This article is not only applicable to the affected ones (mainly UPD), but also to other schools/establishments that suffer from "unexpected" expenses due to the mischief of graffiti.
If activism is to be acquainted with graffiti, i.e. spray-painted protests on the walls, I daresay that it is still quite an effective method. However, it depends on what is the writing all about. Quoting Ivy, "what's up with all the vandalism around and outside campus. i don't get the point of having the need to vandalize walls just to get your points across. seriously, it's passe already.", that indeed it is passe, from bored people who write useless phrases on the walls or tables, to historic people using blood as their ink, vandalism has been passed through generations, mixed with ideals and trash. (My history is a bit rusty.oops). Now, what sets the disparity between a mark from a vandal, and a mark from a passion-induced writings is mainly the author's objective. A piece of paper with mere words and sentences on it is different from a paper filled with concrete statements and ideas.
But like any paper or whatnot, certain circumstances must be considered. Not all people consider certain outstanding thoughts different to thoughts of a vandal; thus, even if the activist writes something of pure and concrete idea, if others sense it as invalid, then they consider it as a vandal. Even the price is not fair for the other party, since the writings lead to defacing/destruction of walls or objects. Well, other things are described/explained below by N.del castillo (though I like some of his points because of its trueness):
--------------------------------------------------------------------
WANTED: A New Activism
by Nicolo del Castillo
"This is in reaction to the recent vandalism of UP buildings during the UPCAT weekend.
Spray painting slogans and messages is an old, worn-down way of catching attention. What these people do not realize is that in doing so, they contribute to more resources being siphoned away from delivering education. The paint used to cover their marks, the gasoline used to buy the paint, and chase the culprits (they weren't caught but we have their plate number), all redound to money spent away from direct education.
Shouting and spray painting may still be effective, but much more so quietly distributing leaflets with arguments against the TOFI to parents waiting for their children finish the UPCAT. Engaging people in confident discussion (not memorized lines) about what increased tuition fee does for the country's future will win more hearts and minds than violently flailing words on walls.
You call spray painting brave? I beg to disagree. They run and hide after proclaiming their stand. They would rather besmirch their perceived enemies' buildings with paint than show their enemies' arguments for what they really are.
Truly brave men and women walk slowly, speaking their truth softly and clearly with the aim to convince others rather than scare them; aiming to build a constituency, rather than divide and label people as "for" & "against", "pasista" & "aktibista". The brave are not afraid to stand alone and face the current. They are steadfast in pointing to the light or an alternative way, and have faith that people will soon see their truth.
We need new activists who understand what activism is. It is to be actively, consistently, and bravely forming a stance that would shed new light to old paths and show society a new way of doing things. It is doing the small stuff that ultimately become a mountain of work. It is giving of oneself to a quest, be it a lonely one. It is braving the rain to hold a candle to the dark. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to further discuss my points. But I'm sleepy, and I choose my bed rather than this machine I am operating.
WARNING: Cross-posted to blogger and multiply.
No comments:
Post a Comment