Expect it all in Paris: furious environmental and human rights activists, red-eyed negotiators spewing strong words; long nights, even longer protests; a cacophony of promises, pleas and prayers. 

The 21st Conference of Parties or COP21 in Paris in 2015 signaled the penultimate moment for the world to deliver a new climate agreement that will exhort both developed and developing countries to cut their emissions and invest aggressively on adapting to climate change and switching to renewable energy.

Paris is not the end all and be all of climate change action. It is, no doubt, an exciting time for journalists, bloggers and communicators to write and report about, but the story does not end there. (READ: #AnimatED: Beyond Paris)

I used the word “penultimate” in describing Paris because while is it indeed a watershed episode in climate change history, it is just a springboard to uncovering and realizing the bigger picture of the fight against climate change. The goal still remains: seeing governments, members of the private sector, civil society and communities work together in creating programs and policies that will save lives and generations from the consequences of a warming world.  

But how does Paris figure in this? Here’s the continuation of the climate change narrative: the end of 2015 should be treated as a vital invitation for people to link COP21 to realities on the ground. 

Inspecting the INDCS 

Media should track the implementation of the intended nationally-determined contributions or INDCs submitted by different countries.

The INDCs outline what each country aims to do to cut their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to climate change. Since both developing and developed countries pledged to do something, check if they are taking steps to deliver on their word. 

This is crucial because the INDCs also cover the assistance and support that industrialized countries must provide to developing countries in order for them to mitigate and adapt effectively to climate change.  What are the challenges, the constraints, the gaps, gains and pains? 

There should be laser focus on the specific actions that the countries vowed to take. “The media should pay attention to how nations and others follow through on their commitments,” Andrew Kolb, senior director for content at the Conservation International said.  This includes a careful examination and incisive analysis of the policies and programs that governments have developed to meet their commitments.  

There is guidance on the targets, as the INDCs have been envisaged to detail the base year, time period, percentage of national emissions, sectors and gases covered and contributions. This is a goldmine of information as journalists could scrutinize the particular agencies and actors in each sector and assess the level and pace of progress that each has attained in meeting the national commitment in the INDCs. Ask the important questions – are they on track? Why or why not? What institutions are doing their job, what are those that have encountered more difficulties in doing so?

Two things that that have to be noted:  mitigation was initially the crux of the INDCs, but since COP19 in Warsaw, Poland, there has been a strong push from developing countries to also include adaptation. This means a separate set of targets to be monitored.  Second, while INDCs must be ambitious, they should also be reflective of the different capacities and needs of each country, hence the emphasis on having them crafted within the context of national circumstances.  These two points illumine one of the next big subjects that must be closely covered after Paris: finance.

Keep an eye on the money

Developed countries have the responsibility to extend financial assistance to developing countries to enable them to develop, acquire and maximize the technology necessary to reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change. The former also have to compensate the latter for loss and damage from climate change.

The major climate financing mechanism within the UNFCCC is the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which surpassed its capitalization target of $10 billion in 2014. By 2020, countries have promised that the GCF will have $100 billion a year. It is worth watching who will give what and how much.

When it comes to finance, this is one question everyone should be asking:  “Are countries on course to meet their international commitments of mobilizing funding for climate change?” said Jonah Busch, a research fellow from the Center for Global Development.

Segfredo Serrano, agriculture undersecretary in the Philippines, stressed that outside of pledges from countries though, climate finance will also be sourced from “private funds especially [from] the big corporations and businesses.” The GCF has also looked at proposals to crowdfund or source money from small investors and tap affluent individuals. 

Aside from the GCF, another climate finance instrument within the UNFCCC is the Adaptation Fund (AF), whose board has been urged by members of G77 and China – the largest negotiating bloc in the UNFCCC composed of developing countries - to apply for accreditation under the GCF. The AF, which was made operational in 2009, mainly sourced its funds from a 2 percent share of proceeds of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) from the Clean Development Mechanism. The CDM allows developed countries to purchase carbon offsets, but carbon prices have took a plunge, limiting funding for the AF. AF showed the importance of diversifying sources, a lesson that could be applied to other financing vehicles.    

The media should look at these different channels of money, assess if this mix is balanced (is the private sector giving more money than the governments?), report on the evolution of financing mechanisms and last but definitely not the least,  probe where the money is going and how it is being used. 

Prioritize pre-2020

But one need not even look at a trajectory of 10 or more years after COP21. Pre-2020, or the period before the new global agreement takes effect, is a crucial time for dissecting the mitigation, financing and adaptation strategies of both public and private actors. 

Countries would have to find effective ways to narrow the “ambition gap” for emission reductions from 2015-2020 in order to strengthen the foundation for the new climate agreement. The “ambition gap” is the result of not having emission reduction commitments from countries that are significant or “ambitious” enough to prevent global temperature from going beyond the 2°C threshold. Be especially mindful on how major carbon dioxide emitters - may these be industrialized countries like the United States and Japan or expanding economies like China and India – will address this. 

“What are the plans by countries and the UNFCCC to close this gap in the near-medium term?” Busch raised. The media should focus on this concern with the same vigor and vigilance that they would in covering COP21 and post-2020.

People and political will 

There would be understandable interest on what will happen to the direction, design and most importantly, purpose of the UNFCCC climate talks after COP21. “There will still be outstanding issues that need to be resolved by the COP in the next five years but they would be more technical,” Dean Tony La Viña, a climate change negotiator from the Philippines, said. “The most contentious increasingly would be in climate justice issues, like the loss and damage mechanism, as countries experience more climate related disasters.” 

Keep in mind that the climate change negotiations though would proceed within the larger context of achieving climate justice, so look at its evolution in congruence with changes in the intersection of science, policy and governance. The locus of this intergenerational subject is definitely not just about the future of the UNFCCC.  La Viña, for one, emphasized that the heart of media coverage after COP21 should be the people who are at the “frontlines of climate change, both the experience of it as well as adapting and mitigating it.”  

This only proves that the media should vigorously carry out its watchdog function when reporting about climate change, post-Paris. Whatever aspect or component of climate change action journalists would zero in – may this be renewable energy, emission reductions, markets, money, adaptation in agriculture and other sectors – the focus should be on the people who will be affected by these steps, on the lives that they will change.  Make governments and leaders accountable - from the grassroots level, to the national plane, to those who made promises in a global scale.

The challenge of communicating climate change after Paris will be to capture the importance of people and political will. We did not hit a cul-de-sac after Paris. We’re looking at the next chapter. 

So stay alert. The story goes on. – Rappler.com

The author is a former reporter of Rappler. In 2013, she started working as a communications specialist under the environmental cluster of the Ateneo School of Government. Since then she has participated in the UN climate change negotiations as an adviser and eventually a member of the Philippine delegation.

Last month, the thin veneer of solipsism I used to feel in watching the news was shattered.

I was in Florida, thousands of miles away from Paris, yet I couldn't escape the shock and the sadness of what was unfolding in front of the television screen: terror attacks in six separate locations around the city; 130 dead and scores of others injured. The ominous superstitions attributed to Friday the 13th had become all too real for Parisians and the rest of the world.

All of a sudden, it wasn't an out-of-sight-out-of-mind type of situation, anymore – especially because I was preparing to fly to Paris in a few days.

I arrived with my sister and our American friend in Paris three days after the attacks. Charles de Gaulle Airport, touted to be among the busiest airports in the world, was largely vacant save for a few travelers, airport employees, and the occasional group of soldiers strolling the airport facilities.

In a taxi on our way to downtown Paris, I expected dozens of checkpoints along our path and troops marching the streets, but to my surprise, everything appeared normal. There were plenty of vehicles on the roads, the shops were open, and the people were out and about — openly defying the government's orders to stay indoors.

Joie de vivre

We stopped at a small cafe called Le Petit Louis and enjoyed some hot chocolate while waiting for our Airbnb host. There was a group of three young friends sitting beside our table, engaged in a casual conversation over half-empty drinks and a folded Le Parisien newspaper on the table.

Its headline read: Cet Homme a Organise Le Massacre (This Man Organized the Massacre), referring to the attack's ring leader, Abdelhamid Abaaoud.

The cafe's bartender sat by one of the empty tables near the girls, lighting small candles. I asked him if it was for the victims of the attacks. He chuckled and told me they were in fact meant for the dinner tables.

I noticed the girls at the other table looking at us. I turned to them and asked about how they felt about the recent tragic events. One of them who introduced herself as Lauren, revealed to me that she lost four of her friends during the attacks. “I was sad, but we also have to live, you know?” she told me. (READ: Longtime Bataclan owner wants show to go on after Paris attacks)

“If we are afraid, the terrorists will win. The answer is Joie de Vivre, the joy of life.” She smiled with a subtle sense of defiance. (READ: Paris attacks: 'We were targeted because we love life')

It didn't take long before I witnessed firsthand how the Parisians practice what they preach when Lauren's friends Vy, Lolita, and Dany the bartender joined in for a lively exchange of silly stories punctuated by bad jokes and genuine laughter.

No 'cure-all'

While hanging outside the cafe, I struck up a more serious conversation with a French-Tunisian woman. She was in Tunisia when a lone gunman opened fire at tourists at a popular beach resort in Port El Kantaoui.

I asked her if she supported President Hollande on waging war against Daesh – the Arabic acronym of ISIS which many Europeans prefer to use – and she told me France should have waged a war on Syria a long time ago, when the terror group's influence in the region was still limited.

Her perspective, however, is just one among many opinions that currently divide the French people on the ISIS and Syria debate. While many demand swift retaliation against ISIS especially in Syria, some people believe that it is dangerous to think a military strategy is a cure-all solution for this complicated crisis.

After all, it is difficult to wage a war against an unconventional enemy that has no established front lines and is driven by an ideology that transcends geographic borders.

Not quite business as usual

The next morning, I woke to Atika Shubert on CNN counting the explosions heard in an apartment complex during a police operation in Saint-Denis, a suburb in Paris where some of the terror suspects, including Abaaoud, were hiding.

While the news made everyone outside of Paris susceptible in thinking that the entire city was in a state of hysteria, the rest of Paris went on with their daily lives. People outside our apartment walked in quick strides as they hurried to work, oblivious to the media barrage in Saint-Denis. Out of sight, out of mind.

Apart from the Saint-Denis incident, everything actually seemed normal that day despite the presence of soldiers carrying high-caliber weapons and police cars at all the major tourist spots.

We felt like regular tourists and we had almost forgotten that Paris was still in a state of emergency. Everything appeared to be business as usual around Paris – but not quite.

French flags flew at half mast all over the city. The Louvre was open, but it didn't have the notorious lines of visitors it's usually known for. Place De la Concorde was filled with various groups of middle-aged Chinese tourists pouring out of buses, lining up for group photos, and proving the benefits of community Tai Chi by doing impressive jump shots in front of the Place's Ferry's wheel.

Notre Dame seemed to have a considerable amount of visitors, but apparently not enough for the restaurants in the area struggling to find customers. The Lover's Bridge was practically empty except for a few curious visitors, and a busking couple singing a passionate love song in English and French to an invisible audience.

The Eiffel Tower, closed the previous day, was reopened and was perhaps the busiest among the places we visited that day. There were walking tours, illegal vendors selling Eiffel key chains, and a lot of tourists on the lawn in front of the tower making poor attempts at selfies and forced perspective shots.

At Place de la République

It was a fun day, yet, the idea of being a cheerful backpacker traveling in a country still recovering from a tragedy felt insensitive and selfish to me.

I had a strong urge to spend some time with the mourning people of Paris and that the only way for me to justify my travel to France was to prioritize my visit to Place de la République – the unofficial memorial for the victims of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and more recently, the Friday the 13th attacks.

We arrived at the Republique Station during rush hour and the area was busy with commuters eager to get to their next destination. The memorial was in the middle of a busy roundabout, yet it had a very solemn atmosphere.

Conversations were hushed while people prayed. There were parents watching their kids writing messages and drawing figures on the pavement with colored chalk. There were people lighting candles and even grown men silently crying. There were journalists with cameras constantly hunting for the next front page photo, and reluctant subjects ignoring the loud clicks while praying in peace.

There were also tourists taking selfies with their camera phones, eager to tell the world about the tragedy of Paris along with the irony of their grinning faces on Instagram.

I walked with my sister and our American friend to the base of the monument where people left hundreds of flowers and candles for the victims and I began to pray, asking for world peace – the most unlikely, most unrealistic request I ever wished the heavens for, but for once, I meant it.

Love vs. the 'Piecemeal Third World War'

Pope Francis has called this disparate conflict the Piecemeal Third World War. Although we may not fully acknowledge it yet, it is already being waged within ourselves. Religious fundamentalism has succeeded in inciting hatred in people.

I can feel real divisions in opinions even between those closest to me. On Facebook alone, I see messages and posts full of hostility and bigotry toward other people all the time —and yes, they're from my friends and family, and probably yours, too.

As we made our way to the other side of the monument, we stumbled upon a group of Muslim women holding white roses while calling for war against Iran and Syria.

I wanted to listen to what they had to say, so I squeezed my way into the circle and listened closely to the group's speech: “We ourselves have been victims of this brutal repression,” the spokesperson declared in front of the cameras and curious onlookers.

“Millions of our brothers, sisters, are youngsters who have been exploited in Syria, in Iraq, in Iran, because of repression. We are the same voice of defending freedom, of defending justice, of defending democratic value. We need to be behind each other. We need to be united, with one voice to stand firm against terror.”

Calling for unity has never been more important to the vilified French Muslims who are facing times of uncertainty in their own country. Despite having the largest Muslim population in Europe, France has been subjecting its Muslim community to varying forms of religious oppression and discrimination for many years now.

Some argue France's heavy-handed treatment of Muslims has (and probably still continues to) lead some people to become radicalized. After a series of terror attacks just this year, many French Muslims are fearing reprisals and even more discrimination against their community.

There is also great concern among the Muslim community that the far-right political parties all over Europe including France's National Front, led by Marine Le Pen – a politician who is openly anti-Islam and anti-immigration – are gaining a lot of momentum.

While I was waiting for an opportunity to talk to the women, my sister dragged me out of the crowd. Our American friend was spooked by what was happening and wanted to leave. I intended to stay longer, but I was forced to go with them.

The new normal

While on a train going back home, I was trying to reason with my sister to allow me to return to the Place when a voice on the public address (P.A.) system made an announcement in French.

It initially sounded routine, but in the background we could hear tense radio chatter that made us wonder what was going on. “Excusez-moi, parlez-vous Anglais?” I asked the lady seated in front of us. She was curiously studying us earlier while my sister and I were having our little discussion in Bikol.

She promptly stood up, grabbed on to the pole we were holding on to and told us in a calm voice: “There is panic in Liberté station and people are running. They are going to stop train operation until it is safe.”

And there it was—my first real glimpse of the “new normal." I felt a strange mix of emotions that included fear, confusion, paranoia, defiance, and I-have-to-go-home. There was an eerie silence on the train. Everyone seemed calm, and so was I.

But as a matter of fact, my nostrils were stretched to take in more air. I began to wonder if the next wave of terror attacks had finally begun. After a few moments of suppressed panic, the P.A. finally announced the train was safe to proceed again.

The woman told us she was sorry that we had to experience such an incident while in Paris, which I found rather strange. I asked her why and she said people in Paris were a little bit on the edge, but that life had to go on.

She continued to say that she was happy that we decided to visit the city despite of all that was happening because it helped give Parisians like her a sense of normalcy. When she arrived at her station, she waved us goodbye and disappeared into the crowd.

Quite frankly, I do not remember much about the places I visited in Paris. But, I still vividly remember the brief moments I had with the people I met there. I also still remember the wonderful moods the City of Light gave me, despite being in the middle of one of the darkest chapters in its recent history.

I can see now that peace is such a very delicate thing to maintain – even in the land of liberty, equality, and fraternity. All the moral progress we have made as a human race is currently under a test. It is up to us to remember the things history has taught us not to ever repeat, or revert to the old prejudices we've been fighting so hard all these years to eradicate.

For the most part, France has so far chosen to stay united as a people despite their fears and differences. Here's to hoping they'd continue to actively choose to do so. Here's to hoping the rest of the world would choose to do so. – Rappler.com

Chad Verzosa is a freelance writer currently based in Tampa, Florida. To view examples of his work, you can visit his website.

A technician in Dubai wishes he could go home instead of just sending presents to his loved ones. A nurse in the US wishes that when she does go home, her job will still be waiting for her when she gets back.

They both wish a trip home didn't cost so much money or take so much time. It wouldn't be so difficult to rationalize a trip instead of again participating in the holidays via webcam.

They wish their flights won't be canceled or delayed. They've saved through the year to be able to pay for their trip. In their jobs as nannies, engineers, and factory workers, it's all they've been thinking about. After the balikbayan boxes these workers send through the years, they don't keep much of their wages for themselves other than putting away for airfare in case they do get the chance.

A mother wishes that when her children see her again, they'll recognize her. At the very least she'll hope that someone teaches them to fake it and run to her for a rehearsed hug. A father will want them to laugh and smile with him and tell him they love him, but even if they don't say thank you, their health and happiness will be enough.

Wishes for family

Even if he's arrived with presents for each one of them, what he really wishes for his family are good health and ease of life. He doesn't want his children to worry about their tuition, books, or having something nice to wear for a family reunion. He wants them to stand tall among their friends knowing that they are well-dressed and well-fed because they are loved.

Maybe if they are proud of themselves they will forget that in order to do that, he had to leave them behind.

She wishes her children are making the most of their education. She hopes they realize the edge they have over their peers in going to a better school and having access to better jobs when they're done. She hopes they don't waste their opportunities by starting families too early or deciding that school is not for them, when she would have done anything for that chance.

Regardless of how hard she works, she doesn't wish for much for herself other than that her sacrifices won't be for naught. Maybe with their level of education they won't have to leave their own families to feed them when it's their turn. For her, that will be enough.

A husband hopes the spouse he left has not strayed from him, although he's quite aware of the necessity of intimacy in married life. A wife hopes her husband has not started another family in her absence, though she knows very well what it's like to be lonely and long for a loving pair of arms.

He hopes his wife has put their hard-earned money to good use and saved some for emergencies. She longs to tell him she depends on him as much as he depends on her. He wants to tell her that despite the distance, he still considers her his home.

Lack of choice

Instead of resenting them for being away, OFWs hope their families realize their lack of choice. That as sad and difficult it is to leave them, it is necessary to earn a better wage to address the needs that a local job cannot.

That daughter in Rome hopes her family knows the bitterness in her chest when she is alone and away from them, the hardships she stomachs but never mentions, and the loneliness she constantly tries to fight. An auntie in Australia wishes her nieces and nephews would make the most of their lives while she sacrifices hers so they might have a better chance.

A longtime seaman hopes to get some rest from my work when he visits. He hopes that when his relatives come, they sincerely want to see him instead of asking for help to fix their houses. He's used to being approached to address health issues or to pay for schooling, but he's hoping for a break this time.

For once, a lifelong domestic helper in Hong Kong wishes nobody would need anything from her for just a few days. They all wish their families recognize that working abroad doesn't mean that money is in endless supply.

A housekeeper wishes she could let her family know of her struggles, but she doesn't want to burden them with her difficulties because they might feel guilty and think she resents supporting their lives.

As a mother, she hopes they instead appreciate the advice she gives from a distance – reminders to do well in school and stay away from vices – because more often than not it's the only thing she can do from afar. 

As we send our gift requests and lists of holiday wants to our relatives abroad this year, have we ever wondered what would be on their own lists? What would they say if they're actually asked what they would want for Christmas?

Unlike requests for clothes, toys, gadgets, and cash, OFWs ask for nothing material. Aside from more health and strength to work some more for their family's survival, what do our beloved overseas workers really want for themselves this Christmas? Have we even asked them what they want in their own lives?

More importantly, what could we do to return the favor of our OFW relative's sacrifice? – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – The age of consent in the Philippines is 12-years-old. In the eyes of the law, a Filipino can legally engage in consensual sex at the age of 12. Sex with a person below the age of twelve is considered statutory rape. 

Two women brought this matter to my attention on two different occasions this past week. 

Myrza Sison, editor-in-chief of Cosmo Philippines, emailed me to say that the very low age of consent (one of the lowest in the world) shocked her.

In her interview with Cosmo US, “Why Twentysomething Filipina Women Often Have to Live Double Lives,” Sison was asked how she handles the coverage of sensitive issues like sex and abortion in the devoutly Catholic Philippines—and in light of the age of consent being so young. 

Sison asserted that sex education should begin at the start of adolescence and lamented the fact that SexEd is left out in many school curricula. Given this and sensitivities like abortion being illegal in the Philippines, Cosmo bolsters its coverage of contraception and sexual reproductive health rights.

Amina Evangelista-Swanepoel, executive director of women’s health NGO, Roots of Health, wrote about age of consent in her column.

Evangelista-Swanepoel pointed out that a 12-year old is typically in the 6th grade, hardly what would be considered as a position of emotional and physical maturity to make an informed decision to have sex.

Problematic 

Setting the age of consent at 12 is problematic in itself, but when we zoom out to look at the bigger picture, we can also see that the law is inconsistent with our other existing laws related to sexual health.

The HIV/AIDS Prevention Law prohibits anyone below 18-years-old from getting an HIV anti-body test without parental consent. Similarly, the Reproductive Health Law prohibits minors from accessing contraceptives at public health clinics without parental consent. (READ: Why the RH Bill is also a youth issue)

Adolescence is a tough confusing stage. You’re too young to go to the bar, but too old to go to the zoo. And given our existing laws, Filipino adolescents are old enough to engage in sex but are not old enough to access HIV tests or contraceptives.

They are prohibited from accessing safeguards that would protect them from the risks of unplanned pregnancy or sexually transmitted infections like HIV – physical hazards that they would be exposed as a result of having sex.

What they do have access to is pornography in the myriad of ways that it is available on-line (and some of our street billboards, I might add), hook up apps like Grindr, Tinder and Facebook groups where clan meet ups and eyeballs are arranged. 

Speaking metaphorically, they are going off to “play the field” of dating and relationships without proper training, adequate preparation, or education.

And the ramifications of this have already begun to show. The Philippines has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the region. We are one of nine countries in the world where rate of new HIV infections continues to increase by more than 25 percent. (READ: HIV and teen pregnancy: A national youth crisis)

Emotional hazards 

A visiting foreigner engaged in development work asked what kind of sex education young Filipinos get considering the prohibitive nature of our laws and the strong unspoken rules of propriety and conservatism.

“Prayer,” one person in the group answered. 

“Cross your legs. And cross your fingers, too.”  I answered, alluding to how avoiding the physical hazards of being sexually active are sometimes seen as a matter of luck.

Sex education is summarized and limited to: Don’t have it. 

But who are we kidding? Filipino youth are having sex and they are starting to do so at a younger and younger age.

The Young Adult Fertility Survey (YAFS) conducted by the University of the Philippines showed the number of young Filipinos (both males and females) who have sex before the age of 18 increased from 13% in 1994 to 23% in 2013. 

Additionally, YAFS estimates that 1.4 million young people have engaged in casual sex, with about 600,000 having had FUBU or "fuck buddy."

Of those who reported engaging in casual sex, only 18% used a condom. Not very surprising considering that, as minors, they would not be given condoms in public health clinics.

They could always buy them, but they would have to steel themselves for the embarrassment of asking the pharmacist across the counter for a prophylactic. (READ: On preventing HIV/AIDS: Are you afraid of condoms?)

Emotional hazards

By not giving adolescents proper sex education, we are missing out on an opportunity to educate them about taking precautions that expose them to the emotional hazards of sexual activity.

We are losing out on the importance of talking about taking care of your emotional well-being, knowing and setting your boundaries, your right to say no, protecting your self-worth and self-respect – the very things you need to watch out for when you share your body with another person. (Read: [DASH of SAS] Talking Sex to Kids)

We can go on and on about how kids should not be having sex; how they should temper their fiery, aggressive behavior, but that would be a simplification, a deliberate oversight of the reckless carefree ways that marked our own youth. Besides, it is obvious by now that that strategy has failed us.

We would be a much better people, a much better nation if we created a safe, non-judgmental environment for Filipino adolescents—starting with modifying our laws so that they are consistent in ensuring that they protect rather than inadvertently punish our youth. – Rappler.com

Portrait of young beautiful girl from Shutterstock

Sans the entertaining word wars between presidential candidates and the hilarious trolling and counter-trolling on social media between their fervent devotees, the 2016 elections pre-campaign season in the Philippines is actually showing signs of emergent intellectual discourse. 

It is easy to condemn the polarizing divisiveness and the noise it has so far generated. But it is also, quite misleading to do so. While the mudslinging is easily apparent, hard and real contentious issues, albeit insufficiently articulated, already underpin the passionate exchange of convictions and ad hominems. 

For the pseudo-intelligent voter, this is an occasion to display self-righteous cynicism. 

But for someone who knows the crucial distinctions between politics and democracy, rhetoric and policy, or strategies and tactics, and can read the distinctions between the huffing and puffing of candidates and talking heads on mainstream and social media, the emerging discursive field this campaign season, at least on the national level, is on the contrary a refreshing break from the clichéd and bland pro- and anti- polarities voters have been accustomed to identify with.  

Rodrigo Duterte for example is forcing us, Filipino voters to theorize our own collective sense of justice outside its narrowly confined constitutional norms. Meanwhile, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos is destabilizing attitudes towards historical remembering and memory-making beyond history from the eyes of the winners. Needless to say, Grace Poe is dividing Filipinos on the importance of nation-state bound citizenship in a supposedly borderless global village. Mar Roxas, on the other hand, is forcing us to rethink the coherence of the dominant social class while Jejomar Binay is challenging previously held theories on the “masa” consciousness. 

Platforms of government have in turn, and rightly so, coalesced around these deep-seated issues. In the words of today’s millennials, the campaign teams are on a “hugot pa more” overdrive – that is to say, drawing from the position of their respective constituents within the broader spectrum of political categories, even categories of democracy which dominant and erstwhile undisturbed narratives. 

But as important as platforms are in gauging a candidate, voting on the basis of platforms alone is hardly the fool-proof test of an intelligent vote. 

Beyond the surface

Setting aside the question of whether the substantive meat of platforms and policy directions can even be differentiated from each other, platforms are simply declarations. And in a constitutional setting where political actors are bound to act according to privileged norms, even Duterte’s statements that run against the grain of constitutionally protected precepts have to be taken with a grain of salt. 

An intelligent voter must go beyond the surface of declared platforms and professionally-managed PR stints and ask two critical questions: 1) what does the candidate presently possess that he or she is willing to expend in order to win?; and 2) once installed, how might his or her expenditure affect regime stability and performance? 

These questions are not simply about political platforms. They inquire into the extent of a candidate’s political capital. 

The need to evaluate a candidate’s political capital more than a candidate’s platform rests on two realities about politics: foremost is Harold Lasswell’s famous definition of politics as a decision on “who gets what, when, and how” and secondly on the truth that all politicians seek power and once in power stay there. In political science these refer to the accommodations a politician would have to and would be willing to undertake in order to preserve his or her rule. 

Political capital is that stock of trust, goodwill, influence, and material considerations a politician has with the public and with other players in the political field. 

How a politician dispenses or spends his political capital and on which issues and for what ends affects not just his ability to perform but his political behavior once in office. But while scholars have thus far studied political capital mostly during the incumbency of an elected official and have so far confined the source of political capital to electoral victory, extending the evaluation of political capital and its expenditure during the campaign period may also yield significant insights that can guide in a voter’s evaluation. 

For example, a politician who during the campaign period had to spend political capital not just to win but also dodge key issues thrown at him or her such as judicial proceedings, administrative liabilities and corruption allegations may erode the capital he or she will bring in office. This is because he or she must bring into the winning coalition more people for whom accommodations might be made. 

Payback time

The administration of former president Gloria Arroyo should be instructive. In 2001, when Arroyo usurped the presidency from Joseph Estrada she brought into her coalition a broad range of political actors whose interests and demands had to be accommodated. Given the precarious situation of her ascendance to the presidency it was easy for the regime’s rivals to exploit instances of Arroyo distributing the spoils of power. 

It is likely that her 2004 run, despite an initial disavowal of a re-election bid, was informed by the need to satisfy and preserve the interests of coalition partners. This in turn limited her government’s ability to seek an autonomous policy direction, confounding Arroyo with multiple demands. With a much more eroded political capital post-Garci period, Arroyo had to resort to the use of political violence just to keep her regime afloat. 

On the other hand, Benigno Aquino III ascended the presidency with a rich stock of political capital. But even that was nearly depleted when his administration pursued policies and political decisions that required accommodating certain interests such as prosecuting Arroyo, impeaching former chief justice Renato Corona, acceding to popular demand against pork barrel, and then consolidating fiscal control through the disbursement acceleration program and defending it against the Supreme Court. 

The campaign season must by all means focus on issues and platforms. But without assessing the factors that affect a candidate’s political capital, discussions on platforms and issues are largely to remain academic. 

How Grace Poe for example will utilize her existing stock of political capital to bring her out of the legal debacle she is presently facing is likely to diminish the capital she could autonomously use if she still manages to get elected. 

How Rodrigo Duterte will utilize his political capital to maintain the hard talking image his supporters find adorable and simultaneously make himself palatable to other voters in the spectrum may also require some tradeoffs. 

How Jejomar Binay is keeping the corruption allegations against him on the doldrums carries with it some cost. And finally, how Mar Roxas manages to preserve the capital he has to prevent defections in anticipation of guaranteed loss following his continuing dismal performance in the surveys is likely to be costly as well. 

The answers to these inquiries cannot be easily obtained through a checklist of issues comparing items in a platform of government. 

More than a comparative checklist, what intelligent Filipino voters need today is a balance sheet. – Rappler.com

RR Rañeses teaches with the Ateneo de Manila Department of Political Science. He is also an independent political and security risks consultant. 

My fondest memories as a student were of attending William Henry Scott’s History of East Asia class, Dodong Nemenzo’s course on Political Dynamics and the seminars and directed readings on Southeast Asia of Ben Anderson. These three mentors  basically shaped my intellectual curiousity and set me on the path that I continued to pursue. 

Scotty captivated us with stories of the collapse of the Manchu dynasty under the relentless assaults of the world’s largest drug cartel, the British Empire, and wondered about the size of warlord Chang Tso-lin’s penis. Dodong made us read Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao, leaving my English professor-classmates to wonder how such great political figures (save Marx and Trotsky) could get away with such dreadful writing. He walked us through the different ways a revolutionary group could overthrow the state: the coup, the insurrection, the protracted people’s war. As wide-eyed national democrats then, we took the latter survey with a grain of salt. For was not Nemenzo a member of the Lavaite “black bourgeois revisionist gang”? Fortunately, it was also Dodong’s critical re-examination, even of his own politics, that prodded some of us towards radical heresies and led me to do away with my Maoist dogma.

And there was Ben. Let me confess now – and I do this without belittling the formidable intellects of Scotty and Dodong – that of these three mentors – I dreaded Ben the most. For his gentle presence notwithstanding, he always kept us on our toes because we had no idea how to answer his questions, which usually start with the query “What’s odd about it?” While he once comforted us with the reminder that “we can fill this room with our ignorance,” it was also clear that he expected us to know the canons of Southeast Asian studies, the histories of the countries in the region, and our own national histories.

For to answer “what’s odd about it?” we had to think comparatively and be willing to go against the grain of the orthodox explanations. I never felt so provincial and narrow-minded as I did then. For in my time at Cornell we were already dealing with the Benedict Anderson, the author of Imagined Communities, not the Ben Anderson of Joel Rocamora’s time, whose focus was still on Indonesia.

But fear would soon be replaced by admiration of Ben’s obvious brilliance and the care and attention he gives his students. Ben is probably the only teacher I had who returned research papers full of comments scribbled in the margins like “Interesting…,” “Good point, but…,” “He! He! He,” even a series of “No! No! No!” if he thought an analysis was off-base. And if a particular footnote drew his attention, he would head to the library to check out the source himself. For a time, some of us played a cat-and-mouse game with him, often littering our footnotes with Bisayan or Burmese sources, two languages that we knew he had little knowledge of.

But he worked us hard, and so the challenge was to look for dissertation topics original enough to arouse Ben’s curiousity, or sufficiently ambitious to show how much we had learned from his idiosyncratic comparative method . I remember writing a dissertation proposal littered with comparisons from southern Thailand, northern Brazil, western Russia, South Africa and the American West – all because Ben thought that they had features that could help me understand southern Mindanao. At my thesis proposal defense, Ben suddenly turned to me and asked me about the “Hopi Indians” and I could only raise my hands in amazement: for God’s sake, what do I know about the Hopis?!!? 

All three of these mentors, are not only exceptional academics; they have been comrades whose exemplary politics helped many of us define and anchor our own positions. Scotty never wavered from his progressive commitment to the truth even as many of his colleagues (including the famous Rey Ileto) at the UP History Department sold their souls to Marcos in exchange for cash and a chance to write his projected 19-volume epic Tadhana: The History of the Filipino People. Dodong was imprisoned for admitting his membership in the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, and never compromised his radicalism when he returned to UP to once more teach but also become a bureaucrat. Ben was banned from Indonesia for 27 years for refusing to recant the conclusions of the historic “Cornell White paper” – a fate that rarely befalls scholars studying this region. In this age of “racket” they clearly stand out for their principles.

Ben as a friend

Finally, a note on Ben as a friend. He was particularly fond of my late wife Donna who was instrumental in remodeling his kitchen to make it looking less like an extension of his study room, into a real kitchen were the best of Indonesian dishes were prepared. When Donna had a hard time getting comments from her main adviser, Ben and Takashi Shiraishi stepped in and became her de facto mentors. She completed her dissertation closely supervised by these two wonderful folks. It is now a book; Traditionalism and the Ascendancy of the Malay Ruling Class in Malaya was published last year in Malaysia.  

I will always relish those Halloween parties at Ben’s house where students, faculty, friends – including Ateneo’s Fr. Joey Cruz who was my wife’s favorite dancing partner, so that we called him Joey, the Dancing Jesuit – danced to Prince and the Revolution and drank Singapore slings, the pork barbecue foodfests. We would spend the whole night talking about politics with the Dayak Democrat Ben Abel and the irascible Eritrean radical Fuad Maki, and, of course Ben, sharing with us this terrible American bourbon Grand Old Dad. And the Filipinos in those parties – Caroline Hau, especially – would hope these intellectual exchanges and social banter would continue in the future – in Davao, Dipolog, Cebu, Bangkok, Ithaca, and, even here in provincial Manila. 

So to Ben Anderson, wherever you are, thanks for those fascinating nine years at Cornell. Thank you for John Furnivall, O.W. Wolters, George Kahin, Audrey Kahin, and Vivienne Shue; for Java in the Time of Revolution, Imagined Communities, Language and Power and the Spectre of Comparison. We will miss you. A lot. – Rappler.com

Patricio N. Abinales is an OFW.

In his groundbreaking work, The End of History (1989), Francis Fukuyama emphasized the necessity of “distinguishing between what is essential and what is contingent or accidental in world history, and are predictably superficial.” One could argue that something "essential" (and disturbing) is taking place among democracies, both mature and infantile. 

Few years ago, Council on Foreign Relations’ Joshua Kurlantzick worried about a disturbing phenomenon: “Democracy in Retreat” on a global scale. Today, even the United States’ democratic credentials are in serious doubt. There has been an exponential increase in the number of people who have lost faith in existing institutions, even to the point of some Americans welcoming a military dictatorship. 

And this is precisely the context within which one should understand the rise of Donald Trump. Despite his complete disregard for political correctness and his deplorable (and unconstitutional) call for an outright ban on entry of Muslims to the country, capitalizing on growing Islamophobia across the West, Trump is surging ahead in polls. The initial thought that his meteoric rise was nothing but a blip on the radar of American politics is in need for serious re-examination. As New Yorker’s John Cassidy puts it: “Right now the question isn’t whether Trump could win the Republican nomination; it’s: What is it going to take to stop him?”

The success of Trump, and the decline of popular faith in democracy, has tailed a major phenomenon, aptly described by one leading author as the “Rise of the Trash Talkers.” In the Philippines, for instance, things are heading from absurd to outrageous. As a foretaste of the likely quality of our upcoming elections, two presidential candidates with a long record in public service are now drawn into a tit-for-tat, where one is daring the other to have a gun duel. What started as comic slap-for-slap taunting has now ended in a grim gangster-like bravado. And one shouldn’t be surprised if both candidates come out of this bizarre showdown (not only alive but) with a stronger grip on the race. 

Behind the seeming irrationality of our contemporary politics lies a rational public outcry with the status quo. Fed up with the inadequacies of governance for decades, a growing number among the Filipino electorate are willing to look for alternative options. People are sick and tired of business-as-usual politics, whereby politicians say all the right things during campaign period just to betray their supporters once in office. 

Nowadays, openly questioning the merits of democracy is no longer a taboo. And tough-talking by some candidates is beginning to capture popular imagination. It is no longer about crossing certain lines, since the lines themselves are increasingly blurry. In his classic work Political Development and Political Theory (1965), Samuel Huntington correctly warned about the vulnerability of rapidly changing societies to political breakdown, especially when institutions of governance fail to catch up with rising social mobilization and economic growth. In many ways, the Philippines is suffering from this syndrome.   

An unpredictable race

Throughout the past months, there have been at least three seemingly runaway winners among candidates for presidency in the Philippines. Earlier this year, Vice President Jejomar Binay, who has banked on his vast network of patronage and his (purportedly) stellar stint as mayor of Makati, very well looked like a man comfortably cruising towards the office of presidency. 

As allegations of corruption piled up, however, he lost the lead to a relative newcomer, Senator Grace Poe, who has banked on the popularity of her late father (Fernando Poe Jr) and her own squeaky-clean image. It didn’t take long, however, for Poe to confront a barrage of disqualification cases regarding her citizenship status (whether she is a natural-born or naturalized Filipino) and residency requirements. 

After narrowly escaping a disqualification (from political office) case at the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET), where all three members of the judiciary voted against her, she faced disqualification in two divisions of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) vis-à-vis her candidacy for presidency in 2016. While Poe battled against what her supporters see as politically-motivated disqualification cases, with some legal experts even questioning the competency of Comelec to make such decisions, a new seemingly runaway winner has gradually emerged. 

Surveys by the country’s two leading polling agencies, Pulse Asia and Social Weather Stations (SWS), show that Rodrigo Duterte, mayor of the southern city of Davao, is now the candidate to beat. According to Pulse Asia, the tough-talking mayor is the leading choice (34%) of residents of Metro Manila. As for the SWS, a privately-commissioned survey suggests that he is the leading choice (38%) of likely voters nationwide, astonishingly standing as the overwhelming choice (62%) of the top three richest (and presumably most educated) classes in the country. 

Nothing is impossible 

Duterte’s meteoric rise is even more mind-boggling when one considers the ease by which he has dispensed with political correctness, ranging from his frequent use of foul language to his boasting of purportedly killing (suspected) criminals without any compunction. In an intimate interview with Maria Ressa, he reportedly even pondered the imposition of a dictatorship.  

“When I said I’ll stop criminality, I’ll stop criminality. If I have to kill you, I’ll kill you. Personally,” he reportedly shared during the interview. Banking on Davao’s reputation as a city of safety and discipline, he promised to extend this model nationwide: “I would stop corruption, stop criminality, and fix government.” 

For his legions of supporters, they see an authentic, uncompromising leader, who will piece together a broken country. His critics see nothing but a direct challenge to the democratic foundations of Philippine politics. How to make sense of such wild swings in electoral preference of likely voters? Why tough-talking (even when it shatters political taboo) seems to work so well? 

To begin with, some experts have raised doubts as to the reliability of the latest SWS survey. And we may see another wild swing in the surveys in the coming months. But one can’t still deny the fact that Duterte is now considered as a highly competitive candidate, and that his message is finding growing traction among the electorate, especially those in the industrialized capital region. 

Meanwhile, the incumbent president Benigno Aquino’s anointed successor, Manuel "Mar" Roxas II, is still continuing to struggle in the polls, with one survey suggesting that Aquino’s endorsement is more of a liability, standing at -26 percent in Metro Manila. If Roxas wants to stand any chance of winning the presidency, he has to make sure that his candidacy is not viewed as primarily a referendum on the incumbent, whose popularity ratings are on the downhill. Roxas will have to put fresh, inspiring and bold ideas on the table, and be authentic in his own ways. 

The new benchmark

One way to understand the recent trends in surveys is to appreciate the sheer depth of popular frustration with the existing system. Behavioral economics shows that individuals’ preferences are “reference-dependent,” and such references can change overtime. In his first few years in office, Aquino was welcomed by majority of the population as a breath of fresh air after a ‘lost decade’ under the previous administration. The economy stabilized, anti-corruption initiatives were activated (albeit partially) and the global community took notice of the country. 

Overtime, however, rising expectations have given birth to an explosion in discontent over a range of issues. In places like Metro Manila, the residents are suffering from arguably the world’s worst traffic jam on earth. The traffic conundrum is threatening to chip away at the collective sanity of residents, who see the problem as a manifestation of governance failure. 

More than good governance (Daan Matuwid), people are beginning to seek effective governance. And they are willing to vote for anyone who promises (no matter how credible or not) a solution to the governance deficit in the country. The challenge for democrats today, whether in Manila or Washington D.C., is to end dysfunctional forms of decision-making that are giving a bad name to democracy – the greatest gift of modernity. 

More than political freedom, people also demand effective governance. But we should also guard against the dangers of “trash-talking” politics. As Pankaj Mishra warns, polarizing rhetoric carries the danger of “destroying the middle ground where compromise – the mainstay of democracy – is found.” This is why we need serious policy-focused debates, rather than soundbites and bravado, more than ever. Elections should bring us together, rather than dividing us into permanent poles of opposition. More importantly, elections should bring out the best in our leaders, so that they can inspire the nation and mobilize a broad coalition of reform. – Rappler.com

The author teaches political science, and is the author of “Asia’s New Battlefield: US, China and the Struggle for Western Pacific” (Zed, London). This article was partly based on an earlier piece for The Huffington Post. 

MANILA, Philippines – It was not the usual event where the President of the Republic of the Philippines was stiff and formal or ready to field questions with the Malacañang Press Corps (MPC).

In this get-together, Benigno Aquino III showed his soft side, as if with friends. It was his last Christmas party with the so-called "brat pack," the term used to call the MPC during the time of Aquino's mother, that had been following him everywhere every day for the last 5 and a half years.

Aside from giving in to the media's yearly request for a song, the President was full of jokes, even deviating from reading his prepared speech, last December 11.

“May 'hinandang speech si JC (speechwriter), pero parang kulang sa personal touch so babaguhin ko na lang ho,” Aquino said. (JC prepared a speech, but I think it lacks personal touch so I will just change it.)

What’s a gathering with the President without making fun of his lovelife or lack of it? The President was just cool about it, laughing at jokes about his bachelorhood. Many of those present couldn’t help but laugh at the presentations that highlighted Aquino’s personal life and at Aquino’s candid responses. 

Referring to a Palace reporter, Aquino jokingly said, "Kahit na ikakasal next year, hindi ko pinipersonal 'yon, na bagamat nakakatanda ako sa kanya, dapat hinintay niya ako. Ganoon talaga ang buhay, may lucky, mayroong hindi. Baka magkaroon rin ako [ng anak]. So pakiusap lang mamaya pagkain 'nyo, dahan-dahanin 'nyo 'yung cholesterol, dahil kung ako’y papalarin imbitahin ko kayo. Hindi ko lang ma'pangako sa inyo kung kailan 'yon."

(Even if he is getting married next year, I don't take it personally, even if I'm older than he is and he should have waited for me first. That's just how life is, there are lucky ones, there are those who are not. I might get to have a child too. So I wish you go slow on the cholesterol tonight. Because if I get fortunate enough [to get married], I will invite you. I'm just not sure when.)

Love-hate relationship

With only 6 months left before Aquino steps down, he took the opportunity to thank the media for the love-hate relationship he has with them. In retrospect, I think all government officials have that kind of relationship with the press. 

While he said the media takes on an adversarial role, he was quick to point out that the press has served as his "extended family." 

“At sa totoo lang, 'di ba, parang ganoon talaga, parang may pagka-adversarial role. (Truth is, that's how it is, [media] takes on an adversarial role.) But you have made me feel, you have your jobs to do, you have your desks that pressure you, but at the end of the day, I think I can really say with utmost confidence and I can put my hand on any Bible and say, to a large degree, those of you who were here tried to give us really a fair shake. Whether or not you were allowed to give us a fair shake is another matter,” he said.

“I could sense that you were really one of us and in that sense parang extended family ko na kayo (you're like my extended family). Dinamayan na rin 'nyo ako rito (You empathized with me) to the extent and to the limits that you had. Perhaps some of you fell afoul of your various organizations because you were not hypercritical enough. But I can really say that it’s really a pleasure to deal for the most part with a thoroughly professional group such as yourself,” he added.

Many things can be said about the President, but one thing is certain: he doesn’t mince his words when it comes to his feelings about the media.

I am relatively new in covering him. But it does not take a long time to know this, or something like it.

In just a few weeks of being assigned to the Palace, there was a time I was not allowed to ask him any question. Until now, I do not know why or how. But that was straightened out and all is well that ends well.

Also, how can we forget that awkward moment when he scolded former Vice President and now TV Patrol news anchor Noli de Castro during his speech at the program’s 25^th anniversary? Never mind that De Castro was there, the President had to make his comments known.

Despite this, Aquino maintained he never got "irritated that much" with the media.

In fact, he even hoped for a continued relationship with the press after his term.

“Everything that has a beginning also has an ending. I have to say I hope I’ll be open to all of you [that] after I step down, baka we can… Baka iniisip ko nga baka marami sa inyo magsasabi, 'Sir, ang ginagawa ngayon ganito, ganyan,' parang tuloy pa rin 'yung reklamo. Tapos ako naman hindi naman ako ganoon katanda pero siyempre ang papel ko nakikinig, tatango-tango, 'Ganoon ba? Baka dapat ganito’t ganyan.' So baka there will be more opportunities for us to have social standard than the situations that might be mutually irritating. Although hindi naman ako na-irritate sa inyo masyado,” Aquino said.

Looking back

If there’s one thing Aquino would miss once he steps down from office, he said it’s the media. How could he not miss the group of people privy to almost everything he’s doing, the same people who follow him everywhere he goes, and the same group that more often than not make his job more stressful? Others in the group, in fact, have followed Aquino since the 2010 campaign trail. 

It was a welcome treat, at least for me, to listen to the President recall his own little struggles with the media. After all, I thought it was only us who would feel the same way. There were times when we would follow him to a far flung area, only to be disappointed that he wouldn't grant interviews. But we got to take it in stride, learning it's all part of covering the highest leader of the land.

“What will I miss when I step down? And to be honest with you siguro nasa Top 5, hindi ko naman sasabihin number one, 'yung mga ating press conference na ni-label na ambush interview na may pagka-structured, na pinag-usapan kung sino'ng magtatanong at ilan ang tanong," Aquino said. 

(What will I miss when I step down? And to be honest with you maybe it's in the Top 5, I won't say it's the number one – our press conferences which we label as structured ambush interviews, wherein you guys talked about who's asking and how many questions will be asked.)

He recounted the little nuisances of the media – something true, as reporters don't just stop at the pre-arranged number of questions for him. It's not every day that the President can be interviewed, anyway. 

"Normally, kapag bini-brief ako ni Usec Rey Marfil, sabi niya, “Sir, may tatlo tayong tanong.” Tapos 'yung tatlong tanong plus ’yung maraming follow-up. Honestly, mami-miss ko nang konti 'yon. Bakit? Kasi hindi ka puwedeng tutulog-tulog sa pansitan pagkaharap kayo eh. At saka siyempre, medyo kadalasan naggi-guess ka, ano kayang topic natin ngayon dahil hindi naman talaga pag-uusapan 'yung topic nung speech that we had to undergo. So, 'di ba, a tool that is not used might lose its sharpness,” Aquino said, receiving shrieks and laughs from the reporters and their guests.

(Normally when Usec Rey Marfil briefs me, he would say: "Sir we have 3 questions." But these 3 questions would have a lot of follow-up questions. Honestly, I'll miss that a bit. Why? Because I cannot be not well-informed and not alert when I face you. There are also times when I guess what would be the topic of the interview, because usually the topic is not about the speech I had to undergo. A tool that is not used might lose its sharpness, right?)

The relationship between the government and the media has always been imperfect. One walks on eggshells when with the other. While the other is locked and loaded, ready to shoot anytime. But Aquino said he remains thankful. 

“But, anyway, I really just want to say thank you. If our relationship with each other has matured over the years, then 'di ba, siguro nga I can’t really say that I witnessed anybody in this group who was not a true patriot who wanted the best for our country and that I think in itself was reward enough. So good luck in the future. Hopefully, you will have less stressful times in the years ahead. And, again, on behalf of my administration, we’d really like to thank you,” he said.

It has not been an easy ride for him and the media. Six more months and it will all be over. The worst, however, is yet to come – the road to the elections. – Rappler.com 

“Are you an evangelist for the Philippines?” a Latin American scholar asked Professor Benedict Anderson in one event in that part of the world.

Ben’s interlocutor said that in Under Three Flags (2005), the Philippines was being discussed for the first time alongside Cuba and Puerto Rico, and of course, Spain. These and other countries were tied together by a network of political anarchists with whom the ilustrados of the late nineteenth century were entangled.

In the introduction to Under Three Flags, Ben Anderson made it clear that his book, the closest to a novel that he could write, “embarks from the Philippines for two simple reasons. The first is that I am deeply attached to it, and have studied it, on and off, for 20 years. The second is that in the 1890s, though on the outer periphery of the world-system, it briefly played a world-role which has since eluded it.”

Ben was glad to have put the Philippines on the global academic map. It was his way of giving back to the country he loved. Ben passed away in Indonesia on 12 December 2015. He was 79.

He began his career as a dedicated Indonesianist. In 1967, under the supervision of another great Indonesianist at Cornell University, George Kahin, Ben completed his doctoral dissertation on the pemuda (youth) and their role in the Indonesian revolution. A year earlier, he had co-written a paper that, contrary to the official version, pinned the bloody 1965 coup to army officers rather than communists. Suharto was not pleased, especially with the paper’s publication in 1971. As a result, Ben was barred from entering Indonesia, a ban that lasted until Suharto fell from power in May 1998.

The ban compelled Ben to look for another Southeast Asian country to study, which meant learning the language and soaking everything important that had been written on it. He would have studied the Philippines, but Marcos’s declaration of martial law pushed him away. He turned to Thailand, Buddhist and at that time democratic, which offered a fine contrast to Indonesia, Muslim and at that time despotic.

If Ben wrote on Indonesia, it was no great wonder. This most populous Muslim country in the world possessed a cultural complexity that had also attracted another intellectual giant, Clifford Geertz.

If Ben Anderson wrote on Thailand, it seemed necessary that he did, in view of the claim that it was the only country in Southeast Asia to have escaped European colonialism. Ben quickly put that common proposition aside by asserting its neocolonial status in “Studies of the Thai State: The State of Thai Studies,” a paper he presented at an Asian studies conference in 1977.

But the Philippines? Why not? This country in the “outer periphery” was interesting in its own right. Ben sought to rectify its reputed status in the world system by returning to the 1890s. In some ways, Ben’s initiative to put the Philippines on the world intellectual map mirrored that of Isabelo de los Reyes’ who, as a young man, sought to assert his country’s place in the then emerging new science of folklore.

In his attachment to the Philippines, notwithstanding its rapacious political elite whose genealogy he traced famously in the essay “Cacique Democracy in the Philippines” (1988), Ben had taken as it were the native point of view, engaging in what Filipino intellectuals from the late 19th century until today have sought to do: Locate the Philippines in global history and consider it an important actor in the international scene. Given his towering stature in the world of scholarship, Ben Anderson contributed so much more than many of us could dream of achieving.

While many of us in the Philippines see José Rizal’s execution in trite ways, in Under Three Flags, Ben Anderson completely recast it as more than simply a Philippine event. Five months after Rizal’s execution on December 30, 1896, the Italy-born Michele Angiolillo attended a huge demonstration in London’s Trafalgar Square, where he heard a call to avenge the death of Rizal and other victims of the regime of Spain’s Prime Minister Antonio Cánovas del Castillo. On August 8, 1897, Angiolillo assasinated Cánovas, which led to the fall of “cacique democracy” in Spain and of Valeriano Weyler’s brutal governship in Cuba. In making these connections, Ben Anderson made us realize that, even without digital communication technologies, Rizal’s execution was world news and had global ramifications.

Ben also enabled us to see Rizal’s novels in a different light. He taught himself Spanish by reading the Noli Me Tangere, and in the process discovered the many flaws in León Maria Guerrero’s English translation of the novel. (See “Hard to Imagine” in Spectre of Comparisons.) For instance, while Rizal in the opening pages of the novel writes about the multiplication of the hordes of bootlickers in Manila in the present tense, in the English translation the past tense was regnant, making the novel irrelevant to the present. Rizal’s interjections in Tagalog are effaced and the narrator’s stance of talking directly to the reader is erased.

In fact, in Imagined Communities (1983, revised 1991; Philippine ed. 2003) Anderson used the opening lines of the Noli as an example of the intimacy that the novel conjured between author and readers, in much the same way that the nation generates a sense of intimacy among the members of this imagined community. (For citing Rizal, Ben received a note from a Filipino in the US to thank him for “promoting” the national patriot.)

If we take Ben’s dissection of English translations of the Noli seriously, it will not be easy to accept any translation of the novel without referring to the original Spanish. By extension, the Tagalog translations that are used in mandatory high school subjects need a similar examination.

To clarify many tendentious assertions about Rizal’s novels, Ben Anderson resorted to a quantitative approach in which he manually counted the occurrence of key terms; first in the Noli, and then in El Filibusterismo. His two articles were first published in Philippine Studies and then put together as a slim volume under the title Why Counting Counts (2009).

Amid his cunning counting, Ben noted conspicuous absences, such as the paucity of references to the ethnic diversity of the Philippines in the first novel, and to political ideas, classes, and institutions in the second. Ben also made us notice that, unlike non-serious characters in the Noli, Elias spoke in perfect Spanish as a mark that he was not contaminated by coloniality. Yet in the Fili, Ben was excited about Rizal’s use of español de Parian, the language of the marketplace that we can identify with Chabacano, which Ben thought could have been the democratic lingua franca of the Philippines had the US not come into the picture.

But it’s the counting that is astounding, a method seemingly unthinkable for someone whose erudition could not be reduced to numbers. Yet, given Ben’s emphasis on the nation’s bounded seriality, one could think of it as Ben taking the nation’s penchant for counting and applying it onto the Philippines’ two foremost novels, revealing insights that could not have surfaced otherwise.

One study the Philippines lacks, Ben had always insisted, is an in-depth history of the Catholic Church in the twentieth century. This institution has been off limits from critical scrutiny, as though a lèse majesté law existed. This challenge remains to be taken up by a Filipino scholar.

Ben Anderson taught us to see the Philippines in comparative terms, even if the exercise could be dizzying. To encapsulate this doubled vision, Ben borrowed Rizal’s phrase, el demonio de las comparaciones, which he turned into the title of a collection of essays on Southeast Asia, Spectre of Comparisons (1998).

Ben saw the Philippines in world-historical terms. Despite our own inhibition, we need to cultivate the same sensibility.

We lament his passing, but at the same time are grateful for his missionary work on behalf of the Philippines.– Rappler.com

Filomeno V. Aguilar Jr. is Professor in the Department of History and former Dean of the School of Social Sciences, Ateneo de Manila University.

John Rawls, the most prominent contemporary philosopher of justice, once wrote: “Each person possesses and inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason, justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many.” For Rawls, in a society where justice reigns: “the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests.” He concludes. “Being first virtues of human activities, truth and justice are uncompromising.”

As someone who teaches Rawls’ philosophy of justice in my Legal Philosopjy classes, it is clear to me that the Comelec’s First and Second Division decisions cancelling Grace Poe’s certificate of candidacy for president are prime examples of injustice as Rawls understood and articulated it.

New doctrines?

In the rush to determine the disqualification cases of Senator Grace Poe for purposes of including or excluding her name in the printing of the ballots, the Comelec has come out with new doctrines on novel citizenship and residency issues. In the first Resolution that came out from the Second Division, the Comelec declared that residency of repatriated Filipinos for purposes of qualification to elective office can only start from the date of repatriation or the taking of the oath of allegiance required under RA 9225. This was discussed in my previous article “Comelec disenfranchises global Filipinos.”

The second Resolution of the Comelec, this time emanating from the First Division, now proclaims that the citizenship retained under RA 9225 is not natural-born citizenship, but naturalized citizenship. Not only is this ruling unprecedented, it is contrary to the discussion on the intent of the lawmakers in drafting RA 9225 as discussed in the case of Sobejana-Condon v. Comelec (G.R. No. 198742; August 10, 2012).

In this case, the Supreme Court extensively cited the basis for the legislative intent that the citizenship re-acquired and retained under RA 9225 is natural-born citizenship, and not a class of naturalized citizenship. The legislative intent was clear in the exchange between Congressman Libanan as proponent and Congressman Javier as interpellator. According to Congressman Libanan, “natural-born Filipino citizens who became foreign citizens and who have reacquired their Filipino citizenship under the Bill will be considered as natural-born citizens, and therefore qualified to run for the presidency, the vice-presidency or for a seat in Congress”. He also added that “the Bill [RA 9225] will, in effect, return to a Filipino citizen who has acquired foreign citizenship, the status of being a natural-born citizen effective at the time he lost his Filipino citizenship”.

The Supreme Court in Sobejana-Condon has taken this legislative intent at its face value by stating that “[t]he sworn renunciation of foreign citizenship must be deemed a formal requirement only with respect to the re-acquisition of one’s status as a natural-born Filipino so as to override the effect of the principle that natural-born citizens need not perform any act to perfect their citizenship”.

It is only now in the Comelec disqualification case of Grace Poe that its First Division has decided to contradict the legislative intent behind RA 9225 on the retention of natural-born status of repatriated Filipinos, obviously taking its cue from the dissent of Justice Brion in the Grace Poe Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) case. In his SET dissenting opinion, Justice Brion opined that the case of Bengzon v. HRET is wrong when it held that what is retained under repatriation laws is natural-born status. He therefore advocated in his dissent that Bengzon should be overturned, and that a new doctrine must be pronounced by the Court declaring that repatriation is just another form of naturalization, and that what is acquired by repatriated Filipinos is naturalized citizenship, and that they do not revert to their natural-born status.

At least Justice Brion possessed judicial restraint and merely called for a revisit of Bengzon and, consequently, the accepted legislative intent of the retention of natural-born status as discussed in Sobejana-Condon.  

On Comelec decisions

But the Comelec First Division, in what could only be characterized as a single-handed pre-emption of Justice Brion’s call for the Supreme Court to revisit Bengzon, and contrary to the current Supreme Court view on the matter as expressed in Sobejana-Condon, decided to unilaterally proclaim the new doctrine as espoused by Justice Brion, thus effectively overturning the standing Supreme Court jurisprudence on the matter.

Of course Comelec cannot do this. It cannot rule contrary to current Supreme Court jurisprudence. But this is what the Comelec First Division just did when it decided to ignore the legislative intent behind RA 9225 and the Supreme Court’s acceptance of this intent as discussed in Sobejana-Condon. With or without the prompting of Justice Brion’s dissent, the Comelec cannot overturn the Supreme Court. Only the Supreme Court en banc can overturn previous doctrine.

Ironically, this act of the Comelec First Division is not even necessary to disqualify Grace Poe, since it already decided that Poe is not a natural-born citizen from birth. Again, what is alarming is the effect of this pronouncement on natural-born Filipinos repatriated and running for elective offices that require natural-born citizenship. Whether or not what is acquired under RA 9225 is natural-born or merely naturalized status is not even the lis mota of the Grace Poe case. What therefore happened is that, in a bid to establish the undeniable disqualification of Grace Poe, the Comelec First Division went a step further and pronounced the disqualification of all other repatriated natural-born Filipinos from elective and appointive positions that require natural-born status.

This is the alarming trend in the Comelec decisions to disqualify Grace Poe. The Comelec ends up disenfranchising more citizens than is necessary to settle Poe’s personal eligibility, by excluding Filipinos repatriated under RA 9225 – and who are otherwise deemed to have re-acquired their natural born-status – from positions reserved for natural-born citizens, more than the law and jurisprudence presently provides.

Overkill in Poe's case? 

In the exercise of its quasi-judicial powers, the Comelec is expected to observe judicial restraint, and to resolve questions of law only to the extent that they are necessary to make a ruling in a given case with a particular set of facts. Judicial restraint is not observed if the Comelec ends up resolving the potential candidacy of repatriated Filipinos on an issue that does not even concern them, i.e., the right of a person who was not a natural-born citizen from birth to run for an elective office that requires natural-born citizenship.

As to the length of Poe’s residency, the First Division merely reiterates the ruling of the Second Division when it also pronounced the new doctrine on Philippine residency of repatriated Filipinos for purposes of qualifying for elections. It states that the earliest repatriated Filipinos can be considered residents of the Philippines is the date when they take their oath of allegiance in accordance with RA 9225, regardless of the fact that they may have been actually and physically residing in the Philippines for the past 10, 20, or 100 years.

As with the Second Division Resolution, the Comelec in the First Division Resolution pronounced a new doctrine, this time on citizenship. This is both unnecessary and unprecedented doctrine: unnecessary in the resolution of Poe’s citizenship issue, and unprecedented in terms of being contrary to current law and jurisprudence.

By being indiscriminate on the effects of its decision on other repatriated Filipinos, the Comelec resorted to an overkill in Poe’s disqualification cases, as if it wanted to make sure her case won’t stand a chance at an appeal to the Supreme Court. Not even the three dissenting Supreme Court justices in the SET case were bold enough to pronounce new doctrine just to disqualify Poe based on the issue of her citizenship. They were strictly literal in their interpretation and stood by the black-letter law. In the case of Justice Brion, he merely set the premise for a Supreme Court review of the case of Bengzon.

On the other hand, two Comelec Commissioners thought they can do what 3 Supreme Court justices refrained from doing, and believed they can set doctrine that contradicts Supreme Court En Banc jurisprudence, and reverse case law that the 3 justices of the SET did not even dare disturb. This lack of circumspection on the part of the First Division is an alarming trend in the Comelec’s treatment of repatriated Filipinos and OFWs as nothing more than second-class citizens of our Republic.

One has to ask: what’s the motivation behind all of these? Why disregard the rights of millions to stop the candidacy of one? Why the injustice and overkill? - Rappler.com 

While presidential candidates Rodrigo Duterte and Mar Roxas were hurling insults at each other, some pretty important things were happening around us.

In Singapore, one of our compatriots emerged to tell the cruel story of her starvation at the hands of her employers. Hers is not an isolated incident as a scan of maltreatment cases of OFWs in various parts of the world will show.

In the Spratly Islands, amid the backdrop of our international legal battle to delineate maritime borders, Chinese fishermen were deliberately destroying coral reefs to harvest giant clams.

Right here in our shores, a calamity struck again, with images of floods overpowering people, homes and vehicles.

But the conversation that dominated social media, which extended offline, was on whether Roxas graduated from Wharton. This degenerated into whether he was a University of Pennsylvania or Wharton graduate and into the meaning of “graduate” and “undergraduate.” This, despite cut and dried facts.

It is appalling that our mental gas tanks have hit empty, our intellectual energies have gone low-batt.

What was supposed to be, in a more sober time, simply a brief comic entertainment, stretched to a period of grating noise, online hostility and unproductive back-and-forth. Truly, this episode shows that the campaign, like a whirlpool, can suck us in. 

Candidates grab attention with careless, outrageous statements, respond to each other via media, partisans put on their tight blinders and join the fray, media reward these with coverage, and the public becomes a willing audience. All part of the campaign cycle.

Shouldn’t we step back and ask ourselves: What were we thinking? Why did we allow this race to the bottom? What is the election campaign doing to us?

Other politicians have stepped in, reminding the candidates and the public to elevate the discussion. Sure, we should welcome these.

However, here’s a spoiler alert: this idiocy may happen again. We will not see the end of such scenes if we fall for it the next time around and throw reason away.– Rappler.com

Paskong-pasko, naiinis ako, na may halong lungkot, at may halong galit. Ito na ba ang inabot ng ating pulitika?

Hindi ito tungkol sa hamunan ng dalawang kandidato sa pagkapresidente, na nagsimula sa sampalan at humantong sa barilan. Totoong nakakabanas ang ganyang pangyayari, ngunit hindi ito tungkol sa kahit sinong pulitiko. Matagal nang mababaw ang inaasahan ko sa mga pulitiko. Matagal ko nang naisip na karamihan sa mga pulitiko ay umaayos lang kapag tinuruan sila ng taumbayan.

Kaya’t ang kinaiinisan ko ay tayo. Sige, ihanda 'nyo na ang mga puna: elitista, bayaran, nagmamalinis. Kahit ano naman ang sabihin ko, ng kahit sino sa atin, tungkol sa kung sinumang kandidato, ay mababastos nang wala sa lugar.

Lait, akusasyon, pagbabanta

Ganyan ang nangyari sa akin nang hiningi ko sa mahinahon at magalang na paraan ang medical certificate ni Miriam Defensor Santiago. Sa comments section ng artikulo at sa Facebook ng Rappler, sumabog ang mura, panlalait, pagbabanta, at akusasyon.

Bayaran daw ako at ang Rappler. Naku, ha? Hindi ako inosenteng naniniwala na walang bayaran sa media, nguni’t hindi po ako 'yon. Peksman. At hinahamon ko ang sinuman na ilabas ang ebidensya. Ito 'yung nakakainis: kapag hindi gusto ng ilang kababayan natin ang sinabi mo, sasabihing masama ang motibo mo – na bayaran ka, na kampi ka sa kaaway nila.

Mayroon ding pumansin sa mataba kong mukha sa litrato. O di ba, okey? Ang ibig bang sabihin nila ay kung mataba ang isang tao, di na p'wedeng magsabi ng totoo? Wala na ba tayong katinuan na aasahan sakaling humigit ang timbang ng isang tao sa palagay nating maganda?

May isang humingi ng hinahon sa mga bullies and trolls sa Facebook page ng Rappler. Huwag naman daw akong masyadong laitin at propesor naman ako ng UP. Ang sagot? Di ba raw propesor ng UP 'yung Gerry Lanuza na nag-viral at kinainisan ang post tungkol kay Tiffany Uy? Di raw dapat kabiliban ang mga taga-UP.  Ang masaklap nito ay nag-viral din naman ang post ko na pinupuna ang post ni Propesor Lanuza. Tulad ng akusasyon na bayaran ako, walang kalaman-laman ang akusasyong pareho kami ng kaisipan ni Propesor Lanuza tungkol kay Tiffany Uy. Kabaligtaran ito ng katotohanan. At sakali mang pareho kami ni Propesor Lanuza, bakit naman lalahatin ang lahat ng propesor ng UP? Para sa taong 'yon, hindi kailangang santuhin ang katotohanan kung nakakahadlang ito sa kagustuhang kuyugin ang nagpahayag ng isang ideyang hindi niya nagustuhan.

At siyempre pa, ang paborito ko sa lahat, ang pabaon sa aking sana raw ay ako ang magkakanser dahil ipinakiusap ko kay Senator Santiago na ipaalam sa bayan ang kondisyon ng kanyang lung cancer. Ano kaya ang kasalanan ko sa taong iyon na gugustuhin niyang mamatay akong di naman niya kilala? Ganun kalaki bang kasalanan ang magkaiba kami ng pananaw tungkol sa kandidato?

Pansinin ang ingat ng aking pagkakasulat ng huling pangungusap. Kung babalikan ang aking sinulat, walang batayan na sabihin na hindi ko kandidato si Miriam. Sa totoo lang bilang propesor ng UP, hindi ko gagamitin ang kapangyarihang ibinigay sa akin ng taumbayan upang impluwensyahan ang boto ninyo. Labag po sa amin 'yun, sapagka’t ang makinarya ng gobyerno ay hindi dapat gamitin para sa kandidatura ng sinuman. Maaari po kaming pumuna, di po maaring mag-endoso. Kaya’t wala naman po akong kandidatong ikinakampanya. At lahat po ay pinuna ko na. (Ipapaliwanag ko po sa inyo mamaya bakit hinahayaan kaming maging nega kahit hindi p'wedeng mag-endoso.)

Ngunit di tulad ng ilang insecure at immature na botante, hindi ko nakikita na may perpektong kandidato. At hinding-hindi ko pa maisip na dahil lamang nakapili na ang isang tao ng iboboto, samakatuwid lahat ng pumupuna sa kandidato niya ay masasamang tao na dapat kuyugin.

Puksain ang mga abusante

Sa kabilang banda, huwag matuwa ang mga kumuyog sa akin dahil napansin ko pala ang mga 'sinulat ninyo. Alam ko naman ang damdamin ng mga mapang-api – masaya sila kapag nasaktan ang tampulan ng kanilang panlalait. Paumanhin po, pero wa epek po sa akin ang mga sinulat ninyo.

Di tulad ninyo, hindi ako takot sa pambabatikos. Hindi ako tinatamaan, hindi nawiwindang. Kaya’t binabasa ko sa abot ng makakaya ang mga reaksyon. Ngunit di tulad ng mga haters, alam ko ang pagkakaiba ng lehitimong pagtatalo at ng pambabastos. Natututo ako sa mga lehitimong pagtatalo, kaya’t binabasa ko ang comments. Ibinabasura ko lang ang mga banta at panlalait.

Ang ganitong attitude ay mabilis kong natutunan nang nagsimula akong magsulat. Kasama ito sa buhay ng isang manunulat – 'yung tanggapin ang panlalait ng mga walang pinag-aralan at desperado.

At kung ako lang naman ang nakaranas ng ganito, hindi ko na isusulat ang artikulong ito. Nguni’t maraming ibang naapektuhan.

Naapektuhan ang mga tulad ni Gab Valenciano na magalang ding nagpahayag ng kanyang puna tungkol kay Mayor Duterte. Kinuyog, minura, tumanggap ng death threats. At dahil wala siguro silang maipintas sa pisikal na pagkatao nito, ang pamilya niya ang tinira.

Dahil nahuli ang kandidatura ni Digong, siya ang naging pokus ng mga reaksyon, positibo man o negatibo. Kaya’t itong mga nakaraang linggo ang mga kritikal kay Digong ang inatake at binastos.

Ayon sa mga kaibigan, ang ilang attacker ay hindi ordinaryong mamamayan kundi mga empleyado ng mga PR ng mga kandidato. Kung totoo ito, mahiya ang mga kandidato at PR nila dahil sinasakyan nila ang kamangmangan at masamang kaparaanan ng ilang kababayan. Kung PR ka man at ito ang trabaho mo, umalis ka na riyan. Ang tanging lusot mo upang ipagpatuloy ang karumaldumal mong trabaho ay 'yung magugutom ka o ang pamilya mo. Kung hindi naman, nakakahiya 'yang hanapbuhay mo.

Ito ang isa pang problema sa estilo ni Duterte. Sa lahat ng kandidato, siya ang nagbibigay-inspirasyon sa barumbadong pamamaraan ng pakikipagtalo.

At kung madali kong palampasin ang mga nambabastos sa akin, nag-iinit ang ulo ko sa mga umaabuso sa ibang tao. Pasensya na, Gab Valenciano at iba pa, alam ko namang kaya 'nyo ang sarili niyo, kaya lang Pilipino akong tunay, ayoko ng abusado.

Demokratikong talakayan

Ang masakit, hindi naman 'yung mga nakakalamang sa pribilehiyo at edukasyon ang mas malulugi sa sitwasyong ito. Ang higit na malulugi ay 'yung mga mangmang na dahil hindi nakapag-aral, hindi natuto ng tamang paraan ng pakikipagpalitan ng kaisipan at tuloy ay nanlalait na lamang upang ipahayag ang kanilang di pagsang-ayon.

Ang isa sa pinakamahalagang natutunan sa paaralan, kung magaling ang mga guro, ay ang tamang pag-iisip, tamang paraan ng pagiging kritikal, tamang paraan ng pagdedebate. Ang isa sa pinakamahalagang sangkap ng demokrasya ay ang malayang tagisan ng magkakasalungat na opinyon.

Opinyon. Iba sa panlalait at pagbabanta. Pansinin na sa mga ehemplo ng mga Miriam at Duterte supporters, ang naging isyu ay 'yun tungkol sa pagkatao ng nagsalita, hindi ang isyu ng kalusugan ni Miriam o ang pagkapasista ni Duterte. Bakit kaya hindi nila kayang sagutin 'yung isyu?

Heto ang tip ko: kapag ang tinira ay ang pagkatao ng may opinyon sa halip na talakayin ang isyung itinampok, sigurado 'yang hindi kasi masagot 'yung isyu. Ipagpalagay 'nyo nang tama ang puna.

Heto pa ang tip ko: walang lugar sa isang demokrasya ang poot at galit dahil nagkakaiba tayo ng opinyon. Ang sinumang kandidato na kukunsinti ng ganitong klaseng diskusyon ay di karapat-dapat na lider.

Heto pa ang makataong sagot ko sa lahat ng nanlalait para sa mga kandidato: matuto ng tamang paraan. Kung insecure ka na may kakulangan ka sa debate, huwag pa rin matuksong magmura o manlait na lamang. Lumahok at magbigay ng opinyon nang mahinahon at magalang. Harapin ang isyu. Kung mali ka at tuluyang mabuko, hindi ito kahihiyan.

Lahat ng taong naghahangad matuto ay nangangahas at, samakatuwid, nagkakamali. Nguni’t ito ang paraan mong matuto, ang paraan mong maging mabuting mamamayan sino pa man ang napili mong kandidato. At sa lahat ng pagkakataon wala namang tao na tama na lang palagi. Kung bukas-puso kang lumahok sa pambansang talakayan, mabilis mo ring matutunan ang ilang mahalagang kakayanan na makabubuti sa buhay mo mismo – ang maghanap ng datos na mapagkakatiwalaan, ang makita kung alin ang kaisipang hinugot sa lohika at hindi sa haka-haka, ang maging mahinahon sa harap ng pagkakaiba ng paniniwala.

Ang pagpili ng ating lider, lalo na ng presidente, ay hindi parang pagpili ng koponan sa basketball. Hindi nakakatulong ang panatisismo na parang namimili ka ng celebrity idol. Lahat ng kandidato – LAHAT – ay may pagkukulang at kagalingan. Sa panahon po ng kampanya, sama-sama po tayong magsuri. Makinig tayo sa bawat isa. Ano naman kung makumbinse ang karamihan (pati na ikaw) na may pagkukulang ang kandidato mo? Ang kailangan natin ay hindi isang perpektong kandidato kundi isang kandidatong lamang ang mga positibong katangian sa mga pagkukulang. Masusukat lang ang mga kandidato sa pamamagitan ng magalang, bukas, malaya, at walang-takot na tagisan. Sa ganitong paraan lang tayo makakabuo ng tamang desisyon.

Batid ng karamihan kung gaano kabulok ang sistemang politikal ng bayan. Batid nating lahat na kung wawakasan natin ang kahirapan, kailangan ng reporma rito. Hindi natin dapat iasa sa kahit sinong lider ang ating kaunlaran. Kaya’t tayo, hindi sila, ang dapat maging halimbawa ng tamang paraan sa pulitika. Aayos silang lahat kung aayos tayo.

Kaya sa susunod na may mapansin kayong asal-panatiko, atakeng personal, panlalait, pagmumura, at pagbabanta, 'yun ang punahin ninyo kahit pareho pa man kayo ng kandidato. Sabihin ninyo sa kanya na dahil sa asal niya, baka makumbinse kayo na iba na lang ang iboto. – Rappler.com

As quickly as Steve Harvey was condemned for his error on Sunday did we forget he even made one, dismissing it as an "honest mistake" anyone could make, as if it had no effect on anyone and it should simply be shrugged off. Let's get over it, right?

As swiftly as the country rejoiced at Pia Wurtzbach's victory did we not waste time before holding knives against anyone who might have expressed anything less than a glowing reaction to the new queen of the "universe, rather" who brought back a crown we've been deprived for 42 years.

Of course we have a right to be proud, and there is nothing more obvious than physical beauty and poise to highlight our humble country's existence in the international scene. It is a symbol of something we already know but have fought hard to make others see - that we truly are a beautiful people, not only on the outside and in our grace, attitude, and intelligence. "Confidently beautiful with a heart," as Miss Universe 2015 said.

We already got the crown, the sash, and the proverbial scepter; the modeling contract, the international exposure, and the bragging rights. Generations to come will speak of this victory over and over, highlighting the accompanying drama that just added to the story's memorability.

Why are we so mad?

So why are we so mad? Why are we studying each contestant's reaction post-announcement, as if one's immediate response to a chaotic, confusing, and incredibly awkward moment defines their innermost character? It was an absurd and unprecedented situation. I doubt anyone would know how to act properly in any of their places.

Here come the Monday morning quarterbacks, the post-game reports, the video analysis of who kissed Miss Philippines sincerely and who was Judas who did not. Who reacted immediately to urge Wurtzbach to take her cue on the stage, and who stood stumped and unsure what in the world was going on? As if we know exactly how we would be after decades of training to be still, composed, and silent. As if we would know that we would be judged for consoling someone who had her dreams come true for a minute and then yanked from under her feet before she could even cramp from her smiling.

Hindsight is always 20-20, and all of a sudden everyone is an expert on Philippine pageantry. We compare this outcome with all the others' outcomes, as if judges, questions, dresses, competitors, venues, and criteria were constants in this highly subjective contest of "beauty." It's so classic how if we lose, we say luto (we were cheated), and even if we win, well, there is always room on the exciting nega-train. Get on board.

So quickly after we applaud Wurtzbach's grace do we criticize her Q&A answers, saying they should have contained this detail or have shown more intelligence and wit. She already won the crown, for crying out loud. Obviously the answers were enough for the judges to declare her the winner. I am personally glad the words "HIV awareness" was spoken for the first time in a beauty pageant. At least someone is not ignoring the fastest growing epidemic in the world.

As if exposing all the imaginary attacks on one's favored candidate will make her victory sweeter, as if losing the crown for a second wasn't enough of a challenge aside from going on this exhausting trajectory three consecutive times without losing faith. Aside from her handlers, this victory is truly Wurtzbach's alone. The rest of us are only spectators who feel pride and admiration, but in the end we had nothing to do with her success. If we can't celebrate it, we simply should try to be kind.

Harvey has walked scot-free without this incident affecting him or his career. What's done is done and he believes he did his best to repair it. Having no one to turn our disappointment to, we attack the women who were subjected to his error. As if to make up for the absence of a dramatic victory walk, we play the scene over and over - checking the list, checking it twice, gonna find out who's naughty or nice...

Enough. There will be many victory walks in Wurtzbach's lifetime. This achievement doesn't mean more or less depending on the number of fabricated detractors we come up with and decide to openly hate.

Take cue from the winner

It's a beauty contest. The show Toddlers in Tiaras reveals what many of these women have to go through from childhood in order to get that far. Most of them do it out of financial necessity, knowing their physical attributes have a shelf life and they may or may not have invested in other marketable skills for when they're no longer in the spotlight. They are aware it's a superficial but necessary endeavor, where they are judged by the absence of extra flesh around their bathing suits, to how they maneuver their impossible gowns, to how firm their smiles are planted on their faces regardless of the situation. Let's give them a break.

It's not even a war, and yet for whatever it's worth the fates have declared that this year the Philippines has won it. It's unfortunate that we are so deprived of victory we no longer know how to accept it, that we have to make it sweeter by exposing all the possible sources of negativity. We have to make ourselves feel better about what we believe was taken from us by rubbing it in the faces of those who have different opinions. We have to wage wars in comment sections, again showcasing how mean we can be as a people while defending our pride. If only we felt as protective of our reputations when it comes to issues that are truly important.

Can't we just take our cue from the true winner in all of this, in how she smiles and waves and accepts her well-deserved victory? We are shortsighted when it comes to our heroes. We are pikon when we don't get our way. The least we could do is use this rare moment as an inspiration, instead of another reason to be at each other's throats, just because it feels better to quarrel than be content in united celebration - the way winners should be. – Rappler.com

The 2015 Miss Universe will perhaps go down as the franchise’ most memorable, if not controversial, edition, mainly thanks to Steve Harvey’s gargantuan mix-up of the eventual winner’s announcement.

Donald Trump, who no longer owns the franchise after uttering outrageous statements throughout his presidential campaign, was quick to exhibit Schadenfreude with the debacle. Even the Colombian president pitched in, indignant about Harvey’s gaffe. 

Miss Colombia (Ariadna Gutiérrez Arévalo), who was arguably the most physically beautiful contestant, had to endure an excruciating experience of handing back the crown shortly after it was revealed that the true winner was Miss Philippines, Pia Wurtzbach. Combining wit with beauty and grace, the Filipina contestant brought back the crown to her home country after almost half a century, when Margarita Moran won the title back in 1973. 

What caught my attention about the event was the first question and answer portion, when the top five contestants were asked about extremely socially-relevant issues, ranging from gun control to terrorism and drug abuse. As for Miss Philippines, she was, however, asked a question that was fundamentally geopolitical (rather than domestic): Should the Philippines welcome back American bases on its soil? (READ: 5 Miss Universe questions: Terror, drug, foreign policy)

With less than a minute on her hands, the Filipina contestant provided a relatively polished answer, but ended up on a relatively controversial note, stating “The Philippines is very welcoming with the Americans and I don't see any problem with that at all [author’s own emphasis].” In light of an ongoing national debate regarding the issue, particularly with respect to the profound constitutional questions regarding the legality of American military presence in the country, her answer immediately unleashed a backlash on social media, specifically among Leftist groups, who have vigorously opposed any American military presence in the country. 

Aside from shortage of time to appropriately break down an inherently contentious issue, some legitimately wondered why the Filipina contestant was asked about a question that obviously placed her in a tough position. The fact that the event was hosted on American soil, and broadcast before a primarily American audience, surely would affect the calculus of any candidate against expressing a ‘critical’ position vis-à-vis America, including its military activities across the world. 

For this reason alone, she deserves maximum sympathy and support from her legions of fans in the Philippines and around the world. Not to mention, she pulled off a brilliant answer in the next Q&A session, securing her the crown, although not without some complications of course. Aside from bringing joy and pride to her country, Pia Wurtzbach also did a great service to her country by inadvertently shedding light – more effectively than any activist, statesman, or intellectual – on the controversial issue of American military presence in the Philippines. This alone could go down as one of the greatest contributions of the new Miss Universe.

21st century bases 

First of all, neither the American government nor its Filipino counterpart is talking about the establishment of Cold-War-style military bases in Subic and Clark. (The Miss Universe organization perhaps should have done more research before crafting its questions.)

The Philippines is constitutionally barred from hosting "permanent" American military bases in the country, which were abrogated back in 1992, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. On its part, the United States is also not interested in going back to establishing controversial, expensive bases overseas. 

In an era of defense budget sequestration, and a strategic realignment towards a "leaner but meaner" military, Washington is instead searching for "rotational" military access to vital bases across the world, particularly in the Pacific, where the so-called “Pivot to Asia” (P2A) policy is taking shape. So the more appropriate question is whether countries such as the Philippines should welcome growing American "rotational" military presence on their soil. 

Under the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), signed between Washington and Manila hours before President Barack Obama’s visit to the Philippines, the United States aims to gain low-cost ‘rotational’ military access to Subic and Clark and a whole host of other prized bases across the Philippines for at least a decade. By framing EDCA as an ‘executive agreement’, both countries tried to avoid any congressional scrutiny and ratification. (READ: Senate opposes EDCA)

Yet, many legislators and activists maintain that the EDCA may trample upon Philippine sovereignty, and constitutes de facto "permanent" bases in violation of the constitution. Others maintain that the agreement has sufficiently novel elements in order to be classified as a treaty, which requires Senate concurrence. Right now, the EDCA is stuck in legal limbo, with the Philippine Supreme Court yet to issue a final verdict. 

New threats on horizon

Without a question, the United States is the Philippines’ most important ally. And the vast majority of Filipinos see Washington, which has helped the Philippines throughout various natural and man-made crises, in a positive light.

In a 2013 poll (Global Attitudes survey), more Filipinos (85%) expressed favorable view of America than American citizens themselves (81%). This year, even a greater number of Filipinos (92%) expressed a similar view. One can’t find a more pro-American country in the world. 

In light of growing Chinese incursion into and territorial assertiveness across the Philippines’ 200 nautical miles Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the Southeast Asian country has come to depend on American support similar to the Cold War days. And this explains why there is considerable support, within the ruling establishment as well as among the populace vis-à-vis greater American military presence in the country. 

Although, it must be said, there is hardly anything in existing and proposed bilateral security agreements, which explicitly guarantees American support for Manila against China in the South China Sea. The Obama administration has repeatedly emphasized its neutrality vis-à-vis the territorial disputes in the area. 

In the post-Cold War period, the shadow of China has always loomed large over the Philippines and its decisions vis-à-vis America. Few years after the Philippines decided to abrogate American military bases on its soil, China usurped (1994) the Philippine-claimed Mischief Reef, provoking a diplomatic crisis (1995) that almost torpedoed generally cordial relations between Manila, then under President Ramos, and Beijing, then under President Jiang Zemin. 

It didn’t take long, however, before Manila welcomed back Americans under the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), which allowed for a steady and significant number of American troops to regularly visit the Philippines and conduct joint military exercises.  American military presence in the Philippines, however, hasn’t been without its own controversies. One of the biggest sources of criticism is with regards to judicial liability when visiting American servicemen commit crimes against Filipino citizens. 

An optimal agreement 

In the past decade alone, there were at least two high-profile cases involving American servicemen allegedly committing grave crimes against Filipino citizens. One involved US Marine Daniel Smith, who was accused of raping a Filipina but was eventually acquitted by the Court of Appeals when the complainant retracted her original allegations. The case was particularly controversial, because of the tug-of-war battle for custody over the accused, who was eventually escorted out of the country after being initially detained in a local jail. 

Most recently, a similar controversy has unfolded with regards to another American soldier, Joseph Scott Pemberton, who has been convicted of committing homicide against a Filipino citizen. After a similar tug-of-war over his custody, the Philippine government has promised to ensure that the American soldier will serve his sentence in a Philippine jail, though again there are suspicions that he will be serving his jail term under relatively comfortable circumstances in Armed Forces of the Philippines Custodial Center rather than in a conventional jail. 

The VFA (Article 5, Section 10) states “The confinement or detention by Philippine authorities of US personnel shall be carried out in facilities agreed on by appropriate Philippine and US authorities,” and provides the option, under “extraordinary circumstances”, for Philippine Government to “present its position to the US Government regarding Custody, which the US Government shall take into account”, but generally gives the Americans the leeway to maintain custody of the accused “from the commission of the offense until completion of all judicial proceedings.” 

Aside from the concern over whether questions of justice and criminal liability are not compromised by existing (i.e., VFA) proposed (i.e., EDCA) agreements between the two allies, the other concern is the Philippines’ acute dependence on a foreign power to defend its own claims. For much of its modern history, excessive dependence on America has discouraged the Philippine ruling elite from building up even a minimum deterrence capability for the country; not to mention the risk vis-a-vis the potential for escalation of Sino-Philippines disputes as a result of increased American military presence in the area. 

In the end, the challenge for the Philippines is to properly balance its national security interests with questions of justice and the welfare of its citizens. Beyond the principle of whether American military presence is welcomed, it is also a question of how to ensure that it will not adversely impact the Philippines’ sovereignty and national interests. 

Thankfully, Pia Wurtzbach, the new Miss Universe, has provided an impetus for a proper and democratic debate on the issue. – Rappler.com

The author teaches political science at De La Salle University. His latest book is “Asia’s New Battlefield: US, China, and the Struggle for Western Pacific” (Zed, London). An earlier version of this piece was published on Huffington Post. 

At one point in our lives, we have asked someone a favor. No matter how big or small it may be, we direct the favor to someone we trust.

Here's a favor from a girl to her father and all would-be fathers in the world.

“I need to ask you a favor. Warning, it’s about boys.”

CARE Norway, the Norwegian branch of CARE International, an aid organization that fights for women’s rights, published a public service announcement (PSA) about the reality of rape and domestic violence on women.

Nearly hitting 7M views when this was written, the PSA talks about how the idea of rape and domestic violence stem from childhood.

Watch the PSA here:

Teenage nightmare

Early teenage years are times when girls and boys explore and start being curious about the opposite sex.

“I will be born a girl, which means that by the time I’m 14, the boys in my class will have called me a whore, a bitch, a cunt, and many other things.”

People say a lot of things they don’t mean, especially in their younger years. When they say something insulting, it is best to ignore them. However, is it really the best thing to do?

“By the time I turn 16, a couple of the boys will have snuck their hands down my pants while I’m so drunk I can’t even stand straight, and although I say no, they just laugh.”

Oh, it’s just puberty, they say. Sex hormones – estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone, are highly active during teenage years. Thus, it is normal when teenagers become physical with each other. It is part of growing up. Is it really the case?

Laughter is not always the best medicine

“No wonder I’m raped when I’m 21. The guy (rapist) who always told insulting jokes…How could you know? He was just a boy telling weird jokes.”

When kids do or say something foolish or bad, they should never be laughed at. Why? They would not realize the gravity of what they did.

Missing the opportunity to correct a mistake today could lead to a bigger mistake tomorrow.

Rape and domestic violence should never be the topic of jokes or laughing matter. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 1 out of 3 women in the world will experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime. The worst part is that it would usually be from their male partner. (WATCH: #TimeToAct Hangout: Ending sexual violence in conflict)

Favorable favor

The PSA ends with the unborn girl’s favor to her daddy. “Dear Daddy, I will be born a girl. Please do everything you can so that, that won’t stay the greatest danger of all.”

People all over the world  shared mixed reactions in the PSA’s comment section. While others sympathized with the unborn girl’s plea, some viewed the PSA as an act of sexism.

What do you think? – Rappler.com

Firas Abboud is a Rappler intern from the Mapua Institute of Technology.

Photos screengrabbed from CARE Norway video.

As 2015 comes to a close, a filament of thought hangs in the air, rising from the global gaffe of Miss Universe emcee Steve Harvey. It is this: mistakes are moments that define one’s character.

Harvey owned up to his horrendously embarrassing lapse, before millions watching the show live on TV and cyberspace. He took full responsibility. Furthermore, he apologized on Twitter, although he deleted this after he realized he misspelled the countries of the two victims (Colombia and the Philippines) of his mix-up. 

If only the jeers, memes, and jokes left tangible marks on Harvey, it would be like having eggs and tomatoes splattered on his face, pots and pans flying toward his direction. 

Despite his apology, people will not easily forget this error, a perfect subject for conversation in this digital age. It comes with Harvey’s stature, a celebrity who makes people laugh—and now finds that the joke is on him. It comes with the event, a momentous multi-country contest that has had its wide following for decades.

The higher the status, the steeper the fall. Mega-stars live with mega-mistakes. But Harvey appears to be handling the fallout well, making light of his monumental blunder in his Christmas post on Facebook greeting his followers a “Merry Easter.”

In the scheme of things, Harvey’s bungling is mainly his to bear, to account for. While it was initially devastating for Miss Colombia, it didn’t hurt the public, it didn’t leave a trail of shattered lives and broken dreams.

As the noise on the Miss Universe fiasco recedes into the background, as we move on to a new year, what happened on the glittering stage in Las Vegas pales in comparison to bigger mistakes that have happened, those that changed lives forever.

Remember the AirAsia Indonesia crash in December 2014 that killed more than 100 passengers? Without missing a beat, Tony Fernandes, AirAsia CEO, profusely apologized, adding: "The passengers were on my aircraft and I have to take responsibility for that.”

Fernandes’s handling of the crisis showed strength of leadership and a facet of his character: he had the humility to accept responsibility for the accident and acted with dispatch in helping the families of the victims.

Contrast this to the behavior of the Lehman Brothers CEO, Richard Fuld. In 2008, the global investment bank collapsed, triggering a worldwide financial crisis which caused slower growth in developing countries and, some studies say, increased poverty.

When Fuld testified in 2010 before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, he offered no apologies on the role of Lehman Brothers . He has maintained that stance. Years later, in his first public speech since the crisis, he remained unapologetic, laying the blame instead on others.

People are shaped by many factors and mistakes are one of them. How these are handled are windows into one’s character – and could be defining moments. – Rappler.com

If you’re a news junkie like me, it probably also hit you the morning after the Christmas weekend: You had not seriously checked the Internet, the TV, or the newspapers since your boss let you take half the day off on the 23rd to “prepare” for the holidays. 

(I sincerely hope, though, that in our rush, we missed only the news but not the time to reflect on the meaning of Christ’s birth – “Reason for the Season,” remember?)

Where did Christmas go? What happened across the planet these past crazy days that I wasn’t able to read or share on the World Wide Web? What didn’t I notice between the Miss Universe winner announcement blunder and the disqualification of Honor Thy Father from the Best Picture category of the metro film fest?

To help us get back in our news rhythm, I put together this list of 10 or so stories during the holidays that you (also) probably missed. 

More importantly, I hope that these stories will remind you and me to be thankful that our only worries during the Christmas week were last-minute shopping and mad cooking for noche buena (and, yes, neglecting the news). Some people – ordinary people like us – didn’t even feel the Yuletide because they were in the news. And it seems they will be for some time.

1. Christmas was banned in 2 Muslim-majority countries.

The oil-rich sultanate of Brunei and war-torn Somalia prohibited the observance of this Christian tradition, citing Islamic teachings. Imams in Bandar Seri Begawan said allowing Christmas celebrations might lead Muslims astray, while the director general of the religious affairs ministry in Mogadishu said it “could damage the faith of the Muslim community.”

People displaying crosses, candles, Christmas trees, singing religious songs, sending holiday greetings, or even wearing Santa Claus hats or costumes in Brunei could land in jail for 5 years, while those in Somalia would be inviting the Shebab “to carry out attacks.”

I wonder how they would have reacted to the viral video of Muslim sufi and gazal musicians doing covers of classic carols.

2. More Syrians tried fleeing their troubled country – and died.

For two consecutive days, December 22 and 23, a total of 24 Syrian migrants, including 10 children, drowned in the Aegean Sea while trying to reach different parts of Greece. It’s been the story of these migrants trying to flee their villages sieged by extremists: overloaded boats capsizing as they risk the turbulent waters for a hopefully better life in Europe. In this Syrian exodus in 2015, the International Organization for Migration said, about 700 people, many of them children, died trying to cross the Aegean to Greece, while almost 3,000 perished on the Mediterranean crossing to Italy.

Still on migrants, about 200 from Africa tried to break into the Spanish territory of Ceuta from Morroco on Christmas day. Two of them died while 12 were hospitalized for injuries. African migrants tried to get into Ceuta by scaling a barbed wire fence or swimming across to the city.

3. America debates whether it’s right to link the Christmas story to today’s Middle Eastern refugees.

The president of the non-denominational Union Theological Seminary in New York took to task “conservative Christians” in the United States who, he said, are resorting to “distracting technicalities, legalistic interpretations and references to allegory and symbolism” about the Christmas story so it serves their “religious discrimination” against Syrian refugees.

“The Christmas story is not about a refugee family, but it is about a family seeking refuge….It was a fiercely political environment through which they wandered. Why should we pretend like it wasn’t?” the Reverend Serene Jones wrote for Time.

“Our presidential candidates have said they would admit refugees from the Middle East who believe like the Jewish Mary or the Christian James, brother of Jesus. However, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump have balked at welcoming refugees who are Muslim. Not only is this religious discrimination fundamentally anti-American, it flies in the face of foundational Christian values.,” he said.

On Christmas Day, even Pope Francis prayed for those who had opened their doors to refugees from conflict-torn countries. He asked God to “repay all those, both individuals and states, who generously work to provide assistance and welcome.”

The famous Facebook page Humans of New York announced that it was able to raise almost $500,000 for refugee families it met in December. 

Thanking those who donated, HONY said: “As of now, this is enough to provide each family with about $40,000. That is a large amount for anyone, but when you are starting from zero, it is all the money in the world. These families lost everything in the war. Most have multiple children and significant medical needs, so our assistance will significantly ease the stress of starting over.”

4. People died in fire and earthquake, buried by landslides.

On Christmas Eve, a fire hit the Jazan General Hospital in southern Saudi Arabia, starting at the facility’s intensive care unit and maternity department. At least 25 people died, while 107 were injured. In Australia on Christmas Day, a bushfire hit the towns of Wye River and Separation Creek, destroying 116 houses, which were mostly holiday homes. Five hundred firefighters were needed to put out the blaze in these areas along the Great Ocean Road tourist drive southwest of Melbourne.

Also on December 25, a 6.3-magnitude earthquake rocked Afghanistan and Pakistan, killing a pregnant woman and injuring almost 70 others. The region had barely recovered from the 7.5-magnitude quake that hit it in October, killing about 400 people and toppling buildings.

On the same day in Myanmar, a landslide buried mine workers in Hpakant, Kachin State, the center of the country’s billion-dollar jade industry. The media reported that 50 people were under debris, but local authorities said there were only 3 or 4. Dozens have died in smaller mine accidents in the area earlier in the year. In November, however, a massive landslide there killed more than 100. 

In China, the Christmas Day mine collapse in Shandong province killed one person and trapped 17 others. Two days later, the owner of the mine committed suicide, drowning himself while helping 700 other rescuers try to save the trapped workers. A week before, a landslide at a quarry site in the city of Shenzhen killed 7 and left dozens more missing.

5. There were floods here and there.

We were saying in the Philippines, after Nona (Melor) and Onyok, weather patterns have indeed shifted: Imagine, typhoons coming in December? Well, not just on our side of the planet. Parts of northern England have been flooded since December 26 due to Storm Eva. Hundreds of military personnel have been deployed to rescue residents from York, a historic city where some 3,500 properties are now at risk, as well as other places in Yorkshire, Lancashire, Leeds, and Greater Manchester. The post-Christmas floods came 3 weeks after Cumbria, also in northern England, was badly hit by Storm Desmond.

In Latin America, more than 160,000 people had to evacuate after heavy rains brought by unusually strong El Niño pattern. Paraguay, Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay are experiencing the worst floods in decades, and authorities have reported at least 6 died.

Wild weather has been battering southwestern United States and parts of Canada since a day after Christmas, claiming at least 43 lives. Latest report said at least 14 people were killed after tornados – rare in December – touched down in Dallas, Texas, while warnings of blizzards, freezing rain, and flash floods have been raised over 21 states, from New Mexico to as far north as Michigan. Hundreds of flights have been cancelled. 

6. The crazy weather confused even the flowers.

While one end of the US experienced severe weather, the East Coast had an unusually warm Christmas Eve, with 72 degrees Fahrenheit (22 Celsius) recorded at New York’s Central Park, “the warmest Christmas Eve since records began in 1871,” reported Agence France-Presse. The temperatures reached 66 degrees (19 Celsius) on Christmas Day in the area, leading The New York Times to call the phenomenon a “tropical Christmas.”

The Christmas Week warmth shattered records in the East and the South, the Weather Channel noted, but in balmy Las Vegas, it snowed on Christmas Day. The National Weather Service said the last time it happened was in 2008, and in 1988.

The weather, it seems, has confused even the flowers, that at the New York Botanical Garden, they are blooming way ahead of spring. “Across the region, this uncharacteristically warm winter has flower beds springing to life…. It is not normal. And while the plants will probably not be harmed in the long run, it may mean a less vivid floral parade in the spring,” The New York Times reported.

Brian Sullivan, the botanical garden’s vice president for gardens, landscape, and outdoor collections, told the newspaper that these are either “fall flowers that are having an extended blooming period” or “spring flowers that are opening up too early.”

7. In China, the air was so bad, people were told to stay home.

After Beijing issued its first ever red alert for smog in early December, 10 other cities did the same as of Christmas Eve, advising people to stay indoors or risk inhaling abnormal amounts of harmful particles that can penetrate deep into the lungs. In one city, Xinxiang, the PM2.5 count was “nearly 30 times the World Health Organization’s recommended maximum exposure of 25 over a 24-hour period,” Agence France-Presse reported. A red alert is the highest in China’s 4-tier pollution warning system.

8. How do we suppose the terror-stricken, the typhoon victims, and the hungry would celebrate?

Tourist arrivals dropped, while security was heightened in churches and shops, for Christmas in Paris, a month after the simultaneous jihadist attacks that left at least 128 people dead. The Galeries Lafayette and Printemps department stores were not as crowded as in past holidays, but heavily armed soldiers still patrolled the area. Tight security checks were conducted in many of France's 50,000 churches, as authorities warned that church services at this time “could constitute targets of exceptional symbolic force.” Visitors’ bags and coats were checked for guns or explosive vests.

In the Philippines, residents in provinces north of Manila that were hit by a typhoon earlier in December were still wading through knee-deep floods, and only wanted food, water, and urgent medical care for Christmas. “I doubt Santa Claus will come tonight. The water's too high,” one resident said on December 24. The typhoon left at least 24 people dead, and 206,000 others spent the holidays waiting for the floods to subside. For noche buena, they had food rations from government.

In the city of Manila, many street dwellers didn’t have anything to eat the night before Christmas while most families around them held the traditional feast. Many parishes and village councils had run out of food to serve in their feeding programs, and would only have something to offer again in January. One in every 4 Filipinos is considered poor by government standards. 

9. Still, there were stories to smile about…

Tim Peake, the British astronaut aboard the International Space Station, tried calling home on Christmas, but dialed the wrong number. “Is this planet Earth?” he said, but quickly realized he must have freaked out the lady who took his call. He apologized through a tweet. Read here the reaction of pensioner Betty Barker, the 79-year-old woman who was on the receiving end of what she earlier thought was a prank call.

While Major Peake’s ISS appeared like Santa’s sleigh 250 miles above the French-Spanish border on Christmas night, children in other parts of the world tracked Saint Nick online, via Google’s Santa Tracker and Microsoft’s interactive page on the North American Aerospace Defense Command website. Check out on Santa Tracker and on NoradSanta how the maps and games give users updates on where Santa Claus was and how many gifts he and his reindeers had delivered.

Meanwhile, from his home state of Hawaii, US President Barack Obama broadcast his annual Christmas greeting, especially thanking “the brave men and women of our military” and their families who “serve to keep us safe.” This year, however, the American president had guests on his televised address. Find out who.

In the UK, a song performed by a choir of doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, porters, and administrators soared through the British pop chart, past Justin Bieber’s “Love Yourself,” but not without help from the popular Canadian singer himself. He urged his followers on Twitter – 72 million of them – to buy “A Bridge Over You,” a single being sold by the choir of the state-funded National Health Service to raise funds for charity. 

Bieber tweeted – "So for 1 week it's ok not to be #1. Let's do the right thing & help them win. It's Christmas. @Choir_NHS good luck" – and the charity choir was on top in no time.

Justin Bieber is not the only one from Canada who’s charitable by heart. A Filipino cook who works in British Columbia, Paul Ivan Torio, helped the homeless in his host province through what he did best – feed people. Read and watch about his Christmas Day outreach on Rappler.

10. …and lights – natural or otherwise – to behold this Christmas.

Who’s not impressed with those photos of fabulously lighted American houses and lawns during the Christmas season? For those grand displays US households use 6.63 billion kilowatt hours of electricity during the holidays every year – more than what poor countries like El Salvador, Ethiopia, and Tanzania each use the entire year, according to the Center for Global Development.

In the Nordic countries – Sweden, Norway, Finland – the sky is dark from 2 pm to 9 am. They have these long nights for half a year until April, so people resort to artificial lights to keep the gloom in check. A lady in Stockholm, for instance, runs a spa where visitors can sit in a “sunroom” for an hour and bask in the rays of special therapy lamps. In other places in the region, people light candles as early as November and put up light sculptures in public squares. 

The most breathtaking display of light this year, however, was the Christmas Eve full moon. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration said that the last time “a full moon dawned in the skies on Christmas” was in 1977. After 2015, it would not happen again until 2034, it added.

“That’s a long time to wait,” NASA said, “so make sure to look up to the skies on Christmas Day.”

A number of Rappler followers did, and shared their photos with us.

Were there people stories that particularly touched you this season? Share them in the Comments section below.– Rappler.com 

It’s often said that when one dies, one is remembered for how she touched lives or said the kindest of words. I’d like to think that the best editors, when they die, are best remembered for the judgment calls they made in the roughest of times.

Much has been said and will be said about Letty Jimenez-Magsanoc. But one thing cuts across generations that she has worked with as a journalist: she’s got balls, and boy how she showed them when the times called for it.

When challenging power and exposing its warts, nothing is taboo for her, such as a romantic affair, for instance, involving a president and an ex-paramour.

In 1992, soon after Fidel Ramos became president, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) was tipped off about the influence-peddling activities of Rose Marie “Baby” Arenas, said to be Ramos’ former girlfriend and one of his top campaign contributors. Marites Dañguilan-Vitug and I pursued that story for PCIJ.

Was it worth investigating? When does one draw the line between the personal and the official? When does a private person become fair game to the media? The answer to weeks of PCIJ discussions was basic: once it impinges on state affairs and public interest, a private affair is – and ought to be – open to media scrutiny.

Letty didn't think twice. She ran our two-part series on Baby Arenas and her backdoor attempts to put friends in government and push for certain contracts. Never mind that it was only barely a month after Ramos had taken his oath as president. Never mind that various interest groups tried to talk her out of lending precious newspaper space to “gossip.” Never mind that the new president was expecting some sort of a honeymoon with the press.

The establishment unleashed its fury after. A swarm of columns, including from Inquirer opinion-makers themselves, dismissed the series as chismis, ridiculed “this type” of investigative reporting, and chided the Inquirer for dignifying it.

Letty took it all. And slept well.

The Ramos administration, after all, would not be her problem.

Erap and the Inquirer

It was another president that gave Inquirer hell: Joseph “Erap” Estrada.

In 1999, when the Inquirer published its exposés against Estrada without let-up, his friends in the entertainment industry tried to punish the paper by pulling out all their movie ads.  The advertising boycott soon expanded to other businesses scared of Estrada. The boycott was accompanied, too, by veiled threats from the country's most powerful man.

When Inquirer ran a PCIJ exposé that Estrada had acquired P1 billion worth of real estate, the president fumed and told reporters, “Ipa-i-imbestiga ko sila (I will have them investigated)."

With Letty and Sandy Prieto-Romualdez standing their ground, the country’s biggest newspaper would not bend its knees to power. Estrada was ousted a year later.

No to holidays

Presidents, paramours, politicians, public figures – Letty loved them as any no-nonsense journalist would: she loved giving them their reality check. Not even the holidays would make her take a break from this (I thought about this when she made us all scramble for information after her sudden death on Christmas Eve).

The last time I got a call from Letty was on New Year’s Eve in 2011.

I was on the road when I heard the familiar husky voice. Letty wanted Rappler’s permission for Inquirer to run Rappler’s exclusive on the questionable doctorate degree that then Chief Justice Renato Corona had obtained from the University of Santo Tomas (UST), which we published on December 22, 2011.  

Rappler had not fully launched at the time, but we had been publishing stories, particularly on Corona who was about to face trial in an impeachment court. We readily agreed to Letty’s request, but I was not prepared for what I saw on January 1, 2012, in the Inquirer's hard copy.

The Rappler story, written by Marites Dañguilan-Vitug, screamed as the Inquirer’s banner that day – ruining the New Year of both the chief justice and UST.

In reply to the Inquirer, UST not only denied the allegations; it also justified its initial refusal to respond to Vitug’s questions when she was investigating the case. “Does anyone claiming to be an online journalist be given the same attention as one coming from the mainstream press?” said the UST statement carried by the Inquirer the following day. “We understand that while Miss Vitug used to be a print journalist, she’s part of an online magazine, Newsbreak, which has reportedly been subsumed into ‘www.rappler.com.’ What’s that?”

The rest, of course, is history.

Thank you, Letty. – Rappler.com

It was a thought-provoking conversation about change in our society, an admission that our generation has largely failed, and that change would be led by this generation.

While waiting for the wedding of TV reporter Pia Gutierrez to naval officer Errol Dela Cruz on December 26, I chatted with my partner in the procession: Rear Admiral Jose Renan Suarez of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

He had a quiet strength that showed a passion fueling his faith in the future – necessary for his job as the head of the Naval Education and Training Command.

We spoke about a shared focus: the ongoing battle against corruption, instilling a code of ethics, providing a clear mission, and encouraging strategic thinking – for his officers and our journalists. [Disclosure: I sit on the board of the Philippine Navy.]

We discussed problems in organizational development: breaking feudal structures of management; empowering marginalized voices; creating a culture of excellence and meritocracy; encouraging entrepreneurship and accountability. 

Over the next half hour, we spoke about what drew both of us to this couple and their wedding: the idealism of youth and our hope for change in the next generation.

He spoke so eloquently that I asked if I could do an interview about leadership on video, and while he said yes, it's a shadow of our conversation. With the camera on, he became stilted and retreated into "safe" language, but our conversation stayed with me for days.

We talked about the lure of power, and when I asked him how he keeps his ideals, Suarez replied, "I hope I will never reach the stage when I become the ogre."

Then he told me a story. 

There are different versions of this parable: Suarez said they were brothers; others say they were friends. Some say the winner becomes the ogre; Suarez said they had a choice. 

The lesson is the same: that the enemy isn't out there, it's in you, and that power is so tempting few can resist its lure – especially when you enjoy its fringe benefits.

Suarez said as he rose up the ranks, he avoided the trappings of power: for example, he drove himself to the wedding, and he doesn't have an aide. I understood that: I live within my means; avoid borrowing against the future. That's allowed me to quit high-paying corporate jobs, and while I make a fraction of what I used to make, my ideals are intact. 

The enemy is within. 

As we go into the 2016 elections, these are the leaders I will be voting for: the men and women who have slayed the enemy within – who are self-aware enough to draw the lines they will never cross...before the lure of power can turn them into the ogre that never dies. – Rappler.com

With estimates of around P2.4 billion lost daily from our economy due to traffic congestion in Metro Manila, the current transportation bottleneck is something that should concern every Filipino.

The amount could swell up to P6 billion by 2030 if unaddressed, according to Senator Paolo Aquino IV.

The amount is no joke, and if we sum up the daily losses incurred by this situation, it could have been used to build world-class hospitals, research facilities, academic institutes, and defense equipment, among others.

It would be easy for us to rather censure government offices such as the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) or the local government units (LGUs) that are responsible for ministering the traffic on their areas of responsibility, but playing the blame game would lead us to nowhere.

I highly appreciate efforts from Malacañang by putting the Philippine National Police’ Highway Patrol Group (HPG) on the roads to man the flow of vehicles, but I believe this solution is only temporary and would eventually require long-term plans and solutions.

Thus, I’m sharing a few ideas on how to solve Manila's traffic woes.  

Invest in infrastructures

First, I do not see any possible reason for the government not to invest on building new infrastructures. By mentioning “infrastructures,” not only am I regarding highways, skyways, and the likes. In fact, I actually am focused more into building railroad systems being the most efficient way of transportation ever present anywhere in the world.

It has to start somewhere and I believe that improving the currently existent Light Rail Transits (LRT) and Metro Rail Transits (MRT) would be a great head start. From there, we can extend the routes that are covered by these transits to include the entire metropolis.

Then we must prepare to expand further into areas outside Metro Manila, including cities in Visayas and Mindanao.

Building railway systems will benefit us three-way. First, the pissed motorists will not have to lose hours on the road which will result to better productivity. Better productivity means better business performance. Second, we would no longer have to waste billions of pesos from transport congestion and may instead use this sum of big bucks on other projects. Third, the economy will boom as products become more mobile . 

Learn from Latin America

Aside from this, we should also follow examples from fellow developing nations in Latin America, where they organized a very systematic public transportation procedure. Buses and jeepneys should have common terminals where they are allowed to pick up and drop passengers.

Well, this is probably not the first time you are hearing this suggestion but it never gets done. I am looking at a brighter side, however.

Political will

Political will is very much needed in times like this so that the construction of transport stations outside jammed areas will be brought to reality. Strict implementation of the rules should accompany great ideas.

Violating drivers should be charged reasonably. Here comes the role of the MMDA, LGUs, and most especially the HPG, which should be visible on the roads catching violators. Better walkways should also be provided for passengers who will be walking from where they are to pick-up stations or from drop-off stations to their specific destination. 

Parking spaces

We should also organize parking spaces for those who are bringing in private vehicles. Those who use black (or green) plated cars should also have their own “terminal” where they can leave their vehicles outside congested areas and then walk to their specific destinations. For all we know, it may actually be a better idea if we revise the Building Code of the Philippines to require future establishments to have a certain minimum space allotted for parking lots.

But in the context of today, creation of parking buildings (probably not those like in Makati that cost billions) would be highly appreciated. Perhaps, it will require stretching efforts for the passengers, but if we only analyze our situation carefully, a pinch of some sacrifice will go a long way. 

Bicycles

The promotion of bicycles as a means of transportation should also be supported by the government because not only is it economic but is also healthy for the cyclists and for the environment. Some may argue that riding a bicycle may actually be a health hazard and is dangerous in the metropolis because of high levels of pollution and the risk of getting along with vehicles. In this case, I strongly suggest for exclusive bicycle lanes.

Patience

In the meantime, we all should share the responsibility to maintain better road traffic conditions by bringing with us tons of patience as we drive along EDSA and other major highways. After all, it’s not that difficult to give way to others who are sharing the road with us.

When everyone has the discipline (this is a long shot, but then again, we need to start somewhere) and proper road etiquette, losing a few seconds or minutes of giving way to others will result to actually saving hours of being stuck in heavy traffic. The solution is in us. 

If you do have any other suggestions, please leave them on the comments section and share them with your fellow Filipinos! – Rappler.com

Richmond Sim is a Computer Engineering student of the Ateneo de Manila University. He is also a former junior student partner of Microsoft Philippines.

A version of this article has been published on Richmond Sim’s blog: www.rcsofficial.blogspot.com.