The Philippine situation can be likened to any one of the many dilemmas straight out of the book “Catch-22” by Joseph Heller: Things could have been so pretty good if only they were not so pretty bad.
Time Magazine, in the second time that it would honor a Filipino in as many months, posthumously named 18-year-old Muelmar Magallanes as one of its 10 Heroes of the Year. Magallanes died at the height of typhoon Ondoy after repeatedly saving up to 50 of his neighbors.
Magallanes swam back and forth the raging waters to bring neighbors threatened by the rising floods to higher ground. On his last trip through the currents, the wall of a house collapsed on him and a tv set fell squarely on his head, killing him instantly.
The heroism of Magallanes, while different in how it was carried out, nevertheless matched the conviction and dedication of Efren Peñaflorida, whose “Kariton Classroom” earned for the Filipino CNN's Hero of the Year Award.
Just a month ago, Time featured Manny Pacquiao on its cover, a recognition that came even before he went on to reap more honors for his country by becoming the first man ever to win seven world titles in seven different weight classes by stopping Puerto Rican champion Miguel Cotto.
All these honors and recognitions would have helped redeem some of the pride the country lost elsewhere. But there can only be so much of a good thing. You just cannot have everything. So, along with these great reasons for pride, along came great reasons for shame.
First to shatter the fragile respite was no less than Manny Pacquiao himself, whose record-setting win over Cotto was followed immediately by allegations of marital infidelity involving a pretty starlet.
Then came the barbaric massacre of more than 50 people, many of them women and journalists, in the worst politically-related act of violence the nation has seen in many years. It was a shot heard round the world.
On the heels of that massacre came a presidential order clamping a state of martial rule over the province of Maguindanao, an act widely criticized not just for itself but also for the justifications, or lack of them, that underpinned the imposition. What comes around comes around.