This new lockdown is NOT what the healthcare workers were asking for. In fact, it was the exact opposite of what they demanded and recommended.
(A thread)
HCWs prefaced their demands by saying that “we are waging a losing battle against COVID-19 and we need to draw up a consolidated, definitive plan of action”.
Duterte repeated his promise of a vaccine but offered no clear plan to rescue the struggling healthcare system.
HCWs reported that they are experiencing fear, fatigue, and poor working conditions.
Duterte's response is to threaten HCWs, castigate them for airing grievances ("Do not demean the gov't"), dare them to stage a revolution, and set them up as objects of blame.
HCWs pointed out that the government has failed in case finding, isolation, contact tracing, calling instead for a public health solution.
Duterte ignored these demands, and doubled down on his military approach, even telling nurses to join the police if they want higher pay.
HCWs demanded better public transport options - including bike lanes, adding: "We need this now, not next year".
Duterte's MECQ effectively eliminated transport options - making it harder for HCWs and non-HCWs alike.
HCWs pointed out that any "timeout" requires social amelioration for people affected by it.
Duterte again ignored this call, instead mouthing off defeatist statements - "I cannot give money and food to the people" - despite having loaned billions for the pandemic response.
In conclusion, Duterte has just made it worse for HCWs and non-HCWs alike, succeeding only in turning the latter against the former.
His latest actions confirm the diagnosis: His failed, incoherent, divisive non-leadership is responsible for our continued misery. DUTERTE RESIGN!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Those who insist that mining is good for the Philippines should learn from environmental anthropology and read all the scholarship on how so-called "responsible mining" has affected communities and ecosystems all over the country. Here's a reading list to start with:
This article demonstates how large-scale mining adds to the country's typhoon vulnerability, in many ways anticipating Odette and other recent storms:
This article adds that mining likewise renders the country more vulnerable to droughts, adding that environmental impact assessments are often insufficient to account for long-term consequences:
Some of my graduate students are embarking on their master’s thesis this semester, and I would like to share the advice I have given them in these "four questions you should ask yourself when choosing a thesis topic"
(A thread)
1. Are you interested in the topic? This is most important - more than pursuing a "hot issue". Maybe at first you think you can work on any topic, but when the going gets tough, and when the writing becomes tedious, it's your interest that will keep you going.
2. Is the topic interesting? Scientific significance aside, an interesting thesis will make it more likely for you to have an enthusiastic adviser, more feedback - and better cooperation - from colleagues - not to mention higher chances of your being able to publish out of it.
Some years back, I was walking in the banks of the River Danube in Budapest when I saw these bronze shoes.
Getting curious, I approached them and saw a plaque that reads: "To the memory of the victims shot into the Danube by Arrow Cross Miltiamen In 1944-1945." (1/5)
It turns out that on that very spot, Jews were ordered to take their shoes off, and then they were shot "so that their bodies fell into the river and were carried away”.
The shoes serve as a haunting memorial to this day of the horrors of an otherwise-forgotten time. (2/5)
As I walked away from the shoes, I realized how such a simple work of creativity can leave a lasting impression.
The shoes do not just remind people of a past horror; they get people into thinking about how we can prevent another similar horror from ever happening again. (3/5)
What is wrong with the government’s response to COVID-19? Why is the pandemic still out of control? Beyond specific policies, I think the entire paradigm is problematic.
Here's a thread that breaks down this faulty paradigm:
1. The gov’t’s paradigm continues to place the burden and blame on the people. They are quick to impose requirements on individuals (e.g. face shields, quarantine passes, curfews), but slow to pursue steps that require gov’t itself to act (e.g. contact tracing, mass testing)
2. Politics, not science, continues to dictate policy. There is no better example than the embrace of rapid antibody tests that look good in the eyes of the public despite the evidence-based dangers of its use. Another example is the absurd, equally-dangerous motorcycle barrier.