No to Unity!

Democracy has been described as a legitimizing term. This means that anything will look or sound legitimate or good if one attaches the term democracy to it; no matter how undemocratic it may be. Decisions are easily accepted if one asserts that it was reached through a democratic process. Unconstitutional acts have been legitimized in the name of protecting democracy. The same is true with the term “unity”. Politicians use it all the time during elections. “Our problem is that we are not united, we need unity,” goes the simplistic exhortation. Recently, two events in the Philippines have resulted to renewed calls for unity–the Glorietta Mall explosion and the pardon given to former President Joseph Estrada.

Immediately after the explosions and the accompanying suspicions that the blast was a diversionary tactic intended to deflect the attention away from current corruption and bribery charges against the government of Arroyo, politicians mainly from the administration started a chorus calling for the people to unite and avoid politicking that will ust divide the nation.

Justifying her pardon of convicted plunderer Erap Estrada, Arroyo asserted that it is time to move on and heal old wounds so that the country can unite in its vision. And it’s not just the politicians, the man on the street also peddle this rhetoric on unity. When asked whathe thinks is the most pressing problem in the country, an ordinary citizen will most likely say the lack of unity and that the solution is, of course, unity. But have we thought about this? Is disunity our real problem? Is unity the solution to our problems?

I think unity is overrated. I think it is one of those meaningless concepts that we employ when we have no idea what we are talking about. Of course unity DOES mean something. According to Aristotle’s Poetics unity is one of the three principles of dramatic structure stating that a drama should have but one plot, should take place in a single day and be confined to a single locale. The dictionary defines unity as the state or quality of being one; singleness, or, the state or quality of being in accord; harmony.

But what do these meanings actually mean when employed in the context of political life? Everytime Arroyo chastises the opposition for criticizing her policies and asks them to instead unite, does she mean that we should all agree to her administration’s policies? Does it mean that we should just turn a blind eye to the illegitimacy of her government, the extra-judicial killings that remain unabated, the quasi-martial rule that she is implementing, and the immorality and arrogance of her government?

When people ask for unity does it mean that we should all think alike? That we should just ignore our individual needs and interests and subjugate it to common interest?

Our society is composed of individuals with different religions, culture, language, and political biases. Unity cannot mean that we erase those differences so that we can have a nation united. If that is unity then to hell with unity! Religion, culture, language and politics become richer because of diversity. Government needs an opposition so it can be checked. Even if the Philippine Senate appears to be merely grandstanding with its numerous investigations, it is indeispensable that a group or institution check the abuses of government; especially this government!

People are always hesitant to join debates and arguments. They say its a waste of time. They say they want peace and quiet. Well, that is probably the reason why we get the government that we deserve. We cannot ask for genuine democracy and say that we do not want debates. Debates, discourses, discussions and argumentations are the very essence of a democratic society. We do not settle our differences by shooting each other. We do not achieve unity by allowing one tyrant to decide for ourselves. We deal with our diversity through democratic debates. We discuss in public our vision. We argue about proposed alternatives. We oppose those policies that are against our interests. That, my fellow democrats, is what democracy is all about.

So, no! I don’t think our problem is that we are disunited. I do not think that we need unity. Anything that calls itself ‘united’ will find itself fragmented soon. Just look at the so-called united opposition. On the contrary, I think that the problem of this country is that there is too much of the term unity in our discourse.  I think we are too silent aboit issues that we should be noisy about. We are too peaceful. We need a bit more rage. It is time to disabuse our minds into thinking that unity will solve our problems. I think it is time we delete it from our political dictionary. I have.