More than a decade ago, when many in this room were just beginning to consider what their sexual orientation might be or question their gender identity, feminists like myself, weary of the struggle for women’s equality, were saying, “I am so tired of doing gender, let us just do sex.”

A longer time ago, some women woke up to the fact that they were oppressed merely because they were biologically female. They decided to do something about this and thus became feminists. The first use of the term, “feminista” in the Philippines was 115 years ago when the Asociacion Feminista Filipina was established in 1905. They proposed reforms in prisons especially on behalf of women and minors, labor reforms especially for working women, and educational reforms. They also worked to establish the first puericulture center in the Philippines and the La Liga Nacional Filipina para la Proteccion de la Primera Infancia,  which to me was a precursor of our current reproductive health initiatives.

But it seems all that was not sufficiently challenging so these women also participated in a 3-decade struggle to win the right of suffrage for Filipinas which they won in 1937. Similar to our struggle for the Reproductive Health Law, they had to face down religious conservatives or macho men led by the worst of them all, religious conservatives who were also macho men.

Similarly, when the contemporary women's movement began in the 1970s it made sense that all things gender seemed like all things women. Arguments flew left and right, abetted by medical professionals that women's oppression was based on their biology. Some of these arguments have become so mainstreamed they remain today as sexist stereotypes. For example, we are told that we are less rational because of the hormonal variations that accompany our menstrual cycles. Freud, one of the most pre-eminent intellectuals of the last century stated that women also were less morally developed, were wounded and stuck at the stage of narcissism and suffered from penis envy. It was these types of arguments, for example, that rationalized the denial of women's rights to suffrage because one cannot give the vote to less moral and rational creatures.

Sociobiological arguments also rationalized the denial of access to jobs and education. It was argued that women’s distinct role in childbearing and breastfeeding made us natural caregivers which then became linked to the idea that our main purpose was to raise children and serve husbands. Our physical fragility supposedly meant that we could not take the rough and tumble competition of earning money for ourselves. Later on, women were allowed only jobs that were considered less strenuous keeping them out of large areas of the work force.

Sex and gender

The counter-arguments feminists made were therefore quite logical. They argued that sex had nothing to do with the roles men and women were assigned. That anthropological data showed that different sexes were assigned different roles in various societies. The variation across cultures was so big that one could find certain jobs made taboo for women in one society, made taboo for men in another. 

The argument of the sex and gender framework is that sex is unchanging but what women and men are supposed to do (i.e. gender roles) are changeable. To empower women, it was necessary to break the socially prescribed gender barriers that kept women from enjoying equal opportunities and privileges as men. Thus, the right to vote, access to education, to jobs of all kinds, to positions in government, especially higher positions and to top management, were seen as ways by which we could break down the social prescriptions that kept women unequal.

Little wonder that feminists, the government mechanisms and laws, and the ordinary citizen tend to use women and gender interchangeably when talking about things like equality. Our omnibus law “Magna Carta of Women,” for example, calls for "gender mainstreaming" as a means of accomplishing "women's empowerment.” In fact, the law does not define "gender" but only gender equality referring to "the equality of men and women.”

Nationalists and LGBT

But the success of the women's movement, the presence of other movements like those working to end poverty and the rise of the movements of lesbian, gay, bisexual and intersex peoples have presented real challenges to our early conceptions of sex and gender.

For example, the idea that women capturing high political positions as a means or measure women's empowerment and increasing equality has been sorely tested if not disproven. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was one of the biggest barriers to the passage of the reproductive health law. Many women in the previous Congresses were anti-RH too.

Conversely, we are finding out that men's interests diverge and converge with women's interests based on other factors. We had to wait for a male president to pass the RH law, and many of our champions for the law were men. Furthermore, while men continue to be the overwhelming perpetrators of sexual and intimate violence and women are the overwhelming victims, there are also male victims and women perpetrators.

Whereas women have always been present in other social movements such as nationalist movements, women have found that nationalists have often accused us of being Western puppets because women's rights, especially sexual and reproductive rights, are seen as inventions of the liberal West and a conduit for imperialist culture. I might add that such accusations are not just levelled at us by men making nationalist arguments but also women. On the other hand, many women and men continue to make the argument that national development cannot be achieved without progress in the status of women.

I will now finally come to the point of this conference and the reason why you asked me to address you. What then is the relationship between the women's movement and the LGBT movement? I suppose there is a connection because the LGBT movement is as equally concerned with sex and gender as the women's movement is.

But here, the already blurred framework of sex and gender becomes even fuzzier. Let me put it another way: are only lesbian and bisexual women part of the women's movement? What about transmen and women? Are transwomen, who are for the most part biologically male but identify as female, part of the women's movement? Are transmen, mostly biologically women, but who identify as men, part of the women's movement?

Many of you probably know that the acceptance of transwomen into women's organizations has caused rifts in women's movements in other countries. Even more problematically for us here, many lesbian and bisexual women have found the women's rights advocates can be dismissive or hostile to LGBT rights. Many lesbian, bisexual and transwomen do not consider themselves feminists.

Do you see now why some of us would really rather not do gender anymore and just do sex?

What is gender?

The joke is actually a reversal of what my preference has become. That is, I no longer care to do sex but prefer to do gender. (Parenthetically I will add that as a feminist I uphold the right of any person regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity to express themselves by staying single and celibate. 

I of course welcome asexuals to my movement.

I hope at this point that you are wondering what gender really means. My definition of gender is a hodgepodge of other definitions I have come across, as well as a distillation of what I, as an activist, have learned.

Gender to me is a social organizing force that encompasses the domains of the biological, intrapersonal, interpersonal and social and that determines a person's access to and control of opportunities and resources. It is a system of difference and inequality that reinforces and is reinforced by other systems such as race and class, but is nonetheless distinct from these.

Taken this way, we can see how maleness and femaleness is not a distinct biological attribute that can stand apart from social interpretations. In other words while our bodies exist as physical realities we cannot really see our bodies except through eyes that have been socialized to see things a certain way. Or, as Simone de Beauvoir has said, "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman."

My definition of gender includes why we give primordial importance to certain biological differences. In other words, gender includes both biological sex and the social relations that give meaning to the biological difference and thereby give rise to differing roles, responsibilities and privileges. Beyond that it also includes issues such as identity, sexuality. Gender is a system that creates oppressed categories such as women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex. Most importantly we cannot forget that gender is a systematic force in society.

Judith Butler calls this, “the heterosexual matrix.” Society places immense importance on whether our genitalia mark as a male or female. If you are biologically female you are supposed to be attracted to a man and you are supposed to feel, look, act, behave and identify as a woman. The same is true for those whose biology classifies them as “men.” These gendered social prescriptions privilege those who fit into the category called “men” as opposed to those who fit into the category “women.” If you cannot fit into the gender prescriptions, because of your sexual orientation or your felt gender identity then you are countermanding the gender system, and are therefore penalized for your inability to conform.

If one accepts that biological sexual difference is intrinsic to gender but that gender is also intrinsic to how we understand biological sex, then the sex and gender difference becomes moot. For a feminist we need to end the gender system and that means our feminist goals are inextricably linked to LGBT liberation.

However, when I say that gender is a social organizing force, I mean it to say that I recognize there are men and women in society today as well as LGBTs. Thus, while I see the struggles are linked, I also see how the gender system has positioned women differently from LGBT peoples. Woman is a necessary part of a binary that gives meaning to the privileged gender “man”. LGBTI are categories that threaten the gender system of inequality because they disrupt the heterosexual matrix that are an important part of gender definitions of what “man” and “woman” are.

I make this distinction because while I believe that the feminist movement and the LGBT movement are sisters, they are distinct movements that must remain in coalition.

I shall end by saying that today, you have asked me to talk to you about how the women’s movement might relate to the LGBT movement. And my answer is: it is though the concept of gender and the inequalities brought about by gender. – Rappler.com

The author delivered this speech at The First Philippine Gender, Sogie and Health Conference University of the Philippines College of Medicine and One’s True Nature on September 19, 2015.

SOGIE refers to sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.

MANILA, Philippines – Aries Rufo's face lit up when he saw me in the newsroom after my first libel case was filed against me.

I had been nervous about the case, wondering what strings Janet Napoles would pull to make sure I paid the price for not keeping my mouth shut. But Aries was thrilled about my legal case. “You’ve arrived!” he said. (READ: Rappler senior investigative reporter Aries Rufo dies) 

His reaction helped give me the courage I needed to continue investigating the Napoles family. Aries was no stranger to legal cases, but he remained relentless in exposing injustice in every facet of society – from the Church to politics to the courts. No one was spared from his pursuit for truth. He was one of the bravest people I knew. 

I loved his work, and I loved his guts.

He made leaders tremble. He made them livid. One of my favorite memories of him was when he was so stubborn, so incessant about pursuing a story, he tried in vain to get the side of a politician who refused to talk to him. He asked for my help, but I could not get through to the senator either.

Aries took the matter into his own hands. He attended a media event by the politician, and afterwards, on the senator's turf, cornered him and bombarded him with questions. Caught off guard, the politician, after avoiding him for weeks, blew up and yelled at Aries’ face. 

While most journalists would’ve been scared off, Aries told me that story with amusement. “I guess he really was hiding from me!” he said. 

I loved Aries’ brain.

He was smart, probing, and precise. When I was investigating properties of politicians and the Napoleses, and I could not understand financial statements and documents, he was my go-to. Aries explained to me what every line in the statements meant, what important numbers to pay attention to. He was eternally patient, and so generous with his knowledge. (READ: A collection of Aries Rufo's stories) 

And I loved watching him at work.

Our last interview together was in December, with former Ambassador Marciano Paynor, who was leading government's preparations for the Pope’s visit. Aries asked questions in a way that was critical but not offensive. He was a good listener. He processed and diced information so quickly and intricately. As a journalist, he could do no wrong in my eyes.

I also loved Aries’ spirit.

He was a journalist to the core. One time, when a competitor beat us to a story, and our editor called us out on it, I sulked. Aries however, replied to the email thread: “Oh my goodness... painful nga.... Don't worry, Glends. Hanap ng counter-punch (We will find a counter-punch).”

He ended up owning that coverage, dominating it with substance. That was his personality – determined, and never discouraged.

It was a privilege to work with him. As an aspiring investigative journalist, I was inspired by him. His work was so impactful, so significant, but his ego was non-existent. He was self-effacing, modest, never one to call attention to himself. And Aries, he had a wonderful sense of humor. Even having known all the dirty little secrets of the corrupt, of the powerful, he was often smiling, and always cracking jokes.

I expected my libel case even before it came, because a source told me the Napoleses weren’t happy with me. They weren’t happy with Aries either.

I unearthed the email he sent me after I told him there was a possibility we both were going to get sued:

Natashya... it would be an honor to stand beside you, raise our sweaty right hand and admit to our crime…

Scene 1: Stern but hopefully objective Judge: How do you plead?

Us: No contest, your honor. Guilty beyond reasonable doubt, for being beautiful, even without trying.

Judge: Guilty as charged!!!

You were beautiful in so many ways, Aries. Without even trying. – Rappler.com

In the news on the Lumads, with all the poverty, the killings and deaths, it’s difficult to imagine any explanation other than what is presented: the brutish military unreasonably attacking members of the New People's Army (NPA) while terrorizing sweet Lumads or forcing them to fight. 

It’s easy to forget that, even in the news, many sides are not given much time or space - maybe because the answers of the more traditional Datus, or even of the military, are less fantastic, less easy to understand, or the actors are just more reserved.

Apart from what I have read and watched, I had the opportunity to hear the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Lumads, some of whom are suspected of...something, on separate occasions. Their stories, told from very different perspectives from the media, turn out to make more sense than what I was prepared to believe.

On review, it occurs to me that people against the military cite a document without any source, or statements of the church to confirm whatever evidence they have. I don’t know when the church became a fact finding or investigative body. They aren’t even required to verify what they hear. Just because we think they don’t lie doesn’t mean they are not easily lied to.

And yet the evidence they demand from the other side is asked for with such incredulity. Between a people whose laws are not even written, a military with at least some sources of evidence, and politicians and other officials who should have access to documents, I can’t see how we can really believe one side or the other.

Big voices 

It made me think about how, though I am generally not hysterical, I can appear rational and apparently be so easily swayed by the people screaming the loudest, especially when the story is about poor davids and evil goliaths. It also made me think about how one-sided the media can be and how things snowball because politicians often react to partial information, same as me - except they can mobilize arms and make sweeping pronouncements from which they cannot back down.

There is still so much to know and we are not listening to what is not being said. No one is bothering to explain the allegations that the innocent school teachers and administrators they keep looking for are actually the suspected NPA members who teach Lumad kids how to assemble, carry, and use firearms and sing some other national anthem.

There are too many unanswered questions but come to think of it, all I hear are how the AFP is lying. Can it really be that one else is lying? That the NPA, who have much to gain from a fragmented community, is not lying? I don’t even think anyone has really figured out who the legitimate Datus are, or who should be the credible sources of community information are. Who knows where the stories are coming from?

The facts will hopefully come out.

In the meantime, this is what I do know: apparently very little about our indigenous peoples (IPs) - despite specializing for a while in the protection of traditional knowledge. I see our IPs as distant discovery channel subjects rather than as Filipinos - my own people who should be more kin to me than any other in the world.

Even knowing the difficulties of agrarian reform farmers, how much less I imagined our indigenous struggle to remain peaceful - despite all that’s being done to them and to their homes with such impunity - because they are so far away and friendly and uneducated. How have I been missing important things they say because I measure their value according to the untrusting habits of the city life I lead. Small things like: how can there be no witnesses or alibis?

I don’t know. I’ve never lived in forests or have witnesses who are also in hiding, hunted down on both sides by the NPA from whom they try to escape or the government forces who want to arrest them based on some evidence that no one has seen or verified.  

People have a tendency to hear things that support their beliefs. Lawyers are supposed to have been trained better, like investigators or scientists or journalists: to learn to get the truth by suspending disbelief and reserve judgment until as many sides are allowed to speak, then consider each argument as faithfully as if you had to argue it yourself. 

Listening, a rare gift when we rely so much on noise. - Rappler.com

Trina Monsod lectures on international criminal law at the Ateneo Law School and constituonal law at the FEU law school.

September 21, 2015 being the 43rd anniversary of the declaration of martial law, I would like to share three tales from the anti-Marcos resistance abroad that illustrate why breaking the law is sometimes the only way to live up to the demands of a higher law.

It was 1975, and I had just finished my PhD at Princeton. At that time, an academic career was something that I had no intention of pursuing. The task at that time was quite clear to me: to overthrow the Marcos dictatorship. I became part of an international network connected to the Philippine underground and a full-time activist. I went to Washington and helped set up an office that lobbied the US Congress to cut aid to the Marcos regime. 

Soon we realized that in order to do any effective work, we had to look at all the dimensions of US support for the dictatorship. For example, the largest part of US aid to Marcos was channeled through multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, and the problem was that the lack of transparency of the Bank meant that we couldn’t get any information about the Bank programs. The only information that we got came from sanitized press releases. It became clear that to show what the Bank was doing and expose it, we had to get the documents from within the Bank itself. At first, we slowly formed a network of informants within the Bank. These were acquaintances, "liberals with a conscience." Our work was part of a process of building what was effectively a counter-intelligence network not only within the Bank but also within the State Department and other agencies of the US government.

Well, these people started to occasionally bring us some documents, but this was a tedious – although necessary – process. The information was not enough, so we thought that it was necessary to resort to more radical means.

So, my associates and I investigated the patterns of behavior of Bank people, and we realized that there were some times in the year when there was nobody in the Bank: Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year’s Day, July 4, Memorial Day, etc. On those days and over a period of three years, we went to the Bank pretending that we were returning from a mission, with our ties askew and said that we were just coming from Africa, India, etc. The security guards always asked for our IDs. When we pretended to fumble for them, since we looked so tired, they said, ‘OK, just go inside.’ It always worked. As you can imagine, security was quite lax in those days.

Once we were inside, we were like kids let loose in a candy store. We took as many documents as we could – and not just reports on the Philippines – and photocopied them using the Bank facilities. This happened over three years!

The documents – some 3,000 pages of them on practically every Bank-supported project and program in the Philippines – provided an unparalleled look at the workings of a close relationship between two non-transparent authoritarian institutions, the World Bank and the Marcos regime. First, we held press conferences to expose the documents piece by piece, to the embarrassment of both the Bank and the Marcos regime. Eventually, we came out with a book, published in 1982 by Food First, entitled Development Debacle: The World Bank in the Philippines. According to many people, this book contributed to the unraveling of the Marcos regime. I hope they were right.

As for what I learned, well, it was that accepted or orthodox methods have their limitations and that to do really effective research sometimes you need to break the law. But you have to be utterly professional in the process. We were quite careful in going about it, and we were not able to tell the real story about how we got the documents until 10 years later (1992), when the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution in the US had lapsed. My associates and I could have gotten 25 years in jail had we been caught breaking into the Bank, though of course good behavior would have shortened that jail stint with an early parole.

But on a more serious note, the decision we had to make was not easy. It is never easy to decide to break the law, not only because of the penalties involved but because we all are so deeply socialized to follow the law. But we felt that we had no choice. Otherwise, the truth would have been buried for a long, long time, in the vaults of the World Bank.

How opposing Marcos got me addicted to burritos

In 1978, the dictator Marcos held one of his stage-managed elections.

To draw international attention to this vile maneuver, several of us took over the Philippine Consulate in San Francisco. We threw out the staff, including the consul general, and locked ourselves in.

A standoff of a few hours took place, as the police tried to convince us "terrorists" to give up. When we refused to do so, the SWAT team broke down the doors, fired tear gas at us, and through the application of force at strategic points of the body (e.g., placing the baton on one's throat and pulling it up), they succeeded in breaking up our human chain and put all of us under arrest.

At our trial a few weeks later, the judge offered us a lenient sentence after finding us "guilty" of a whole host of crimes, including trespassing, destruction of property, and resisting arrest. We refused the judge's offer, calling him Marcos' stooge, and told him we did not recognize the authority of the court and proceeded to walk out. At that point, the court marshals tackled us and hauled us off to the San Francisco County Jail in San Bruno, California, where we were told we would have to serve out a month-long sentence among hardened criminals.

After one week we decided we had to find a way to break out of the jail. So we staged a hunger strike, telling the press we would do it till we died. During the next week, we ate nothing. Not only did the other inmates not harm any of us. They donated their supplies of orange juice to us and started to chant the anti-Marcos slogans that we taught them. 

As I weakened, all that I could think of all day was a supersize carnitas burrito.

Fearing that we would in fact fast unto death and worried about the example of civil disobedience we were providing to the regular inmates, some of who were, in fact, thinking of joining our fast, the warden ordered us released after a few more days.

Upon release, I rushed to my favorite Mexican fast-food place on 16th and Mission in San Francisco, and downed the supersize carnitas burrito I had been dreaming about for over a week.

Not surprisingly, I got horribly sick from such instant gratification and spent the next week outside prison in a worse state than when I was in jail. Every time I went to the toilet, I grunted "Down with Marcos" with all my intestinal might, and that was the secret of my recovery.

Imelda, Van Cliburn, and pandemonium at Kennedy Center

It must have been 1980, during the depths of martial law, when news about the resistance to Marcos in the Philippines was so hard to get out to the international mainstream media. 

Imelda's coming to Washington, however, offered an opportunity. The event was Cecile Licad's concert at the Kennedy Center, which was attended by Imelda and her good friend, the renowned pianist Van Cliburn. Activists in the Anti-Martial Law Coalition in Washington, DC, decided to give the dictator's wife the surprise of her life: we planned to disrupt the concert.

Now, one disrupts political events, but never, never an exclusive event where the rich and the famous get together to connect with high-brow culture to have their souls washed and lifted by the music of Beethoven, Bach, and Brahms. But we uncivilized bastards were desperate. Nothing was going to stop us from spoiling the dictator's wife's evening and showing Washington and the world that the Philippine resistance was alive and kicking.

A number of us paid a fortune – some $75 a ticket – to get into the damned event, and I borrowed a friend's tweed blazer to look respectable. We waited till the end of the first piece, something from Tchaikovsky or some other mad Russian, before making our move.

At a given signal, I cried, "There's a fascist in the house and pointed to the box in the balcony where Imelda was sitting, pretending to appreciate the music, along with Van Cliburn, probably holding hands, though I couldn't tell for sure. A number of us rushed to the front and unfolded a banner that read "Down with the US-Marcos Dictatorship!"

At that point, pandemonium broke loose, with some people thinking someone shouted fire. The Washington, DC, police was called in, and over the next 20 minutes, they went after us as we ran between the rows of seats, jumping over people, with people screaming and shrieking. Finally, the last one of us was nailed down, wrested to the floor, handcuffed, arrested, and marched off to the police station.

The concert resumed, but Imelda's evening was spoiled. Unfortunately, Cecile Licad also lost her poise, but I guess that's what she got for allowing herself to be patronized by Imelda. As for Van Cliburn, I guess he probably began to realize he had to stop holding hands with Imelda or risk his reputation.

At the police station, we were told that the Kennedy Center management decided not to press charges, and when we told the police we were protesting Imelda's presence, they said, "Marcos' wife?" They laughed and let us go, showing that even among some policemen there were anti-fascist sentiments, at least when it came to Marcos.

The next day, a piece in the Washington Post carried the headline "Protesters Disrupt Kennedy Center Concert." Great. Barbarians 1, Marcos 0.

Anyway, for me, it was also a way to avenge the Beatles, who were nearly beaten up by Imelda's hordes when they snubbed a reception she gave when they visited Manila back in 1967 or 1968. The Beatles probably saw what the rest of us did not yet see that point. What prescience! That's one of the things that made them a great rock band. – Rappler.com

Former representative of Akbayan in the House of Representatives and author of numerous books, including Development Debacle: the World Bank in the Philippines.

Majority of comments on articles about Martial Law seem to be from staunch defenders of that era. There are and will always be citizens who see those years as an era of peace and prosperity in our country. 

We don't need to debate that. Instead we simply need to tell, retell and listen to the stories of those who survived those years. As the younger generation we need to do our own research, take the blinders off our eyes and learn what exactly life was like during Martial Law before coming up with flowery images of those years as a beautiful moment in history.

Silence by force 

You would never have seen an article such as this as I would have already been taken, tortured, and killed for my opinions. If Martial Law were still in effect, bloggers who wrote anything even remotely critical of the government or its cronies would be jailed like they do in other countries.

There would be none of your Facebook rants about the administration, Metro Manila traffic, or even the outfit a politician is wearing. In fact, there wouldn't be Facebook, Instagram, and Gmail in the Philippines the way these websites are banned in China.

If I wrote during Martial Law, I could be taken from my home the way 23-year-old Lily Hilao was for being a prolific writer for her school paper at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila. In April 1973, Lily was taken by the military, and was raped and tortured in front of her 16-year-old sister. By the time Lily's family retrieved her dead body, it bore cigarette burns on her lips, injection marks on her arms, bruises and gun barrel marks. Her internal organs were removed and her vagina was sawed off to cover signs of torture and sexual abuse. Liliosa Hilao is considered to be the first female casualty and martyr of Martial Law. 

Zero criticism 

Martial Law engineer Juan Ponce Enrile defined subversion during a 1977 BBC interview: “anybody who goes against the government or who tries to convince people to go against the government – that is subversion.” Proclamation 1081 gave the military the authority to arrest, detain, and execute anyone who even dared to breathe sadly about the Marcos administration.

Archimedes Trajano was only 21 when he questioned Imee Marcos on why she was the National Chairman of the Kabataang Barangay during an open forum. He was forcibly taken from the venue by Imee's bodyguards, and was tortured and thrown out of a building window, all because the presidential daughter was irked by his question.

Maria Elena Ang was a 23-year-old UP Journalism student when she was arrested and detained. She was beaten, electrocuted, water cured, and sexually violated during her detention.  

Dr Juan Escandor was a young doctor with UP-PGH who was tortured and killed by the Philippine Constabulary. When his body was recovered, a pathologist found that his skull had been broken open, emptied and stuffed with trash, plastic bags, rags and underwear. His brain was stuffed inside his abdominal cavity. 

Boyet Mijares was only 16 years old in 1977 when he received a call that his disappeared father (whistleblower and writer Primitivo Mijares) was still alive. The caller invited the younger Mijares to see him. A few days later, Boyet's body was found dumped outside Manila, his eyeballs protruding, his chest perforated with multiple stab wounds, his head bashed in, and his hands, feet and genitals mangled.

Trinidad Herrera was a community leader in Tondo when she was arrested in 1977. In this video she recounts being electrocuted on her fingers, breasts, and vagina until her interrogators were pleased with her answers to their questions. 

Neri Colmenares was an 18-year-old activist when he was arrested and tortured by members of the Philippine Constabulary. Aside from being strangled and made to play Russian Roulette, he witnessed fellow detainees being electrocuted through wires inserted into their penises, as well as being buried alive in a steel drum. 

Hilda Narciso was a church worker when she was arrested, confined in a small cell, fed a soup of worms and rotten fish, and repeatedly gang-raped. 

Necessary methods

60,000 were arrested during the first year of Martial Law alone, and many of their stories will never be told. Michael Chua wrote a paper detailing the torture methods used during the Marcos regime.

Aside from electrocution of body parts and genitals, it was routine to waterboard political prisoners, burn them using cigarettes and flat irons, strangle them using wires and steel bars, and rub pepper on their genitals. Women were stripped naked, made to sit on ice blocks or stand in cold rooms, and were sexually assaulted using objects such as eggplants smeared with chili peppers.

Forty-three years have passed. Time, as well as the circus that is Philippine governance make it easy to forget Martial Law as the darkest and most terrible moments in Philippine history. Many of its victims have died or have chosen to remain silent – silence being most understandable because these stories are truly difficult to remember, and much harder to tell. 

Stories need to be told

Yet these horrific stories need to be told over and over until we realize that the pretty cover of the book of the Marcos years is actually full of monster stories. We need to bring the graphic accounts of torture and murder to light so that those who rest comfortably in their illusions that the Marcos years were pleasant will at least be stirred. 

Instead we often hear from those who want to erase the evils of the past, those who tell us that these young people, many of them barely past their childhoods when they were tortured and killed, were violent rebels who sought to overthrow the government. Never mind that it was one of the most corrupt and cruel dictatorships the world has ever known, and that it was by the efforts of these young heroes that the reign of the Marcoses ended. 

Majority of Martial Law victims were in their 20s and 30s at that time – the same age our younger citizens are now – those who have the luxury of shrugging off the Marcos years as a wonderful time. Unscathed by a more cruel past, the younger generation is only too eager to criticize the current state of our government and our people as being undisciplined and requiring an iron fist such as the one Marcos used to supposedly create peace in the past.

They forget that if we were still under Martial Law (or should it return), such sentiments of “subversion” could cost them their lives, and that the same freedom and voice they use to reminisce about a time they know nothing about would have been muted and extinguished if we did not have the democracy we enjoy today.

Hindsight is always 20-20, as they say. It's convenient to look at the past with rose-colored glasses instead of memories of needles in your nail beds, electric wires attached to your genitals, and a barrel of a gun thrust inside your mouth, the way thousands of Martial Law victims suffered and still suffer to this day. 

Just because it didn't happen to you or your family doesn't mean it didn't happen to more than 70,000 victims during that time. Just because you were spared then doesn't mean you will be spared the next time this iron fist you wish for comes around. – Rappler.com 

As a citizen of an irreversibly globalized world, I often find myself cringing each time I watch a film that views “nationalism” as sacrosanct and endorses it. In my opinion, nationalism is like an alcoholic beverage — beneficial only when it is moderate. Too much of it can be counterproductive to the nation itself. 

While there are several definitions of nationalism, I refer to it here loosely as one’s loyalty to his or her own nation of birth which is sparsely grounded on language, ethnicity or culture. In this context, nationalism is dangerous because it instigates a structure of social dominance which could eventually incite dangerous domination of others by the arbitrary favored group. 

Nationalism can be dangerous because it goes beyond the realms of reason and tends to pit nation against nation (e.g., China-Philippines, Israel-Palestine) for superiority and ethnocentric survival. This makes nationalism hardly any different from racism. 

And don’t get me started about the perils of economic nationalism a.k.a. protectionism. 

Dangers of hyper-nationalism 

Here lies my problem with Heneral Luna, a provocative, well-meaning piece of Philippine cinema that can also be dangerous for its promotion of hyper-nationalism as the prime solution for the country’s woes. 

While admittedly, the invocation of national unity is something else and could help inspire the country’s energy towards a unified goal, this motivation can easily be misconstrued as a call for blind nationalism — which is a thoroughly different thing. 

While I’m not sure how much “creative license” director Jerrold Tarog allowed himself in his cinematic adaptation of the life of one of our country’s greatest military generals, it’s plain to see that Heneral Luna’s brand of nationalism is collectivistic. It tends to be fascistic and authoritarian just like Adolf Hitler’s and Ferdinand Marcos’. And having experienced such system first hand, we know enough to know just how damaging that can be to the country.

I am not trying to discount Heneral Luna’s achievement in terms of technicalities and innovation though. Its cinematography is awe-inspiring. Its form suits its content and doesn’t distract from it. 

Heneral Luna is certainly an upgrade from the usual historical-biopic films we’ve had in the recent years such as Bonifacio and El Presidente, both of which failed to humanize their protagonists by portraying them like flawless saints of blind patriotism, and in the process, denying them their audience’s empathy. 

Tarog’s direction and storytelling allowed us to see General Luna’s own human frailties – his sightless idealism and tendency to see the world as black and white as evidenced by his reluctance to compromise. Truth be told, it isn’t the lack of unity during that period that killed Luna as intimated by the movie, it’s his naïveté and stubbornness.

Filipino nationalism has always been an intricate and variegated phenomenon that remains an enigma even for us Filipinos up to this day. 

Maybe the problem is that we, as a nation, try too hard to become something we are not. Maybe the solution to our dilemma is quite simple: the acknowledgment and acceptance of our national diversity. Perhaps that should be our take-off point, and from there, slowly try to unkink the knots along the road towards a united vision. And while national unity sounds pretty damn good, it is simply a means to an end, not an end in itself.

Finally, love is never selfish. And though any form of love regards others, love regards the self as well. I would like to believe that our love of country is a two-way street. That if we love our nation, she will reciprocate that love and will never ask us to sacrifice our happiness for her. And if this is truly the case, then there’s no way our beloved nation will ever ask us to die futilely for her. – Rappler.com

Jan Albert Suing, 25, a Kapampangan living in Makati City, is a graduate student from the University of the Philippines Diliman and works for CSRSDI as a policy research associate.

“E di meron,” was the student’s curt response after Vice President Jejomar Binay was left with no choice but to admit that informal settlers – “about 3 or 5 percent” – continue to live in Makati.

This encounter happened a week ago when the Vice President took part at the University of the Philippines-Los Baños’s (UPLB) forum on governance and transparency. Students and faculty engaged in a candid conversation with the man who wants to become president. The forum covered a range of issues including dynasties, corruption and extra-judicial killings.

Forums like this breathe life into a toxic political environment. Thus far, the pre-campaign season has been defined by tasteless political point scoring – from exchanges of charots and chakas to ambiguous and almost meaningless statements of presidential contenders in carefully staged events. 

This is why UPLB’s town hall-style forum was an occasion that must not be taken for granted. The forum illustrated the power of citizens to redefine the quality of political conversations. It set the standard on how precise presidential aspirants should be when making claims. It showed how a vigilant audience can enforce accountability–fudging answers will be called out, evading responsibility will be booed.   

Talk is cheap 

Philippine politics has never had a dearth of orators capable of delivering glossy sound bites. Politicians who can flawlessly deliver tautologies and motherhood statements personify the impression that talk is cheap. But talk can also be meaningful, especially when citizens ask tough questions and demand thoughtful answers.

Asking tough questions forces candidates to elaborate on their positions. It challenges them to go beyond bullet points of beautiful things. To ask tough questions is to be insistent that flesh is put on the bones of abstract promises.  It empowers citizens to distinguish rhetoric from reality. It adds depth to our political conversation by going beyond platitudes and exposing candidates who are unable to provide a concrete roadmap to their vision for the country. Tough questions can reveal a candidate’s character. It can unmask a person’s instincts – the choice to lie, to pander, to duck, or to tell the truth.  

Culture of inquiry

The UPLB forum has successfully promoted the culture of asking tough questions. A direct question on political advertisements put Binay on record saying that none of the taxpayers’ money was spent on these commercials, which citizens, in turn, can fact check.

The Student Council Vice President’s line of questioning compelled the Vice President to admit that his role in the Aquino administration was mere “organizational,” not “functional.” This left audiences jeering the Vice President’s claim that being the second highest elected official of the land has very little authority. 

It is too early to lose hope and concede that the campaign season will be reduced to a battle of guns, goons, gold and gigabytes. Possibilities exist for 2016 to be a battle of ideas. In addition to the tough questions raised in Los Baños, we can extend lines of inquiry that we must press presidential aspirants to answer during the campaign period.

If Binay, Poe and Roxas, indeed, stand against corruption and put forward a pro-poor agenda, then they have no reason to avoid giving clear answers to these four questions:  

First, what is the policy behind the platform? While platforms tell us what is desirable, it is policy that lays out how these plans are made possible. To say we should increase the budget for education is one thing, but to explain how the proportions of the national budget will be reallocated to realize this promise is another. Does the candidate propose to reduce the budget of, for example, debt servicing? Then what happens to the government’s commitment to creditors? Perhaps reduce the proportion of the defense budget? Then what about the promise of AFP modernization to counter external threats? Do we borrow more money to pay for these investments? Then how can we justify these expenses to future generations who will shoulder these debts? A reasonable candidate will rank proposed programs in terms of priorities. It is only fair that voters know which dream holds more weight than the rest. 

Second, how will cabinet secretaries be selected? What are the criteria for selection? Who will be in charge of our highways and trains, the transition to K-12, land redistribution and OFWs on death row? No contender for the top political position in the country deserves serious attention if he or she has not thought about who runs the day-to-day aspect of nation building. The President is only as good as his or her appointments.

Third, what are the candidates’ rules on campaign donations? Have they accepted donations from drug lords, land grabbers, smugglers, labor rights violators and illegal gambling operators? Is there a mechanism which can ensure that no donor is powerful enough to define a candidate’s political agenda? How accurate were the State of Contributions and Expenditures that candidates filed in previous elections? What are the candidates’ personal relationships to big business? And, if a candidate claims to be impartial to certain business interests, why should we take his or her word for it?

Finally, how much is a kilo of rice? In Europe, the question “how much is a loaf of bread” is often used as proxy to test the extent to which candidates are in touch with ordinary citizens. If candidates truly know the everyday struggle of Filipino families, then they should know how much a kilo of rice costs. Jamby Madrigal was asked how much a kilo of galunggong six years ago when she was running for president, to which she replied “I am a vegetarian.” It is important to keep these pop quizzes going to test the authenticity of politicians who make bold claims about understanding the plight of the poor.

The rule applies to voters too

“Back to the good old days” was how Vice President Binay described his experience in UPLB. He expected such behavior, he said, reminding the public that he, too, was once a UP student. For all the Vice President’s faults, he, at least for an hour and a half, could not be faulted for being inattentive to an inquisitive audience.

Answering tough questions, however, is not only the responsibility of candidates.  As voters and citizens, we too must subject ourselves to critical questions. How do we distinguish facts from propaganda? What are our rules for engagement when discussing politics with friends whose opinions we find unacceptable? How can we unpack our biases towards particular candidates?

Whether it is in student forums, town hall meetings, televised debates, one-on-one interviews or in social media chatter, the culture of inquiry will challenge candidates to stop hiding behind slogans and spokespersons and protect citizens from falling into the dangerous trap of political apathy, inaction and gullibility.

A thriving culture of critical questioning allows voters, not spin doctors to define the campaign issues of 2016. Asking tough questions and censuring irresponsible answers ensure that the current political spectacle does not deteriorate into a festival of insignificance. – Rappler.com

Nicole Curato is a sociologist. She is currently a Discovery Early Career Research Award Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra.

Is age just a number?

The country’s total number of senior citizens continues to rise. The current population of Filipino senior citizens is estimated at 7 million, comprising nearly 7% of the total population. 

In 1995, the number of Filipinos 60 years old or higher was pegged at 3.7 million, representing 5.4% of the population. By 2000, this figure had increased to around 4.8 million or almost 6% of the total population. 

In the foreseeable future, the percentage of seniors vis-a-vis the total population might escalate to 10% and beyond.

Rights of senior citizens

We, the senior citizens of the Philippines, must fight for our rights. These rights are not simply for senior citizen discounts at restaurants, movie houses, pharmacies, and hospitals, although these are also welcome. 

We must fight against the growing pernicious culture in this country of "copy-catting" the western world's practice of putting its senior citizens out to pasture simply because they have reached their 60s. (READ: Health insurance for seniors)

Has anyone noticed, for example, the work ads that come out in print media which state the anyone above a specified age need not apply? 

A decade or two ago, many Filipinos in their 60s may be considered physically, mentally, and emotionally old. The life expectancy then was in the late 50s. But people today have a life expectancy that extends to their mid-to-late 70s, and most seniors are still physically and mentally active. 

The beautiful love story of two seniors, Francisco "King" Rodrigo and Boots Anson Roa is a testament to this. They got married in 2014, both for the second time. A 70-something-year-old King and a 60-something-year-old Boots are obviously still filled with the sense of wonder, adventure, love of the “young.” 

The country must adjust to this reality of a growing "youthful" senior population.

The remedy

There is admittedly a need to open up employment opportunities to the younger generation, but the remedy is not to put Seniors in homes for aged. 

The solution is for the government and the private sector to focus on the creation of more jobs for all – young and old alike – based on abilities, talent, and experience. One simply does not create employment for one sector of society by creating unemployment in another.

There is also a need to correct the growing mindset that senior citizens are of necessity infirm, mindless, and non-productive. (READ: Home for seniors) 

We, seniors, must fight for the right to continue to be productive for our communities, using our knowledge and experience that we have gathered over the years. Some of these knowledge and experiences are yet to be acquired by the younger generation.

We should fight for the right to gainful employment that will allow us to pass on our wealth of information to the next generations. (READ: Hunger and the elderly)

The government and the private sector can develop tests and systems – rigid, if need be – to screen those who, because of age and illness, can no longer productively contribute to society, from those who, despite age, continue to be valuable assets.

Start with barangays

Perhaps the fight for seniors’ rights can start at the barangay level. 

Every barangay should consider having a Senior Hall where seniors can congregate not just to passively share memories of yesteryears or to secure medical attention, but where they can also proactively teach and train the younger members of their community.

The seniors do not have to do this for free. A portion of the revenue of the barangay, including its internal revenue allotment, can be set aside to pay the qualified seniors for their community services.

On a broader scale, senior residents of barangays can and should, with the cooperation and support of the rest of the barangay, consider setting up Barangay Senior Associations which would serve as a proactive senior advisory body. It will be the voice of moderation to the Barangay Assembly, the Barangay Development Council, and the Barangay Council — a barangay’s most influential and potent bodies.

The Barangay Seniors Associations of the over 42,000 barangays nationwide could then come together in a National Confederation of Seniors Filipino Citizens, which could proactively be involved not only in the affairs of the elderly, but also be a source of wisdom for the national and local governments. 

This is not a unique suggestion. In the United States, for example, there is a national society for seniors. When the Seniors speak, even Washington listens. Meanwhile, other countries like Japan, Great Britain, France, and Germany have highly influential and organized societies representing seniors.

There are laws that enable and empower people with disabilities. Let us push for and support legislations that would provide the same for senior citizens. 

It is important to empower and enable senior citizens through gainful employment according to their abilities, so they can remain productive citizens. 

Most of us seniors grew up in a culture of learning at the footsteps of our parents and grandparents. We are all members of the so-called "Greatest Generation.”

Now that today’s youth are immersed in self-centered activities and their laptops, cellphones, and electronic gadgets, our country might be in danger of drifting away from the real and important values that, that “Greatest Generation” has sought to pass on to the young: being someone of service to others, and being engaged in family, community, and nation-building.

It is about time that the young be taught to sit, listen and learn once again at the footsteps of the wise and the experienced. – Rappler.com

Rafael E. Evangelista is 74 years old. He is a lawyer and currently a consul of the Republic of Lithuania to the Philippines, the National Commander of the Defenders of Bataan and Corregidor, the director of the Prime Foundation for Media Arts, and the President and National Co-Convenor for the Gising Barangay Movement.

When Philippine President Benigno Aquino III formally declared 2015 as the year to visit the Philippines, I thought “right on!” 

Having spent nearly four years living in the nation while serving as the US Ambassador to the Asian Development Bank and then returned many times as a board member of humanitarian organization Community & Family Services International, I have long felt that the beauty and charm of the nation deserved much more attention.

From Batanes to Baguio to Sorsogon to Siquijor and Cotobato, I have seen the breadth of the country and all it has to offer travellers to and within Asia.

On March 30, Aquino signed Proclamation 991 declaring 2015 as “Visit the Philippines Year.” And indeed the nation will get some very high-profile visitors, expected to include US President Barack Obama, when the APEC summit comes to Manila this November.

Against this backdrop, I was saddened to hear the recent news of a return to violence and kidnapping. As of Thursday, September 24, two Canadians, a Norwegian and a Filipina were still missing after having been kidnapped from a tourist resort on Samal Island, near Davao City. 

The news brought back memories from more than a decade ago of kidnappings by the Islamist separatist group Abu Sayyaf and others. The deaths of hostages in the Dos Palmas kidnappings in Palawan in early 2001 dominated headlines some 15 years ago.

Now, from Manila to Bangkok, questions are being raised again about how safe is travel to Southeast Asia.

Thailand – the leading Southeast Asian destination for visitors – continues to investigate the bombing of a revered religious shrine in central Bangkok. The August bombing, which injured more than a 100 and killed 20 people – many of ethnic Chinese origin – led Hong Kong to raise its  “Outbound Travel Alert for Bangkok to red. “Residents intending to visit Thailand (Bangkok) should adjust their travel plans and avoid non-essential travel, including leisure travel,” said the official Hong Kong government news release.

Other nations still have travel warnings or advisories in place for Bali and other Southeast Asian destinations, well after the September 2001 terrorist attacks which devastated the travel and tourism sector for some time.

Arrests and investigations continue to play out as to who was behind the Bangkok bombing, and whether an "international terrorist group" was involved. Regardless, steps will need to be taken on fundamental traveler safety and security issues. This is as true in Thailand as it is in the Philippines. And such steps must be taken not just for tourists, but also for a nation's own citizens.  All lives matter, tourist or resident.

Greater connectivity

So, what more can the Philippines and indeed all the nations of Southeast Asia do as a region to keep travel and tourism as a key economic contributor to local businesses and communities? 

The 10 countries that comprise the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, have committed in the past to a vision of “responsible, sustainable and inclusive tourism development." The need for greater connectivity of Southeast Asia’s diversity of destinations also will be underscored in an “ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan, 2016-2020” to be launched at the 2016 ASEAN Tourism Forum to be held in the Philippines. 

But ensuring greater information sharing and other steps to ensure visitor safety is also critical. Policy makers also should recommit to three broad steps to ensure that Southeast Asia remains competitive, individually and collectively, and safe as a destination. 

First, ASEAN member nations must work to build greater flexibility and segmentation into their efforts.  The ability of hotels and tour operators, among others, to adapt is critical particularly as the visitor mix evolves. Meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions may well come to the forefront for some destinations. The growing numbers of Chinese tourists and the need to tailor marketing and outreach efforts to their needs, just as has been done for Korean and Japanese visitors in the past, is one clear trend that can be leveraged.  

Chinese travellers already now make up about 25 percent of all foreign visitors annually to Thailand, and their presence is being felt across the region. More than 4 million visitors from China traveled to Thailand in the first half of this year alone, and those numbers were expected to grow, prior to the recent bombing.  

The Philippines too must be prepared for growing numbers but also a shifting makeup of inward bound visitors' home countries. The aftermath of the killing of Hong Kong tourists taken hostage on a bus near Rizal Park in 2010 as well as tensions between China and the Philippines over territory in the West Philippines Sea led to drops in Chinese visitors to the country.

Second, all 10 nations of ASEAN must continue to invest in their product offering. This must include finding funds for the maintenance of existing destinations as well as the establishment of new ones.  While not every nation will have the resources of a Singapore to fund landmark new attractions such as the city-state’s award-winning Gardens by the Bay, investment and a supporting regulatory environment is critical to ensure continued competitiveness.

The need for resources for both development and maintenance also is best addressed by partnership with and involvement of the private sector. Development of a corruption–free, enabling environment for business to succeed must be a clear priority.

The recent “2015 Formula 1 Singapore Airlines Singapore Grand Prix” is just one example of a corporate-supported travel attraction and how public and private sectors can work together. And as hotels and restaurants must reinvest in their properties, so too must government-owned attractions, from national parks to state-funded museums and airports.

And third, all of ASEAN must recognize that the region’s sustained attractiveness will be driven by its residents and the services they provide – and then act accordingly.  At the heart of Southeast Asia’s attractiveness as a destination must be its people – more than buildings or beaches, no matter how historic or attractive. Educational investments must follow as well as access to capital, with clear metrics for success.

Community involvement

For emerging destinations in particular, this focus on human resources and capacity building is as critical as any focus on building core physical infrastructure. 

Community involvement also will be important to build support for nascent travel and tourism efforts and to help ensure tourism dollars stay in the community. Even the richest of ASEAN’s member states also must address the issue of human capital as higher paying industries draw people away.

Even amid terrorism worries, Southeast Asia’s attractiveness as a destination rightly endures. Tourism can more than survive. It can continue to thrive, attracting growing numbers from Hong Kong, Mainland China, Japan, Korea and elsewhere.

Many visitors to the Philippines can attest to this – that it is indeed “more fun” in the Philippines. But beyond the brand campaigns, a focus on strengthened security and basic law and order will be fundamental to the sustained growth of any ASEAN member state’s tourism sector, including the Philippines'. 

Vigilance and preparation are key. From Metro Manila to the islands of Mindanao, lessons must be learned and acted upon if “Visit Philippines Year” is to succeed this and every subsequent year. – Rappler.com

Curtis S. Chin, a former U.S. Ambassador to the Asian Development Bank, is managing director of advisory firm RiverPeak Group, LLC.  Follow him on Twitter at @CurtisSChin.

This is in response to the iSpeak article "The Problem with Heneral Luna" published on September 23:

As a citizen of an irreversibly globalized world, I often find myself cringing when I see people reacting against nationalist causes. Although it is true that nationalism is like an alcoholic beverage which requires moderation, it is clearly different from the idea of hyper-nationalism and racism. 

Truly, there are several definitions which can be used to define nationalism. From primordialism, constructivism, to modernism, such a definition changes according to one’s approach. However, if we are to abide with professor Teodoro Agoncillo’s definition, he would define nationalism as simply the defense of one’s independence. Hence to overstep these boundaries is to become hyper-nationalists, that is, when we seek to act aggressively towards other countries in the name of our superior race (its underpinning being similar to racism). 

So, how can we misconstrue one for the other? 

False presentist review of Heneral Luna

Nationalism, as a concept, can also be seen not only from different perspectives but also from different time periods. 

During the days of Luna, the Philippines was still in its embryonic stage when the Americans decided to “benevolently assimilate” the islands. As the film depicted – which is also historically accurate – other Filipinos in the Aguinaldo cabinet were vacillating towards the idea of making the Philippines an American Protectorate, and it was this very idea that Antonio Luna was against.

He was not arguing for the annexation of the United States, nor did he lambast their cultural background. He simply wanted to protect the country’s freedom, and that was what he died fighting for, despite the disarray of the cabinet. This was the context that Heneral Luna dwelled on, and not on today’s generation of disillusioned nationalists.

Let us not forget that nationalism, at least in Asia, developed primarily as a response against colonial oppression and not as a tool for assimilating cultural minorities which is what, others may argue, it has become today. Hence, to judge a movie set in a colonial context from today’s post-colonial issues is a sin of Presentism.

Being a nationalist in a globalizing age 

Also, while it is true that nationalism is a difficult concept to use these days, provided the post-WWII consequence of hyper-nationalism, it is an exaggeration and an absurdity to equate Luna’s brand of nationalism (in defense of motherland) with Hitler’s Nazism (which sought world domination) and Marcos’ corruption (his “strong-society” is more akin to greed than love of country).

Be that as it may, what is wrong with a film espousing such nationalist sentiments in today’s variegated world? 

It is precisely because of this globalizing community that we need such films all the more. Our country has been lagging behind for the past 50 years in comparison to our Asian neighbors, and one culprit could be our lack of national identification. We are too preoccupied with self-gain that we forget the greater good. Is this not the case with today’s politicians? 

If you are to re-watch the movie, it not only aims to bolster nationalism but also directs our attention to this repetitive cycle of Philippine politics – personal interest, backstabbing and murder. 

How do we hope to compete in this global, not to mention the ASEAN community, if our very people are busy squabbling among each other?

Ultimately, what the movie endeavors to point out is not the need to die for one’s country since this act of nationalism is only true for Luna’s time. 

Today, we are free to express our love of country without the need for martyrdom. What Heneral Luna does is to therefore pose us this question: this was what your ancestors were willing to do for their country. What are you willing to do for yours today? – Rappler.com

Jose Mathew P. Luga is an instructor in history from the University of the Philippines-Baguio

Various stories have circulated over the years since the fall of the Marcos regime. Some of these stories are about the origins of the "Yellow Confetti Rallies" that galvanized the business community in Makati shortly after Ninoy Aquino's assassination in 1983.  

Subsequent yellow confetti rallies in other parts of the country, particularly Cebu and Davao, replicated the Makati experience during that period. These Makati confetti rallies ended in 1986, the year that Ferdinand Marcos fled the country. 

One such story attributes the Makati rallies to the late Senator Butz Aquino and to the organization he formed called the August Twenty-One Movement or ATOM. This story goes: as a street parliamentarian, Butz was the pasimuno (leader) of the EDSA People Power Revolution of 1986 when he led ATOM, and yellow confetti then rained from Makati's high rise buildings.

Without any intention of discrediting Butz Aquino, who indeed played a very important role — alongside Cardinal Sin and Cory Aquino — in the phenomenon of what is now called the EDSA People Power Revolution, this story, and other stories like it, should be corrected and clarified. 

This version of the story could lead Filipinos to believe that it was ATOM that was responsible for the rain of yellow confetti coming from Makati's high rise buildings that led to the protest that "washed away the dictatorship." 

Another story that has circulated is that the Makati confetti rallies were a spontaneous reaction from Makati denizens to the excesses of Marcos, a story of spontaneity that scratches only the surface of what really transpired. There was indeed some spontaneous combustion in Makati, but not in this simplistic and romantic way.

Truth to tell, neither Butz nor ATOM had anything to do with the organization of the "yellow confetti" revolt of the business sector in Makati — except as participants in the marches that ensued after and as a consequence of the confetti storm that enveloped Ayala Avenue and its environs. 

The confetti rallies of Makati were the brainchild of 8 persons who wanted to mobilize the business community immediately after the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983. They were Francis Laurel, Pec Castro, Gus Lagman, Pete Estrada, Tony Mapa, Lito Banayo, myself, and an 8th member who prefers to remain anonymous. (Of the 8 members, Pec Castro and Tony Mapa have since passed on.)

The 8 had agonized for days after Ninoy's assassination on what they could do to show their solidarity with Ninoy's cause. The group had been meeting for many months secretly in the back rooms of Makati every Monday (hence, the name they gave to themselves, "The Monday Group"), to discuss  how they could possibly help end the reign of the conjugal dictatorship.

One day in one flash of genius, the group agreed that since the Filipino loves fiestas, they would go the confetti route to mobilize the business community. The idea of organizing confetti rallies proved to be a brilliant one. 

The mobilization of the rallies however took painstaking planning and surreptitious implementation. An organizer for each major building in Makati, specially along the "triangle" formed by Ayala, Paseo de Roxas, and Makati Avenue, had to be located. Sworn to secrecy, the organizers were then tasked to organize and mobilize the employees and, if possible, the employers in the buildings where they worked. 

The instructions to the employees conscripted were simple: "Wait for an explosion (from a big firecracker called bawang that would explode from a building midway up Ayala Avenue), drop confetti (preferably yellow) from your offices, go down from your office buildings and work places, and gather on Ayala Avenue.”

The employees were of course informed that the rallies were meant to protest the assassination of Ninoy, and that they would have an anti-Marcos drift.

Marchers from the greater Makati area and from other parts of Metro Manila were also mobilized to converge on the Ayala "triangle." In subsequent confetti rallies, known critics of the administration and other personalities from the opposition were also invited to speak to the gathered crowds.

The Monday Group had another stroke of genius when it concluded that it would be difficult to keep the marchers converging in the  Makati "triangle" in place for very long, unless there was a "glue" to hold the crowds. 

The marchers, tired and thirsty after their marches, would tend to drift away at the end of the marches, even with the best of speakers on hand to address the crowds. 

To fill up the "triangle" and to keep the area filled through the working hours, the Monday Group realized that the Makati employees would provide the needed glue. It became clear that committed employees, who were not exhausted by the marches, could stay for the duration of the rallies. For other employees, of course, the confetti rallies provided them the opportunity to play hooky from work.

In fairness, though, many employers and bosses were willing conspirators and participants in the rallies themselves.

In retrospect, none of the rallies during the so called "EDSA 2" had this "glue," which accounted for why most of the marches of EDSA 2 quickly dissipated after the marchers reached their destination points in Makati.

Employees unite

The plan for the confetti rallies in Makati worked to perfection, far beyond the dreams of the Monday Group. 

The Makati "triangle," in the first confetti rally that was called for on a specified Friday, exploded in a shower of yellow confetti as large crowds came down from Makati office buildings. It was the start of the business revolt that could not thereafter be stopped. 

In what seemed like a spontaneous combustion, this first confetti rally ignited other regular Friday rallies that lasted and spread until Marcos fled in 1986. 

People who were not part of the original organized rally groups started to join the Makati rallies in droves, thousands at a time. Employees started on their own initiative to cut up their PLDT yellow pages into confetti that was showered over Makati during every rally. 

The anti-Marcos mindset in Makati took on a death-challenging life of its own. Even when Marcos sent in armed Metrocom troops into the triangle the day after the first yellow confetti rally, the employees were not to be deterred. They unilaterally took to the rooftops and rained pickup missiles against the hapless troops. 

When Makati Mayor Nemesio Yabut tried to hold his own pro-Marcos rally at the junction of Ayala and Paseo de Roxas, Yabut and his hakot crowds were subjected to much the same treatment as the Metrocom troops from the Makati rooftops. 

Today, the so-called revolt of the business community against the dictatorship is attributed by many to the yellow confetti rallies of Makati.

Until now, the Monday Group has never spoken or written openly about their organizing role in the Makati confetti rallies.

We have preferred to remain faceless for years. But in the face of inaccurate accounts of how the confetti rallies started, the Monday Group have decided to tell the story as it happened. Like everything historical, there comes a time when the true story of these rallies should be shared. 

In September, during the anniversary of the declaration of Martial Law, I have, on behalf of the Monday Group, decided to share our story. – Rappler.com

Rafael E. Evangelista is a 74-year-old retired capital partner of the international law firm of Baker & Mckenzie. He is currently the consul of the Republic of Lithuania to the Philippines.

This was originally posted on the author's Facebook page:

This is an open letter to the ever-so-righteous Filipino voters and to those who aren’t even registered:

Dear ever-so-righteous Filipino voter,

Here are some of the reasons behind the “I won’t vote” mindset:

• “I don’t like the candidates.”
• “They’re just the same.”
• “Nothing will really happen once they are elected.”
• “They are all TraPo (Traditional Politician).”
• “I’m not a registered voter.”
• “I don’t care.”

If you have this mindset, hear me out:

1. You don’t like them? 

Whether you like it or not, one of them will win and eventually become your president, vice president, or whatever. You are a citizen of your country, you have laws to follow and one of those laws is to recognize that whoever gets elected will be your leader, unless you renounce your citizenship and get out of your country. What happens if your bet loses? At least you can say that you had exercised your right to vote and you have the legitimacy to oppose your new leaders based on the standards, reasons, and merits you had when you voted.

2. They’re all just the same? 

Do you have data and evidence to support this? The campaign season hasn’t even started, wait for televised debates or attend programs in your area if ever they visit your place. If not, use social media. They say social media will play a very vital role in the 2016 national elections. (READ: #TheLeaderIWant)

We are the social media capital of the world. You know, to be honest I’m also an #AlDub fan, I hope that when the campaign season starts, we can have that same energy when we participate on intellectual or rational online debates.

We must use social media to widen the perspectives of everyone to register, to vote, to scrutinize the candidates, to research about them, and to fact-check them. After all, in one click we can have access to almost all the information we need and want. If we can set a world record for tweeting #AlDub over 12 million times, perhaps we can also show the world that we can do better when we’re talking about the future of our country.

3. Nothing will happen once they are elected? 

Since when did you realize that you can see the future? Better make that a business to have extra income then. Kidding aside, it’s easy to say that but what are your bases?

Have you prejudged candidates because of their names, popularity, or their connections? Is that a valid reason? If you say yes, ask yourself this: have you done something to make things better? Not just for you, but for your community. If you’ve done something, well and good. Do not stop, the struggle continues. But if you’ve done nothing, more than complaining online, do something. Move.

4. TraPo? 

Well, this is the common reason we don't vote for certain candidates, right? They are Traditional Politicians because of how they promote their names, how they approach people, how they make decisions, how they do everything. Because their names have been there for quite a while, they must be TraPo.

So who is not TraPo? Who does things the other way around? That’s an ideal candidate, we all want that, but before you support someone who isn’t like that, do your research first. You just might have missed his ads on TV, YouTube, radio, or even billboards in some provinces.

I’m not saying I’m all for TraPo, what I want to point out is that we have this certain mentality to put everyone down, to highlight their mistakes (which is also okay), to label them and to never acknowledge the good things they’ve done. But remember to also recognize their merits, if any.

Ideally, some politicians are where they are now because of the good things they’ve done in the past. If they messed around along the way, then scrutinize them.

5. Not a registered voter? 

Then what are you waiting for?

Don’t tell me you’re one of those Filipinos scrutinizing candidates or complaining about the government, and yet you're not a registered voter? Shame on you.

I’ve always said this and I will say it again, if you are eligible to register but you decided not to register and vote, you have no right to criticize the government. It’s your fault for not participating in the first place.

I’ll respect your opinions only if you have registered and voted. The deadline for registration is on October 31, you still have time. Visit the offices of the Commission on Elections in your city hall or surf the Internet for more details like the Tatak Botante Facebook page.

6. You do not care? 

Then to me, you are a selfish person.

As long as you are a citizen of the Philippines, as long as you are using the roads, the sidewalks, being protected by the police, or enjoying any kind of services that the government offers, it is your obligation to care about your country. How? By showing that you care. You must think of your country's future. One simple way is to vote for the fittest leaders who will steer our country towards a better state than where we are today. 

That's all for now, you righteous one. – Rappler.com

Jules Guiang is a TV host and youth leader. He is the founder and board chairman of the National Alliance of Youth Leaders and the Tatak Botante voter education campaign. 

How unfortunate that even now, some people still look at Muslims with discrimination and hate in their eyes. After all these years, little has changed.

I am a Muslim. Do I look like I’m carrying a bomb? Do I look like a terrorist to you? Do I look like someone who is capable of killing innocent people? Do I look like I might murder you where you stand?

Last week, a powerful bomb ripped through a bus in Zamboanga City, killing 1 person and wounding around 50 others.

The usual suspect? A Muslim.

A sketch of the suspect doing the rounds on social media describes him as someone who “used Tagalog language” and was a “Muslim type.”

The “Muslim type” apparently meant that the suspect looked like a Muslim or sounded like a Muslim or wore something that hinted he was a Muslim.

The sketch was released by the National Bureau of Investigation Region 9 which, in the past, was slow to act on their job. The NBI was surprisingly quick this time; in fact, so quick that it exposed how, as an agency of the government, it can easily judge and implant hate. (READ: DOJ orders probe into NBI agents over 'Muslim type' tag)

The description clearly proves the anti-Muslim bigotry and Islamophobia dangerously simmering within many of us.

We are reminded of the 14-year-old Muslim in Texas, Ahmed Mohamed, who was arrested and treated like a criminal after he brought a home-made electronic clock to school. He has hopes of becoming an engineer, but a teacher and the Irving Police treated him like a criminal instead.

We are reminded of a Muslim mother onboard a Delta Air Lines flight from Florida to Detroit with her children, who was harassed in February. A woman first complained that Darlene Hider’s children were being disruptive. But after noticing her hijab, the woman reportedly told her, “This is America!” Hinder felt so small, especially with her children around, witnessing the display of bigotry and Islamophobia.

In the Philippines, Muslims have long been the objects of discrimination and prejudice for many decades.

We are seen as barbaric, a community that resorts to violence to resolve conflicts. 

We are feared as we are always, always seen as the criminals. We are the ones behind every bomb attack in the country, every massacre, every murder, every robbery, every abduction, every rape, every case of corruption. 

We are seen as capable of everything that is evil.

But there are good Muslims, they say. The good Muslims are dead Muslims.

Yes, there are dangerous Muslims. Muslims who are drug lords. Muslims who are war lords. There are murderers among us. There are corrupt Muslims.

But there are dangerous Christians, too. Christians who are drug lords. Christians who are war lords. There are many Christian murderers. And certainly, a horde of corrupt Christians.

But you don’t see an NBI report identifying a suspect as a “Christian-type” – or “Cebuano-type” or “Ilocano-type” or “Ilongo-type."

The poison brought by Islamophobia has resulted in the suffering of many Muslims. There are countless stories of Muslim professionals unable to find jobs easily because of their hijab or because of their names – the “Muslim-type” names.

It is because of this that many Muslims are languishing now in Philippine jails, many of them mistakenly arrested fior suspicion of terrorism.

In Davao City, there is a real estate company that refuses to sell condo units to Muslims, despite a city ordinance that bans discrimination based on gender, color or religion. This is true despite Mayor Rodrigo Duterte’s support for the passage of the ordinance.

A close friend of mine, a proud Tausug from Basilan, is often mistaken as a non-Muslim. 

“Parang hindi ka Muslim kasi maputi ka (You don't look like a Muslim because you have fair skin)” or “Parang hindi ka Muslim kasi ang bait mo (You don't seem like a Muslim because you're nice)” are just  some of the comments that he often gets. These comments never flatter him, as they never should. Always he takes offense, feeling that his identity is belied by the color of his skin or his manners perceived as mild compared to others.

That the NBI describes a suspect as Muslim-type is evidence of deeply-rooted prejudice. That people in law enforcement possess this kind of prejudice is no small matter. This same prejudice poisons them and allows them to justify trumped-up charges, illegal arrests, and human rights violations against my fellow Muslims. 

The NBI sketch is proof that the poison is still within us. – Rappler.com

We are living in an era of pervasive discrimination, racism, and social inequality. We are living in a world where we are easily judged. Every day, we wake up to a society where freedom is not always an option. 

Discrimination among Muslims has been too obvious lately. 

A few months ago, Tahera Ahmad was denied an unopened soda can on an affiliated US domestic flight. Why? The flight attendant said Ahmad might use the can as a weapon. A few days ago, 14-year-old Ahmed Mohamed was arrested in Texas for bringing a home-made clock to school. Ben Carson, Republican US presidential candidate, also recently said that no Muslim should ever become the US president.

Meanwhile, in Zamboanga City, news broke about a suspected bomber who was then labeled as a “Muslim type.” 

Now, what do these mean? Aren't these manifestations of discrimination, inequality, and oppression? Where is social justice now? (READ: NBI's 'Muslim type' profile)

Why are we being judged just because we wear a veil? Why are we being judged just because we are Muslims? 

'Islamophobia'

I have been wondering why a non-Muslim can grow his beard without any fear of being suspected of bad intentions. But when a Muslim sports a beard, there is a high chance he would be labeled an extremist. (READ: DOJ orders probe NBI agents over 'Muslim type' tag)

I have been wondering why nuns can cover themselves from head to toe, but when an Islam sister does this, she is often misjudged. I have been wondering why, when a person protects his land, he is called a hero; but when a Muslim does it, he is tagges as a terrorist.

I wasn't aware of the term “Islamophobia." Don’t you think it’s too nasty? Don’t you think it disrespects Muslims?

Are we really living in a free world if Chinese-Muslims are prohibited from "fasting," one of Islam's pillars, during the holy month of Ramadan?

Don’t you think it is useless declaring a holiday when the actual day isn’t the declared one? How can you expect Muslims to feel the essence of the two most important feasts of Islam community when they need to rush to work or school after Eid’l Fitr (Feast of Breaking the Fast) or Eid’l Adha (Feast of Sacrifice) prayer? It happened not just once.

Inhumane

The suffering of Muslims in the Philippines is inhumane. But I also believe that our Muslim brothers and sisters from other parts of the world are even more oppressed.

Religious discrimination has become too epidemic, too invasive. It is now or never – discrimination has to end. Imagine a world where religion and race are no longer issues. It is the kind of world I bet we would all want to live in.

Discrimination is the root of human division, and it has to disappear. Otherwise, wars will never end. It must be scratched out from people’s mind or else the youth will never learn to correct their misconceptions.

We also need to focus on cultivating human relations, regardless of differences in gender, nationality, religious faith, class, education, among other factors. For a simple reason: because we are all human. We are all the same; we all want to be respected.

We should never forget past achievements like the African-Americans who fought for their civil rights in the US, and the women who fought for equality. Muslims are also struggling to fight for their rights, we are also aiming to be truly accepted in this society.

I am optimistic of a future where the world has no vacancy for discrimination because it will be filled with peace, love, and harmony. And that future starts now, as we end discrimination now. – Rappler.com

Yarah Musa is a first year Legal Management student at the Ateneo de Zamboanga University. She is a Rappler Mover in Basilan.

Image via Shutterstock

The Philippine military has repeatedly stood aside while paramilitary forces have attacked indigenous villages and schools in the southern region of Mindanao. These forces have committed killings, torture, forced displacement, and harassment of residents, students, and educators with impunity.

The Philippine government should urgently act to end these abuses and investigate alleged complicity by military personnel. (TIMELINE: Attacks on the Lumad of Mindanao)

Paramilitaries in Mindanao have been terrorizing tribal people while the military at best does nothing. The Aquino administration should not only be cracking down on the paramilitaries, but also on the military officers supporting them.

Residents interviewed by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and government officials have linked military personnel to the two paramilitary groups involved in the attacks. Surigao del Sur’s governor, Johnny Pimentel, publicly accused the military of creating and controlling the Magahat Bagani Force (the “Magahat”) paramilitary group. “The military created a monster,” Pimentel told reporters on September 6, 2015.

Human Rights Watch received reports that elements of the military were consistently nearby when the Alamara group carried out attacks in Davao del Norte. In some instances, the troops accompanied paramilitaries as they harassed students and teachers of a tribal school in the town of Talaingod. 

“The soldiers stayed outside the classrooms but allowed the Alamara to go inside, fully armed, accusing us of being supporters of the NPA (New People’s Army),” said one student, referring to an incident in March.

Tribal and environmental groups have accused the military of using these paramilitaries, who are tribal members and thus familiar to local residents, to help clear ancestral areas to pave the way for mining companies and other business interests.

The government has designated the Caraga region, which includes Surigao del Sur, as the “mining capital of the Philippines.” Davao del Norte and Bukidnon are also known for rich mineral and natural resources that indigenous peoples (IPs) claim as their ancestral domain.

Attacks

On September 1, the Magahat paramilitary group allegedly attacked a tribal school in Surigao del Sur province, torturing and killing an educator and two tribal leaders. The attack caused an estimated 4,000 residents to flee their homes, mostly to an evacuation camp in Tandag City, the capital of Surigao del Sur. (READ: Lumad killings unacceptable – UN experts) 

Since 2014, a paramilitary group called the Alamara has committed violence against villages of IPs in the provinces of Bukidnon and Davao del Norte. The group has particularly harassed students at tribal schools run by religious and nongovernmental groups, claiming that these schools are used to indoctrinate tribal children in communist ideology. 

School administrators respond that the government-accredited schools teach approved subjects attuned to the tribe’s culture. 

These attacks have resulted in the closure of some schools and the disruption of classes. Hundreds of residents fled their villages and sought refuge at a Protestant church compound in Davao City, where children hold classes under trees and tents.

Save Our Schools Network, a Manila-based advocacy group, lists 52 attacks on schools in 4 Mindanao provinces from 2014 to mid-2015 by combined paramilitary and military forces. While paramilitaries have attacked public schools, most of their targets are tribal schools in far-flung villages where the NPA is also present. 

The Philippine government should join the Safe Schools Declaration, which was opened for endorsement in May in Oslo, Norway. The Declaration outlines concrete measures that all governments can take to better protect students, teachers, and schools from attack.

The Philippine armed forces has denied allegations of direct or indirect involvement in the paramilitary attacks. It has instead accused the NPA and alleged supporters of spreading what military officials call “black propaganda.” 

At a September 15 news conference inside the armed forces headquarters in Manila, 3 tribal leaders denied the military’s involvement in the violence, and accused the NPA of instigating it. However, Pimentel and other tribal groups said that two of the 3 leaders at the news conference were actually leaders of the Magahat and the Alamara.

“The armed forces is not involved in these alleged abuses. What is happening is a tribal war,” Major General Cesar Lactao, chief of the 4th Infantry Division, told Human Rights Watch, noting that the Magahat and the Alamara as well as the victims themselves were all from tribal communities. He asserted that the allegations were just “propaganda” by the military’s enemies.

Lactao announced on September 17 the formation of a task force to pursue action against the paramilitaries. The police earlier recommended charges against 23 alleged members of the Magahat, including 3 of its leaders, but no arrests have been made. The official Commission on Human Rights announced that it will conduct an inquiry into the alleged abuses. 

The military’s claims of “tribal war” and denials of complicity fall flat when soldiers do nothing to stop grievous crimes happening right nearby them.

(WATCH: Lumad killings not due to tribal war — UN Rapporteur)

{source}<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pZxeCoOzxc8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>{/source}

President Aquino should immediately order the Justice Department to conduct an impartial and credible investigation into these attacks, and prosecute those responsible. — Rappler.com

Phil Robertson is the deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), an international non-profit, non-governmental human rights organization. HRW aims foraccurate fact-finding, impartial reporting, effective use of media, and targeted advocacy.

Nasaksihan ng madla ang pinanawagan ng Sanggunian na “malaking” pagkilos ng Iglesia ni Cristo noong Agosto 27-Setyembre 1, 2015, sa isinagawang rally sa harap ng DOJ at sa EDSA upang iparinig sa gobyerno at sa mga mamayan ang nagkakaisa raw nilang paninindigan. Napapaniwala nila ang mga sumama sa rally na ang isinagawa nila ay pakikiisa sa Ama at sa Kanyang Anak na si Hesukristo. Subali't ito ba ang “kaisahan” na itinuturo ng Bibliya na pakikiisa sa Ama at sa Anak?

Kung babalikan ang kasaysayan, mapagtatanto na hindi sa isang iglap lamang natamo ng Iglesia ang katatagan ng pagkakaisa nito. Ito ay bunga ng matiyagang pagtuturo ng Sugo ng mga salita ng Diyos at ng mabisang pamamahala niya sa buong Iglesia. Nang siya ay papagpahingahin ng Diyos, sinundan lang ng kapatid na Eraño G. Manalo, ang humaliling Tagpamahalang Pangkalahatan, ang mabuting halimbawa na iniwan ng Sugo sa pamamahala kaya patuloy na nasinop ang Iglesia, napanatiling buo at matatag na nagkakaisa.

Itinulad ng Panginoong Hesukristo ang Iglesia sa isang matibay na gusali o bahay na nakatayo sa ibabaw ng matibay na pundasyon: “Kaya’t ang bawat nakikinig at nagsasagawa ng mga salita kong ito ay matutulad sa isang taong matalino na nagtayo ng kanyang bahay sa ibabaw ng bato. Umulan nang malakas, bumaha, at binayo ng malakas na hangin ang bahay na iyon, nguni’t hindi nagiba sapagka’t nakatayo sa ibabaw ng bato” (Mateo 7:24-25 Magandang Balita).

Ang ikatatatag ng gusali o bahay na ang tinutukoy ay ang Iglesia, ay nakasalig sa patuloy na pagsunod sa mga aral ng Diyos (Efeso 2:22). Kaya naging matatag ang Iglesia sa panahon ng pamamahala ng kapatid na Felix Y. Manalo at ng kapatid na Eraño G. Manalo ay sapagka’t buong ingat nila at ng kanilang mga tapat na katuwang na sinunod at ipinatupad ang lahat ng mga aral ng Diyos sa ikapananatili ng pagkakaisa nito. May pinagdaanan ding mga pagsubok ang kaisahan ng Iglesia noon subali't napanatili itong matatag.  

 Ang pagkakaisa ng Iglesia ay matibay na nakasalig sa aral ng Diyos na nakasulat sa Bibliya: “Masdan ninyo, na pagkabuti at pagkaligaya sa mga magkakapatid na magsitahang magkakasama sa pagkakaisa!” (Awit 133:1).

Kaya ang mga magkakapatid sa Iglesia ni Cristo ang inaasahan ng Diyos na magtataguyod ng aral ukol sa pagkakaisa. Banal ang pagkakaisa ng Iglesia sapagka’t pagtupad ito sa utos na mula sa Diyos. Kaya ang lahat ng pagkakaisahan sa Iglesia ay dapat masang-ayon sa mga salita ng Diyos na nakasulat sa Bibliya upang maingatan at mapanatili ang pakikisama o pakikiisa sa Ama at sa Panginoong Hesukristo.

Anu-ano ba ang kanilang isinagawa sa naturang rally? Una, hinikayat nila ang mga kapatid na makiisa at sumama sapagka’t iyon daw ay paghahayag ng paninindigan para ipagtanggol ang kapakanan at karapatan ng Iglesia.

Pinapaniwala nila ang mga kapatid na naging biased o unfair ang gobyerno sa pagharap sa kasong isinampa ni kapatid na Isaias T. Samson Jr laban sa 8 miyembro ng Sanggunian. Pinapaniwala nila ang mga nag-rally na special treatment ang ibinigay ni Secretary de Lima kay kapatid na Samson dahil siya raw mismo ang nag-asikaso ng kaso nang ihain sa DOJ at hindi na raw idinaan sa proseso. Mas inuna pa raw ni Secretary de Lima na harapin ang kasong inihain ni kapatid na Samson kaysa sa mas naunang kaso ng pagpatay sa 44 na miyembro ng SAF.

Ikalawa, pinapaniwala nila ang mga kapatid na nakikialam o nanghihimasok ang gobyerno sa affairs ng Iglesia dahil internal lang o pang-Iglesia lang daw ang usapin kaugnay ng kasong isinampa, kaya ipinanawagan nila sa gobyerno na igalang ang  batas ukol sa  “separation of Church and state.” Kaugnay nito ay hiningi nila na hayaang ang Iglesia ang lumutas sa usaping ito.  

Ikatlo, inimbita at pinagsalita nila sa rally ang mga taong kilalang kritiko ng kasalukuyang pamahalaan tulad nila Pastor “Boy” Saycon, Gng Margarita “Tingting” Cojuangco, etc.  Ikaapat, nanawagan sila sa kapulisan at militar na makiisa at sumama na sa kanila.  

Ikalima, dahil sa nadala nila sa kalsada ang may 20,000 tao ay nagresulta ang kanilang pagkilos sa pagsasara ng mga kalsada, malalang trapiko, pagkabalam ng trabaho kapuwa pampubliko at pribado, pagkalugi ng mga apektadong negosyo, ingay na nakaabala sa mga apektadong paaralan at maging sa pagamutan, at kalat ng basura at dumi sa kapaligiran.

Sa maikling salita ay naging pahirap at abala ang naturang kaisahan sa mga mamamayan kaya maraming negatibong komentaryo ang narinig pagkatapos nito. Ikaanim, hinarass ang isang cameraman dahil sa diumano’y hindi patas na pagbabalita ng istasyon. Marami pang iba, subali't ang mga ito na lamang ang minabuti sa akdang ito na banggitin at gamiting batayan sa pagsusuri.

Pakikialam o panghihimasok bang maituturing ang ginawa ng DOJ nang tanggapin ang kasong isinampa ni kapatid na Samson laban sa Sanggunian na nagdetine sa kanila ng kanyang pamilya sa kanilang bahay (serious illegal detention)? Hindi ba kapwa aral ng Bibliya ang pagkakaisa ng Iglesia at ang pagpapasakop sa gobyerno? Itinuro ng Panginoong Hesukristo na “…Ibigay kay Cesar ang sa kay Cesar at sa Diyos ang sa Diyos” (Mateo 22:21)?  

Paano maibibigay ng Iglesia ni Cristo kay Cesar ang para kay Cesar? Itinuro ni Apostol Pedro na, “Alang-alang sa Panginoon, pasakop kayo sa lahat ng may kapangyarihan sa bayan: sa Emperador, ang pinakamataas na kapangyarihan; at sa mga gobernador na sugo niya upang magparusa sa mga gumagawa ng masama at magparangal sa mga gumagawa ng matuwid (I Pedro 2:13-14 Magandang Balita). 

Ang isinugo ng Diyos at binigyan ng karapatang magparusa sa mga gumagawa ng masama ay ang gobyerno. Sila ang awtoridad upang magsuri o mag-imbestiga kung may naging paglabag o wala, at kung may dapat panagutan sa batas o wala ang sinumang inakusahan o isinakdal. Ang pananagutan ng Iglesia ay ang pagtitiwalag sa kasamahan o kaanib na gumawa ng masama (ICorinto 5:13). Kaya nga may usapin o kaso ngayon dahil humigit sa nararapat ang disiplinang ipinataw ng Sanggunian kay kapatid na Samson at sa kanyang pamilya.

Hindi inakala ng mga nasasakdal na hahantong sa serious illegal detention ang ipinataw nilang “house arrest” sa sambahayan ni kapatid na Samson. Hindi nila nabantayan ang kanilang aksyon, kaya marapat lamang na harapin nila ang kasong isinampa laban sa kanila.

Pakikialam o panghihimasok bang maituturing sa internal affairs ng Iglesia ang ginawa ng DOJ nang tanggapin ang demanda ni kapatid na Samson? Hindi ba’t itiniwalag na ng Sanggunian si kapatid na Samson noon pang Hulyo 25, 2015 samantalang ang kaso ay isinampa niya noon lamang Agosto 25, 2015?

Internal affair pa bang maituturing iyon na ang nagsampa ng kaso ay tiwalag na sa Iglesia? Naipaalam kaya sa mga kapatid na nag-rally na ang Sanggunian ang unang nagsampa ng kaso laban kay kapatid na Samson pagkatapos na siya’y itiwalag? Na ito ay nai-file na sa fiscalia ng Quezon City noon pang Hulyo 27, 2015 sa kasong libelo?

Ang sabi nga ni kapatid na Jun Samson sa isang interview sa kanya ay, “Bakit  noong  ang Sanggunian ang nagsampa ng kaso ay hindi nila in-invoke ang "separation of Church and state" at ngayong sila ang sinampahan ko ng kaso, ang turing nila ay nakikialam na ang gobyerno?”

Wala man lamang bang nakapagpayo sa mga miyembro ng Sanggunian sa marapat nilang gawin? Bakit isinangkot pa ng Sanggunian ang mga kapatid na nag-rally nang labagin nila ang utos ng Diyos na ibigay sa gobyerno ang para sa gobyerno?

Tila hindi na mabigyan ng Sanggunian ng distinction kung alin ang para sa Diyos (o sa Iglesia) at kung alin ang para sa gobyerno? Talaga namang may distinction ang Church at state, kung ang pag-uusapan ay ang saklaw ng kapangyarihan o ng pananagutan ng dalawang institusyon. Pero sa isyung pinag-uusapan na may naging paglabag ang Sanggunian sa karapatang pantao ng pamilya ni kapatid na Samson, labag sa Bibliya ang panawagan ng Iglesia na huwag manghimasok ang gobyerno sa usapin.

Hindi naibibigay kay Cesar ang para kay Cesar na aral ng Diyos, sa ginagawa ng Sanggunian na hadlangan ang imbestigasyon sa kaso. Isang bagay pa, kung idinaan ba ni kapatid na Samson ang paghahain ng kaso sa sinasabi nilang proseso, halimbawa’y idinulog ang usapin sa pulisya, o kaya ay sa fiscalia, ituturing ba nila iyon na pakikialam ng gobyerno sa internal affairs ng Iglesia? May rally kayang ipananawagan?

Kung ang kapakanan at karapatan ng Iglesia ang talagang ipinakikipaglaban kaya nag-rally, bakit pati ang mga kritiko ng pamahalaan ay kanilang inimbita at pinapagsalita? Bakit nanawagan din ang mga tagapagsalita sa kapulisan at mga nasa militar (mga tao rin ng pamahalaan) na lumabas at makipagkaisa sa kilusan nila? Hindi ba’t ang paglalagay at pag-aalis ng mga namiminuno sa gobyerno ay dapat masang-ayon din sa itinuturo ng Bibliya?

Bilang mamamayan ang karapatan ng bawa't isa ay bumoto bilang pagpapasakop sa gobyerno. Sa kabilang dako ay gagawin naman ang pagboto na may pagkakaisa bilang mga kaanib sa Iglesia? Muli, sa aksyong ito ng Sanggunian ay nahayag na hindi nila nabigyan ng distinction kung alin ang pang-Iglesia at alin ang hindi. Kung alin ang sakop ng kapangyarihan nila at ang hindi.     

Sang-ayon ba sa Bibliya na samantalang ipinakikipaglaban ang kapakanan at karapatan ng Iglesia ay ipagwalang-halaga naman ang kapakanan at karapatan ng ibang mga mamamayan? Hindi ba’t maraming mamamayan ang naperhuwisyo ng pagkilos na ito at may mga nasaktan pa nga? Utos ng Diyos na igalang ang lahat ng mga tao (I Pedro 2:17).

Nasunod ba ng mga nag-rally at ng mga tagapanguna nila ang utos ng Diyos na ito? Naging mapayapa ba ang rally gaya ng ipinangalandakan at ipinagbunyi nila? Nasaksihan ng buong sambayanan ang talagang nangyari kaya hindi ito maikakaila, ni mapagtatakpan.

Hindi ba’t maraming mamamayang napinsala ng pagkilos na ito, kaya maraming nagalit mula sa iba’t ibang sektor ng lipunan? Ang Diyos pa kaya ang hindi nagalit? Hindi Siya nalulugod sa kaguluhan (I Corinto 14:33 Magandang Balita).

Isinasaad din sa Bibliya na ang Diyos ay hindi Diyos ng kaguluhan kundi ng kapayapaan (I Corinto 14:33). Kaya, pag-aangkin na lang ang ginawa ng Sanggunian at ng mga nanguna sa rally sa pagsasabi na pakikiisa sa Ama at sa Anak ang kanilang isinagawa. Sila-sila na lang ang nagkaisa sa pagkilos na iyon at walang kinalaman ang Ama at ang Anak.

Kung may pagkasi ng Diyos ang “kaisahan” nilang iyon, ipinaisip sana sa kanila na isagawa ang pagkilos sa dako na walang mapeperhuwisyo at wala ring magagalit na sinuman. Inialok naman sa kanila ni Mayor Herbert Bautista ang Quezon Memorial Circle, hindi nga lang nila tinanggap. Pero kung ayaw nila roon, puwede naman sana sa Luneta, ihihingi lang nila ng permit, o kaya naman ay sa Philippine Arena, na pag-aari ng Iglesia. Kung bakit sa kalsada pa rin nila isinagawa ang pagra-rally gayong mayroon namang ibang opsiyon, sila ang nakakaalam ng kanilang talagang agenda.

Ibang-iba na ang diwa ng pagkakaisa ng Iglesia ngayon sa pagkakaisa ng Iglesia na itinuro ng Sugo. Salamat sa Diyos sapagka't mulat na ang maraming kapatid ngayon sa talagang nangyayari sa Iglesia, kaya nga halos 20,000 lamang ang sumama sa rally at ang nakararami ay hindi sumama sa kabila ng paulit-ulit at halos may pamimilit na pananawagan sa kanila.

Nasaan na iyong daan-daang libo o isang milyong tao na inasahang dumagsa sa EDSA? Kulang pa ba ang halos 5 araw na paghihintay para makapagtipon ng inaasahang bilang ng mga taong dadalo? Nasaan na ang tunay na diwa ng banal na pagkakaisa sa Iglesia? Hindi ito dapat salaulain ninuman, kahit pa ng mga humahawak ng kapangyarihan sa Iglesia.

Ang pagkakaisa sa Iglesia ay aral ng Diyos at hindi aral lamang ng tao, kaya dapat maging palasuri ang bawa't kaanib, lalo na ang mga ministro’t manggagawa at mga maytungkulin kung ang ipinatutupad ngayon ay aral o utos pa ng Diyos o aral at utos na lang ng tao.

Kaawaan nawa ng Ama at ng Panginoong Hesukristo na mabalik sa dating kabanalan at kalinisan ang Iglesia maging ang pagkakaisa nito! – Rappler.com

Brother Joven Sepillo Sr has served the Iglesia Church for almost 20 years as an ordained minister. He is one of the ministers expelled by the Sanggunian. 

Often when I teach Philippine Government or Introduction to Political Science classes, especially for Political Science majors, I'd ask my students to do one rather time-consuming classroom exercise. 

I would ask them to do a phrase or sentence outline on Philippine History. I give them this scenario to kick off the classroom activity (yes, can't assign it, I need to make sure they're using their stock [or stuck] knowledge):

"Imagine you were asked by an alien, a non-earthling, to relate to her in summary fashion the history of our nation/country. How would you tell our story? Write an outline..."

Twenty years ago, when I first did this in class, I had a most unsettling realization much like Epy Quizon's surprised reaction to the question posed to him by a group of college students regarding his role as never-standing Mabini in Heneral Luna.

I saw a clear pattern after reading hundreds of students' outputs.

Our students – even after years of basic education from the best and most expensive schools in the country – didn't know much about the Philippine-American War. In fact, it was a blind spot in many of their outlines. Many of them would churn out something like this (edited output of one of my students, a first year Polsci student in 1998):

I. Philippine Pre-history

A. Waves of migration

B. Tabon caves

C. Trade with China

II. Spanish period

A. Magellan arrives in 1521

B. Rizal is shot at Luneta

C. KKK is founded

III. American period

A. America gives us independence and teaches us democracy

B. Quezon becomes Commonwealth President

IV. Japanese occupation

A. Death march

B. MacArthur returns

C. Japan surrenders 

V. The Philippine republics

A. Post-war reconstruction

B. Marcos becomes President

C. Ninoy assassination

D. EDSA revolution and Cory

Seems innocent enough, right?

But I realized, where was the Philippine-American War? Why merely refer to it as a "Period"? 

Do our students know that there are estimates which put the Filipino death toll in that war at around 300,000 (1/3 of Luzon's population at that time)? Do they know that the Americans developed the Caliber .45 hand gun precisely to fight Moros in Mindanao, who could not be easily brought down by gunfire especially when they went juramentado (martyrdom charge) in defense of their communities? 

Do they know that the Mindanaoans were never really fully colonized by the Americans (it's the "independent" Philippine governments that did that later)? Do they know that Luna is supposed to have refused to fight against the Spaniards and thus gained the ire of some Filipinos? Do they know that Mabini is inconsistent in his views on both Luna and Aguinaldo?

And "Philippine Pre-history"? The subliminal suggestion is that we didn't have any history before Westerners came to our archipelago.

Factors

The question then is raised: Why are our students weak in Philippine history and social studies in general? The answer will need a whole history tome to answer. But here's my take:

1. We have failed to take care of our teacher training institutions and our public school teachers. The Philippine Normal University (PNU) has been "maltreated" through the years. Teachers have had to resort to hunger strikes just to push for higher wages. Napabayaan! (Taken for granted!)

2. Textbooks are of low quality, full of questionable content and orientation (colonial, as some point out).

3. Pedagogy has not been learner-centered. Students are not educated to be critical thinkers but are trained to be submissive subjects.

Heneral Luna

It is in light of these that I warmly welcome Heneral Luna in our movie theaters and I am lifted by all the accolades that it is now getting. At the very least, it is making people ask questions about our supposed heroes. At the very least, it is inspiring some students to be historiographers.

On a side note, I find it timely that this masterpiece by Jerrold Tarog is released around the time we are also supposed to remember the imposition of Martial Law in 1972. There must be a nuanced distinction between the notion of an Artikulo Uno and the need for Martial Law in '72. 

Tragically, our education system has also molded many citizens who are now apparently ready to surrender their rights to the false notion of a benevolent dictatorship and in the name of some form of peace and order – the kind one finds in a cemetery.

Sa kabila nito, naniniwala pa rin ako sa Filipino. Ang mga palakpak at papuri sa pagtatapos ng bawa't pagpapalabas ng Heneral Luna ay patunay na uhaw sa katotohanan ang ating Bayan. (Despite all this, I still believe in the Filipino. The applause and praise after each showing of Heneral Luna is proof that our nation thirsts for the truth.)

Hindi lamang tayo – ayon nga sa tanong sa dulo ng pelikula – mga "alikabok na nag-aalimpuyo." (We are not – according to the question at the end of the film – just dust that turns fiery.)

Tayo'y mga daluyong ng pag-asa't pagbabago. Tayo'y Filipino. (We are waves of hope and change. We are Filipino.) – Rappler.com

Louie Checa Montemar is a lecturer of Political Science at De La Salle University and National Coordinator of the Lasallian Educational Commission of De La Salle Philippines. In his spare time, he is a volunteer education and community development worker of ENFANCE Inc, an NGO dedicated to dealing with urban poverty.

I have never dreamed of becoming a nurse. When I was a child, my eager soul was claiming to be a renowned doctor. This vision would sometimes be replaced by thoughts of becoming a scientist, a Nobel Prize-winning author, or a rock star. I have never wanted to become a nurse until I became one. 

You see, nurses as I have found out, are superhuman. 

We go to work almost every day, never minding the long hours, the typhoons and the fact that we do not get to experience holidays like normal folks. There would be times we would have to endure 16 to 24-hour shifts depending on the weather and the traffic situation. When I started this vocation, my body developed its resistance to hunger. There are instances I would have to fake a cough to cover my rumbling stomach. I have been accustomed to ignore my bladder whenever I had the urge to pee. Surprisingly, my small frame could still lift people which are 3 times my size. 

Most of all, my job has tested my emotional endurance, having to deal with people from all walks of life.

Challenging job 

I have tried different jobs before I started working in a hospital. My experience showed me that each profession is difficult in its own aspect. However, nursing has proven to be the most challenging occupation for me. 

I realized that the days I have spent behind the computer in my previous 8-to-5 job had been a breeze. Now, my legs would be in heaven for a 5-minute rest from walking around the hospital unit. In nursing, we have a saying that goes like this: there would be days when you cry before starting your shift and there would be days when you would cry yourself to sleep. 

When the pressure becomes too much to handle, I would find myself on the brink of tears, overwhelmed by the expectations that come with the job. Sometimes I think about my patients too much. I hear them ring their call in my sleep. Not going to work after an exhausting day would be so enticing, but I would still secretly want to go to work because I know how much my patients need me.

It is a shame that unlike other professionals, nurses in the Philippines do not garner the recognition they deserve. 

I meet people who bombard me with non-medical concerns and personal whims. At times, nurses would hear condescending ramblings and disrespect from people who think that nurses are merely changing diapers. We are saving lives and it is our intent to give our utmost care. 

We make sure that in spite of your illnesses, you will feel more comfortable even if it means we have to trudge as we give our hands, feet, and almost our entire being to make you feel well. We want to satisfy your every need that is why we also try to fix your television, your Wi-Fi connection, and even your air conditioning. We are the first people to get disappointed whenever we fail to insert your IV line. 

We know that it is our job to take care of you, but more than that, we truly care for you. We are hoping for your fast recovery so that you can stop eating the same soup and finally have a decent meal. We are praying for your health so you can come back home to your families and start your daily routines. 

We will put your needs ahead of ours because nursing means being selfless.

On becoming a nurse 

Becoming a nurse has given me more than what I have hoped for. 

It had kept me grounded, humble, and hopeful. It reminded me that I am capable of doing greater things. It made me realize that I am a mere human who has her own limitations but is nonetheless not bound by these definitions. My job gave birth to better plans and broader opportunities. 

There are still days when I wonder if this profession is for me, asking myself how long I can endure the physical, intellectual, and emotional stress. Only time will tell, they say. But what I know for sure is that my heart swells each time a patient holds my hand, as if my mere presence would alleviate their pain. 

I feel fortunate when I see how humans love each other until their last breath. And I gain more faith whenever I meet people at their worst conditions but still they never fail to appreciate each sweat, blood, and tears that nurses shed.

I may still whine after a very tiring day but being a nurse taught me not to give up. Indeed, nursing was not my first dream, but it has given me the chance to dream better dreams. — Rappler.com

Cheenee Bagtas is a nurse working in a tertiary hospital. She wrote this piece in the hope of sharing the common experiences of nurses in the Philippines.

It’s official. The AlDub phenomenon has taken the Filipino nation by storm.  

Reports indicate that tweets from the AlDub nation episode on Saturday, September 26, with the official hashtag “ALDubEBforLOVE” reached a record-breaking 25.6 million worldwide.

The reason I decided to write this essay is an editorial cartoon I saw online that draws a comparison between the attention being received by AlDub and by important national issues, from us, Filipinos. I would like to offer my two cents on this issue.

From a philosophical perspective, the metaphysics of St Thomas Aquinas teaches us that one of the general properties of being is beauty – the property that makes a being pleasing to behold. In this sense, we find pleasure in looking at something beautiful. Similarly, many subsequent philosophers commenting on aesthetics associated beauty with that which attracts, pleases or satisfies our physical (senses), emotional (passions) or intellectual (reason) faculties.

From this, we can glean that we cannot help but focus our attention on AlDub because it is showing us something that is beautiful, and as human beings, we derive pleasure from looking at beauty. 

Both Alden and Maine are good-looking. Their on-screen chemistry, the attraction between them, the spontaneity of most of the scenes, and the anticipation of what would happen next are all appealing. Most importantly, the theme that holds everything together is that of a “budding love.” And I would like to believe that, for most people, love is still perceived as something beautiful.

Pressing national issues pale in comparison, in terms of beauty, when placed side-by-side with the AlDub phenomenon. This is despite national issues being more important than AlDub.

From a personal standpoint – from the standpoint of being a Filipino – we cannot help but focus on AlDub because it reminds us of things that are very important to our collective consciousness as Filipinos. I would like to focus on 3 points:

1. Respect for elders

The AlDub Kalyeserye underscores the virtue of respect for elders. It was showcased by the kissing of hands (pagmamano), the use of po and opo, following orders, and most importantly, listening to advice and admonitions. 

Our respect for the matatanda or elderly is rooted in our respect for their tanda. By tanda, I am not merely referring to their age but to their tanda or nata-tanda-an (memory). 

Our ancestors respected their elders not only because of their age, but more importantly, because of their knowledge. Since within tribal villages, the elders have lived the longest, they are the most knowledgeable. Of course, knowledge is useless if one cannot remember it.

Thus, elders are respected because they are considered as receptacles of knowledge. This is reflected today in the respect that we accord to teachers, doctors, and lawyers, among others, whom we believe to be knowledgeable.

2. Patience and perseverance

The AlDub Kalyeserye showed how Alden and Maine waited for the right moment (tamang panahon) with patience and persevered to surmount every challenge that came along their way. Following the popular adage, “Patience is a virtue” and our very own, “Kapag may tiyaga, may nilaga,” Alden was finally granted permission by Lola Nidora to visit Maine at home. 

Our ancestors, most of them hunters, fully understand the value of patience and perseverance in order to bring home food for the village. They have respected and perfected the virtue of waiting and hard work and the art of acting at the right moment to catch their prey, since acting sooner or later than needed could mean that they will not have anything for supper.

3. Respect for women

In the Kalyeserye, Maine is portrayed as the quintessential woman. She did not need to show some skin for her to earn the admiration of Alden. She was faithful to her obligations to Lola Nidora and puts family first more than herself as indicated by her urgency to leave her date with Alden just to make sure that she could give Lola Nidora her medicine on time. 

Simply put, her actions are worthy of respect. Respect for women is an inherent part of our culture. Our forefathers respected the women of their villages because only the women are capable of childbirth and, thus, ensure the posterity of the village. They are also responsible for taking care of the needs of the family and for child-rearing.

Our forefathers considered women as equals and gave them positions of honor and authority such as being babaylan (village healers and messengers of the spirits).

National issues vs Kalyeserye

In contrast, I think that current national issues are not appealing to many of us because we would rather focus on our personal and family concerns than on national concerns. 

Similar to the points discussed above, which are all in the context of the village or the tribe, our present-day tribe is our families, friends and religious communities and we would rather focus on them first than on anything else. 

The AlDub phenomenon has caught the Filipino consciousness in a universal scale because it highlights our ancestral values, which are, deep down inside, our very own personal values. As the philosopher Sartre puts it, “what is most personal is most universal.”

To conclude this essay, I would like to leave 3 things: First, in the September 25 episode of the Kalyeserye, I thought Lola Nidora asked Alden to bring chicharon because chicharon is a specialty of Sta. Maria, Bulacan – Maine’s hometown – so that Alden would go to Sta. Maria (on the 26^th) to visit Maine and to formally meet her parents, as expected in our traditional courtship practices. 

Second, a message to the AlDub couple: Alden and Maine, you are very popular now. The youth look up to you and idolize you. I hope that whatever happens, the two of you will not allow politicians to take advantage of your popularity by thinking twice before endorsing any of them in the coming elections.

You have created something beautiful. Please do not let it be soiled by the dirt of politics. The power of your fans – the AlDub nation – to generate more than 25 million tweets is not lost among politicians, so be responsible of your popularity.

And third, perhaps one of the important things that we can pick up, as a nation, from this analysis of the AlDub phenomenon is that we should learn and strive to make our national issues our own personal issues. Maybe, then, we can begin to give as much attention to them as we have given AlDub. — Rappler.com

Leander Penaso Marquez teaches philosophy at the University of the Philippines Diliman. 

If there is a question that symbolizes the culmination of our so-called Philippine-style democracy, it is this: Nagalaw pa ba iyan (Is he still alive)? It’s a line from the film Heneral Luna. 

What struck me first was the question’s implied rawness and sheer brutality. The more I ponder about it, the more convinced I am that our country’s political fate is self-inflicting, self-perpetuating, and self-fulfilling. 

Sadly, the demise of our democratic subculture may be traced from what our parents have taught us — particularly from Trinidad Famy Aguinaldo, mother of the first Philippine president, General Emilio Aguinaldo.

It was Trinidad who asked “Nagalaw pa ba iyan (Is he still alive)?” She threw this question at General Antonio Luna’s assassins after watching the killing from a window. Luna is her son’s alleged rival.

Mercilessly hacked, pierced, and targeted, Luna had no chance of surviving several wounds inflicted all over his body. Trinidad wanted to be sure that Luna was dead. 

Since then, Philippine politics is almost like a rerun of the Cabanatuan set-up, Luna’s death. While the ruse tells us a sad and familiar story of betrayal, death, and corruption — all of which still plague us today — I think it’s more than that. 

Political dynasty, PH dead end

For me, what transpired in the murder of Luna symbolizes the political intersection of the value of personalism and the practice of institutionalism. The former depends on the force of the family to organize and control power while the latter relies on the force of law to legitimatize and enforce authority. 

When the institutionalism’s impulse prevails, it’ll be easier to persuade our people that we have politically evolved and kept up with societal changes. Also, it’ll be easier for our people to accept the notion that the best way to regulate the general welfare is to limit the traditional familial power with institutional power. (READ: Limiting political dynasties will help the poor)

Unfortunately, in a highly personalistic culture such as ours, the personalism tends to impose itself at the expense of the latter. As a result, it creates a structure of power susceptible to the impulses of dynastic system of politics. That’s why we have too many hyper-privileged political families in the country who believe they’re not only destined to rule over others, but also entitled to be treated special.

The superiority of political dynasties is the dead end of Philippine politics. Unless, of course, we institutionally diffuse political power or change our political narrative to a multidimensional one. But that is another topic. (READ: Can Filipinos destroy political dynasties?)

In my college years, I already harbored an anti-hero sentiment. I did not bother my friends about it because it’s not fun to “rock the boat.” I wanted to fit in. But over the years, I have not changed my stance. Anyone who worships a hero or a heroine is bound to be disappointed. 

Without them, I have learned to trust myself as well as my capabilities. After all, all that there is to depend on is one’s disponibilité— one’s readiness and availability. 

As Bishop Desmund Tutu aptly puts it: "Do your little bit of good where you are; it's those little bits of good put together that overwhelm the world.” – Rappler.com

Efren N. Padilla is a full professor at California State University, East Bay. His areas of specialization are urban sociology, urban planning, and social demography. During his quarter breaks, he provides pro bono planning consultancy to selected LGUs in the Philippines. Visit his blog here.