9/11

(This essay was published on September 11. 2008 in my column JUSTIFIED)

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

---George Santayana, philosopher

September 11 (of 2001)is a day that would forever live in infamy. Said day was probably one of the most savage examples of man's inhumanity to man in recent memory.

History may be a witness to many inhumanities; I, however, am not.Yet on that fateful September morn halfway across the globe, violence had a field day; and I felt like an unwilling vicarious witness.

It was nighttime in Manila where I was then when September 11 happened. I was lying in bed,my mind processing the events of my day that just ended. I was roused from my ennui when my other housemates were in some sort of commotion in front of the TV.It was there captured live on CNN: the Twin Towers in New York collapsed like a deck of cards on fire as it was slammed by two hijacked planes commandeered by Al-Qaeda terrorists.Everything seemed surreal like a Hollywood blockbuster, yet the ramifications were real. Thousands of innocent lives were lost. Still thousands more lives of friends and relatives were destroyed.

Terror and subsequent paranoia shook America the invincible. Other parts of the world felt the same terror, pain and paranoia.

To say that 9/11 was simply a terrorist attack is an oversimplification. More significantly (or ignominiously), it was a horrific story of cultural and religious intolerance, violence and man's inhumanity to man---all of which led to an act of terror.

Countless more lives and property were destroyed due to terrorist attacks, mostly with underlying theme of religious dogma or cultural intolerance: London subway bombings, the Madrid attacks, the LRT bombings in Manila.

In Mindanao, certain localities are said to be hideouts to nascent groups with links to international terrorist organizations.

Several years after 9/11, I wrote an essay on Peace using the events of 9/11 as a literary backdrop. The essay won for me a 2nd prize in prestigious Palanca Peace Essay Contest sponsored by the Palanca Foundation.

It was ironic for me to be writing about peace---and winning a monetary prize for it---while recalling on paper a horrendous event such as 9/11.

I coincidentally recalled all of the above memories a week ago, the first week of September when I heard my first string of Christmas carol. The song was "Christmas in our Hearts" by my all-time favorite Jose Mari Chan. Again, the irony didn't escape me:September 11 occurred during the first "ber" month of the few "ber" months leading to the Yuletide season, a season for peace.

Peace is not the absence of conflict or differences. It is when these differences or conflicts are galvanized by intolerance and violence that humans become monsters.

Hey monsters, here's a groundbreaking (at least for you) thought to consider: Give peace a chance!

Year of the Naked Man

This essay appeared in my column JUSTIFIED.

In the Philippines there are only two schools: U.P. and others---Sen. Miriam Santiago, U.P. alumnus

(This year, my former alma mater---the U.P., I got my bachelor's from Diliman---celebrates its Centennial. The University of the Philippines is symbolized by the Oblation, a statue of a naked man which epitomizes offering one's self in service to society. As a tribute, the following topic, which is also timely since it's the start/end of the second/first half of the school year, talks about school pride which is usually manifested through school bashing---other schools, that is.)
I have come to regard it as the national past time of students. Okay, this last declaration isn't sanctioned by any record book but I 'm positively sure any student---past and present---will agree with me.

No, I am not talking about malling. Malls were not that ubiquitous then, much more part of any student's lifestyle. Not even cheating. Oh sure, it's definitely part of any mediocre student's bag of tricks but I'm proud to say I didn't belong to that shady stratum of the studentry.

What I'm talking about is---drum roll, please---school bashing. School bashing is that insidious habit of students of putting down rival schools. Oh how we (or used to) delight in it! We attribute certain negative characteristics , both real and imagined, to other schools with the end of exalting our own alma mater while putting other hapless students' school in a bad light.

For most students, school bashing has become a communal thing to do, some sort of a bind that binds. It has become not just an excellent conversation piece but also a gold mine of jokes.

Generally, the usual basis for school bashing is the perceived reputation of that particular school as personified by the students who study there. If the students are not so brainy, or financially disadvantaged, then the school itself acquires that characteristic. Of course it is hasty generalization in the extreme , but hey, who says it isn't fun?

In college at the State University (aka U.P.), students of other universities are usually poked fun at by the fact that they fail to pass the entrance exam or make it in what is touted as the premier university in the country.

Jokes would pass around campus belittling other universities and their students. Usually the acronyms which stand as a contraction for the schools' names will be changed into something funnier.

AdMU (for Ateneo de Manila University) becomes Ang di Makalusot sa U.P. or Ang di Makapasa sa UPCAT (in reference to the entrance exam of the State University). DLSU (acronym for De La Salle University) becomes Di Lumusot sa U.P. Other schools? Well, they exactly become just like that---"others."

As one U.P. alumna exclaimed: "There are only two schools in the Philippines ---U.P. and others." Of course, most of the taunts do not hold water but school bashing has heightened school spirit one way or another. Just ask any Blue Eagle, Green Archer or U.P. Maroon.

Other basis for school bashing would be the uniforms worn by the students of the school. During my high school at the Jose Rizal Memorial State University/JRMSU (formerly ZNSAT), students from other schools would shout "taya, taya" (the Cebuano term for rust) when we pass by their campuses just because our school uniforms' color (for the girls, anyway) and school color itself was maroon.

The bases for school bashing---initial perceptions and purported reputation---can persist even if the school has improved , its real reputation has changed, or the student composition has become different.Talking about first impressions dying hard.

School bashing has some merit to it if it is all done in stride, in a healthy manner and if it enhances school spirit. It's like drinking coffee: it perks you up, starts the gears in the brain, but too much of which is definitely harmful.

School bashing is to students what gossiping is to a clique (barkada). There's nothing like a common object to direct your angsts at to your hearts' content.

The negative side about school bashing is that it is a hasty generalization. What applies to some may not apply to others. Or what was perceived to be true before is not true anymore.

In logic class we are told that a hasty generalization is fallacious; it violates the rules of logic and common sense. Well, logic be damned. Fun is the bottomline of this students' favorite past time. For any student, having fun while at school is definitely there at the uppermost part of the list.

There is really nothing bad about school bashing as long as students shall bear in mind that no one school has a monopoly of all the positive "academic features"---diligent and high IQ'd studentry, excellent facilities, top-notch teachers and low tuition fees. To badly paraphrase the singer Sting: "Nobody has a monopoly of common sense on either side of the educational fence."

School bashing remains a fun past time as long as respect for rival schools (and their respective students) is maintained.

Dharma

(This essay, Dharma, appeared in my column JUSTIFIED which ran in a local newspaper.)

While updating my Friendster profile (yes, I do have one; Editor's note: Facebook wasn't in vogue at the time of this writing) one day, I came upon quite an interesting widget called "How evil are you? quiz". I took the quiz to find out for myself. I won't reveal my results as I invoke my Constitutional right against self-incrimination but I find the outcome amusing if not revealing.

If ever I have to reveal the quintessential me, it would be this: I have always known myself to be a nice person, even bordering on being an asslicker. This may sound a little tad too subjective, taking into mind a line from a movie: "Deep, deep inside, everybody thinks they're good."

What does it really take to be good? How does one define "goodness"?

I have tinkered with these questions as we are into the Holy Week. (By the way, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines or CBCP said that those acts of self-flagellation and crucifixion are a "wrong understanding" of the teachings of the Catholic Church. Ha-ha , I've always been suspicious of those sadomasochistic acts; I found them too artificial. Now my suspicions are confirmed. Anyway, I've digressed.)

Socially-speaking, I've discovered that most people have a twisted sense of what being good/kind is.

We usually define something as kind/good if that person readily conforms to our pre-existing paradigms, beliefs and value system, or if that other person easily yields to our peccadilloes. Any adolescent would easily describe his/her parent as "mabait" if the latter would allow the former to go out on a weeknight even if there is class the following day. Any relative would call an aunt or uncle kind/good if the latter would, without any fuss, dole out money, overlooking the fact that the beneficiary-relative has not lifted any finger to look for a job , preferring instead to hang out in the neighborhood sari-sari store.

One anecdotal experience I had anent the good/bad dichotomy while I was still in law school involved two librarians in our library. One is a strict spinster while the other is a harmless-looking guy. The crone of a librarian sticks to the rules. If you get delayed in returning a book, you pay the fine---no buts, no excuses. The guy librarian, meanwhile, condones all the borrowers who get delayed (that included me, wink wink nudge nudge), without imposing on these late-returnees the mandatory fine. In the course of time, the old lady-librarian earned the reputation of being "masungit". If you really have to think about it, neither of them can be actually said to be kinder/more good than the other. The old lady was merely following rules and regulations---and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Strict compliance with rules and regulations is one way of disciplining the students which habit (of self-discipline) they are sure to benefit from.

We sometimes confuse being kind/good with people pleasing:not getting into arguments, trying to be understanding all the time, assenting and conceding to other people's idiosyncracies and just allowing others to do their own stuff. (We have the usual phrase "pabayaan mo na.")

A person should be considered good/kind not necessarily because he/she conforms to our views all the time but because he has an exemplary character and values which are truly admirable regardless of the situation. We are talking here of those absolute moral precepts as honesty, love. respect, being non-judgmental, acceptance, tolerance, altruism, doing the right thing and fighting for what is right, etc. etc. Being good means sticking to good values and good moral standards even if such adherence might offend other people whose values change depending on what is good for them. As Stephen covey, author of "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" would intone "even when in Rome, one does not have to do what the Romans do."

In the same manner, people-pleasing must not be construed as being kind/good. It is of course a challenge to distinguish one from the other. It definitely would take intelligence to make a finer distinction. (To digress again, it was best-selling author Robert Kiyosaki who said, "Intelligence is the ability to make finer distinctions.")

Now, despite being good/kind people still misconstrue you as exactly the opposite---well, what the heck. If you can never please everybody (which you never ever will), go ahead and please yourself. Anyway, nobody gets a prize for being good; oftentimes it is just a matter of "prinsipyo."