Chip Tsao recently wrote a SATIRICAL article on territorial claims over the Spratly islands. The article can be found here:
http://hk-magazine.com/feature/war-homeHere's the excerpt:
"The Russians sank a Hong Kong freighter last month, killing the seven Chinese seamen on board. We can live with that—Lenin and Stalin were once the ideological mentors of all Chinese people. The Japanese planted a flag on Diàoyú Island. That’s no big problem—we Hong Kong Chinese love Japanese cartoons, Hello Kitty, and shopping in Shinjuku, let alone our round-the-clock obsession with karaoke.
But hold on—even the Filipinos? Manila has just claimed sovereignty over the scattered rocks in the South China Sea called the Spratly Islands, complete with a blatant threat from its congress to send gunboats to the South China Sea to defend the islands from China if necessary. This is beyond reproach. The reason: there are more than 130,000 Filipina maids working as $3,580-a-month cheap labor in Hong Kong. As a nation of servants, you don’t flex your muscles at your master, from whom you earn most of your bread and butter."
Predictably, there's a LOT of Pinoy blogger and forum outrage over this. But is it misdirected rage?
If Pinoys are outraged over Tsao's satirical article (satire, people, satire!) then they should also be OUTRAGED over a Saudi newspaper article that praised Pinoy saudi OFWs or that San Francisco newspaper article praising Fil-Ams for not being independent and not welfare-dependent. All these pieces base their opinions on GENERALIZATIONS based on SOME empirical data. Isn't it TRUE that the disproportionate mass of Filipinos in HK are "servants" (domestic helpers)? Isn't it TRUE that the Philippine government's budget is spread so thin that it can barely fund it's national defenses? Chip Tsao's impressions are based on fact. Facts and fairness are two different things. Generalizations can be unfair but they are based on GENERALIZED facts. If they weren't they wouldn't be used. Their potency lies in their ability to draw from facts that the audience can agree with.
But why do only "bad" generalizations get condemned? If there is outrage, it should be outrage against ALL generalizations, positive and negative.
Much of the outrage over this article is misplaced. Instead of being angry that a journalist based his satirical observation on the fact that there are over 130,000 filipino domestic helpers in HK, maybe the outrage should focus on WHY there's 130,000 filipino domestic helpers in Hong Kong to begin with?
We, Pinoys, can keep playing the VICTIM and "I'm Offended" card all we want but the reality remains--a large portion of our population wants to leave the Philippines because of the sad economy. Why not focus the RAGE on the economic arrangement that keeps us a "nation of servants." It is true, a large portion of the Philippines is composed of maids, drivers, tricycle drivers, bus drivers, and guards. Why is this case? It's all about the ECONOMIC PATH we chose. There's many articles written on this, here's one that ENCAPSULATES it:
Why is the Philippines POOR?
http://www.forumcash.com/wordpress/why-is-the-philippines-poor/Bottomline, before you become outraged--THINK FIRST and focus your rage on the REAL tragedy of the Philippines. Assailing some Hong Kong journalist online is worthless. The problem is deeper than that and its easier to fix than you think.
