Filtered By: Topstories
News

Why Mareng Winnie was (likely) not addressing you


Many have now watched and re-watched UP Professor Solita “Mareng Winnie" Monsod’s video of her last lecture for the semester, which went viral on YouTube and other social media last month. While many found her general message of service to the nation inspiring, her statement that to leave the country is an act of betrayal drew the ire of a great many migrants. For many migrants, such a statement sounds absurd, or at least archaic. Especially today when it is they who showcase to a global audience the skills and talents of the Filipino, who sweat blood and tears to earn the dollars that prop up the economy, and who bear the most inhuman working conditions so that their remittances and balikbayan boxes could allow their families back home a decent life.

There was Joy de Marcaida, a Filipino-American physician, whose indignant essay here on GMANews.TV asks, “How am I be a traitor when the dollars I earn here translate into businesses and consumer confidence and local spending by the family and people I still support back home? How is it that I am a fool when I have wrought only respect and admiration and love in [the United States] for a Filipino?" And there were the online comments from many OFWs who invoke their service and sacrifice after they leave. On Spot.ph, there was Rachel, who wrote, “pero the Philippine economy is propped by OFW money", and Bida, who posted, “…as an OFW, I cannot allow this one opinion of hers to render useless my choices in life… I have to be away from my kid while I do my bit in helping keep the Philippine economy out of the red." These are rather compelling arguments to disprove the idea that overseas Filipinos are all traitors to their country. But what is interesting about all these comments is that their writers all assumed that Mareng Winnie had referred to them, when really, her speech was specifically directed towards elite, “highly skilled", young scholars—those whom she specially addressed as the country’s “crème de la crème"—those who were still torn between staying and migrating. She, in fact, did not articulate anything about Filipinos who have already chosen to permanently reside abroad, like Dr de Marcaida. Or those who are temporarily working abroad as OFWs, such as Rachel and Bida. Her actual intended audience was the incipient elite migrants who have—literally and figuratively—a world of opportunities open to them. And this, we reckon, is where the actual insult lies. It can be said then that the uproar from multiple sectors of the Filipino migrant community was a case of “misrecognition". The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu defines this as an act where one misreads one’s class position in society as a result of social forces that mask positions of subordination. In this case, this would pertain to how all Filipino migrants felt themselves alluded to by Mareng Winnie because, most likely, they have come to believe the Philippine Government’s insistence that they are all the same, that they are all equally mga bagong bayani. But while this government talk might provide migrants some sense of comfort and recognition, the sad fact is that it does not at all resemble reality. Truth be told, there is a deeply ingrained but unspoken government framework that works to actually separate migrants according to their value to society. And, the true significance of Mareng Winnie’s last lecture is that its underlying assumptions reveal this often unspoken, and deeply troubling, hierarchy of migrant bodies. First, there are the elite migrants. These are the so-called “highly skilled" talented individuals whose intellectual and also political and economic capital afford them multiple opportunities for leadership and advancement at home and abroad. Mareng Winnie’s speech in fact follows the same spirit of government efforts that attempt to lure elite migrants back to the country. For instance, in 2009, Senator Edgardo Angara, head of the Congressional Committee on Science, Technology and Engineering (COMSTE), promised job promotions and higher salaries for Filipino overseas scholars upon their return to the Philippines. It is understood that these individuals are such invaluable national resources that local state and industry should provide opportunities for them to convert their newly acquired knowledge and skills from abroad for their political and economic gain back home. What is most valuable about elite migrants are their very bodies, and this is why they should be physically present in the country. It is understood that by physically being at home, they directly transmute through their bodies the ideas, talents, and skills absent in a deprived and depleted Philippine society. In our own research on UK-based Filipino scholars, we found that this strategy directed at overseas scholars is actually successful. The elite, “highly skilled" Filipinos we met in the UK all expressed the wish to return and give back to the country, partly to fulfill a nationalistic obligation, but also and significantly to adopt leadership roles in their respective accounting firms, law firms, think tanks, universities, local government units, and other institutions at home. In other words, while return for them might be a patriotic duty, it is also a strategic move that reaps personal benefits. What worries us however is that the concern that we have for elite “highly skilled" young talents to return to (or stay in) the country is something we do not equally extend to our other migrants, such as the balikbayans who permanently reside abroad, and more importantly, the OFWs whose departure is only meant to be temporary. Second in the hierarchy of migrant bodies are the balikbayans. While it is a catch-all term that we use today to refer to any Filipino migrant returning to the country, historically it was meant by the Marcos regime only to describe Filipinos permanently residing somewhere else and only visiting the country temporarily, as if a tourist. Balikbayans are like the Fil-Am doctor Joy de Marcaida above, who insists that her good work abroad has reaped positive recognition for her country in the eyes of her American colleagues. Indeed, the interest of balikbayans has long changed from fixing their status in the homeland to fixing their status in their home away from home, usually America. And it is for this reason too that that they are often caricatured as coming home only to complain about how backward everything is in the Philippines and, at the same time, proselytize about how superior everything is in the land of the American Dream. This is why the Philippine state (and public) is rather ambivalent about the value of these balikbayans. And as a result, what the state only expects from them are their dole-outs to people still stuck back home and the tourist money they spend during their occasional visits. Third and last in the hierarchy of migrant bodies are the OFWs, primarily made up of domestic helpers, construction workers, and other so-called “semi-skilled" and “low-skilled" labor. These are the people who make up the majority of the Filipino diaspora. These are the people the state pays lip service to in their Bagong Bayani Awards. These are the people whose value abroad is as cheap labor, just as their value for the Philippine state is as export material. The continuing dependence of the Philippine economy on exporting OFWs reveals that we value their bodies only when they are overseas, where they can be good Filipinos by sending remittances to buoy the economy. Their bodies are only to come home in moments of tragedy, as is radically exemplified by the statistic that five corpses of OFWs arrive each day—their deaths a result of subhuman treatment abroad. For us, the real insult behind Mareng Winnie’s message and in similar government efforts to address “brain drain" is that the economic opportunities we create and the nationalistic responsibilities we impose on elite young talent are of higher value than those of other migrant groups. To be good Filipinos, elite migrants should come home, balikbayans should intermittently come home, and OFWs are of greater value when they are away from home. This unequal distribution of responsibility, we contend, reflects the unequal significance we place on the lives of different Filipino people. Whether and how we could accord equal value to the lives of less privileged migrants is an issue that we hope will equally merit the concern not only of the crème de la crème, but of the general Philippine public. This article is based on the recently completed research of Jonathan Corpus Ong (PhD Student, University of Cambridge) and Jason Cabanes (PhD Student, University of Leeds) on the political engagement of Filipino elite migrants, forthcoming in the Journal of Southeast Asian Studies. While the authors’ research focused on elite migrants, what they found most striking are the class inequalities between and among migrant groups that are maintained rather than transcended in migration.
LOADING CONTENT