Principled disagreement and anonymous black propaganda: A challenge

Over the past few days, I have been receiving reports of anonymous efforts to bring down Alex Castro in the race for USC Chair. As a fellow candidate and in behalf of UP ALYANSA, I wish to voice my strongest condemnation against these malicious attempts.

The campaign is a time not just to show off each candidate's and each political party's strengths and victories, but also a time to educate and to engage in a healthy, passionate, and principled discourse.

In the earlier part of this week, members of ALYANSA made a principled disagreement with Alex Castro's citation of wrong information on the sin tax law. Rooted in our advocacy to make this campaign more about platforms and less about personalities, we demanded an apology from Alex Castro and a retraction of the misinformation that the 15% allocation for tobacco farmers has been stricken off the sin tax law. To this day, we have not received any apology or retraction; so, our principled disagreement and demand continue.

But when a supposed screenshot of an alleged chat conversation between Alex and a "friend" cropped up, I was personally disappointed. Today, a perverted statement entitled "Sex Will Fix" was released in different areas in campus.

These are exactly what ALYANSA has been campaigning against. While we make sure to maintain our principled disagreement with Alex Castro and KAISA on the level of issues and platforms, efforts like these serve as roadblocks to our dream of an informed student body.

The anonymity of these efforts reveals exactly their purpose: Nothing more than to regress to personality politics and blur this campaign into becoming a pageant of reputations rather than clear platforms. I personally challenge the people behind these efforts to come into the open and make a principled choice to inform, rather than to maliciously attack. I challenge the people behind these to reveal their identities and the USC Chair candidate they support, if any, so the students may decide for themselves what to make of the propaganda.

As student leaders, it is our duty to inform and shape the debates in campus to become a discourse of principles, integrity, ideology, and platforms. This campaign is not about me; it is not about Alex Castro's alleged chat messages or motives. This campaign is about the students and their right to make an informed choice on their next University Student Council.

Carlo Brolagda
ALYANSA USC Chairperson candidate
February 20, 2013

What do you think about endorsements given by individuals and groups to parties during elections?

We consider elections as good opportunities to define our platforms, as well as demonstrate our brand of leadership. Consistent with our principles, we engage in the elections as a venue for greater student empowerment. Of course, given the nature of elections, we also recognize the reality that parties also compete in informing the general public, hoping to attract the broadest support from students.

Therefore, as part of this annual democratic exercise, ALYANSA welcomes like-minded individuals and groups who support the formation. Nonetheless, consistent with its pillars, as well as its progressive, multi-perspective character, ALYANSA conditionally recognizes endorsements as long as it does not compromise the integrity of the formation. We welcome endorsements from individuals and groups with established credibility, and who can account for their actions to the public. We also reserve our judgment to turn down some of these endorsements, in certain instances, when it compromises our formation's integrity.

This is ALYANSA's way of ensuring that this democratic exercise remains credible, as we strive to maintain our integrity to the public. We always lay down our credibility on the line every time we conduct ourselves to the public, and it is our commitment to maintain this credibility as we engage in the USC elections.

Someone told us about your founding faculty adviser’s issue as regards your choice of standard-bearers this year. What do you say about this?

The essence of inviting the UP community to a partnership of principle, embodied by our call “Kasama Ka”, is to demonstrate our ability to build bridges amidst differences.

The real test of any invitation comes when it is met by a different response than what you originally hope for. Differences in position have always existed WITHIN, and AMONG parties in campus. We believe that it is an opportunity, not a setback. In this light, and consistent with being open to each other, we remain hopeful that any differences we have will be settled in the near future.

For the meantime, we remain committed to the task at hand -- that is, to communicate that ALYANSA’s brand of leadership remains the most relevant to students and the UP community.

-----

Stories have been floating about a different account of the party’s selection process for this year’s standard-bearers. There are even other stories about the party in general. What is your take on it?

In a mature democracy, parties are vehicles for spirited yet civil debate, in the hope of ensuring lively participation in the political process. While parties certainly have differences AMONG its members, they come together as one in the pursuit of their principles. Parties, while valuing openness, also operate on the basic trust that their members would be promoting the party’s ideals.

Hence, “very reliable sources” claiming to “represent” a party, while issuing statements that are clearly detrimental to its well-being, must be first subjected to skepticism. It is easy to issue statements under the cloak of anonymity, but it is even harder to substantiate these without consulting the parties themselves.

We dare these “independent” sources to substantiate their claims, and come out in the open in order for these issues to be threshed out. True, we may not agree with the other parties in campus most of the time, but we believe that ALL THREE OF US be treated fairly and with respect.