Letter to the Editor by Vinzhill Simon

Letters to the Editor is a section where The LaSallian publishes sentiments and opinions by members of the community on matters concerning life in De La Salle University in any of its aspects. Should you wish to send a letter to the editor, kindly email your letter to [email protected], or send a message to our Facebook page.

To the Editorial Board of The LaSallian,

Lesson: An Anarchic Student Body is No Student Body at All

An anarchic student body is a contradicting, bewildering claim to raise amidst the most interesting University Student Government (USG) General Elections (GE) in recent memory. To begin, no student body, that is any form of student representation and governance, can be anarchic since a basic inquiry of the concept would reveal that it is an abject absence of governance. Thus, an anarchic student body simply cannot be. However, this paper’s objective is not to deliver a lesson on political science, since there are concerns that requires attention.

Firstly, there is an apparent presumption that the University’s COMELEC has furthered the student population’s apathy towards student campus politics. This thesis, central to the letter delivered to the editor, is flawed as it gives no concrete indication that the COMELEC’s action has indeed caused a measurable dip in student involvement in student politics and governance. The letter’s following statements deliver another contradiction: its claims on student apathy. If there is an active and impassioned discussion regarding campus politics, regardless of what positions are taken, would claims of increasing apathy still hold?

Secondly, it is deeply regrettable that the letter dismisses the valid concerns of students regarding the USG as anarchic tendencies. While it is wonderful that there is clarification, from Merriam-Webster no doubt, of the definition of anarchy, it must be made clear that an immediate association of calls for the USG’s abolition to the concept, is insensitive. It is because such an association discounts the students’ sentiments towards the USG, the plethora of valid concerns, and any movement for corrective actions on the USG. Further, it would seem that the concept of reform escapes the letter’s author as it neglects the possibility of the creation of a new student body that could emerge from the abolition of the USG; akin to how the USC of old was supplanted by the USG.

Thirdly, it must be said that more than structure, the USG parallels the Philippine government in its elitism, manifested in the fixation on academic pedigree peddled during elections; and its abhorrence to discuss the most fundamental matters in the country, exemplified by the USG’s limited endeavors and the absence of any overt positions regarding land redistribution, labor export, and wealth concentration, among others. Issues which we cannot possibly cast aside, even inside the University, if we are to be genuine achievers for God and Country. All of which add credence to the students’ perception of the “’dirt’ of politics that seem to exist in the student body.” As such, the letter’s opinion that the USG is indeed a training ground for genuine and pertinent national leaders must be rendered as faulty.

As a member of the LaSallian community (Three years as an undergraduate, barely one as a graduate student), it is dismal how student leaders, despite their impressive academic pedigree, are yet to figure out why the student population has been reluctant to engage, or at the very least “appreciate” the USG. An equally safe assumption on student apathy would rest in the observation that students do not find the USG relevant to their pursuits inside the University nor is it genuine in its representation of student interests in forums, whether local or national. There may have been tireless battles in the Tuition Fee Increase Board, but where did the USG’s efforts lead the students? The approval of the impending 4% tuition hike and the sustained inclusion of other school fees. There may have been tireless battles in the Student Handbook Revisions Committee but where does the revisions stand now and how substantial were they? While recognition is indeed due for those hard workers in the USG, it is apparent that the current efforts in allaying apathy is insufficient. Beyond social media publicities, Internet polls, and conferences with notable speakers, there must be there must be a willingness to sink amongst the masses, live amidst the student population; listen to them, refrain from dismissing their sentiments, however blunt these could be, and translate these into concrete policies and actions.

The true understanding of the principle of the USG’s mandate from the student population lies not in reciting its Constitution but rather respect for the students’ opinions, sentiments, and modes of action even if unwelcoming, and it certainly does not lie in reiterating conduct inside the USG but in heeding criticism no matter how frank. Caution must be exercised. Calls for reforms in the USG, even its abolition, is not anarchy; and the presence of criticisms towards the USG disproves the “total” rampancy of apathy. Further, any insistence that it is the student population which should change to prevent “anarchy” and to allay “apathy” is negligence as it should be the government which should determine and adapt to the shifting needs of the community it serves.

Indeed, an anarchic student body is indeed not the answer to the challenges faced by LaSallians, and it must be explained to the letter’s author that recent developments in campus student politics are neither indications of student apathy nor movement towards anarchy. Contrary to the letter’s claims, there are substantial proofs that these developments reinforce order and student engagement. Is it not order and an apt exercise of authority that the COMELEC declared candidates ineligible because of non-compliance to set procedures? Is it not participation in campus politics that students share in various media their sentiments toward the USG? I believe that these questions should have been asked first before delivering claims of apathy and anarchy, before an undue critique on the parallels of the USG and the national government was made, and before any insistence for students to appreciate an institution that is yet to prove its relevance to them.

With the Student Government in transition, I implore its impending leaders to heed and serve the people!

Beholden to the LaSallian and the Filipino,

Vinz Simon