The Anti-Pinoy “Rip-Off”

courtesy of

“If I’d written all the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people—including me—would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism.” ( Hunter Thompson, 1937 – 2005 U.S. writer and journalist).

The Anti-Pinoy is a blog site which is critical at Filipinos in general and at times at Filipino Voices, another blog about the Philippines, her people and the politicians that bleed the country dry.

Anti-Pinoy has incisive writers with one dimensional view asserting their monopoly of patriotism and the truth.   Here is a snippet of their self-righteous delusion:



So why does my post have to undergo your review? And why should I trust that your scissors are different than the scissors at FV?



I don’t do scissors – there’s a vetting process – and you know how that went.

Jcc got pwned haha!  


hahahaha.. vetting process. you think you can also be mutawa policemen or fashion police only this time you want to police individual’s right to expression. you love to preach but would not want to be preached upon…hahahahahaa…


let’s put it this way. you bet on the wrong horse. the ship has left the port. next time, be on time. tough luck. deal with it.

you have Aquino your President..

and we have AP the blog..

can’t have the cake and eat it too.


its shakesperean language for “doublespeak”.

you don’t want balance.. its a pity that FV which you and Bencard have accused as one-dimensional and would make a lot of noise about it only to impose it on your own turf.. talking of revolutionaries who freed their own people only to enslave them later… so why accused other people of hypocrisy when you have your own?


@jcc: MSM already provides the balance – LOTS and LOTS of it.


We’re already providing balance too… MSM and the 3-headed monster is providing so much of the triumphalism and personalistic culture we’re so against, so we’re the voice in the wilderness screaming against the vultures. The dichotomy is rather clear here – you’re either for the truth or not. You’re for the truth, go AP. You don’t believe in AP’s truth, you find a place for your concoction of truth.


I understand that people have different views from ours — hell, you’d be surprised at the degree our views differ from each other’s within our group — but we’re not in the business of publishing “all possible views,” and I’m pretty certain (since I’m the one that wrote most of the “About” declaration) that we’ve never misled anybody into thinking that was what we’re here for.

Do you, for example, post pieces that oppose your personal views on your own blog? Of course you don’t. I don’t on mine, either. And I’d bet that neither one of us thinks there’s anything wrong with that at all, and I don’t see where the fact that AP happens to be a collaboration automatically renders that standard inoperative.

If our audience wants to find a “balance” to our point of view, they can find it elsewhere; and as a matter of fact, we encourage them to do that, and then come back and share what they’ve learned in the discussion. Not saying that we — or is more often the case, our other readers — won’t hammer the hell out of them in the comment threads, and I suppose a lot of people find that intimidating, but we welcome everyone and neither block nor modify (apart from an automatic tool that takes the edge of some of the profanity) anyone’s participation. That was the issue with FV, not the content per se — although to be accurate FV always presented itself as a “balanced” collection of voices, which eventually did become misleading, unlike us. That’s the difference; they didn’t tolerate the dissent. We say bring it on, if you think you can — if you have an alternative point of view to something that’s been written, make your best case in the comments and prepare to defend yourself.

But as far as putting up an article espousing views that significantly run counter to ours (and yours do) just for the sake of objectivity or “balance”, I see no purpose in that. We’re here to make a specific assertion, or rather a continuous series of assertions, not to serve as some neutral information portal. With all due respect, since I realize probably can’t avoid sounding arrogant but I’m otherwise trying not to be discourteous, the success of AP tends to confirm the effectiveness of how we do things around here. It’s just not for everybody, I suppose.


just dream this out guys… “what if tomorrow you find yourselves the owners of the  3-headed hydra you conveniently labelled, MSM, therefore, these fora would be one-dimensional channels for Anti-Pinoy sentiments” that would not accept any views contrary to yours, except if those contrary views appear as a footnote.

The MSM, right now, is better off, though it is not in your own deluded sense, ideal, because it is capable of tolerating dissent and opinions contrary to yours. You talk of liberation of the mind, but yours is as closed as the people you want rescued from their own ignorance. How pathetic!


you are nothing but a bunch of delusional and pathetic people who wallow in the idea that you have the monopoly  of patriotism and the truth!


We will let the market decide  – it’s a free market .

AP is a corporate entity with its own set of values on which it will sink or swim.

Speaking of ignorance – hey, AP didn’t vote for Aquino YOU JCC VOTED FOR AQUINO ..



There were 15 million people who voted for Aquino. He was inaugurated President and the people spoke their choice.  Who was your presidential candidate? If he lost the election, you should bow to the choice of the majority already. If you have no candidate, then you must be one of those  red-waiving flag on the street, which, incidentally some of them had joined the NP.

Democracy is about the rule of the majority, though they may be ignorant majority. There is no civilization yet on earth that devised a system that only the “intelligent” people like you should vote for their leaders. If they happened to choose one who, in your approximation is not deserving president, wallow in that in your private moments, for right now, the ignorant majority had spoken and you must learn to live with it rather than be cynical about their choice and impose your own deluding self-righteousness.

Adlai Stevenson, a presidential candiate put it more succinctly  after making an inspiring speech and was aproached by a woman who said: “Every right-thinking” individual should vote for you”.  He replied:  “That’s not enough, we need the majority”.

16 thoughts on “The Anti-Pinoy “Rip-Off”

    • Fighting for the truth and for the betterment of your country will require a lot of sacrifice. The Vietnamese fought against the French and the Americans for almost 25 years. It will take more times for the Flipinos to fight. Because, there are people who just want the status qou to continue. It took 300 years for the Spaniards to rule us. Before, the fight for independence started.

  1. reis,

    only because no civilization yet has invented and found an effective a system where suffrage should be property-based and degree-based. the essence of participatory democracy is to let all members of the society participate in the process.

    the rich and the college graduates, incidentally are only a few, and yet they would determine the fate of the many who aren’t if we go by your ideal of “intelligent democracy”.

    • I’m not imposing on the idea of an “intelligent democracy” since that’s about as corruptible as communism. But I am saying that the vox populi will suffer for choosing a candidate by sheer popularity alone. Look at the U.S. for example who voted for Obama for sheer popularity as well. He has now apologized for America “past transgressions” against human rights-violating countries, spent more than his two predecessors with his stimulus bill, enacted a healthcare program that everyday Americans can’t afford, and compromised national security by cutting their military budget at a time when terrorists are most vengeful. And he does all this while his family are having state-sponsored vacations across the world. The majority chose poorly and thus they are suffering for it.

  2. @JCC

    What about a smarter majority that can spot idiots such as these from a mile away, so impeachment won’t be necessary? That seems to be what that AP site is about.

  3. its a very difficult solution. power corrupts, so an angel placed at the corridors of power can be become an evil overnight. if you think you already placed in power those lily white statesmen, and be euphoric about it– you could be wrong.. my solution is constant vigilance.. men basically could not be trusted with life-time power, the very reason why recall/election was invented by new civilizations.

    even if the electorate are intelligent and chose a leader which have good track record, the inebriation power brings is too powerful a potion.

    • Unfortunately, the definition of “good and evil” changes from religion to religion and from culture to culture. And while its true that people with intelligence can be corruptible, the same apply for the more unjaded members of society. In fact, despite what the mainstream media displays the poor are actually more inclined to evil acts as they are ignorant of their transgressions. Besides, a country can be more easily destroyed by gross negligence than by corruption. The previous Aquino administration was proof enough of that.

      I consider that AP site to be a sort of tough pill to swallow or tough medicine. While their messages are harsh, they’re simply realist who like to point out genuine flaws in our culture. They could choose to be more sensitive or politically correct, but well all know that political correctness has become a phrase that is far from its intended definition

  4. good and evil from a civilized society is a clear dichotomy.. trashing your fellowmen is evil, symphatizing with their pain and suffering is good.

    the poor can only transgress during election when they sell their votes, but the powerful transgress throughout the term that they were elected to office.

    you cannot abuse a power which you do not have.

    • Trashing involves senseless insults that have no grounding whatsoever. Criticism on the other hand is a whole other monster as it involves pointing out flaws that prevents progress as a people. And sympathizing with their pain and suffering? Call me pessimistic but we Filipinos have been playing the victim for far too long the the martyr complex is getting old.

      And the poor only transgresses during the elections? You must be kidding. The only difference the how the poor and rich transgress is that the rich has more opportunities.

      • “x x x most people when they find something has gone wrong, do look for someone to blame quite as soon as they look for a way of putting it right. Equally, people who lack the advantages that others have form intense resentments against the “privileged”, claiming that they (the non-privileged) are being denied their rights.” Niethzsche.

        Are you complaining against Pinoys because of their character flaw, which admits that you do not suffer from such flaw, or are you complaining because you are not as privileged of those you are complaining against?

  5. Don’t make accusations on a person’s background unless you know them. It’s both rude and baseless. And we can argue endlessly whether I am any different from the people I am criticizing. Perhaps I’m not, but at the very least I am aware of these flaws and seek to avoid them in the future.But I doubt the teeming masses are aware of their cultural flaws, and no one bothers to enlighten them. So when rarities like AP come along, they are marginalized as self-righteous, anarchistic, and all other kinds of dismissive comments for trying to change the way things are for the better.

    • so you want to enligthen them.. the unsaid part of your statement is that you have found the light, while the teeming masses are lightless. i am not prepared to say that i found it, for quite frankly truth is relative and a lifetime quest.

  6. jcc, that you’re being peeved with your exchanges with Ap, and the others, is becoming obvious here. that means you’re losing. take it easy and regroup.

    • vince,

      When you say one is losing the argument it means in the contentious issue, an objective umpire comes up with a verdict.

      As i said, the quest for truth is a lifetime quest. I don’t find it, and I look at others who claimed they find it, one egregious lie.

      As regards the inebriation of power brings, my solution is “constant vigilance”.

  7. “even if the electorate are intelligent and chose a leader which have good track record, the inebriation power brings is too powerful a potion.”

    So what recourse a citicenry has to change this perpetual trend?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s