Lalas is a fourth-year international development studies and
political science student. He is vice president of Samahang
Pilipino and a former Viewpoint editor. Â
By Jonah Lalas
A few days ago, the Daily Bruin Editorial Board compared Samahang
Pilipino to an “oligarchy,” regarding our
organization’s decision to not sing the American national
anthem at our annual Pilipino Culture Night (“Oh say,
Samahang can’t see democracy,” Viewpoint, May 20).
They stated that the decision made by the Samahang Pilipino
board was done without the solicitation of the opinions of our
members. Moreover, they quoted me and my argument that the board
needs to be able to make efficient decisions, stating that while
“democracy may be slow and cumbersome, this excuse is exactly
what so many dictators of the past have used to seize
power.”
There are several problems with this editorial. First, it should
be stated that before The Bruin makes such assertions of
undemocratic actions against large groups with small numbers of
elected board members, it must first examine its own policies. As
Viewpoint editor last year, I got the opportunity to sit on the
Daily Bruin Editorial Board, the body that the Daily Bruin Policy
and Procedures Manual states is the “official voice and
opinion of the Daily Bruin.” Yet this board was made up of
seven members last year, and six this year, despite the fact that
the newspaper employs a staff of over 150 students. These positions
are not elected; rather, they go to certain section editors and a
number of staff representatives, who are chosen by the editor in
chief and the Viewpoint editor.
Every day, by majority vote, this editorial board takes stances
on certain issues, many of them controversial. Do they bother to
solicit the opinion of all 150 staff members? Do they conduct a
survey? Do they allow their staff to sit in on editorial board
meetings and offer their opinions so that it is reflected in the
editorials? Of course not. Such a process is cumbersome and given
the need of the paper to increase awareness on crucial issues every
day, such ultra-democratic policies simply would not work.
Last year, the editorial board decided to conditionally endorse
Ralph Nader for president. Is this reflective of all of the
students on the newspaper staff? Not by a long shot.
I am not saying that I disagree with Daily Bruin policy. I only
wish to illustrate that when you are dealing with large
institutions, leadership boards are often used to expedite
processes to make them run more efficiently and effectively. Though
the decision to omit the Star Spangled Banner and the Philippine
national anthem was made without all board members present, we
followed proper constitutional procedure and met quorum.
The Bruin also accuses Samahang of being undemocratic. Yet our
members are elected, our board meetings are open to general
members, and we always invite their input, especially at our weekly
general meetings. Rather than acknowledging this, the Daily Bruin
editorial states, “Groups have a right to express “¦
their political beliefs, but when only a few members decided on
what beliefs to express, it becomes unethical.” Does this not
apply to the six people on the editorial board who represent the
official newspaper voice? The Bruin might as well devote their
editorials to denouncing every organization in the world with a
small body that makes decisions.
Furthermore, The Bruin makes a reference to
“dictators.” Before the editorial board implicitly
compares Samahang to dictatorships, they should have reflected more
closely on all our reasons for not singing both the U.S. and
Philippine national anthems. This year marks not only the 30th
anniversary of Samahang Pilipino, but also the 30th anniversary of
martial law. In 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos, with the economic
and military support of the United States, declared martial law in
the Philippines beginning over a decade of state-imposed torture,
imprisonment and censorship. Philippine soldiers would force
Pilipinos to sing the Philippine national anthem in order to make
Pilipinos show their allegiance to the Marcos dictatorship.
There are students in our organization who have had family
members killed, tortured or beaten under the Marcos regime. My
father, a political activist, was forced into hiding and ultimately
had to leave the country because of his stances against Marcos. It
is appalling that at a time when our organization is remembering
this dark period in our history and calling for a moment of silence
at PCN for victims of human rights violations, The Bruin would
compare us to the very dictatorial policies that we are
protesting.
Finally, The Bruin demands Samahang members “hold their
elected leaders accountable by demanding a public apology.”
Had The Bruin done its full reporting, it would have found that
last Tuesday evening on May 14 at an all-cast PCN meeting, we did
make a formal apology to our members for making the decision so
late in the quarter.
The next time the editorial board criticizes a campus
organization, it needs to do its job, examine all of the facts, and
reflect more closely on its own policies.