Today, the nation marks the 26th year since Senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr. was assassinated at the tarmac of the then-Manila International Airport. The 1983 assassination is currently regarded as one of the sparks that ignited the last waves of massive public outrage that eventually lead to the ouster of President Ferdinand Marcos in 1986.

A few days ago, I appeared (very) briefly in GMA 7′s 24 Oras newscast on a segment about Ninoy Aquino. The segment focused on the relationship between the late senator and the late dictator and strongman Pres. Ferdinand Marcos who both belong to the same fraternity, the Upsilon Sigma Phi. The popular theory, among brods especially, is of course though the rivalry was real, Marcos couldn’t have made a martyr out of his main political rival, and much more so out of his own fraternity brother. Aside form the fact that at that time, Marcos was bedridden and simply too sick to orchestrate and mastermind the assassination, we simply weren’t indoctrinated that way. Marcos also had very little political gain to compensate the great political risk entailed by doing the deed. This may be speculation to some, but for brods who understand the unique personal dynamics existing among fraternity brothers, it is a ‘theory’ worth more than a grain of salt.

Puzzled, the reporter asked me to explain how, in my opinion, the intense political rivalry between Marcos and Aquino, could have existed among two fraternity brothers. I told him (though, all these got cut from the final segment that went on air), it was a natural consequence of putting two ambitious politicians in the same fraternity. I added, that though we were indoctrinated to strive for a prosperous and progressive country, we were free to choose the means to achieve what we believed was for the good of the Filipino people.

Fraternity history recounts how the brods, especially in the late 60′s and 70′s were found in all sides of the political spectrum, from the side of the dictator and his ‘cronies’, who believed in authoritarian leadership to achieve prosperity, to the mainstream political opposition, who believed in the ideals of “liberal” democracy, to the communist left who believed in the Maoist armed rebellion and national democracy with a socialist perspective.

From my experience, I recounted how even in the university today, brods are encouraged to exercise their beliefs and fight for their principles by being active in their own political parties. In UP for example, while most of my brods were leaning towards conservatism and compromise activism, I was allowed to and encouraged to stay in the militant formation I belonged to even before I joined the frat. When I was in the University Student Council, the chairman then was a brod who belonged to a rival party, and a fraternity batchmate of mine belonged to the third party, and we had many principled differences and arguments with regard to various campus issues, but at the end of the day, we treated each other with great respect and still shared many fellowships.

Read the rest of this entry »