Quisling is what one might call an out of the ordinary word for Filipinos. Some have not even heard of it. Yet it is a word that best describes why Congress for better or worse will pass the RH bill.
According to a Wikipedia entry “the term was coined by the British newspaper, The Times, in an editorial published on 19 April 1940, entitled “Quislings everywhere.” It came from the name of a Norwegian, Vidkun Quisling.
He assisted Nazi Germany in the conquest of his own country so “that he could rule the collaborationist Norwegian government himself.”
There are other words for that, traitor being one that is more understood. The tabloid and popular newspaper The Daily Mail picked up the term and the BBC used it until it became international coinage. The Times’ editorial explains why quisling was picked up as the fitting word for this particular kind of politics.
“To writers, the word Quisling is a gift from the gods. If they had been ordered to invent a new word for traitor... they could hardly have hit upon a more brilliant combination of letters. Aurally it contrives to suggest something at once slippery and tortuous.”
In Philippine politics of today and the debate on the RH bill, the word is even more apt because of slippery and tortuous reasons. The politicians often forget or ignore that what they do is against the interest of the country. They are so deep in tortuous domestic maneuver that the issue of loyalty to one’s country does not even come into the discussion. Making a law out of their idea of what “family planning” constitutes does not even come into the picture. Some Filipino politicians take it as a given to favor the interests of other nations or cultures over their own. Yet they do so without any compunction.
More from Wikipedia: “In American English, the term is less well known than the equivalent phrase Benedict Arnold. Nonetheless it appeared in the 1944 Warner Bros. cartoon Tom Turk and Daffy, uttered by a Thanksgiving turkey whose presence is betrayed to Porky Pig by Daffy Duck. It also appeared in a 1966 Peanuts comic strip, Linus tries to hide in Snoopy’s doghouse only to have the beagle rat him out. “Traitor! Quisling! Squealer!” Linus shouts at Snoopy as his sister Lucy drags him away.”
* * *
On the RH bill debate, I would like answers to the following questions. Was there a confidential report known as the NSSM 200 in which population control of particular developing countries including the Philippines were singled out? After answering that question, my next question is why has it suddenly become imperative that it be made into law under the Aquino administration?
If the answer is yes on both counts then there is reason to condemn those who vote for it for these reasons. A more honorable position for legislators of this country is to ask the question whether it favors the country and the well-being of its citizens.
Each country has a specificity and that must be respected by foreign sectors who think it is their business to decide what is good for the country. The Philippines just happens to have a Catholic majority. Therefore the Catholic Church is within its right to be consistent with its teachings on reproduction and life.
But there are also secular reasons why Filipinos should reject the RH bill. One is the exercise of its sovereignty when it is under pressure to follow an agenda of more powerful and wealthy countries.
There are many aspects of the RH bill but for me it comes down to the issue of the freedom to choose for the individual Filipino on one level and the freedom to choose for the Filipino nation on another level. I would concentrate the debate on this aspect.
* * *
I have excerpted portions of a posting entitled Population Growth, Birth Rate, Death Rate, Life Expectancy of Filipinos and the RH bill. This was sent to me by Anti-Pinoy’s Warlito Nobleza Vicente in Facebook.
The article quotes Dr. Romulo Virola, NSCB head: “But come to think of it, is overpopulation really bad when China and India are the envy of everybody these days? Is it not in fact partly because of their huge population of conspicuous consumers that investments are pouring in?”
It then criticizes pro-RH cherry picking.
“The pro-RH are quick to cite cherry picking when in fact — their use of statistical outliers, to justify raising taxes for everyone, and present this as if this were the norm — is not the just the height of cherry picking, it is severely flawed and highly misrepresenting the data — a complete FRAUD!”
They say RH bill is needed because the Philippines is “the 12th most populous nation in the world today,” that the Filipino women’s fertility rate is “at the upper bracket of 206 countries.” It states that studies and surveys “show that the Filipinos are responsive to having smaller-sized families through free choice of family planning methods.” It also refers to studies that “show that rapid population growth exacerbates poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth.” And so it aims for improved quality of life through a “consistent and coherent national population policy.”
But what are the facts on the Philippines?
According to data culled from reliable statistics, population growth rate decreased from 3.0% to 1.8%, for the period from 1960 to 2009;
birth rate decreased from 26.3% to 25.68%, for the period from 2003 to 2010; Death rate went down from 5.6% to 5.06%, for the period from 2003 to 2010; fertility rate went down from 7% to 3.1%, for the period from 1960 to 2008; life expectancy at birth increased for the period from 2003 to 2010.
“The data shows that the population KPIs are consistently trending down ‑ and not going up as previously claimed. All these happened via fund realignment and without increased funding for health.”
Therefore “poverty in the Philippines cannot be attributed to upward population pressure given the downward trends shown by empirical population data.”
“The justification for increased funding of procurement and distribution by the DOH is not supported by the empirical evidence.”
More populous countries are richer than the Philippines because of correct economic policies that it says are “robust market-driven economies.” “Philippines, Nigeria, Bangladesh — have a lot in common — they have huge populations, have protectionist economies — and are poor.”
On the other hand the Aquino administration that is pushing for the RH bill prevents direct investments because of a cocked-up constitution that it refuses to amend.