Poverty Critique

Miss Ka Inday Bagasbas is just one of the many Filipino people who suffer from severe poverty. It’s no secret that there are impoverished individuals in our country after all, what country doesn’t have the issue. But it’s people like Ka Inday who ask questions like “Shouldn’t the government be helping?” or “What happened to all those promises of change and reform?” It’s debatable whether or not the government is doing everything in its power to fight off poverty but it is clear that they recognize the problem. The citizens, as well, are aware of the poverty rate. Any active member of Philippine society will be aware that numerous people are suffering but people like Ka Inday show us that it’s actually even worse.

So what is poverty and why is it a problem? At the most basic level, poverty is the deprivation of opportunity, resources, options, or anything else we as humans have a basic right to. So while most people think of poverty as a lack of money, this is not the full picture. Poverty means that people are without the things that they need and deserve. While money and resources are the most common examples, poverty is not limited to these concrete things. Poverty deprives people of education, options,free speech, and a future. Poverty is also not just a lack of these, it is the deprivation of. Poverty is not (or at least it should not be) a natural phenomenon. It doesn’t just happen. People are deprived of what they need. The distribution of these elements is not equal and as a result, some people get more and others get less.

But what causes this? Why do some get more while others get less? Well there are numerous theories and reasons. One such theory is the Cultural theory of poverty which states that those who suffer from poverty are those who are lazy or have no future planning skills. In short, some people are poor and that’s their fault. While this is not totally untrue, one cannot generalize this as the reason to why there is poverty. Ka Inday’s story is full of hardships and how she fought to support her family as a single parent. She suffered from poverty but she was not lazy. She was a very hard worker who lived a harsh life and it would be an insult to call her lazy and to tell her that all that has happened was her fault. 

Kasalanan bang maging mahirap? Being poor was never our choice but staying poor was an option.  

Pareho ba sila ng kwento ni Ka Inday?  Is it applicable to every poor person? The statement emphasized too much discrimination on being poor. 

The Neoclassical theory tells us that poverty arises from the laws of supply and demand. This country aims to be globally competitive and as a result we tend to take the market efficiency approach. It’s complicated to say what goes on but the gist of it is that by making economic solutions, sometimes social problems are created as well. Ka Inday fights against the demolishing of relocation sites. The government aimed to demolish these relocation sites, believing that they caused problems for cleanliness and road work. By applying this solution, infrastructure can be improved but the lives of those living there would be made even more difficult. This is KaInday’s point.

This does not mean that the government can’t solve the problem of poverty. Ka Inday believes that the government is not doing everything in its power to address the problem. She has seen the effects of poverty first hand. She watched as president after president made a promise to make things better, when in reality, nothing changed. She believes that they could have solved this problem long ago but forgot about it. Maybe the government is trying its hardest to solve the problem but at the very least, it should have improved things by now.

Citizens are also responsible. While the government must be critiqued, the citizens should not just stop there. The citizens should also be charitable. They have the power to improve the situation, after all, if they don’t do it, who will. But the nation requires harmony between the government and the citizens. Only then can the problem of poverty be solved.

Bayaning Third World

Bilib ka ba kay Rizal o wala ka lang pakialam?De leon's masterpiece simply portrayed the Image of Rizal as a hero and how much we know about his life.  

Bayaning Third World

The movie is primarily about two film-makers who have hopes of making a movie about the Philippine national hero, Jose Rizal. Wanting to be as accurate as possible, the two research on the life of Jose Rizal, his death, and his supposed retraction to the Catholic Church, the very Church he heavily criticized in his two novels, Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. The movie creatively shows the research process by having the film-makers interview the historical figures involved in Rizal’s Life. Historical figures such as Rizal’s mother, Teodora Alonso, his siblings, his supposed wife, Josephine Bracken, and certain other Jesuits who claim that they witnessed the aforementioned retraction. The Movie culminates with the interview of Rizal himself.

Josephine Bracken : Wife of Rizal? Or Among the other girls?

The movie is a deep analysis of the life of Jose Rizal and the people he was involved with. By having the film-makers “interview” these historical figures, known facts about the national hero as well as historical events pertaining to him are shown in a completely new light.In general, the film-makers analysis of Rizal’s life focused on one thing, his supposed retraction to the Catholic Church. A source of controversy. The authenticity of Rizal’s signature in the document is the question that these two film-makers strive to answer. Was the document, as well as the signature, a forgery by the Spanish or was it authentic? If authentic, why did Rizal do as such? This was against his character and his beliefs which he made no attempt to hide, earlier in his life. If the document is authentic, why did the Spanish still have him executed? The film-makers then interview different figures who were prominent in Rizal’s life in order to arrive at the truth. In a sense, the movie plays out like a detective story, having a mystery and interviewing key witnesses in order to make sense of it all.

The film-makers interviewed Rizal’s mother, Teodora Alonso, to get a better idea of what the young Rizal was like. They wanted to see if Rizal was devout in worship as a child. Perhaps if he were, this could provide insight on the decision to retract. Rizal’s siblings were also interviewed and they also provided insights to what Rizal was going through on his last days. Jesuit priests who claim to have witnessed Rizal’s retraction were also interviewed, thought the film-makers remain skeptical of what they say considering who they are. And of course, Rizal’s lover, Josephine Bracken, was also interviewed. She claimed that Rizal wished to marry her and that he could only do so by signing a retraction to the Catholic Church. She claims that they were married but no one, not even the film-makers, can prove this claim. This is due to the fact that although there was a retraction found, no catholic marriage certificate between the two. Finally, the two film-makers go to interview Rizal himself. But he does not provide any additional insight that could aid the two.

One of the themes of the film is the depiction of Jose Rizal as a mysterious figure. His retraction could undo everything he did against the Spanish. If the document was indeed authentic, then would he really deserve to be our nation’s national hero? Of course there is no evidence to support that the document was indeed authentic but this does not necessarily mean that it is a forgery. The film-makers are shown to be frustrated at their inability to arrive at the truth and for a brief moment, begin to doubt the National Hero. The film highlights the irony of how Rizal is the national hero of the Philippines and yet we are not able to verify much about him. How can we agree on whether or not he should be our national hero when some of us can’t even agree on the answer to the question “Who is Rizal?”

Rizal is a hero, of that there is no doubt. But if we compare what he did to the actions of the other Philippine heroes of his time, it becomes debatable whether or not we can call him our national hero. There are different answers and opinions to the question of whether or not he deserves the title. There are those in favor of him being our national hero, and those who are against it.

It’s good that those involved in this film sought out to find the truth. This is, after all, how we learn about history. They are thorough in their endeavors and while the output of their work is well researched, they do admit that they can’t find the answers to every question regarding Rizal. Perhaps some of the answers to those questions will remain a secret for an indefinite amount of time, a fact that is expressed through the frustration of the two film-makers in the film.  As said in the acclaimed film “The Life of Pi”, “Doubt keeps the faith living.” Trying to make sense of history amidst the unknown is like this. Rizal is a hero, but this does not mean that he was perfect. He did things in a way that some of us may disagree with but this does not mean that he was any less of a hero.