyone needs or wants agrarian reform. What we need is to ensure that these farmer workers are treated and paid well.
It makes sense that wage earners will opt for the security of having a definite monthly income complete with health benefits against the uncertainty of putting up one's capital where they have none should have been considered by their "supporters."
Land reform alone without the necessary support, training, and capital assistance is doomed to fail and naturally it was the fear of the unknown that they feared the most.
Excellent work Felicity, let me re-post this at my blog Pedestrian Observer GB......
I understand the stand of those farmers interviewed because I know what it is like to till a land on your own. If it is true that the farmers in HL will only get 0.78 hectares via land reform, then, they may just end up doing nothing more than subsistence farming. And that is if they can afford to till the land on their own without being buried in debt. What if they couldn't? They will just sell the land to get out of their indebtedness and go back to zero once again as what one of them said. It happened to us. Although the land that we own was never a product of Agrarian Reform (my father bought the land on his own), we still lost it because we were buried in debt in spite of all the hard work we put just to maintain it. We sometimes couldn't help but noticed that farm workers were better off because they receive wages for a day's work while all we got were debts. But do you know why things like that happens? It's simply because small farmers will always be victims of low market prices and that alone is more than enough to kill whatever small capital they have at the start. They will then end up borrowing for more capital and so begins their bondage to accumulated debt. Eventually, it will force them out of the land they till and back again to where they started. So what's the point in that? The only ones actually that will gain something in the end are the middlemen, the traders and the businessmen who profits from the sweat of the lowly farmer. And what does that mean for the Maoists like Ka Satur? A good punching line and good recruitment ground for their protracted people's war. No wonder why they will always try to infiltrate the picket lines of legitimate workers demanding decent wages and politicized the issue to their advantage. That's just what they wanted. That's just what they are hoping for.
@minsupala_blogmaster
1) "No wonder why they will always try to infiltrate the picket lines of legitimate workers demanding decent wages and politicized the issue to their advantage. That's just what they wanted. That's just what they are hoping for." - Just like noynoy, you point at them, the leftists, who fired the first gunshot while farmers' testaments say it came from the inside. Were you there?
2) They will just sell the land to get out of their indebtedness and go back to zero once again as what one of them said. It happened to us. - It happened to you, yes. But Pedro is not Juan. How can you be so sure that their fate will be the same as your fate? Whatever they do with the land, it's their choice. as for the farmers who do not want to risk, are afraid to be on their own, that's their choice. it's better to risk and gamble, at least you tried to do what you think what might be than not trying at all.And if these Cojuangco-Aquino's really have concerns for these farmers, e di tulungan nila. sa hinahaba-haba ba naman ng panahon na ginamit nila ang lupa, walang mapapala ang mga manggagawa? wag nilang sabihing di makakaahon ang mga ito.
And why did Corazon design the SDO in the first place?hmmm??
@ marco:
Have you even tried farming small like we did? Were you even once a farmer?
1. "Just like noynoy, you point at them, the leftists, who fired the first gunshot while farmers' testaments say it came from the inside. Were you there?"
-- Did you watch the video? It's those people on the video who said they were infiltrated. It wasn't me. I was just giving my comment on their declarations. And I know what I'm talking about Maoism because I had been where you probably had never been........
2. "It happened to you, yes. But Pedro is not Juan. How can you be so sure that their fate will be the same as your fate? Whatever they do with the land, it's their choice. as for the farmers who do not want to risk, are afraid to be on their own, that's their choice. it's better to risk and gamble, at least you tried to do what you think what might be than not trying at all.
-- You tell that to the farmers shown in the video not to me. I was sharing my experience and my thoughts because I had been there. Did I impose my will on them? I didn't. But if you try to watch that video again, the Maoist did impose their own line of march to the farm workers. Look at it again and it will tell you that for those people shown there the strike they wanted was just for increase in compensation and more work, and it was the outsiders who made it all "ipamigay ang lupa" issue.
3. "And if these Cojuangco-Aquino's really have concerns for these farmers, e di tulungan nila. sa hinahaba-haba ba naman ng panahon na ginamit nila ang lupa, walang mapapala ang mga manggagawa? wag nilang sabihing di makakaahon ang mga ito.
And why did Corazon design the SDO in the first place?hmmm??"
-- You tell that to them because I'm not a capitalist. Why would I defend them when they are the ruling class and I'm not. I'm just a worker like those farm workers shown on the video.
Thank you very much for this post. The issue is becoming clearer.
@felicity yes it may have a 'kernel' of truth, kapiraso nga e.i accept the fact that these farmewrs have different views. you said farmers, it sounded everyone of them. how many of them did you interview? marami yung nag-welga, pito lang ang mga nakausap mo. and how are we so sure that these people are one among those picketeers? yung isa nga umuwi na sabi niya di ba. gaano mo ba katagal inembistigahan ito?The human voice is the most powerful testimony to any human experience-oh yeah it can also add and deduct accounts, dagdag-bawas ng mga kuwento...ang pinoy lagi na lang nagmamakaawa sa ganang karapatan niya kaya ang mga ganid nagagamit sila. I remember a tale when i was young about imelda marcos. sabi daw niya, ang mga pinoy malimusan mo lang ng piso, abot langit na ang pagsamba sayo.these farmers you interviewed are given a 'kernel' when in fact they should be getting more. And speaking about the benefits, natural! kasi yun ang utos ng batas sa mga cojuangco. Didn't you tell them, if you know, why are they given allowancers,tuition fee, etc? partial-patial lang weh. Did you help them analyze what is? i guess not, basta makapag-post ka, ayos na..The title of your post should be "What Felicity and the 7 Farmers Don't Understand About Hacienda Luisita"
@ marco:
By the way, read my comment again. I never said anything about any gunshot or any Cojuangco-Aquino. I was commenting only on the content of the video. And for your information in case you can't reach the Cojuangco-Aquino that you seem to hate so much, a tormented person (worker) should never expect mercy from their tormentors (capitalist). The bourgeoisie will always protect their interest because if they cease to do so that will be the end of their story. That is to say that a capitalist who gives up his game in a capitalist economy will always be eaten by capitalism itself. What is happening to small farmers is the consequence of stiff competition in already saturated world market. So they too are being eaten by capitalism despite their effort to preserver their own skin. I'm not sure if you are Maoist or just a follower of another bourgeois political camp, but here's something that you can think about if by some chance you are Maoist:
"Of all the classes that stand face to face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a genuinely revolutionary class. The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of Modern Industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product.
The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay, more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If, by chance, they are revolutionary, they are only so in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend not their present, but their future interests; they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat." (The Communist Manifesto)
***To Felicity, thanks for the space. I'm out of here. Sorry if I have inserted another comment with a scope that is far from the raw content of the video you shared.***
@minsupala i'm not a farmer but i live where the farmers are... mingle and tsika with them too. so i think you should also read these links and then maybe could come back here and comment again on the writer's blog :)
@felicity - don't play safe. you know you could feed us more than just that. i don't wanna say it's a crap... again, there's more than that.
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/182195/corys-land-reform-legacy-to-test-noynoys-political-will
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/181877/hacienda-luisitas-past-haunts-noynoys-future
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/182515/how-a-workers-strike-became-the-luisita-massacre
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/183662/after-luisita-massacre-more-killings-linked-to-protest
@minsupala_blogmaster LOL i'm neither of the two. nice last post.
@felicity thanks! i'm outta here too. makapag-tsaa na nga lang :)
Marco,
Your words here--
"The human voice is the most powerful testimony to any human experience-oh yeah it can also add and deduct accounts, dagdag-bawas ng mga kuwento"
--apply in the most amusing way to your own words. I love how you blatantly disregard the writer's request to view the video with an open mind. As it stands, you watched the clip from only one perspective: to discredit whatever message these farmers are offering.
My dear, let me tell you something. You're not very smart, you with your guns blazing and your misplaced indignation. The blogger never claimed that the contents of this video -- and the opinions expressed therein -- are universally reflective of the views of all Hacienda Luisita residents. She never said, "Look, see, I interviewed these people, and it's true! Nobody wants the land!" No. She said, quite simply, that she conducted an interview, that she picked those who were left unemployed, and that this video is the fruit of those efforts.
One wonders why you're even in this discussion, when you're so convinced that the video lacks any validity or that Ms. Felicity has neglected to abide by basic journalistic tenets. You can't even form complete sentences, "partial patial lang weh". You're clearly of no use here when you can't even support your own dissenting opinions.
And please, don't try to use the late Teddy Benigno here. His kid is a colleague of mine, and their family is voting for Noynoy because they believe in him, period.
It is not my place to analyze what should and should not be. I went there to hear what they thought, not there to proselytize and impose. Who am I to presume what the farmers want? It is their lives, not mine. I would not even presume understand everything they have gone through. And on that note, how do you know I didn't play devil's advocate while interviewing them? Ah, yes, you are all-knowing nga pala.
I do wonder how you have jumped to the conclusion that I have no understanding of the situation. Why, because you assume that I dispute the "Left"'s arguments wholesale simply because I am giving space to what the farmers say that do not sit well with you? There is a disconnect there, Marco.
Interestingly, last week, a respected reporter ranted on his twitter about someone in the Aquino camp seeming to imply that anyone who raises an issue against HL is "simply a stooge of Joma Sison" (quoting the reporter). If that is indeed what the Aquino camp meant -- ang kupal diba?
Same goes for you. So anyone saying anything about HL not sympathetic to the "Left"'s line of argument simply "doesn't understand Hacienda Luisita" -- ang kupal diba?
Lalo na since those seven farmers are FROM hacienda luisita, and you're not.
(ps: I did 10 man-on-the-street interviews, 2 more in manila on camera, and 3 workers off the record).
Anyway, your opinion is your own. I did what I set out to do: air the other side of the story. If any minds are changed, that is incidental and not the purpose and intent of this venture. It's up to you whatever side you believe, that's your prerogative. But these people deserve their story to be heard too. I hope you can respect that and set aside your bias. If you don't agree, then you don't. But like I said in my entry above, these voices deserve to be heard too.
Thanks and have a good day.
@Marco. thanks for the links. interestingly those links are from the series I found issue with for not airing the other side of the story. Moot response, then.
And yes, I can feed you more than that. I just choose not to, at least for now. Chew on this one first.
Cheers.
@foxpenner thanks, well said :) I just saw his last post. He quoted the Communist Manifesto, so it is clear where he is coming from.
(Disclaimer: I have nothing against communism, I find their worldview interesting even if I don't find it suitable for me personally).
thanks for giving the first vid to bite on. :) i do not belittle the views of the farmers who wants to opt out of the SDO, same as i dont want to interpret this video as the end all statement of what the farmers wants in relation to agrarian reform.
as HLI is a complex issue internally, an outsider should also be given all the perspective with regards to that matter. the GMA articles did not do justice at all.
more power. great work. :)
@felicity: job well done... you have the courage to see and "share" the other side of the story....
for marc: he is a Satur follower? well obvious.... the 7 farmers are more credible than you... and Satur! Linta!
@ felicity:
I came back to read the comments on your blog and I noticed that I need to make some clarification. You may have inadvertently ascribe my "last post" to "marco". I'm the one who posted the Communist Manifesto quote for "marco" just in case he is a Maoist. But he said, he isn't so it's immaterial now. I know I'm the odd man out here, but I find your work enlightening because what we see on television is mostly highly politicized and slanted presentation of the HL controversy. I'm not rooting for any of the political camps who are trying to make use of the HL controversy to advance their own hidden agenda because if there is any side I would take it will only be side of the workers and of a free workers' movement not hijack by those whose version of Marxism is as adulterated as their political gimmickry. That's the reason why I hit Maoism in my post because I know their petty bourgeois ideology from inside out. Like I said to "marco", I had been where "marco" probably had never been.
@ marco:
I have been to the links you posted before, so like Felicity I found your response moot. But thanks anyway for sharing it. I found Ms. Dychiu's report wanting by the way because it was slanted too much to advance a particular viewpoint. If one wants to present at least a fair birds-eye-view of the real situation in HL, you have to go to the ground and get every angle of the story and let them be heard with the same weight you give to the side you're bias with. The special report Ms. Dychiu made for GMANEWS didn't do that. So Felicity here did her own digging and presented what she found on the ground that wasn't presented in Ms. Dychiu's report. I found her work enlightening because I know how Leftist formations can hijack workers' legitimate demands to suit their own convenience. They already did it to the entire workers' movement in the Philippines to advance their own protracted people's war which is basically resting on the classic Stalinist position of a "two-stagee" revolution and unfortunately many well-meaning workers, students, etc. already died because of it. It's really a long story but I can't just hijack this blog to talk about it. Besides, we would be out of topic in relation to the video above if we will continue to discuss it here.
---------------------
***To Felicity, I came back just to clear things up. I'm done so I hope I haven't "hijack" your blog yet to suit my convenience. LOL Thanks for allowing us to comment by the way. It has been a pleasure, and please continue your work to air the side of those who were never given the chance to share their side of the story.***
Sugar lands are not as easy as ricefields to cut up and distribute. Unlike ricefields that can generate sufficient revenue for a small area of land with the use of some fertilizer, insecticide etc, sugar lands cannot. 1 ton of cane can only generate 2 sacks of sugar!!!!! and there are on average only 50 tons of cane per hectare. And 1 hectare each is just too big to be distributed, managed, and then owned by a small farmer with little capacity for harvesting (big tractors are needed for this), planting (fertilizer is much too expensive especially for a big land), milling/conversion to sugar (millers do not accept small quantities for milling due to machine efficiency issues). This is a situation where economies of scale apply, a bigger production level is more efficient in the long run.
this is great, felicity! it's nice that young people are engaged in doing investigative stuff like this. i did something similar in another part of the country ... and the farmers said pretty much the same things. hope you do some more clips on the marginalized whom certain elements are doing their damnedest best to exploit and use to further their own personal agenda!
Thanks for this post... I also didn't find the GMANews report far from truthful, with so many gaping holes left unplugged. At least you gave me an insight of what the other side thinks or believes in. The story is much clearer now.
@minsupala_blogmaster and @marco sorry for the mixup on the communist manifesto! :)
Thank you so much for your work and for being responsible journalist. We hope others would understand the real situation in Hacienda Luisita. It is very depressing how the people of hacienda being used by others and benefit at the end, and left this people suffering. For info Hacienda Luisita considers to be the economic prime mover of the Province because of its Luisita Industrial Park who employs an average of 10,000 workers. It also has a sugar mill who employs at least 800 employees, 1,700 independent sugarcane planters who generated numerous workers within the region. It is simple as breaking down hacienda would simply breaking down the hopes and dreams of the people relying inside Hacienda Luisita, your work will bring smiles and hope to this people. God Bless you!
something is wrong with this report.
this is self-serving propaganda to favor your president.
those you interviewed aren't even members of the farmworkers union. had you really been into being objective, i wonder why the ULWU union president was never even involved in this report.
Everyone above was in the ULWU. One was even a union steward who was present at the negotiations.
Anyway, since you seem to have missed it, reposting from the entry above:
I also did not include any portion of my 45-minute interview with Lito Bais, current ULWU (United Luisita Workers Union) leader appointed (not elected) by Rene Galang, the ULWU leader tagged in the 2004 strike and who, according to witnesses, disappeared into thin air at the height of the protests, and who is now, according to Bais, in hiding within the hacienda in a place Bais nicknames “Texas.”
I did not include Bais’ interview because he’s had his time on print and in the airwaves. (If you care to know what he has said, the GMA News series quotes him substantially; also, here are the latest news naming him as spidered by a quick Google News search.) I did include portions of my interview with Lito’s brother Manuel.
When I met Lito, he had just finished an interview with what he told me was Bulatlat. He also told me that he just spoke to a local foreign-paper correspondent (which I confirmed by having a brief word with the said correspondent outside Lito's house that day). Lito was also on the phone with another publication who was seeking his response to an issue before we started our interview. At one point during our interview, he also told me of the many calls he gets from the media requesting a statement from him. In a way, he has become the media's default source.
If any legitimate party is interested in seeing my interview with Lito Bais (or any of the farmers I interviewed) or transcripts thereof, tweet me. I've already furnished copies, full and partial, to some members of the media and other interest groups.
@pedestrianobserver : cool! saw your blog! where did you get your links to the "i blog for human rights" and X child soldier icons? i want to add them on my blog too :)
I wrote about child soldiers, you might be interested: http://felicity-on-the-ground.blogspot.com/2010/03/child-soldiers-in-contemporary-warfare.html
:)
Looking at the bigger picture, the Hacienda Luisita Massacre (even the Mendiola Massacre) was a by-product of the semi-feudal, semi-colonial society that we inherited from Spain. The deeper issue here is that Land should've been given to the farmers way back in 1972 when Marcos signed PD 27, and again when the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law was passed when Cory became president. Why? Maybe its because most of the members of Congress belong to the landed gentry, and who would want to give up their land? (read the Rulemakers by PCIJ).
In twisty thorny situations like this, sometimes it is instructive to go straight to the horses mouth, so to speak.
Thanks for trying to unearth and present the ground-level story. Especially when, as is sadly sometimes the case, spokespeople and representatives may have a separate agenda.
By the way, this could easily have been turned into a hit piece (as we have seen), so kudos.
@Jerome: American policies.
(Excerpts from my Facebook chat)
Di mo na gets no?
Di mo ba napansin at barya lang ang binibigay ng mga Cojuangco at Aquino?
1986 nasaan yang mga taong yan na nasa interview?
2010 nasaaan yang mga taong yan na nasa interview?
Pareho pa rin buhay nila. Mga anak nila nag-abroad na siguro.
As a leader of the country Cory and Noynoy could have done something to make these people's lives better?
Don't you get it? Distinguish between survival and paulan ng barya, and raising the QUALITY OF LIFE of these farmers after 23 years?
Di mo gets? Bigyan mo ng sardinas at bigas yang mga taong yan, samahan mo ng ABS-CBN telenovela, masaya na yan.
Ang punto bigyan mo ng higher quality of life yung mga tao sa Hacienda Luisita.
1986 nasaan sila, si Obama, Singapore at China?
2010 nasaan sila, si Obama, Singapore at China?
Nakikita mo lang iboto si Noynoy and everything will be ok.
Ang hindi mo nakikita nandyan na si Noynoy 1986 pa, anak ng presidente, pero wlang nagawa.
(continuation of Facebook chat)
Teka, c cojuangco nmn ang may-ari ng hacienda luisita, shares lang ang kila noynoy...
did noynoy had the power to decide over hacienda luisita? ang masama ata eh, kung cy mismo ang nagdecide over hacienda luisita, at wala cyng ginawa, yon ang kasalanan.
Just in the case of gibo, he was in the position to prevent the massacre from happening, but he didn't....
Wawa We April 23 at 10:57am
Diane,
Alam mo sa Japan, Australia, Canada, US, Germany, England, Denmark, Switzerland at mga iba pang countries na mataas ang pinag-aralan at may respeto sa buhay ng tao, yung sinasabi mong sila Cojuangco ang may ari at 2 percent lang di lulusot sa ethical standards nila.
Kasi itong mga bansang ito may respeto sa dignidad ng tao e.
Ang pinoy hahanapin ng butas para lang mapaganda.
Pero sa tutoo lang 23 years na yan, di ba?
May nangyari ba?
Bakit aasa pa tayo?
Dahil si Kris?
Dahil kay Cory?
i will have to take exception to the report. misleading at best, and self-serving.
in law, it is of little probative value because such testimonies are done to protect one's own interest. the same is true with this report. had you not been clearly in support of your president, perhaps such report would have had the effect of balanced reportage, but the omission of the ulwu president is suspect, and seems to be in pursuance of the desired impact of the video.
it would've been best if we disclosed immediately our leanings because the report is being bandied around in youtube and other sites as a product of objective investigative journalism. clearly, with your position in favor of noynoy, we cannot admit of absolute objectivity.
---
1. i became an activist because of hacienda luisita in 2004 and i was there during the shooting down of the farmworkers. they were shot down for protesting the P9.50 per week wage of supposedly stockholders under the stock distribution option scheme under the CARP. kahit pano natin tignan yun, hindi makatao yung P9.50 a wee.
2. yung dating ng report, parang sinasabi nila na ang mga tulad namin ay unthinking activists who know not what we fight for.
3. kaya naman lupa ang panawagan dahil yung structure ng lupa yung pinag-ugatan ng problema. imbes na ipamahagi under the general rule ng CARP, SDO nalang daw. bukod pa rito, dapat bago pa yung CARP pinamahagi na unde the terms of a loan agreement by Cory's father. Around 1985 dapat naipamahagi na ito under Marcos' land reform decrees.
4. twin ang panawagan, ang minimum demand itaas ang sahod na P9.50 a week, pero ang maximum na demand, buong ipamahagi ang hacienda sa mga farmworkers, hindi na sa ilalim ng SDO kundi sa ilalim ng GR ng CARP.
5. walang mali, sa sabayang panawagan na ito. dahil kung hindi maipapamahagi ang lupa sa maximum, kailangang maitaas ang sahod.
6. may ilang bahagi ng video na irrelevant sa usapin ng hacienda luisita, at tulad ni palparan, dumudulo sa redbaiting. ano namang mali kung pumasok sa usapin ng luisita ang mga aktibista, if not to organize the farmworkers to ask for higher wages? mali ba yun, kasalanan ba yun? hindi naman ata.
7. hindi totoong nagbayad si satur ocampo ng 6M. yan ang deception na sinasabi ng kabilang hati ng ulwu para idiscredit yung campaign na naganap noon, kesyo may kumita at hindi ang mga tagaluisita. alam niyo, kung kikita nalang din naman, hindi na kami magpapakahirap pa sa ginagawa namin. para lang kumita ng 6M papabayaan naman mamatay yung mga tao namin? grabe naman ata yung paratang na yun. sa totoo, binubukas ng ininterview ang sarili niya sa libel, dahil tsismis na ginagawang gospel truth ng nagsalita na talagang kumita raw si satur ng pera. pero kahit ganito, syempre hindi kakasuhan ni satur ang mga magsasaka.
8. sinasabi tumakas daw si ka rene galang. magkaiba ang tumakas sa umalis para iligtas ang sarili sa kapahamakan. seryoso at nakakatakot na ang mga banta sa buhay niya sa lugar. alam ninyo, ang kasabayan niyang chair ng CATLU, ang union ng azucarera, ay nashoot down sa luisita nung kainitan ng massacre at sigurado kaming siya na yung susunod. pagtapos ng massacre marami pang ibang supporters ang nashootdown by alleged military elements. sa 7 pinatay noong massacre, 7 pa ang pinaslang pagkatapos, kasama ang catlu president.
ito ang batayan kung bakit niya kailangang magtago, dahil sa seryosong banta sa buhay niya, higit pa sa kahit ano. nagkikita pa rin kami ni ka rene ngayon, at hindi naman siya yung may bagong bahay at pajero na pagtapos ng strike.
9. sa usapin ng walang kapital. alam ninyo, hindi issue ang kawalan ng kapital sa usaping repormang agraryo. kahit wala pang agarang kapital, mahalaga ang kagyat na pagbibigay ng lupa. trabaho ng DAR ang magbigay ng support services kasama na rin ang microfinancing para mabuhay ang mga agrarian reform communities at tulungan silang makabangon. ganito rin naman ang kwento ng sumilao. alam nilang wala sila kapital, pero dahil mahalaga sa kanila ang lupa, ilalaban talaga nila nang patayan. ganito mismo ang linya ng landlords kung bakit nila tinututulan ang landreform, hindi lang sa luisita kundi sa lahat ng bahagi ng bansa. kung ganito ang posisyong ng report na ito, nakakatakot dahil nagmumukhang hindi pro-land reform talaga si noynoy.
10. ang mga aktibista, hindi pinipiling mainitan sa araw para lang sa wala. at tingin ko hindi rin naman ako bobo para hindi malaman ang totoo sa naganap sa luisita. sa bahay ng isang napaslang ako nakitulog isang gabi noong panahon ng welga. at isa sa mga konsehal ng tarlac na pinaslang ay isa sa mga lagi kong kakwentuhan.
11. kahit pumasok man ang evil left, hindi matatawaran ang katotohanan na kahit nasa kanan ka pa nung pulitika ng bansa, walang taong nabubuhay sa P9.50 kada linggong sahod ng manggagawang bukid. si conrad de quiros, kaalyado ngayon ni noynoy, ang nagsabi noong kainitan ng massacre - kahit wala pa ang kaliwa sa masaker na naganap, hindi naman mag-aalsa kung wala talagang nagugutom sa hacienda luisita.
sagad sa pagkatao ko ang mga paratang dito, dahil hacienda luisita ang dahilan ng alternatibang buhay na pinili ko ngayon.
salamat.
I don't know how it can be self-serving if a) I'm not the one running for president and b)this issue should not have been politicized in the first place, and this was not meant to be political at all, just a follow up to my journalistic critique and c) kung may mali talaga nagawa si noynoy edi bakit ko iboboto? i'm not blind.
i will not presume, nor should any of us presume, that we know better than the farmers about what THEY want. let them speak. tao din sila, pilipino din sila, and above all, buhay NILA ang maaapektohan ng kung anuman ang mangyari sa hacienda.
hay naku, mga tao dito nagmamarunong ng nagmamarunong. bakit, kayo ba ang maapektohan sa isyung luisita? hindi naman a! kaya ipasalita niyo naman ang mga maaapektohan, hindi na nga sila napapakinggan babaliwalain niyo pa. ay sus! mga close minded! nagmamamarunong! kala niyo kung sino kayong nakakaranas sa isyung luisita. hay mga tao talaga.
ang ginawa nga dito ay para mailabas naman ang sinasabi ng mga ibang mga magsasaka, na halatang hindi nakikita sa TV o nababasa sa dyaryo.. gusto lang ni felicity bigyan din ng air-time mga ito.. kaya tumahimik na kayo at ipasalita ang mga hindi dating napayagang magsalita dahil puro sina satur at paeng at ang mga aktibista lang naririnig natin.. sabi nila, ibigay sa magsasaka ang gusto nila.. ayan na o, yan nga ang gusto nila!
kung ayaw nyo ang naririnig niyo, edi IGNORE. basta, mabuto nalang at narinig na din ng mga marunong makinig ang nais sabihin ng iba. edi mas informed na tayo hindi ba.
alam na namin lahat ung mga argumento ninyo na yan. sakin lang, kahit hindi si noynoy boto ko, alam ko parin na hindi naman niya kasalanan kung mali man o hindi so cory. grabe naman kayo, gustro ninyo superhero presidente niyo. edi si batman nalang kaya iboto ninyo?
pero ang nakikita ko naman dito ay hindi pulitika, kayo lang ang mga nomumulitika! lalo niyo lang dinidiin ang sentimento ng madami na pinupulitika lng ng mga oportunista ang isyung hacienda luisita.
@ teridon
1. i will have to take exception to the report. misleading at best, and self-serving.
---- Why? Is it because it went against your own biases? What about the biases of others who consider Ms. Dychiu's report lopsided? They too said the same words that you spoke as far as Ms. Dychiu's reportage. Everybody is taking an exception and that’s the reason why all sides needs to be heard. That’s purpose of this blog – to air the side of those that haven’t been heard yet in the news media.
2. in law, it is of little probative value because such testimonies are done to protect one's own interest. the same is true with this report. had you not been clearly in support of your president, perhaps such report would have had the effect of balanced reportage, but the omission of the ulwu president is suspect, and seems to be in pursuance of the desired impact of the video.
---- Who's interests are we talking about? Clearly, those people interviewed in the video have their own interests in the HL controversy and that what dictates their own viewpoints. The same thing is true with the other sides. Do you mean to say that the testimonies of those people in the video are of little probative value because they were done to protect their own interests? If that is the case, what about the testimonies of the likes of Lito Bais, et. al. or the position of Ka Satur, and even yours? If we apply your own words equally to everyone without bias, then, everybody's testimonies are of little probative value in law.
As far as I have understood the objective of this blog, it's to air the side of those who haven't been given the chance to be aired verbatim in the news media, especially in connection to Ms. Dychiu's reportage in a GMANEWS Special Report segment. I think Felicity, the author, has made it clear why she didn't include the side of the ULWU President from the very beginning. But still she offered to any legitimate party the chance to see her interview with the ULWU President, or at very least the transcript of it, just in case they would ask for it. Something that Ms. Dychiu’s report didn’t do for the other sides that she didn’t bother to interview.
3. it would've been best if we disclosed immediately our leanings because the report is being bandied around in youtube and other sites as a product of objective investigative journalism. clearly, with your position in favor of noynoy, we cannot admit of absolute objectivity.
---- From my vantage point, the video above only shared the leanings of the people shown in the interview – towards their own interests. I tried to check for myself if Felicity, the author, had written anything pointing in the direction of your assumption. I maybe wrong, but I haven't seen anything of that sort yet and it would be wrong for me to put words into her mouth. And granting that she is leaning towards the direction you are pointing her to be, that doesn't alter the fact that the HL controversy had sides that haven't been seen in the news media yet that we all need to hear. Now, what's so wrong about it? You mentioned it yourself further down your comment that there's another "kabilang hati" of ULWU in the HL controversy. Do you mean to say just because they do not subscribe to the other half of ULWU you support they don't have the right to be heard as equally as your side have been? Wouldn't it be self-serving for you to say that you can say anything you want and other sides can't because you don't agree with them?
@ teridon
4. i became an activist because of hacienda luisita in 2004 and i was there during the shooting down of the farmworkers. they were shot down for protesting the P9.50 per week wage of supposedly stockholders under the stock distribution option scheme under the CARP. kahit pano natin tignan yun, hindi makatao yung P9.50 a wee.
---- I'm not an Aquino-Conjuanco supporter, much less a supporter of any other bourgeois camp like your side and other sides of Leftist equations of the Philippines support, but yet I'm proud to say that I'm taking the side of the workers who are mostly never heard and of a free worker's movement that is often hijack from their own hands. But the issue shown in this blog is not about us or what we advocate but who they were and who they are now. By "who" I mean the workers whose side that were never heard, the side that you called as the "kabilang hati" of ULWU. But are they right in their chosen position? I bet you would say "no" from the way they you present your own defense. But the thing is, I don't think that is objective of this blog or the video shown in it. You need to try to see outside the box for once and hear the spectrum of voices that I myself may or may not agree and yet opted to listen and see.
5. yung dating ng report, parang sinasabi nila na ang mga tulad namin ay unthinking activists who know not what we fight for.
---- That's your own interpretation of the report and you're entitled to it. Others have their own interpretation and they’re entitled to it as well. But the point here is, those farm workers shown in video have their own side of the story to tell and whether we like it or not, they too must be given the chance to be heard.
6. kaya naman lupa ang panawagan dahil yung structure ng lupa yung pinag-ugatan ng problema. imbes na ipamahagi under the general rule ng CARP, SDO nalang daw. bukod pa rito, dapat bago pa yung CARP pinamahagi na unde the terms of a loan agreement by Cory's father. Around 1985 dapat naipamahagi na ito under Marcos' land reform decrees.
twin ang panawagan, ang minimum demand itaas ang sahod na P9.50 a week, pero ang maximum na demand, buong ipamahagi ang hacienda sa mga farmworkers, hindi na sa ilalim ng SDO kundi sa ilalim ng GR ng CARP.
walang mali, sa sabayang panawagan na ito. dahil kung hindi maipapamahagi ang lupa sa maximum, kailangang maitaas ang sahod.
---- Most people have seen that side of the story already, the same way that they saw the Aquino-Cojuanco side or at least the glimpse of it by the way of their pronouncements and actions. I have to admit though it's the side of the Left that we have heard more often. As for the other "kabilang hati", we just begun to hear from them and I hope we could hear from them more.
@ teridon
7. may ilang bahagi ng video na irrelevant sa usapin ng hacienda luisita, at tulad ni palparan, dumudulo sa redbaiting. ano namang mali kung pumasok sa usapin ng luisita ang mga aktibista, if not to organize the farmworkers to ask for higher wages? mali ba yun, kasalanan ba yun? hindi naman ata...
...sa usapin ng walang kapital. alam ninyo, hindi issue ang kawalan ng kapital sa usaping repormang agraryo. kahit wala pang agarang kapital, mahalaga ang kagyat na pagbibigay ng lupa. trabaho ng DAR ang magbigay ng support services kasama na rin ang microfinancing para mabuhay ang mga agrarian reform communities at tulungan silang makabangon. ganito rin naman ang kwento ng sumilao. alam nilang wala sila kapital, pero dahil mahalaga sa kanila ang lupa, ilalaban talaga nila nang patayan. ganito mismo ang linya ng landlords kung bakit nila tinututulan ang landreform, hindi lang sa luisita kundi sa lahat ng bahagi ng bansa. kung ganito ang posisyong ng report na ito, nakakatakot dahil nagmumukhang hindi pro-land reform talaga si noynoy.
---- The farm workers only expressed their views and sentiments of the facts and events that took place in HL. They are entitled to it as you are with yours. If they seem to be "redbaiting" to you, then, that's your side of the story and not theirs. The same thing with your defense for Ka Satur and Rene Galang. It's your take of the story and not theirs.
8. ang mga aktibista, hindi pinipiling mainitan sa araw para lang sa wala. at tingin ko hindi rin naman ako bobo para hindi malaman ang totoo sa naganap sa luisita. sa bahay ng isang napaslang ako nakitulog isang gabi noong panahon ng welga. at isa sa mga konsehal ng tarlac na pinaslang ay isa sa mga lagi kong kakwentuhan.
kahit pumasok man ang evil left, hindi matatawaran ang katotohanan na kahit nasa kanan ka pa nung pulitika ng bansa, walang taong nabubuhay sa P9.50 kada linggong sahod ng manggagawang bukid. si conrad de quiros, kaalyado ngayon ni noynoy, ang nagsabi noong kainitan ng massacre - kahit wala pa ang kaliwa sa masaker na naganap, hindi naman mag-aalsa kung wala talagang nagugutom sa hacienda luisita.
sagad sa pagkatao ko ang mga paratang dito, dahil hacienda luisita ang dahilan ng alternatibang buhay na pinili ko ngayon.
salamat.
---- Again, from my understanding, this blog was intended to air the side of the story that we haven't heard verbatim in news media. Your side has your own story to tell. And of course, you have spoken about it already. Now, let the people think and decide for themselves whose side to take. Again, for me I'll take the side of the workers and of a free workers' movement. And that's my own side of the story too. I won't insist, however, that I be heard solely or just dismiss the side of the farm workers shown in video for I respect the intent of this blog and I do want to hear the side of those that haven't been heard yet.
Thank you very much!!!!
Hi, felicity! I have been an avid follower of your articles. thank you for doing the investigative research on Hacienda Luisita. Have I been in the Philippines, I would exactly do what you did even if I don't have the qualifications you got. But coming from a journalist like you, whose credentials are spectacular, an article as sensitive like this makes it more believable. Don't mind the people who told you the article is self-serving. Damn them! (sorry for the word) That's just what they do best.. OPPOSE.
Keep up the good work! :)
Thank you for sharing your blog. I have re-posted this page on my FB account. People should make up their minds based on information that's authentic. Thank you for providing that. -- dina ocampo
Hi, felecity! Good job. Why?.. because now were hearing some of the sides from the people of HLI themselves. On the news, its always the side of satur + associates were hearing from. Anyway, i can't blame them. It's a business, they're profiting from it. Bakit mo naman hihintuan ang isang bagay na kumikita ka.
"Maybe" they are pushing lupa-lupa for them to buy it, because they know that the farmers have no capital to start with. Lalo na kasama ni satur si manny villar sa ticket nila. Hmmm.. do the math..
and one more thing.. Gustung-gusto nila satur na na-pag-uusapan lagi.. because of media exposure, its a free advertisement.. no cash-out.
I am a farmer and i own a small portion of land. If you own a land and u don't have a capital for your farm, the best next thing to do is to lease or sell the land in order to at least profit. Kung ipamimigay na ang lupa, sure ako andyan sila satur kasi kailangan bumalik yung puhunan nilang nag-barker sa issue na yan.
What am i aiming about.. lets also look at the financial side of the story. In every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction.. and at the end of the day pera pa rin ang pinag-uusapan.
Oh by the way, para dun sa kumo-kontra dun sa video, i invite everyone to do the same because with felecity's high credentials she took the risk by going to tarlac and doing this interview.
As to felicity.. more power! Go girl!
I believe I haven't officially thanked you for helping me decide on my president and spurring me to write my case for Noynoy -- Thank you!
I believe in giving voice to the unheard; your video has allowed them to reach out to thousands.
Congratulations and all the best!
Cheers,
Jason
medyo may intellectual dishonesty dito sa ginawa mo, ms. tan. una, binanatan mo ng todo ang report ng gmanews.tv dahil sa tingin mo mali-mali at iisang panig lang. tapos sinabi mo, pupunta ka sa luisita para hanapin ang katotohanan. pero ano ang ginawa mo? you just presented a few farmers na kontra kina lito bais, at napaka-tendentious pa ng mga argumento at totally without basis or proof (lalo na ang akusasyong binigyan si satur ocampo ng 6m).
in the final analysis, propaganda din ang ginawa mo na ang makakabenepisyo ay si noynoy at mga kalaban ng ulwu at catlu. true, pinresent mo ang side ng ilang mga farmers pero what they said didn't help the discussion of the issue. they merely vented their ire.
medyo tuso ang posisyon mo na ang ginagawa mo lang ay ang side ng mga farmers na di naririnig. ok lang sana ito kung hindi mo pinipresenta ang sarili mo na journalist. e kaso, napaka-self-righteous pa nga ng dating mo about journalism, as if you are god's gift to journalism in this part of the wood.
hindi mo pueding sabihin na kaya di mo nilagay ang side nina lito bais ay dahil masyado na silang sikat sa media. tusong pag-iisip yan. kung totoo kang journalist, give us the complete picture. otherwise, don't pass yourself off as a journalist na walang kinilinngan kundi ang katotohanan.
in the final analysis, walang pinagkaiba ang ginawa mo sa mga puntong ayaw mo sa story ng gmanews.tv. bagkus, mas maganda ang ginawa ni stephanie dychiu dahila at least mas throrough ang research, mas maayos at mas complete ang picture, kahit na sabihin mong one-sided.
Hi,
I'm reposting this on my facebook. Thanks.
The farm workers interviewed justly expressed what/who they are: workers (not peasants as the maoists claimed).
As communists (and we don't believe that CPP-NPA/Bayan Muna and the likes are communists), we have a fundamentally different analysis on the Hacienda Luisita issue which is now being used by Bayan Muna for the candidacy of Villar against Noynoy. The truth is both Villar and Aquino (and all the presidential candidates) are anti-peasant and anti-workers.
@ Pasyo
I agree with your position as a matter of fact that is the trajectory of my previous posts towards Maoists, their apologists as well as to well-meaning individuals trying to make sense of the HL controversy. Although I tried to limit my statements within the context of this blog out of respect to Felicity, it has always been my position that the those farm workers in HL were trying to advance their own immediate interests by fighting for wage increase and for more work. And that's exactly what they said in the video. Their intentions and actions were just sabotage, and their movement hijacked, through the intervention of the Maoist formation like Bayan Muna whose interests were never in line with the interests of workers in both the industrial and agricultural sector of our society. What the Maoists are doing is no different actually from the government they are trying to sabotage with their protracted peoples war. They are both trying to roll back the wheels of history in the so-called agrarian reform program. No wonder Bayan Muna, Akbayan, Sanlakas, etc. can make alliances with mainstream political parties like LP, NP and the PMP because at the end of the day their interests are one and the same. Their respective intentions, rhetoric, and tactics may vary but in the end it's the workers, the toiling masses that suffers.
On a different note, I think know you and you know me. And if I'm correct, we used to work together. LOL
@ felicity
It looks like your blog attracted every color in the rainbow. LOL I promise that this is my last politically-charge post though in deference to your desire for people not to politicized your piece of work on HL. But to be honest with you the HL issue, particularly the original demands of the farm workers and their actions, cannot really be taken in a neutral mode because it is political in itself. It may be possible to present it neutrally like you tried to do, but that's all you can do about it in neutral terms. Outside of that, it will always be political because like I said that's basically what it is about.
Again, thank you for your work and for the space you have given us. More power to you!
@Minsupala: I'll be glad if we know each other and we used to work. Maybe we can work together again? LOL. You can PM me if you want. Best regards!
@Felicity: My apology also. But I think its the maoist people who started "politicizing" your post/video, though the issue itself is political.
Obviously, Felicity is not a neutral. (Who is, anyway?) Most importantly, neither is her video.
Next time, I hope we don't fall for Felicity's feigned neutrality. Farmers deserve better than that.
http://viewerdiscretionisadvised.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/felicity-and-luisita-can-the-subaltern-speak/
it only shows that redistribution should not be the only concern of land reform. a finite resource such as land, should be managed sustainably (considering the economic, social and ecological dimensions of it.) unlike the virtual land in farmville (he he he) further subdividing it to smaller portions would not optimize its eco-social contribution.with the chains and layers of people and processes involved in production (farmhand, farmhelp, capital and service providers, irrigation providers, traders, buyers) agricultural production is actually one big enterprise. and with that, only a sustainable business model could answer the increasing needs of people dependent on it. new forms of ownerships and/ or profit/fruit sharing should be set in place. I also abhor the idea that control remains in the hand of a mega-family corporation but individually distributing it would even marginalize the people at the far end of the value chain. the idea of setting up cooperative, interdependent structures and mutually reinforcing agro-enterprises, owned and managed by the farmers, could be explored and it should be coupled with efforts to build the capacity of farmers to deal with it in a businesslike way.
o baka gusto niyo rin panoorin ang mga ito:
Noynoy Aquino: Walang Bahid?
http://www.bulatlat.com/main/2010/04/18/video-commentary-noynoy-aquino-walang-bahid/
Hacienda Luisita massacre: An outstanding issue of the people on Noynoy Aquino
http://kodao.org/video/hacienda-luisita-massacre-outstanding-issue-people-vs-noynoy-aquino
may award-winning reports ang Bulatlat.com tungkol sa Hacienda Luisita.
http://www.bulatlat.com/main/luisita/
@Edgar Allan Paule:
Representation is certainly dangerous business, regardless of who is doing the representing.
Gayatri Spivak has herself questioned the tendency of radical political movements to condescend toward or romanticize the other, no matter how well-intentioned such movements and their members are, and has said that "subaltern" is not "a classy word for the oppressed".
@felicity
iba ang tapang ng taong nasa tama...
hehe
god bless
mga farmers din ang nasa video na 'to. at least ito, mas malalim, verifiable ang mga assertions, anti-noynoy pero hindi lang propaganda.
http://www.bulatlat.com/main/2010/04/27/video-documentary-noynoys-luisita/
ngayon ko lang nakita 'to. oh well, ilan lang ang na-interview na tao.11,000 farmers went on strike so that's enough statement for me against those that were interviewed.
besides, the blogger is a big noynoy supporter, so what do we expect? check this out: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=118594522357&topic=13105&post=57866#topic_top
if this post would be deleted just the same that an above comment was deleted, well, i get the point. hehe
@ranix
more than 11,000 supported EDSA II ... just something to think about :)
@Jonas: Pag nakikita ko ang bulatlat na dyaryo sa kalsada, naiiisip kong hindi ko dapat itong tangkilikin... Pero kanya kanyang trip yan, kung trip mong mag basa ng bulatlat at paniwalaan ang laman noon, sige lang...
@Felicity: Yung mga ibang nag post against this blog missed the purpose -- that this is to give the other side of the story (vs Dychiu's one sided blog turned NEWS).
P9.50 per day? ikaw nga ang mabuhay nun..
at responsibility ng Gobyerno ang Health care.. nasan a ang Land Reform?
@Jonas: How can you see Bulatlat on the streets? It's an online publication. It doesn't have a print edition.
Sorry, I meant @Ronan.
Wow so nice to hear another point of view of Hacienda Luisita (from a Noynoy supporter)? So if this were a wikipedia article, it would say "neutrality of this article is questionable" (or something like that).
I think these farmers you interviewed are short-sighted individuals who doesn't see the real change in a genuine agrarian reform. Plus I think that they are of the minority. The number of protesting workers against Hacienda Luisita in videos all over the net are waayyy more.
I think these people are the people who will vote on their immediate needs and have given up trying for real change. Just for the peace and quiet they will remain obedient and settle with what their employers decide no matter how unjust. Question is why are they contented with getting wages when they can get justice through a genuine agrarian reform?
Just a thought:
http://ohnoy.wordpress.com/2010/04/15/noynoy-aquino-buying-hacienda-luisita-votes-for-p3000family/
A "good" and genuine agrarian reform must be supported by allowing credit facilities, training, funding for sustainable progress of the farmers. The agrarian reform by the Cory Aquino administration was NOT a genuine land reform. The farmers were left on their own and destroyed it by allowing SDO. What we need is a genuine land reform not influenced by politicians with connections to landowners to prevent conflict of interest.
An English translation subtitles would be very helpful to those who do not understand Tagalog. Thanks
I just posted this on my FB with this comment:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/world/americas/23haiti.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw
investigation by NYT shows possible massacre of prisoners in Haiti, I can imagine as hot, sweaty, subhuman as some filipino prisons -- they just wanted out (pretrial incarceration for petty crimes). UN was surrounding the camp. I ♥ the UN but there are times I ask not where are they, but why are they?
i guess the question is, will one blame the UN for the altercation? No, although it raises questions about what, in their position, they could have done. It reminds me of Aquino "involvement" in Hacienda Luisita -- were they responsible for the actions of others? No, but it raises questions on how they could have prevented it.
The method of NYT in collecting first-hand accounts, as presented in the article, is through 5-11 witnesses, about the same # of witnesses I interviewed for my piece on HL.
addendum to my last comment:
note that the NYT article above separates the two accounts: the official version of events, and the witness version of events. Two entirely different interpretations of what unfolded.
In HL case, there are 3 general versions of events (see argument for multiple points of views especially in sensitive topics in my first HL entry "Where GMA News went wrong"):
1. The Cojuangcos'
2. The "makakaliwa"
3. The residents of Luisita
(I did not use "strikers" because as video above tells you, and as I discovered at the hacienda, even the strikers were divided and confused).
All three have something at stake, thus their own version of events. I chose to hear out #3 because they are the most affected, and both #1 and #2 have political mileage in play.
It is important to see all versions of events to be able to paint an informed picture of an issue in your mind. This entry is meant to open up our eyes further, no matter how uncomfortable the repercussions are on any side of the political fence.
So for those who cannot accept that there is a version of events out there that does not sit well with them, sorry, but life does not conform to you.
@Jonas -- bulatlat is a left-leaning publication so that is expected.
and i don't know what propaganda you are talking about.
please read
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/192699/prinsipyo-o-caldero-why-noynoy-won-in-luisita
this was written by a noynoy supporter. at least he was honest enough to disclose that.
i was also able to interview a lot of farmers in luisita, both from ka lito's and manuel's camp because i am doing a documentary focusing on the farmers who voted for noynoy.
this video fails to understand and depict the plight of the farmers.
in the first place, kaya naging pro-noynoy si manuel was because he was hired by his in-laws who are part of the management. that alone betrays why he shifted sides. manuel was also part of the luisita strike.
kung wala nga naman makain ang pamilya mo, what is your choice? these pro-noynoy farmers are really left with no choice. if they stick to their principles, they will starve. this is how oppression takes on a different form.
when you go to hacienda luisita, the pro-noynoy farmers are waiting around for payment/help from noynoy. the anti-noynoy farmers still try to till the land. that is the stark contrast i observed. am i saying that pro-noynoy farmers are lazy? no. all i'm saying is that farmers from both camps have legitimate concerns. and actually, magkaiba man ang form na hinihingi, they are still asking for the same thing: THEIR RIGHTS AS FARMERS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF LUISITA. even the pro-noynoy farmers haven't received anything. the difference between the two camps is that the pro-noynoy trusts the aquinos, the anti-noynoys don't.
and the aquinos will play with this. divide and conquer tactics di ba? they have actually managed to create a very painful rift between the two brothers (manuel and ka lito) who were once very close to each other.
in the spirit of full disclosure, i would like to say that i work for gma news and that i am not a supporter of noynoy.
Going over comments (bored at work.. finally time to wind down). Interesting to see how people claim to think they know what my opinions are on the politics of Hacienda Luisita based on what I have written. My endeavors in the last two posts were purely journalistic in nature. Nothing political about it -- it only became political because the issue itself in general was politicized. I wonder how people can tell from my posts my opinion its politics.
1) I think the handling by the media was not up to par.
2) I agree with Howie Severino, when we had coffee, that it is a test of Noynoy's leadership vis-a-vis his control over his family.
3) I cannot judge if there was something wrong with it legally, as I am not a lawyer, but I do find something off with the timing of the laws.
4) Even if some/many farmers prefer not to own the land, since he promised it, well then he better give it.
5) Both posts are is about #1.
@Shineywiney - I disclosed and it's not a secret that I support Noynoy. And I do understand the plight of the farmers, it's on record. it's just not in the video, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT THE SCOPE. The scope was that the media has generalized the farmers into one lot: they don't like Noynoy and that's that. But like you said, there are many different categories of farmers, and I'm sure they overlap.
Besides, unlike you, your documentary is funded by a news organization. My cameraman and I had to take time away from our regular work and do this without pay or any other compensation.
And I think you are generalizing that the pro-Noynoy farmers, about them sitting around waiting for the Aquinos to save them. Of course I have hours of tape and only 5 minutes on YouTube. We talked about how the Cojuangcos treat/ed them (very well, medical, education, etc), how they make their money now (they till land that was "given" to them at no charge until the hacienda makes an income again), how they feel betrayed by the strike because the land and its yield was a source of pride to them, and now it is barren.
So yes, it's very complicated. Yes, there have been violations of rights. I agree. It's clear. But you cannot simply put it as "anti-Noynoy" vs "pro-Noynoy" because before September 9 2009, there was no Noynoy in the picture. The problem has been longer than that.
Like I said, it was politicized.
@Shineywiney - as an addendum I would like to point out that I am holding you up to higher standards compared to most others in this forum, since you are a practicing journalist, and despite assumption by the less-discerning, these posts were concerned about journalism and the practice thereof.
On to my point: I was highly disturbed by your statement that the farmers just don't understand. Remember that as a journalist your job is not to judge what your subject does or does not understand, but to seek to understand why the subject understands it in the way they do, and report those findings. For all you know, it is you who do not understand something, and after all, it is not your life.
To judge your subject's understanding is highly dangerous to the output of your investigation and poses a risk to the profession, both in terms of the output of your investigation and in terms of public (audience and subject) trust in the media. How can the public trust that you are giving them an uneditorialized report? And how can the subject trust that you are not judging what they are sharing with you?
Also, as a second point: the Aquinos "managed" to divide Lito and Manuel? You speak as if it was their intent. That is an accusation, careful. Please do share the details as to how you jumped to this conclusion, or at the very least quote someone competent to pass this judgment.
hi felicity,
thanks for taking time to answer my super late comment. i would just like to clarify an assumption you made - that i am journalist. no, i am not. i am more of a freelance filmmaker who happens to work in gma. so, although i am flattered that you are holding me up to higher standards (which kind of strikes me as arrogant though. are you saying that journalists know better than others? this contradicts your statements.) you are the one who practices journalism. i don't. i didn't take up journalism. i don't do news for a living. i don't do investigative reporting. i make films.
so i am quite confused when you say your "endeavors in the last two posts were purely journalistic in nature". what exactly do you mean by this?
and i apologize for labeling the two camps anti and pro-noynoy. the labels are not meant to box them but to make it easier for me to explain what i meant. it was politically incorrect. but the luisita issue is quite complicated and i can be quite inarticulate sometimes. that's why i don't write, i shoot.
my accusation is - yes, an accusation. if i were a journalist, i would provide you with all the proper details, quotes and all. but i don't have time for that now.
so, let me jump to the point that i want to make. you cannot claim that doing the story on the luisita farmers and shooting them with your camera is not political. EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL.
"My cameraman and I had to take time away from our regular work and do this without pay or any other compensation. " - why? is it because you were working as a volunteer on noynoy's campaign? even before you got to know the farmers, your goal was already to discredit the other farmers who are fighting for their land, wasn't it? or perhaps i should say it in a prettier way. your goal was to clear noynoy's name or at least to have some proof (a video) that all his critics are so wrong. am i getting warmer?
your video is on youtube. it will be embedded and passed on as the only REAL TRUTH. though you tried to explain yourself here on your blog, the explanation is conveniently left out on your video. and by doing so, you have also taken sides. i respect your opinion. but you have stop denying that you have taken a stand (for the other side). there is no such thing as objectivity. no such thing as non-political.
honestly, wala naman akong problema sa ginawa mo. i can always just say it's bad journalism (like what you've accused gma news of). or even bad filmmaking. and don't get me wrong, hindi ako super loyal sa gma. i have my own issues with them.
my problem is, you pass yourself of as the only noble one in this highly complicated issue because you were not trying to be "political" and was just trying to be "journalistic". what did you accomplish then? some lame propaganda for the cojuangco-aquinos.
oh, and another thing.
i never said the farmers don't understand. where in my post did you get that? what i said was:
"this video fails to understand and depict the plight of the farmers."
medyo wrong grammar yata ako, but what i meant was your video failed to paint a bigger (therefore, more truthful) picture. the only reason you should be highly disturbed is because you have managed to simplify (not in a good way) the luisita issue.
if you're really gunning to be a great journalist, maybe you should read more on how agrarian reform works. and i'm not trying to be condescending here. i think it's really all about agrarian reform - and not about the strikers, the left, the critics of noynoy. it is all about the rights of the farmers. yes, these farmers' voices need to be heard. but they were also there during the luisita strike. why? they were fighting for agrarian reform. agrarian reform is not just about the redistribution of lands. or getting decent wages. and when people are getting killed left and right, and life became worse after the strike, what choice do you have? vote for noynoy. baka lang sakali matulungan na sila this time. but if you go back on history, the cojuangco-aquinos will always find a way to serve their own interests.
hi sorry, on train to germany, cannot respond at length -- re: holding up to higher standards not because journalists know better but because journalists should be discerning in this way. others not being journalist have luxury of making assumptions. thanks for clari that you are not really journalist. i wish i could spend more time to go in depth on issue (not all appeared in the 5-minute video, we went into other things) however i do have a job and like i said my foray to the hacienda was very limited and most definitely unfunded, unsubsidized, unsponsored. use of resources a favor.
also got some of the same answers that only choice is vote for aquino. some for shallower reasons, others for deeper, well-thought out reasons.
yes it's a matter of rights. but not everyone chooses to avail of rights (different from obligations, remember). and yes some do not understand their rights fully. but some do, and still choose the "unpopular" option. i think one of the farmers there makes it pretty clear why.. he thought out the one hand and the other.
"they were also there during the luisita strike. why? they were fighting for agrarian reform. agrarian reform is not just about the redistribution of lands." --> watch video again. true for some. but for others they explicitly said "dagdag sahod dagdag trabaho, nung lupa na pinapagusapan, bumwelta kami."
so you see it goes back to original point: the "lupa" group is not the only group, and they are the only ones portrayed in the media. my only purpose was to show that's not the only school of thought.
and ps - just because one understands does not mean one needs to agree. applied for me (i did not agree with everything the farmers up there were saying to me, just as i agreed with some of what litio bais was telling me). but i stand by my point: media did not fairly air sufficient sides to the story. and this was my response.
cheers mate!
oh and simplification of the issue -- funny. because it made it more complex for me, and i got a lot of messages from people both anti-aquino, pro-aquino and i-don't-care saying that this third dimension of the players in the issue just makes the entire thing more complicated. i never claimed anything beyond that there is another group of voices out there whose opinion worth considering as well.
Post a Comment