As I mentioned earlier, there is a growing number of Filipino-American organizations working to lend their voice and support to the daily demands for economic rights and social justice back home, even as they also increasingly are involved in the defense of immigration rights and other issues here in the United States. Sometimes, their issues are inter-linked with the advocacy movements of other ethnic groups, such as in the fight for immigration rights where big Filipino contingents have marched in the streets alongside hundreds of thousands of immigrants. In the cases of the Desperate Housewives episode and Sentosa 27, the advocacy actions have elicited the support and participation not only of Filipino doctors and nurses but also other professionals , other service sectors, including lawyers. All these only show that issues and concerns that unite many Filipinos galvanize us to attend forums and other venues of discussions as well as into the streets for pickets and marches that serve to articulate our protests and demands for justice not only to the public but also to the media so that the voices are heard by thousands and even millions of people here and in the Philippines as well. It is through collective demands and unity such as these that Filipino expatriates in the United States gave effective support to the anti-Marcos dictatorship movement in the Philippines that was sparked by the assassination of Ninoy Aquino and culminated in the ouster of the Marcos dictatorship in 1986, as well as in the removal of the morally-bankrupt Estrada presidency in 2001.

At this point, I would like to say something about the concept of “constructive dialogue” in relation to the Desperate Housewives issue. The framework of “constructive dialogue” had been pushed supposedly in the spirit of drawing a “win-win” situation requiring, however, the cessation of peaceful pickets and other protest actions against the ABC TV network. What happened was that, “constructive dialogue,” designed to be held behind closed doors, led to giving certain concessions (e.g., promise of jobs and employment opportunities Filipino artists) that, in effect, diluted the Filipino communities’ agitation for a real apology and other concrete measures and, hence, essentially led to the unsatisfactory resolution of the issue about racial prejudice. “Constructive dialogue,” as a mechanism for resolving an issue, may be valid in a situation where the aggrieved party, for instance, is an individual. However, the injustice committed in the “Desperate Housewives” issue is racial prejudice, and the victims are a whole country. Cries of indignation, demands for apology, and calls for boycott came from Filipinos based not only in the U.S. but also in the Philippines and many other countries. They were asking for justice and redemption, not job opportunities, and certainly they were expecting the demand for justice to be dealt with transparently where the sentiments of millions of Filipinos are heard and heeded. To insinuate that pickets, calls for boycott, and class suits are not “constructive” or “proactive” is to deny the aggrieved people their freedom of speech and to use other forms of avenues in seeking redress within the bounds of the law. To hold a “constructive dialogue” within the closed walls of the global company that committed the racial slur is to restrict our collective articulation of protests to a select few. Let us be reminded that justice is never given or begged for, you have to fight for it even if the one that stole it from you is a global enterprise with a powerful communication network.

This is also why, even if we support the initiation of class suits in the continuing quest for justice, the avenues for articulating our protest and indignation should remain open. More so, if the class suit being filed is against a company that has unlimited resources under a justice system that is not always favorable to the actual victims of injustice. Alternative lawyering and legal resources approach emphasizes going beyond the usual court centered approach, emphasizing our ethnic collective interests and recognizing the importance of combining two or all forms and courses of action to achieve justice and redemption.

Today, our collective demand for justice and other issues should also welcome any moral, legal, and political support from other organizations in the spirit of solidarity and on the basis of mutually accepted principles. But the leadership of our campaign against ABC should remain in our own hands and collective efforts as members of the Filipino-American community, and those ready to assist us voluntarily and without any pre-conditions should uphold this leadership and initiative. This is a defining moment of Filipino American Empowerment, let us cherish it and move forward.

Let me close with an anecdote about two lifelong friends, a chicken and a pig, who were going on their usual morning work together.

The pig turned to the chicken and asked, “What do you think we should have for breakfast today?

Quick as a flash, the chicken answered: “Bacon and Eggs.”

The Pig said, “Hey wait a minute!! You only want to participate, yet from me you expect total commitment.”

In making our community of voices into a collective demand for justice in this campaign, we need to render total and complete commitment, no less.

Sa inyong lahat, isa pong makabuluhan at mapayapang araw. Mabuhay ang lahat ng ating mga duktor at pangkalahatang mangagawa sa sektor ng kalusugan. Mabuhay ang Migranteng Pilipino! Posted by (Bulatlat.com)

*Speech delivered at the Summit Meeting of Fil-Am Leaders
Caesars Palace, Las Vegas, Nevada
Nov. 10, 2007

 Save as PDF