The Seeds of Evil: How Communism Infiltrates Public Universities?
The evil political ideology behind “free access to education” is very clear: Socialism.
The pernicious tentacles of communism are now at work in our campuses, particularly in state universities and colleges (SUCs).
The violent, barbaric, and highly disturbing March 19 student protest at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP), a taxpayers-funded higher education institution located in Sta. Mesa, Manila, shows the degree of communist collectivization and indoctrination of the Filipino youth today. Militant students violently protested against the university officials’ plan to raise tuition from the current P12.00 ($0.26) to P200.00 ($4.39).
The taxpayers-funded state university’s tuition hike proposal was intended to improve school facilities and instruction. But the school administration’s notice, which states that a 1,567-percent tuition hike would be imposed on incoming freshmen, enraged militant students. The school’s notice read: “ADVISORY: The public is being informed that PUP will increase the tuition and other fees of incoming freshmen in board and laboratory-intensive programs for the school year 2010-2011, subject to the approval of the University Board of Regents.”
Irate militant students reacted with violent protests wherein they staged a mass walkout from their classes and torched chairs outside the university’s premises. They claimed that the tuition hike proposal was “unjust” and “inappropriate” without considering the fact that the P12.00 per unit charged by their school was at 1979 levels. Apply that to the current pricing of general services plus inflation and the purchasing power of peso, said amount is reduced to less than one peso per unit. The militant students and their political appeasers, particularly the Kabataan Party and leftist party-list groups and organizations, also paid no attention to the fact that the proposed hike is not across the board for all academic courses, but laboratory intensive courses, and that none of them would be affected, but only incoming freshmen. The student activists also refuse to consider that the state university has not increased its tuition for the past 32 years amid its insufficient annual budget of P660 million.
For the past 32 years, PUP has not increased its tuition fee amid its meager budget of P660 million a year. It offers the lowest tuition fee for its thousands of students from the marginalized sector of the society.
The proposal was in response to a cut in the national government’s budget for PUP. Based on the 2010 national appropriations act, the outgoing Arroyo administration cut the budget for the state university by P43 million ($943,720) to P661 million ($14 million). The budget would be shared by 1,483 faculty members and around 52,000 students across the state university’s six campuses, two branches and 10 extension campuses across the country.
As expected, militant youth organizations, such as the National Union of Students in the Philippines and the Kabataan Party-list, orchestrated the anti-tuition hike protests wherein militant students stormed the Commission on High Education (CHED) building in Diliman, Quezon City on March 22 to oppose PUP’s proposed tuition increase.
The Kabataan Party came up with an exaggerated statement wherein it claimed that the tuition hike would affect an estimated 66,000 incoming freshmen.
“This is a very important national issue that should be addressed by presidentiables this election period. Those who promise to advocate better access to education, a better future for our youth, [and those] who declare that they want to help the poor should make a categorical stand against the proposed tuition hike in PUP and other state universities,” the Kabataan Party secretary said. He added: “The next president must increase the budgetary allocation and state spending on education and should stop unjust tuition increases. If they fail to do so, they will be trashed like what the students did to the armchairs.”
What is the implication of this typical leftist rhetoric? Did the Kabataan Party try to equate “better access to education” with “free access to education?” Who will subsidize the tuition of these more than 50,000 students? The government? The answer is NO! It is the taxpayers who are paying for every centavo spent on every student of every state university in the country.
Now the Kabataan Party calls on the next administration to allocate more “budget and state spending” for education and to put an end to “unjust” school free increases. But who will pay for more government spending? Who will be sacrificed to what the militant students and their political appeasers call “better access to education?” The taxpayers! It seems that these leftist organizations and militant students feel that every penny that the government wastes or spends comes from an infinite source of magical wealth.
More government spending means higher budget deficits. There are only four sources of government wealth: 1) tax money; 2) foreign creditors; 3) printing of paper money; 4) foreign donations.
Like their communist elders, militant students are also wont to making exaggerated claims and sensationalized data and information. Contrary to their claim that PUP proposed to impose 2,000 percent hike on incoming freshmen (not all students), the real figure is 1,567 percent.
University of the Philippines professor and economist Winnie Monsod is not convinced that PUP’s proposed hike is “unreasonable.” In her commentary on QTV 11, Monsod said that the state university’s plan was very reasonable. She said that the price of all items, including that of educational services, has increased for the past ten years, from 2000 to 2010.
Thankfully, Monsod commented on the student activists’ irrational, hippyish and violent demonstrations, which resulted in the destruction of the state university’s property worth P.5 million, including that of the CHED’s steel gate and other property worth P.5 million.
“Bringing it up to P200 is unreasonable only in the sense that if tuition fees had been allowed to rise in tandem with the general cost of living, the tuition fee should only be P189.90 instead of the P200 per unit,” she said, adding: “If we take into account that education costs had increased much faster than the general cost of living.”
“I guess somebody should bother to do the arithmetic,” the lady economist said.
But the most alarming and disturbing aspect concerning the violent student protests is not the degree of destruction done to school property, but the level of communist indoctrination of the youth and infiltration of our colleges and universities, both public and private. What I’m seeing here is not the physical damage to school property but the destruction of the consciousness of the youth.
But since the proposal was made during the height of the campaign period, several politicians like vice-presidential candidate Mar Roxas saw an opportunity to gain the support of young voters by supposedly saving incoming freshmen from paying a higher tuition rate.
Another incident took place at the University of the Philippines, the top-funded state university by taxpayers’ money, when
radical student activists lobbed plastic bags containing green paint at a school official who was supposed to attend a meeting on the imposition of new fees. The school official, UP Los Baños Chancellor Luis Rey Velasco, was deeply saddened over the radical activism at UP.
“Pasensya na po kayo kung ganyan talaga ang salita ng mga estudyante ng UP ngayon. Nakakalungkot [We apologize for the behavior of UP students. It’s saddening],” the school official told reporters before leaving the area.
Communist infiltration of the country’s higher education institutions is no longer a secret. In his speech at the University of the Philippines-Diliman, Bayan Muna Rep. Satur Ocampo urged the students to continue the communist revolutionary struggle.
“[L]et me salute the thousands of activists today, the older and the young, from UP and elsewhere who, with commitment, enthusiasm and hope, carry on the revolutionary struggle shoulder to shoulder with the masses — through its multifarious ramifications, means and methods and up to its highest form. Regardless of how some people, or perhaps a good number of people, may view its continuing relevance to our national life, or its prospects of succeeding in its avowed goals, the national-democratic revolutionary movement is undeniably alive.” said Ocampo.
The message of Ocampo is very clear: He wanted UP to be the center of “neo-liberal terrain” so as to bring back the old glory of “militant activism.”
The continued rise of student activism is just one of the destabilization goals of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). The communist planners clearly understand the role of the youth in the revolutionary struggle.
Perhaps not all student activists or militants fully understand what they’re wishing for. Their activist mantra— “better and free access to education”— which is being lauded by socialist politicians in Congress, does not belong to a semi-Republican society, but to a socialist slave pen.
Education is not a right. A ‘right’ means man’s freedom of action in a social context. It pertains only to human action, specifically, to man’s freedom of action. A person is not born with a right to a trip to tour the country’s tourist destinations. A person has no in-born, innate right to a dinner at Manila Hotel, or a free cosmetic surgery at Belo Medical Clinic or a college degree in Nursing or Medicine. Those who argue that every person in these parts has the right to free education either do not understand the proper concept of right or have sinister political agenda. We cannot have such right to a better and free access to education because the concept of individual rights in a free society does not impose any obligation on other people. The only obligation or responsibility of every individual is to leave his neighbor alone, to not violate his rights, to not interfere with his private life. We don’t have a right to enslave the productive members of our society.
Free access to education simply means socialized or highly subsidized education. It means that someone has to be immolated or sacrificed to others in the name of the greater good. While students in private schools, colleges, and universities pay the ‘agreed’ amount of school fees, student activists would like to be exempted from this obligation. I used the word ‘agreed’ since student consultation is required by the government through the CHED before any tertiary school is permitted to increase its tuition rate. If students activists demand exemption, the question is: who would pay for their “better and free education?” The taxpayers, of course.
In the Philippines, the most taxed and regulated by the government (e.g., corporations, businesses, and other profitable private entities and individuals) are being denounced by the leftists and their new student recruits. While these socialist ingrates call for more government spending on education, health care and other public services, they blatantly vilify and call for the enslavement of those who produce the goods and make wealth possible.
The evil political ideology behind “free access to education” is very clear: Socialism. Five to ten years from now, the young leftists in our campuses would become part of our social system, and they would be instrumental in the concretization of the ideology they absorbed from their leftist professors and the neo-liberal intellectuals. Our campuses are like a ticking time bomb. Most of which, particularly the taxpayers-funded colleges and universities, are a threat to our freedom and to the future of this country.