VELOSO, Ella Beatrice Reflection Paper: Vaclav Havel

POS 100 G February 21, 2019

It is a time of crisis. As frequent and normal crisis could be in one’s life, there is still

no denying that the emotional turmoil and stress that is currently happening between polar

opposites and ideals in my age have impacted so much of how I think, and behave in life.

Currently, I am trying to form a compromise between my child-like idealism and rough

cynicism with regard to the social context, especially in areas involving politics, and the

government. I believe that politics would always be inherent in everything one does, but it is

mostly seen and focused on what the government does that I come to understand more of what

politics actually entail. My idealism and cynicism on world and social issues persist in my head

and I have an on-going crisis regarding it almost every day since I know that there will be

implications in my personal life. Vaclav Havel’s acceptance speech for the Sonning Prize

helped me figure out what could be a great way to look at politics and governance, and what a

citizen in crisis, like me, could do.

In our class discussions, Politics “involves the production, allocation and use of

decision-making powers among large groups of individuals.” This entails huge power among

the individuals involved, especially those in the government. Specifically, the 3 fundamental

powers of the state include Police Power, Power of taxation, and the Power of eminent domain.

These powers are notably used to interfere with the private property of citizens. It is to be noted

that these powers are necessary to keep the order within the state, and for the officials to do

their job, but it is also important to notice that in exchange of the citizens’ surrender of their

freedom, money, and property to the state, they also expect that the government give them what

they are due: safety, healthcare, growth, and development. It is the latter part of this

responsibility that goes undermined when I think about the government, and how it is supposed

to work.
 Like in Havel’s speech, I do associate politics as being a dirty business. I usually think

that holding people in power over a vast majority is unfair, and unjust. But in theory, and

ideally, politics could be an enabler for change for a people. I guess this is why Havel says that

people are driven to it, it is to enact change, to turn ideas into reality. There is such a ring of

hope to it. But, as everything else in life, being in a place of power is a struggle. Havel says

that there are also the reasons of self-affirmation, and perks why individuals seek a place in the

government. It is easy for both of these reasons, especially the need and appreciation of perks,

to override the first one. There is a danger when the perks and ego could blind someone from

seeing the bigger picture. The very reason why they exist is so that they could follow through

with their first main reason: to enact change, to turn ideas into reality. The possible tragedy to

this is not that the politicians are grounded to their reasons less and less, but that it would seem

to be that they are bothered by the abuse they can do less and less. Power changes, and

catalyzes, but then it also corrupts. This is the dichotomy, and this is the struggle that politicians

must face.

In the greater scheme of things, power has been obviously corrupting our country’s

officials, and they have been abusing of the privileges that they have. Just the other day,

Rappler CEO Maria Ressa has been arrested for cyber libel. It is unjust, and a clear threat to

the people’s freedom and their access to information on what the government is doing. Police

power was used to intimidate, and threaten other civilians involved in the arrest when in fact,

what they were doing were clearly unlawful. The senatorial elections are also coming up, and

several places already have politicians’ faces. In the news in the internet and on TV their

promises kept on repeating. They take pride in what they have done and in the great and grand

things that they could do, discounting the fact that some of them are supported by maligned

organizations and individuals, they have been convicted of crimes, and are only in it for the

perks and privileges Havel has been talking about.

 This begs the question of who really is fit to lead a state? Havel says that the pure and

modest people are well suited for politics and I cannot help but compare them to the people

who run in our elections. Politicians who run usually parade their extreme benevolence, and

they make it apparent that they are people who are very grounded on their high principles. But

as noble as all of their claims may sound, what I think are important are those values that only

seem to accompany these traits and platforms. One need not be a hero to all the masses, a brave

warrior ready to fight for our country, or a highly intellectual scholar, but I think what a state

needs is someone who has patience, consideration, and an understanding for others. Some

politicians could have the tendency to appear coldhearted, cynical, and brawling when faced

with enemies, but in the end it is not what matters. Good manners, and respect will always

weigh more. But the humble, modest people, one’s who Havel considers “pure” are rarely put

into office, they are more of a minority in the population of politicians. I think Havel embodies

the very individual that he says is fit for politics. Reading his words, it conveys to me a

vulnerability that I have rarely seen from politicians. He paints the picture of the struggle and

malignance of his context, and it was admirable for me. There are no embellishments, no

promises, just the truth, and a vulnerable individual that shares a struggle that we all face. He

is self-aware, and reflective, and he embodies that an ideal could turn into reality. He embodies

a salvation that entails humanity to reflect and bask in meekness and responsibility.

To scale politics down, I have also reflected Havel’s words in my life and experiences.

I used to be in the Sanggunian, and I was one of the top officers. There was always a struggle

to find out what my reason for being in the position is, and if it is being forgotten or undermined

by my desire to affirm myself that I am capable of being in a leadership position, or if I am

only in it to add something to my resume. There was a point that the thought of winging the

job, and letting my subordinates do most of the work was appealing. In the first place, I was

already sworn into position and it could be written on my resume already. However, my term
was during the first year of Duterte’s presidency, and various human rights violations were

emerging, and it was the peak of historical revisionism as Marcos was going to be buried in the

Libingan ng mga Bayani. In my interactions with various student organizations in

mobilizations, as well as other people with different ideologies, made me see the type of politics

that could be going on. While my colleagues were stressing over organizing the next statement

from the Sanggunian, or looking for a way to entice Ateneans to participate, I was entertaining

the fact of not following through with my job. I thought that I always had the option of sleeping

instead, delegating it to other people, watching a show, or do something for my friends and

family. In retrospect, there was already a political significance in what I was doing. Though

my acts could be amoral to say the least, and I did not notice any immediate political effect, I

was still contributing to the ongoing ignorance and complacency of the people. I know that

there were wrongdoings by the government, and at this point it is considered inevitable, but I

think it should also be natural for us to struggle against it. I have failed to become the simple,

understanding, and modest individual that Havel asks politicians to be. I abused my perks and

power, and turned it into privilege, towards myself when I should have been doing the exact

opposite. Even though I worked in the service of my constituents, the LS students, it also entails

me to go beyond and to enact a respect and understanding for all. At the very core, it is just

being respectful and understanding towards each other.

After reading on Havel, and knowing the ideals he stands for, I did not know that my

idealism and cynicism could be reconciled. One could be realistic, and practical, yes, but one

can still be hopeful. I am aware once more of the potential of politics, and its function. From

what I thought was a cutthroat field, I can now see that it can be caring, honest, humble, good,

and most of all, humane. There are still crises, but it’s not anymore choosing one or the other.

I know now what politics should stand for, and it’s a congruity between the ideal and real that
we must try to merge. This project is far from over, but politics and people share the very core

ignites human action: hope.