The idea of common good as related to the film “Imelda” was clearly demonstrated I thought. The film’s depiction of her rise to power at the expense of the poor was also apparent.
The issue of “free riders”, or those that do not contribute to shared resources was clearly shown in the film. Imelda lead a lavish lifestyle, clearly not paying a fair share of taxes, if at all, all to be a beacon for the poor, as some goal that they should try to attain. Though she came from a poor community, her family was well connected, and it is doubtful that she was ever needy, despite the war time rationing that was mentioned by her friends. The people’s revolution was an example of how some strife could develop when other people become free riders, and how those free riders could they take advantage of resources without paying for them.
People dislike giving up rights or freedoms for the “greater good”. The Philippine people had some rights and freedoms, notably a democratic election, but after Marcos fixed the elections, this was taken away. His reasoning was that the citizens must give up some measure of freedom to ensure security, or at least the idea of security. Those imprisoned for political reasons were powerless to fight the regime. When the people finally did overthrow the dictator, Imelda commented how she left the countries with diapers and diamonds, as if to show her connection with the poor people. This contrast, of poverty and richness, resembles the failed policies of the regime, like how they tried to become the cultural center of Southeast Asia, and yet the bulk of the population never visited cultural centers.
For the Marcos’, they tried to come up with a concrete idea for a common good that benefited the Philippines, but the absolute fraud that took over Ferdinand is a clear sign of how complete power can corrupt even the noblest ideas.
-S.Smith
No comments:
Post a Comment