Searching for a Hero (Happy Father's Day)

“Only the leader’s own involvement in reality, within a historical situation, led them to criticize this situation and to wish to change it.” – Paulo Friere, Pedagogy of the Oppressed

As we celebrate the 150th birthday of Jose Rizal, are we still in search of a hero?

Coincidentally, on the same day, we celebrate Father’s Day.

Oftentimes we are asked, whom do you consider your hero? And usually we enumerate names we just read from history books. We are told by their exploits and heroism during the times when we could not even relive their lives except the trying words of our historians, documentary shoots, and life-imitating films. Almost, yet persistent in their larger-than-life attempt to capture history, our scholars have provided us a near-to-life panorama of our academic past. We owe it to them if we see Rizal as repository of almost supernatural talents, Bonifacio as a brave man without fear of death, Aguinaldo as a revolutionary who waged his own revolution inside the Philippine revolution. These are the most known heroes and widely read about personalities in the history of our country.

Why Rizal or Bonifacio or Aguinaldo then? What about Bicolano heroes like Jose Ma. Panganiban or Tomas Arejola? Why not our fathers?

For one, our history-book heroes exemplified a life destined to be great, and willingly faced a death by sacrificing their lives. Of course, their deaths were their heroic acts that defined their heroism. To the idealist, they have done in an extraordinary way what any ordinary man could not. To the realist, they simply fulfilled the task assigned by the call of times. To the gestaltist, they completed the missing part of our aspiration for freedom and totality as a nation. To most of us, they responded to the challenge of self-determination. To the rest, they were merely the stories of men printed in the paper, or depicted in a monument, imaged in a bill, or painted in a card.

More than the epic life and death they led, their heroism was highlighted by the classic struggle to free our country from the bondage of colonization of Spain, to liberate from the oppressive imperialism of America, and to save the nation from the inclusive expansion of Japan.

Today the war waged by our heroes continues. It is not yet won but little victories were gained. Although our country does not confront armies of the imperious foreigners, it faces enemies in various forms. The most formidable of these is the prevalent poverty of its own people. Slowly, poverty is eating up what has been gained by our heroes, including the very foundation of our nationhood – our dignity as a people. In times like this, our country needs a hero. Soon, our new hero will certainly rise. I don’t know where I get my hope for this prayer but I am sure somewhere, someone will answer the signs of times.

Our Philippines definitely is in dire search of a hero who will empower its people to perfect its being and fate. Someone who while in power and given the responsibility will yield the same to the people. Have the Ramon Magsaysay Awards helped us find our modern hero? Has the Nobel Prizes eluded us for some reasons?

Your guess is as good as the whole nation who practically begs for everyone to share a piece of this responsibility and power for her/his own people. Our heroes responded to the signs.

And there are other nameless and faceless individuals who do their own share of heroism in our struggle to regain what we had in the beginning of history.

There is certainly one with a name and face that is familiar to us. He may even come with several names (Tatay, Ama, Papa, Father) - but there is only one that endears him to us. Call him, and a hero is with us.

Youth for Peace: Young Adults Who are Changing the World

The Junior Chamber International, or JCI, is a membership based, non-profit coalition of some two hundred thousand young people, aging in range from 18 to 40.  Their goal is simple: to create lasting and positive change in our world, using community-based initiatives to create a global revolution of positive progress.

Once a year, the JCI honors ten up and coming youths through the Ten Outstanding Young Persons of the World award. Ranging in age from 18 to 40, the award is bestowed upon those young leaders who have shown true innovation, extraordinary service, or a new and creative way to think about an existing community issue.

Of the ten, we will focus on three who are moving us, as a collective unit, toward a much improved and more peaceful world.

Melanie Hennessy visited Nepal when she was only 18 years old. She soon found a full time position in Nepal seeking to alleviate the plight of its children. Having been recognized in the humanitarian/Voluntary Leadership role for her JCI honors, Hennessy established a school in Nepal, with an Orphanage fund set up back home at her Irish University NUI Galway. In addition to starting another charity, TEAM Nepal, she returned in 2010 to create Walking Hospitals, in which volunteers shadow local doctors from village to village to provide assistance to those in need. Melanie was also selected as one of Ireland's Outstanding Young People of the Year.  

Uyapo Ndadi, of Botswana, turned down a well paying job at a law firm to pursue his passions.  Founding the Botswana Network on Ethics, Law, and HIV/AIDS (BONELA), he fights against the spread of the virus, as well as for the rights of its sufferers. As an advocate of people's rights, Ndadi fights against discrimination in the workplace while providing legal aid free of charge to clients. He works with communities at all levels in an effort to bring denizens into the fight with BONELA.  Uyapo is now the Director of the organization he started, bringing ethics and honesty to the role as he continues to fight for the human rights of his people in Botswana, a country which has one of the highest rates of HIV in the world.

For the Business, Economic, or Entrepreneurial accomplishment, the JCI gave the award to Emily Cummins. Known for creating the toothpaste squeezer for Arthritis sufferers and a water-carrying device designed for Third World use, Cummins bested herself with the creation of her award-winning portable refrigerator. The solar powered, sustainable device can be built from household items, making it the perfect instrument for Third World countries. In Namibia, Emily became known as the "Fridge Lady" as she toiled for five months in research and development phases. The work paid off—her invention is now saving the lives of countless Africans because medical supplies, as well as food, can now be moved in an uncontaminated fashion, regardless of local water quality. The sick can be treated like no other time in recent memory, all thanks to an invention that 21-year-old Emily thought up in her grandfather's potting shed.

To think on what these young people are accomplishing—all in their early to mid twenties—is truly mind-boggling. It gives us hope as a nation, a world, and as a community tied together in the global marketplace.

When you read about such positive and life-altering changes being made using creativity, wit, and intelligence, it belies an attitude that we can all step forward to make positive changes in our own communities.

Start with something small. You don't need to change the world with the first thing you try. 

Bryce Hammons is a guest blogger for My Dog Ate My Blog.

Human Rights Against Human Wrongs

“The conception, the idea of Right asserted its authority all at once, and the old framework of injustice could offer no resistance to its onslaught.” – Hegel, Philosophy of History

           Why is it that humans feature and point out what is wrong rather what is right?

            Whatever happened in Pangantucan, Bukidnon in 2000 that resulted to the deaths of 16 cult members of the Catholic God’s Spirit and 4 militiamen is up to the prayers to justice to both victims? While the public is painstakingly dragged to blur the truth, the authorities are digging holes to justify the unspeakable acts of their subordinates. They are trying to cheat the TV footages that bear the raw images of people being killed. The veracity of those shots of film could equal the law of gravity that all things that go up must come down. Yet they have the face to declare that what happened should be viewed in its entire context, not in a few minutes of footages. Conversely the public cannot be told to think in which way the authorities will want them to think. Those film shots sonorously unveil the only piece of truth the public can get hold of the gory incidence in Bukidnon, the Philippines.

            It is defined in the Rules of Engagement of the Philippine National Police that the use of force is justified only if it becomes the last resort when all other peaceful and non-violent means have been exhausted. With guns ready for action anytime, the authorities expose themselves to the slightest provocation of using force not as the last resort but the first line of defense. The two excuses are mutually dichotomized and yet can be referred interchangeably as if each one were of the same kind. These two are being invoked by the authorities as the justification of the enraged overkill of 16 people that should have been a simple arrest of one wanted person. Any concerned citizen would like to think that this becomes an exception rather than a rule with the activation of the CAFGUs. Otherwise the authorities are implicitly inviting citizens to arm themselves if confronted by the same undisciplined and haphazardly trained units of militiamen. This implication runs counter with the current drive of Dept. Interior Local Government in getting rid of the unlicensed and loose firearms, which are normally used in illegal activities and crimes. While the authorities are trying to confiscate the loose firearms and encouraging the citizens not to arm in order to protect themselves, they should also observe the discipline and training of those who are tasked and supposedly to protect the public. Unless this is achieved, they cannot talk peace and have guns at the same time.

            Anyway, what on earth has compelled man to do such ferocious act against another man? I am tempted to dismiss the notion that man is inherently evil but it brings me to light that we like to watch boxing and cockfighting, two figures scalping, hitting bloodily. It is further reinforced when Echegaray was sentenced to die and how we all waited for its consummation. Interestingly, the sight of blood and conflict excite the vulnerability of giving in easily to our temporal indulgence. However, the great Rousseau helps me to come to a personal conviction, that man is naturally good and that it is by institutions alone that he becomes evil.

2010 Nobel Peace Prize: Pursuing the Hard Peace This Time

As the year 2010 is about to end, let us take a look at the controversial Nobel Peace Prize which again hugged headlines.

For 2010, the Norway-based Nobel Committee decided to award the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobao, a Chinese literary writer, professor, and human rights activist.

The west applauded the decision. And human rights groups and activists commended the awarding to one of their fellows. However, Chinese government opposed the awarding to one of its jailed dissidents. Several governments including Cuba and Venezuela joined China in criticizing the popularization of a "western" idea of peace. Later, at least sixteen countries boycotted the awarding ceremony.

Why was there strong opposition to Liu Xiaobao receiving the Peace Prize?

Normally, the government of the country of origin of the winner would share in the pride and honor of bringing the Nobel Peace Prize home. How could China celebrate with the award when it would be given to its convicted dissident? How could China and other countries that are ruled by deviants to the "western" standards of governance applaud to the awarding?

When Mother Teresa won the same award in 1979, was there a public opposition? None.

When the award went to Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1964, the world embraced the awarding to MLK because he had fought ideas and beliefs in hierarchy system. He did not directly challenge the government.

There is parallelism though of this year's award to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 and Nelson Mandela in 1993. Both Suu Kyi and Mandela challenged their governments, and as a consequence of their actions, they were detained for several years. But Myanmar (Burma) was no China at that time. South Africa elected Mandela as the first ever black President of the country.

In Liu Xiaobao's case, he has challenged his government to implement political reforms. And now, he is serving an 11-year imprisonment for inciting to subvert Chinese government.

China is recognized as a global power with economic, military, and cultural strength. Almost every country wants a piece of China, be it in trade, finance, military, cultural exchange, scholarship, religion, environment, etc.. In other words, China could afford to stand up with its leverage.

Notably, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize decided to pursue a hard peace. It is a peace that deals with political institutions which are represented by a government. This year's award legitimizes the works and advocacies of Liu Xiaobao and other jailed political dissidents in other countries.

This made 2010 Nobel Peace Prize controversial because governments would definitely defend their political institutions. In contrast to soft peace epitomized by Mother Teresa dealing with humanitarian and social issues, hard peace, as the name suggests, is expected meet strong opposition from those who benefit from the political institutions that perpetuate structural violence to the peoples.

Oh My, What Happened To The Philippines?

Today is Human Rights Day.

It could have been splendid for human rights advocacy if governments' representatives had intended to attend the awarding of Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese human rights activist who is jailed because of his advocacy. Then, it would have been clear that globally human rights, as a collective set, is at the heart of governance.

It could have been.. But China was reported to have waged an intense campaign and pressure to boycott the awarding. Earlier, eighteen (18) countries have succumbed to that pressure. Now, at least only sixteen (16) countries because Serbia and Ukraine made a turnaround and announced that it would send a representative to the ceremony in Oslo. Among the sixteen countries, the Philippines is one of them.

How could one view the non-attendance of the Philippines in the awarding ceremony of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to a jailed Chinese dissident?

One way to view it is to look at the explanation of the invited party. The Philippine government justified its conspicuous absence by saying that the non-attendance is not a boycott but a conflict of schedule of the Ambassador to Norway. Anyone buying this justification? Come on, even a 5-year old kid could provide a better reason than that.

Another way to look at it is the rise of China in the global arena. With so much cash reserves, China has leverage to influence decision-making of any governments in need of necessary investments. The Philippines is a host to huge Chinese investments, making China its third largest trading partner. And it can only get bigger and bigger.

And another way to view it is to take account of the recent hostage-taking incident in Manila which killed eight Chinese tourists. The non-attendance of the Philippines could be its way of atonement and seeking reconciliation to the aggrieved and angry Chinese peoples and government.

Alongside with the Philippines, a number of countries would not be around during the awarding. I am not going to dwell on the list of countries that are alleged to have succumbed to the Chinese pressure and supported the Chinese protest against the Nobel. Although many point to the similarities of those that will boycott the awarding, I would not magnify the obvious defining characteristics of these countries - the way they treat and uphold human rights in their own jurisdictions.

Each country has its own reason for its non-attendance. I would leave the evaluation of their reasons to the reasoning public and readers.