Back in 2006, in my own blog, I pointed out an interesting phenomenon I called
The battle of the epistles (a battle that kept
going, and going, and going...). It made a public personage of
Bong Austero, for example. The
The battle of the open letters gets relaunched every time the political crisis starts veering towards violence. And it has extended to blogs, where manifestos (which, essentially, what an open letter is) get posted online. See, for example,
The "Wala na bang iba?" Manifesto (read the whole thing). But still, the main battleground remains open letters, and the usefulness of such letters for institutions to express their thoughts.
One example is
Ateneo de Manila Sanggunian President: Statement on the Manila Peninsula Siege, similar in attitude to the manifesto linked to, above:
Change is disguised in many ways. Let us not be swayed by the propaganda of ill-thought nationalism.
Ateneans, I challenge you to speak and let your thoughts be heard. One opportunity is during the Senate Inquiries on Friday (December 7) at the Henry Lee Irwin Theater. This is the moment to shine, be passionate, think of how you reacted to the Dress Code issue during the first semester. This is the Ateneo way, after all. If not, then what is?
For the sake of discussion, here are other statements, too, from more senior people.
First, there is the open letter or statement of Pugadlawin, an Ateneo de Manila organization of faculty, etc. Here is what they have to say:
An excerpt:
When Pugadlawin (Puwersa para sa Ganap na Demokrasya, Labang Wagas para sa Inang Bayan) was organized amidst the threat of both a military coup and martial law in February 2006, we said that in the face of looming political polarization, what was needed is a new force to reclaim and rebuild the political center. The challenge is to work for genuine democracy: to defend the hard-won victories over authoritarianism, and to deepen democracy beyond its often formal and elitist character towards greater popular participation and social justice. We reiterate this call today: 1) to oppose initiatives that cater to narrow interests, curtail participation and endanger democracy (e.g., coup attempts, government repression, self-serving cha-cha); 2) to build consensus around democratic processes and institutions as the way to resolve the political crisis and promote reform (e.g., elections); 3) to forge a sociopolitical agenda that would galvanize citizen involvement, linking social and political transformation, local and national development. Our aim is to build democratic institutions and foster hope in political action.
And here is a statement from the Christian Brothers of De La Salle University. First, an introduction:
And then the statement itself:
An excerpt:
For these reasons, even if it amounts to no more than a voice crying out in the wilderness, we, the De La Salle Brothers of the Philippines, feel the need to proclaim once again the same values we espoused in 2005: truth, justice, honesty and integrity. Without these, no government can be trusted, and where there is no trust, governance degenerates into bribery and intimidation. We join in the call of courageous religious leaders and of proven men and women of conscience who seek a moral revolution. But if such a call is to become more than mere lip-service, we must translate it into effective action on behalf of the values we espouse, keeping in mind the legal framework of the Constitution. We call on men and women of goodwill to act now to make real the change they want to see.
Whatever the opinion, I think it's healthy and necessary, for such open letters to be written, to be circulated, debated, and even challenged. Better for people to take up the pen and express themselves than remain silent. But what do you think, which letter comes close to your opinion?
