I have decided to go with blogdrive... thejaywalker.blogdrive.com.

But I think I should also keep this, if I want to feel sentimental about the past blog, which is this. (labo!)

8)

+amdg+

I will be moving to another blog. So far, I haven't found the one I like. Therefore, I will canvass. The look of this blog is getting old. And I don't think I have the time nor the patience to renew it. If ever I do come across this "patience I am talking about, then I might go on with this one. I don't know, just yet.


8)

I'll just do this quickly. Grandma and Tita Joji came to the Philippines for a visit. Got an iPod. Thanks Lola! I have been sick. So there. Later. JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN.... 8) +amdg+

 

The definition of success varies. Success could mean more power or money for you, if you are an upperclassman or a worker. If you are just poor or don’t have everything you want in life, it means trying to convince yourself that everything is all right and that you are contented with the way things are because in the end you believe that you will be triumphant over your problems or just because you feel that it is the will of God. For leaders, it could be taking what you want without appearing to do harm to anyone around you. In other words success is a one way answer. It is only meant to depict one side of the struggle (there would not be success if there was not a fight or a struggle whatsoever).

 

This is what Machiavelli writes about, the success of a Prince in ruling his Princedom. Although he takes into consideration general human behavior (of the people around the prince a.k.a. his subjects) and gives a warning of how it may be detrimental to the Prince’s power, he also justifies any wrongdoing/fraud that a Prince could possibly make. The reason is because he visualizes people as merely elements of the State. In the literary piece, there is no such thing as individuality or ethics mentioned. Unless there is a threat of a certain human being around the Prince that may affect his rule in some way, then there is no need for paying attention to anyone else’s individual needs, only the State as a whole. He also suggests things like cruelty enables subjects to be united and obedient and it is better to be feared than loved but since it is impossible to have both, a Prince must avoid hatred.

 

Machiavelli’s political concepts/beliefs are, based from the World and country’s experience, effective, but only for a matter of time. It is unrealistic to find a power that would not be subject to rebellion or question after a matter of time. Even the purest of all leaders are somewhat hated by, if not minority, majority. Hatred leads to betrayal and revolution – which in history is constant. And the only difference between the status quo and history is that more people are given the leeway (or at least appearance of such liberty) to speak up or doubt the ones in power (controversial ones mostly, like Marcos, Nixon, even the Catholic Church or God himself).

 

Marx, on the other hand, notices the real root of the problem of the world (class struggle) and acknowledges the more common situations of the common man. He mentions that rebellion happens but does not last for long. He defines the extravagant lifestyle if the bourgeois as unjust. He has confirmed this by giving instances of how the “religious fervor, chivalrous enthusiasm, and philistine sentimentalism” corrupted by “egotistical calculation”, or in one word, money. He even states that capitalism destroys families, which is very true in society today (OFW’s and wealthy families).

 

As he presents these awful effects of capitalization (not to mention causes through implication as well), he also makes readers aware of the current issues that serve as an example of oppression today.

 

He proposes to abolish eternal truths such as Justice and Freedom, may be because of the reality that these can never be attained (even after all the years of the Earth). Since, evidently, there is nothing in the world that is not flawed except the utopia that communism implies (which is also subject to revolution and oppression if a greedy leader takes over).

 

Both writers have solutions that require the empowering of firmness to, if not equalize, overshoot others. Machiavelli (in the Prince) advises (obviously bourgeois in Marxist terms) leaders how to maintain power by presenting possible predicaments and solutions for them. Marx, though, suggests a more violent solution to the difficulty he presented (even if there is the possibility of the “oppressed” being the “oppressor” after they have murdered the bourgeois and taken all their possessions).

 

This only goes to show that in both parties, Machiavelli’s Princes and Marx’s proletarians, there will always be partitions in society, whether you are ruling it or not. The fact that it is up to the reader - who, of course, read at least one of the works, on which one to patronize/side with (Marx or Machiavelli, since they have solutions for the two opposing classes). This shows the gap between humans exists, for there will always be a favored side (sympathy if not over-sympathy for Marx or Machiavelli). And even worse, sides like ignorance/innocence and neutrality all the more divides us.

Even literature itself acquaints us with these margins and at the same time provokes us to justify these divisions by taking a side.

 

With Machiavelli’s the Prince, he only talks about the success of a leader of the State as a leader of the State. And Marx only focuses on the success of a proletariat as merely a proletariat. If both were attempted to be applied, then it would only lead to chaos. Both works show that there are problems in both classes in society. The prince and the proletariat are faced with it. After having addressed it, we see that there is no concrete and absolute solution to human nature.

 

And human nature is our enemy. It is the reason why not everyone can get what they want. With the Marxist/Machiavellian solution, it is also safe to say that both can lead to more destruction.

 

An applied Machiavellian concept was when Ferdinand Marcos came to rule the Philippines. After decades of rule, he went to his fall. Do the ends really justify the means? The question is loaded with so many views to answer with. And my personal view is that there is no end for us to clearly say that it was justified. Marcos’ regime may have fallen but the tragedy he left us with is tattooed in our lives forever. Because of him, majority of Filipinos are too cautious of dictators. And with that, we revolt and revolt not knowing the after effects (economically, morally, and socially) of which. EDSA revolution maybe a “victory” for the anti-Marcos, but this has actually sunk us deeper into devastation. For when we have a ruler like Gloria Arroyo or Joseph Ejercito, we just form a revolution. We have become so confident that there is a possibility to get what we, the people, want so we do not submit to such power, weak or strong it may be. Which leaves us as a country that fears no authority, for it can be bribed or stripped off of power. And we know we have that edge.

 

Even the greatest ruler cannot satisfy his people. The Legend of King Arthur shows us that. Jesus Christ, as well. Both are applying the concept of communism in a way. Both employ equality (the round table for King Arthur and communion for Jesus). And both their lives had ended through unmerited means. Even if today, they are being looked up to (by some people), their principles are not fully applied.

 

Thus, equality was never functional, and maybe it never will be.

 

So, how can the question be answered? How can we see if the end has really justified means if we haven’t even concluded anything so far? If human nature’s desires can never be met, then how can we say there is even an end?

 

And with this it is problematical to determine what success really stands for. If either Marx or Machiavelli’s theories are to be applied, would it be not impossible to describe or call it as such? How can we really define anything as successful without only just looking at one aspect/angle? It is impossible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

need to post this here because i'm using my mom's computer and her 3 1/2 floppy is broken so i'll just copy paste this when i get to the other computer.

yay!  gel is happy because she released a lot and found pulp fiction.. yay! 8)

gel: happy! happy! happy! oh my GOD! you know what song i heard nung pgpasok ko ng car?
      'wag kang matakot di mo ba alam na nandiyan lang ako sa iyong tabi di kita iiwan kailanman!' 
      soOoOoOoh love the song!!!! 
      THANK GOD FOR ERRTHING!!!!
      thanx phuke! ;p

Jay: someone's a little overjoyed. hahaha. alright. i have to watch the new dvd's now. and dress up for popin's thing after. hey POP THE MAGIC DRAGON!!!! 8)

 

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN....

8)

+amdg+

 

schristellarache:
I hope you would first understand the prince before commenting...I would advice you to read the follow up chapters done by machiavelli entitled the disc0urses. for your information, you may say that he was ambitious howver not a loser. If you would remember, the kiss-ass attitude he has is divulged as an application of his own political thought. Writers of infactual blogs..please be aware of your statements...Remember to be careful, only minds of unrequited ambition question those who are great without proper basis.

EXCUSE ME. WHOEVER WROTE THE PREVIOUS COMMENT, ABOUT MACHIAVELLI, YOU MAY NOT KNOW THAT IN ALL HIS WORKS, HE WAS PROVEN TO BE INCONSISTENT OF HIS STAND ABOUT EVERYTHING. DISCOURSES AND THE PRINCE CONTAIN CONFLICTING ARGUMENTS WHICH IMPLIES WEAKNESS IN BELIEF AND PRINCPLE. (KISS-ASS TOO AS YOU PUT IT)

INFACTUAL YOU SAY, TRY SUPPORTING THAT. HE IS AMBITIOUS AND COMPARED WITH KARL MARX HIS WRITINGS ARE CRAP. OF COURSE I LIKE THE WORK, THE PRINCE, BUT IT IS FOCUSED ON BEING THE ONE IN POWER, IN OTHER WORDS BOURGEOSIE... UNLIKE KARL MARX WHO IS MORE FOCUSED ON THE 75% OF THE SUFFERING PEOPLE AROUND THE GLOBE. WE CAN SEE THAT IN THE PRINCE, WHAT REALLY MATTERS TO HIM IS POWER - SOMETHING A HUMAN GETS THAT ISN'T PERMANENT (MARCOS, HITLER) AND MARCOS FOLLOWED THE PRINCE RELIGIOUSLY, LOOK WHAT HAPPENED. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN BY A LOSER. ALSO, BECAUSE ON CHAPTER 16,17, AND 18 MACCHIAVELLI, DELIBERATELY SAID THAT APPEARANCE OF A PRINCE AS A GOOD ONE IS WHAT MATTERS (A SUMMARIZATION OF COURSE), NO MATTER IF WHAT HE IS DOING IS UNJUST OR BENEFICIAL FOR THE PEOPLE. THAT'S WHAT A LOSER IS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 

I NEVER COMMENTED ON THE PRINCE BECAUSE IT'S MEANINGFUL FOR THE BOURGEOISIE THAT WANT TO SURVIVE. BUT I COMMENTED ON HIM WHO ONLY CARED ABOUT POWER - LIKE ALL OTHER MEGALOMANIAC DICTATORS.

TRY ASKING FIRST WHAT I MEAN BEFORE ATTACKING MY VIEWS (WHICH I HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE) ABOUT MACCHIAVELLI AND JUDGING WHAT I WRITE AS INFACTUAL. WHY DID I SAY THAT? MACHIAVELLI - WHO WANTED TO BE IN HELL WITH THE "POWERFUL ONES"/NOBILITY (AS IF IT MATTERED) THAN TO BE IN HEAVEN WITH THE PAUPERS (WHO ARE THE MAJORITY OF OUR KIND) IS WHAT YOU CALL GREAT. IF THAT'S SO THEN GOOD FOR YOU. DON'T JUST BELIEVE THAT ONE IS GREAT BECAUSE THE WORLD TODAY SAYS HE IS.

YOU'RE JUST WASTING OUR TIME WITH YOUR GENERALIZATIONS, THAT'S WHY.

UNREQUITED AMBITION? PLEASE. YOU SAID IT YOURSELF: ONLY THOSE OF UNREQUITED AMBITION QUESTION THOSE WHO ARE GREAT WITHOUT PROPER BASIS... AND YOUR JUST FULL OF THAT, AMBITION.... LOOKING UP TO A KISS-ASS "GREAT" GUY - WHOSE LIFE ANYONE CAN LIVE. AND DREAD AT THE SAME TIME. NEVER GOT ANYWHERE TIL HE DIED.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT THOUGH. AT LEAST NOW I HAVE SOMEONE SOUNDING MORE MATURE TO TALK TO. THANK YOU.

too bad Mr. Acuna didn't go to school today. the day suddenly felt weird. i was so prepared for "CAPITALIST TALKS" and all this KARL MARX stuff, because i honestly love the class. well, since we don't have english, i decided to just go online so i can do something til next class.

gel and i went to SPCP yesterday. saw a couple of buddies. GO JUNIORS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! we were wearing blue to support them. though, i wore my SUPERMAN sando and if i only knew that the Superman logo was the Seniors, then maybe i would have worn something else. Congratulations to the Seniors though for winning Gold and taking our thrown. nice job! but BAD UNIFORMS!!!!! yaix. SOMEONE HIRE ME TO DESIGN UNIFORMS - not only do i need the money, i also cannot stand UGLY UNIFORMS. especially when i have been part of that thing. well, as you all know i designed last year's softball uniform. WHICH GOT ME SO ANGRY BECAUSE ALL THE BATCHES HAD TO FOLLOW MY DESIGN. I THOUGHT IT WAS SOLELY OURS. BUT HEY! im a generous kid.

we chatted with Rach, Jen, and Martha about THOSE DAMN CAPITALISTS. really though, CAPITALISM WILL FALL due to OVERPRODUCTION (karl marx). and they don't really care if their cusotmers die or get sick or whatever, just as long as they get higher income per year. according to my very abled teacher, in a book called "MCDONALDIZATION" (I think that's the spelling) by George R., Fastfood restaurants make their cups look bigger but actually it isn't. it has this certain cylindrical shape with stripes to make it look like it's a lot. and 50% of the FRENCH FRIES IS POTATOES. THE OTHER 50% IS CHEMICALS TO MAKE THE FRIES LOOK PUFFIER. the BUNS of the BURGERS are what make the BURGER LOOK FAT.

THOSE DAMN CAPITALISTS DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYTHING BUT MONEY!!!!!!!!

of course after "Supersize me" the documentary, MCdonalds got it so bad they had to release a SALAD (which by the way we don't have here. because we are a 3rd world country and those damn capitalists will keep us poor for the rest of our lives). WE CAN'T EVEN GET SALAD IN MCDONALDS FOR CHRISSAKE....

the only way for our economy to actually rise is to PRAY THAT OTHER COUNTRIES GET IT GOOD i.e. DISASTERS FOR THEM = GOOD GAIN FOR US. Phuket, THailand - distaster?? for us, it isn't. since our PRESIDENT IS A CAPITALIST, we don't really look at how "kawawa" those people are. SHE'S PRO-IMF. PRO-USA. we are PERMANENTLY DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN COUNTRIES, that we even sell our own bodies to them as PROSTITUTES, HOUSEHOLD HELPS, FARMERS, etc.... the more we do this, the more depended we are on them. and WHAT IF THEIR ECONOMY BLOWS OVER? A BIG BULK OF FILIPINOS WILL BE FLYING ALL THE WAY BACK UNEMPLOYED.

so unless, we become communists (which is almost impossible) or we close our market to foreign countries and do what JAPAN did before, we are never going to get anywhere.

MARCOS actually close our market to the USA and we had P20 is to $1. NOW IT'S P56 TO $1.
according to him (again), 19% of Filipinoes want to move out of the country to get a better life. how nationalistic. but who is to blame?

Other countries? for selling us clothes that come from us but sell it for a higher price. who keeps "helping" us financially but not enough for us to overtake them, just ENOUGH TO KEEP BUYING FROM THEM AND KEEP US POOR AT THE SAME TIME. FOR TAKING ADVANTAGE OF OUR DESPAIR AS WORKERS AND DEHUMANIZING US (like calling us "maids")

OUR government? who are a bunch of animals that steal and make business out of everything possible. who are PRO-FOREIGN COUNTRIES exploiting our own kind. who care only for big MONEY FOR THEM (not for their PEOPLE) that's why there are always cases of money laudering and theft, etc. who pretend to be "PART OF THE MASSES". yeah right!!!! JOSEPH ESTRADA, JINGGOY, FPJ, ETC (PWERSA NG MASA) were NEVER part of the masses. AND THEY NEVER WILL BE THE "PWERSA NG MASA". THEY ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY OPPRESS THE MASSES BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEIR POPULARITY AND SHOWING ILLITERATE PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER THAT THEY ARE THE ONES FOR THE JOB!!!!!

IF ERAP WERE PART OF THE MASSES, THEN HE WOULDN'T GET SPECIAL TREATMENT IN JAIL. NOR WOULD HE BUY A "BORACAY mansion". his so damn rich he lead Nida BLanca to her death. he didn't kill her. he just gave her the money (200million pesos) that others wanted (ROD STRUNK). so they killed her.

FPJ is rich because his movies are all blockbusters. thus his money comes from the masses. of course he's be "generous" he was planning to run for president. a certain millionaire like let's say DANDING COJUANGCO or whoever may just have given him money to run so that when he wins, the money will be scattered to all our beloved multi-millionaire POLITICIANS. GENEROUS? or GREEDY?

yeah, don't we just love them. well, CAPITALISM WILL FALL ANYWAY. no one knows when or how. but it will. like all else. too much products from various companies will eventually make the demand for them lesser. KARMA. so if anyone wants to be in business, watch out! you will end up being one of ....

THOSE DAMN CAPITALISTS..

(at last i have released somehow all the things that have been in my brain for the last 2 months or so)...

gel: (again) HI.
JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN....
8)

+amdg+

hi again. dont be deceived by the title and think this is a mooshy song because it's not, well yeah it is. but try downloading it and listen to it. its is BEAUTIFUL. of course it is the theme song of THE GODFATHER -- "Speak softly love" by NIno Rota. DOWNLOAD IT... it's great.

********
Speak softly, love and hold me warm against your heart
I feel your words, the tender trembling moments start
We're in a world, our very own
Sharing a love that only few have ever known

Wine-colored days warmed by the sun
Deep velvet nights when we are one

Speak softly, love so no one hears us but the sky
The vows of love we make will live until we die
My life is yours and all because
You came into my world with love so softly love

*********

---->the song is great on guitar. i give it an A. YAY!
hunger strikes. bye.

gel: *sings*
jay: singit nanaman.

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN....
8)

+amdg+

hey guys happy new year. too bad i didn't post the SOTM last december but i had one. my phone line (in the room) was temporarily cut off. also, my cable. plus, i converted my 100bucks to unlimited on december 25 of last year but what happened??? WHAT???? SUN had "technical difficulties" and during the whole damn Christmas break i've been calling them and complaining about my lost load.... SUN is starting to SUCK!!!!!! remember:

SUN IS STARTING TO SUCK!!!! DESTINY TOO!!!! PLDT TOO!!!!!!!!!!!! CURSE ALL OF THEM CRAPPY COMPANIES!!!!!!!!! because of these dumb companies, i have been socially dry. hehehe. no not really. but im sort of losing touch with the rest of the world. so there.

********
SOTM: december 2004Artist: Usher
Album: Confessions
Title: My Boo
feat. Alicia Keys


There's always that one person
That will always have your heart
You'll never see it coming
Cause you're blinded from the start
Know that you're that one for me
It's clear for everyone to see
Ooh baby ooh you'll always be my boo

I don't know bout cha'll
But I know about us and uh
This is the only way
We know how to rock
I don't know bout cha'll
But I know about us and uh
This is the only way
We know how to rock

Do you remember girl
I was the one who gave you your first kiss
Cause I remember girl
I was the one who said put your lips like this
Even before all the fame and
People screaming your name
Girl I was there when you were my baby

[Chorus:]
It started when we were young girl
You were mine my boo
Now another brother's taking over
But its still in your eyes my boo
Even though we used to argue it's alright
I know we haven't seen each other
In awhile but you will always be my boo

I was in love with you when we were younger
You were mine my boo
And I see it from time to time
I still feel like my boo
And I can see it no matter
How I try to hide my boo
Even though there's another man in my life
You will always be my boo

Yes I remember boy
Cause after we kissed
I could only think about your lips
Yes I remember boy
The moment I knew you were the one
I could spend my life with
Even before all the fame
And people screaming your name
I was there and you were my baby

[Chorus:]
It started when we were young girl
You were mine my boo
Now another brother's taking over
But its still in your eyes my boo
Even though we used to argue it's alright
I know we haven't seen each other
In awhile but you will always be my boo

********
----> so i chose this because i kept on hearing it from somewhere.... it's played out but i like it anyway. i started appreciating it after i got used to it. didn't like it at first, though. since i got no cable, radio is the way to go. and radio says: MY BOO.. (hindi ung fake aka ghostown DJ's) -- inside joke,. well im really hungry. i'll post more MAS MAY KWENTA stuff when i get my phone back. got alot of stuff that'll depress the human emotion. but since the season has just ended, we all have to be jolly. (actually one of the depressing parts of the stuff)

im hungry. need food.................
gel says: hi. *sings*

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN....
8)

+amdg+

signal number 4. i've been asleep almost the whole day. we're having a Godfather marathon. GODFATHER RULES!!!!! yeah...
anyway, there are many thoughts about Gnosticism that i've been pondering on. i found a Gnostic gospel by Thomas. and it reveals a lot about our God. His existence isn't the question though. interesting. according to my very intelligent english proffesor, gnostic gospels where burnt when Constatine was the emperor. And so the it was only the Catholic Church that was considered the true Christian religion. in 1947, some documents revealing gnostics were found.... and well, i just really really really need to read about it more. Matrix has gnostic elements.

so there, i gotta watch the Godfather now.... i'll publish crap when im in the mood.

8)

gel: hi!!!!

whatta weekend. of course a lot of things transpired. the feeling's heavily light. the weather's terrific. hmmm..... what can i say? welll, whatever it is i wanna say it later. for now, i'll just be a good kid and do my math homework.


8)
JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN.
+amdg+

november's whack.... i have been whack. it's the season to be crazy....

some crap i wrote last i don't know when....