In the heart of every Filipino, the West Philippine Sea dispute rages like an unyielding tempest. It’s a battle of sovereignty, pride, and David versus Goliath. But within this storm, two voices emerge – one defending the Philippines, the other championing China.
“I feel nothing but contempt toward anyone who would find excuses for China and would fault us for boldness to be confrontational, accusing us of irresponsible posturing and warmongering… A mere difference of opinion on politicians during elections is tenable. But not when the difference of opinion is about taking the side of the enemy of the country.” – Antonio Contreras
“Those who have gullibly believed this lie have become such true believers that they have become deliriously emotional about it, a symptom of fanaticism. For instance, a columnist in this paper, Antonio Contreras, claimed he had ‘nothing but contempt toward anyone’ who doesn’t embrace his anti-China views. I cannot understand why a purported academic could spew such venom over an issue that has two sides.” – Rigoberto Tiglao
As the sun rises over the azure expanse of the West Philippine Sea, casting its golden glow on a geopolitical chessboard, on one side sets the Philippines – a nation with a storied past, battered by colonialism, yet resilient. On the other looms China – a behemoth with ancient roots, modern ambitions, and territorial claims that stretch like a dragon’s sinew.
In this high-stakes game, the media wields its influence like a double-edged sword. Enter Tiglao and Contreras, two columnists who spar in ink, representing opposing camps. Tiglao, the unyielding advocate for China, and Contreras, the fiery defender of Philippine sovereignty, embody the polarization that grips our nation.
TIGLAO – GOLIATH’S ADVOCATE
Tiglao strides onto the battlefield, his quill sharpened by conviction. He argues that China’s claims are not mere territorial greed but rooted in historical complexities. To him, the Philippines’ boldness is reckless – a David taunting a giant. His pro-China stance places him in a complicated corner, like a fish swimming against a heavy current.
Why does Tiglao’s position face resistance? It’s the underdog phenomenon – the human heart’s affinity for David. We cheer for the scrappy team, the outmatched banca, the ones who defy the odds. Our country with its limited military might, becomes our collective David. Our empathy flows toward our smaller, aggrieved nation, even when logic whispers that the giant has its reasons too.
ANOMALY – FILIPINO SUPPORT FOR CHINA
Amid the brewing tension in the West Philippine Sea, Tiglao’s alignment with China -- an anomaly akin to an Israelite cheering for Philistine Goliath – defies our emotional compass.
Picture Tiglao as that Israelite, standing amid the ranks. He raises his voice, arguing that China’s actions aren’t aggression but pragmatism. Yet, our hearts cling to our land – ang bayan ko’y tanging ikaw, Pilipinas kong mahal. Tiglao’s words clash with our identity, like a dissonant chord in a familiar melody.
Imagine the following scene: moments before the David-Goliath battle. Noam personifies the Tiglao-like character; Asher, that of Contreras.
Noam: (muttering to himself) “Pragmatism, they call it. As if pragmatism ever softened the blow of a sword or mended a grieving heart.”
Asher: (approaching) “Noam, lost in thought again? Moments before the battle does that to a man.”
Noam: “Asher, my friend, do you see it? The giant – Goliath – towering over us like an ancient oak. His armor gleams and his laughter echoes through the valley.”
Asher: (leaning on his spear) Yes, Noam. But remember, we’re not just fighting a giant. We’re fighting for our land, our people. We face a Goliath who mocks our very existence.”
Noam: (gesturing toward the hill) “But what if we’ve misunderstood him? What if his actions aren’t arrogance but pragmatism? Survival in a harsh world.”
Asher: “Pragmatism? Noam, he defies our God, tramples our fields, and scoffs at our cries for justice. His pragmatism is a blade that cuts deep.”
Noam: (voice rising) “But think! He secures his people’s future. His empire thrives. Perhaps we’re the fools, clinging to honor while our children starve.”
Asher: (leaning in) “Honor? Noam, honor isn’t a luxury for kings – it’s the heartbeat of a nation. We fight not for pragmatism but for justice, for the memory of our ancestors who tilled this soil.”
At this point, one Israelite lad, named David, takes his staff, picks up five smooth stones from the brook, and drops them inside his shepherd’s bag. And with his sling in hand, he drew near Goliath.
Noam: (clenching his fists) “And what if justice is a mirage? What if our defiance leads to ruin? Our slingshots against his iron? Is that not arrogance?”
Asher: (softly) “Noam, listen. Our David isn’t just a shepherd with a sling. He carries the weight of generations – the whispers of those who died defending this land. His defiance isn’t arrogance; it’s hope.”
Noam: (voice breaking) “Hope? Asher, hope doesn’t stop arrows or mend broken families. It won’t feed our children.”
Asher: (placing a hand on Noam’s shoulder) “No, but it fuels courage. It turns stones into weapons, and shepherds into heroes. Our David stands for more than pragmatism – he stands for us.”
Noam: “And Goliath?”
Asher: “Goliath stands for power unchecked, for might is right. He’s forgotten that even giants can fall.”
At this moment, David rushes to the battleground. Putting his hand into his bag, he takes out a stone, slings it, and strikes Goliath on the forehead, and he falls on his face to the ground. The rest is history.
AD HOMINEM AND INFORMED ARGUMENTS
Colossal Hoax: It’s not about EEZs, stupid.
Let’s analyze. Tiglao wields his pen like a rapier. His column title above is provocative and intentionally confrontational. The use of “stupid” directly targets opponents’ intelligence or understanding. The phrase “It’s not about EEZs” implies that those who focus on the EEZ issue are misguided or missing the bigger picture. The title sets a tone of dismissal and superiority and aligns with the ad hominem approach.
Tiglao attempts to soften the blow by explaining that the expletive isn’t meant as an insult. He likens it to James Carville’s famous phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid.” The phrase, used during Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign, emphasized the central issue (the economy) and urged focus. Tiglao implies that his title serves a similar purpose.
While Tiglao’s explanatory note provides context, it doesn’t fully mitigate the impact of the title. The phrase “stupid” remains loaded and derogatory. It undermines respectful discourse and veers into ad hominem territory. His attempt to mimic Carville’s approach falls short because the original phrase didn’t attack anyone’s intelligence – it simply prioritized an issue.
Ad hominem attacks – weapons of short-term persuasion – distract from substantive debate. Constructive debates should focus on informed discourse, where ideas clash, evidence illuminates, and truth prevails.
FORGING OUR PATH
As daylight wanes over the expanse of the West Philippine Sea, Tiglao and Contreras seek solace in their sheltered haven. Their columns ripple through cyberspace, shaping minds, and igniting passions.
But beyond the duo’s ink-stained battleground lies a nation yearning for unity. As the tempest of the West Philippine Sea swirls, our mandate is clear: to listen intently, learn unwaveringly, and forge our path. This David-Goliath saga positions the Philippines, not as a bystander, but as the principal actor, writing its destiny upon the surging waves.
Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered Co-pilot
Head collage photos courtesy of Free Grace International & Quora
Video clips courtesy of YouTube
No comments:
Post a Comment