Thursday, February 28, 2008

Monday, February 25, 2008

On Silence

There are moments when everything that needs to be said has already been said, and thus the only thing left to say is nothing at all. But there are moments when silence springs not from exhaustiveness but from exhaustion. Frankly, it is easy to get tired of the promises that were being shouted during the election season.

All of the candidates (party-affiliated or not) speak of change. But what is change? Will there be genuine change when these candidates come to power in Sanggunian or will it only perpetuate the vicious cycle of incompetence? Can an independent president who claims to have a “fresh perspective” (if such really exists) really make a difference? Can a Sanggunian led by three of the four top officials from the political party that claims to have monopoly over a “strong Sanggu” really deliver its promises? Can a Sanggunian filled with vacancies due to abstentions really function to its fullest capabilities?

Our silence does not mean we are in favor of the candidates or the winners of elections. On the contrary, we believe that the elections did not answer any question but only posed more. Our silence is not one of support but of utmost skepticism on how the rhetoric of change has been easily thrown around by candidates who want to gain popular support.

On a final note, we would like to get the attention of this Ateneo IGEA. If you are looking for stupid all you need to do is look at the mirror.

Friday, February 8, 2008

The Assassination of Karl Satinitigan

Disclaimer: The title is an allusion to the Philippine Daily Inquirer editorial (February 6, 2008) entitled "The Assassination of De Venecia"

We are terribly disappointed at how the Sanggunian has handled the current chain of events. We are referring to the recent string of resignations in the student council, with great emphasis on the issue of Karl Satinitigan's non-enrollment.

We have read the article in The Guidon entitled "Top Sanggu officers resign." We agree to the students' reactions when they say that the Sanggunian should have told the students about these resignations and vacancies. We agree when students talk about how Sanggunian should have been more transparent with the internal workings of the council.

We have also read the statement of the newly sworn Sanggunian President, Cabrei Cabreira, on the status of Karl Satinitigan. We are terribly disappointed at how the statement deflected the various issues raised by our group and other students by saying that "laudable efforts from our lower units were significantly negated by the absence of clear-cut leadership."

Why are they (the President speaking in behalf of the Sanggunian) putting blame on Karl Satinitigan? Is the President of the Sanggunian the only one liable for this "absence of clear-cut leadership?" Aren't the Vice President and the other officers also culpable? Why does it sound like the Karl Satinitigan issue is being used as a fire escape from the burning building known as the Sanggunian? Can't the Sanggunian take care of its own? If it can't, how does it expect to "take care" of the student body? Karl Satinitigan is first and foremost a student and part of the Sanggunian constituency.

If there was one thing that the new president said that was right, then it would be the importance of the coming Sanggunian elections. It would be the true measure of how students perceive this recent chain of events. We wouldn't be surprised if, like the on-going plebiscite regarding the number of course representatives, the quota would not be reached.