Do dissent and the current protestations really divide our people? There are people, who were claiming to be neutral and pro-Philippines, pleading others to not engage into politics, remain silent, and let the current administration do its job. Do criticisms really divide public sentiment and opinion? Criticisms, in the basic sense, are arguments and points that reveal the weaknesses, the flaws, the wrongdoings, and the missing components of a body, an organization, a family, or a person. Criticisms do not intend to divide. Criticisms do not intend to weaken and destabilize. They intend to strengthen by exposing the flaws that needed to be fixed and given attention of.
That is why great statesmen like Ka Pepe Diokno welcomes criticisms because he believed that in a spirit of democracy, we can strengthen our leaders by pointing our that they are wrong, and not the other way around where fanaticism emboldens our leaders to continue their misdeeds without thinking about the repercussions. That is also why Theodore Roosevelt believed that it is a treasonable act to censor criticisms and let the government do what it wants. After all, as what the social contract theories postulated, the people is the premise of government: it is government who engaged into a contract to the people to look for their welfare.
What really is divisive is the fact that the people and organizations being criticized are denying what were being criticized about, for the sake of their pride, ego, , vested interest, and self-preservation.
Divisiveness is the failure of one or both opposing parties to engage in a civilized debate where arguments and opinions, as long as they were drawn from evidences, would be welcomed, where there were no rational and logical argument as well as evidence being suppressed, and where the parties can settle their differences in their current dilemma, by producing the solution and synthesis through the clash of the pros and cons, and the thesis and antithesis. Reluctance to engage in a discussion can mean only one thing: not letting go of their prejudices for the sake of self-preservation.
Divisiveness is being silent when there are still differences to be settled.
Who are the ones calling for a civilized debate and discussion? Those who confuse people with their blame games and confusing statements (hint: Government)? Those who protest in the street to rally their sentiments about the bullheadedness and close-mindedness of government who were evading discussions whatsoever just to provide what was promised? Those trolls in the internet who proliferate lies and deceit?
Who are the ones really doing a favor to our country? Who are the ones who were really pro-Filipinos? The ones defending our sense of history and democracy in the pursuit of truth and liberty? The ones defending the interest of one family who were attempting to revise the history, shroud their abuse of power with lies, and clouds the people’s orientation and consciousness through obscurantism so that they can be manipulated again? Or those, who were cowards, indolent to discussions, and unable to make a stand, pleading others to remain silent as them?