If she dislikes the way the Philippines is run, then she should leave. Period. She is a missionary and is responsible for a different calling, that she is actually qualified for, than local politics, which she absolutely is not qualified for. It really is disgusting in my own country when foreigners from Mexico and the Middle East disrespect our society by trying to change the customs of the country I consider my own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Who is comparing apples and oranges when it is so rational to make the metaphor of humanitarian work “apples” and political activity “oranges”?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have to agree, *humanitarian* does not mean getting involved in a countries internal politics they disagree with. It means helping those who need it directly not through round about agenda's of trying to press political change.

 

It does when President Duterte instructs: "police to shoot human rights activists who are “obstructing justice” "

The Australian nun is lucky the police disobeyed.

 

According to Wiki:

The primary objective of humanitarian aid is to save lives, alleviate suffering, and maintain human dignity.

Couldn't political change have a positive result on the 3 objectives above? It's not aid as you typically think of it (money or food), but I would suggest that alleviating the cause is a better strategy than treating the symptom. Not disagreeing that the quickest way to help is to treat the symptom, but without addressing the cause, it's unlikely the symptom will go away.

Edit: Here is another definition more inline with the general public:
Humanitarian aid is material and logistic assistance to people who need help. It is usually short-term help until the long-term help by government and other institutions replaces it.

What if the government never steps up? What if the cause is the government?

 

Humanitarian aid is understood to be providing direct relief from suffering. We should not twist the generally understood definition into something people can use against political figures. I am so tired of seeing the English language cannibalized in this way in these times of new-think. I will comment that the nun wished to become political. She had her own personal agenda, a higher purpose than the local political process, and that is not acceptable here, and, she knew that but managed to garner some free publicity for the opposition. But is she really relevant here? For example, has the economy, wealth, level of education improved so greatly that there is no need for humanitarian visas? I must say, the standard of living has *vastly* improved since my first stay here in 1988. I don’t see nearly as many beggars on the street. I have seen more in the USA standing at stoplight intersections with signs ‘will work for food’ (Ed. BS). Perhaps missionaries are not very relevant here anymore under the old definition so they must expand their scope to include a newly defined humanitarian that solves poverty by injecting themselves into the previously hands-off political process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So by your *new age* definition including politics every one of us foreigners from developed countries should be able to vote, run for political office, and have 100% rights including land, business, and so on because in doing so it would likely lead to a better lifestyle for the country and people. After all I'm pretty sure one of us knows more in our thumb about true Philippine politics and how things really work here then 2 dozen of the average Filipino's you see.

Or is it really the job of a country and its citizens to decide their own own political agenda, own political beliefs, and own countries fate? Because your statement really sounds like the start of a dictatorship because someone from a *better* country knows better of course how to make things *good*.

 

The definitions aren't mine and I didn't say anyone should do anything. Actually, I just asked some hopefully thought provoking questions. I don't see the nun wanting to make the Philippines a better place a bad thing. I don't see where you owning land has much to do with a homeless person starving on the street and I don't see a nun becoming a dictator. In no way did say I say that people shouldn't pick themselves up, as in the mental illness post, sometimes people need a little help. Where did all this Better country, Dictatorship stuff come? LOL