MACALNAS, Dayamon P.

1. Democracy cripples freedom.

Democracy may be a word familiar to most, but it is a concept still misunderstood and relates
to freedom. Are you also one of those many who believes that democracies are freedom
preserving? And that democracy promotes freedom?

The reality is democracy is not a perfect preserver of freedom, and is actually inimical to it.
Democracy is not as consistent with freedom as it appears to be.

Democracy is defined as a a system of governance where the citizens of a country choose

representatives who form a governing. It is a regime in which power cannot be taken or held against
the majority (UNESCO). While, freedom is defined as “independence from being constrained by
another’s choice” (Ripstein 2009, 240).

Applying the definition, freedom exists when your actions are in no way the decision of any
power other than your own. Freedom cannot exist when democracy exist as such governance
claims an ownership right in you as a person, in turn. It is evident that government claims a right
to dictate how you will live, where you will live, what you will eat and what you can drink.
Democracy is a treat to freedom because the time a rule is passed that limits your behavior, your
freedom is diminished. Now, most people say that democracy is “self governing” yet everyone
still cannot say “no” to those in power thus, the fact remains that freedom is diminished. Thus,
democracy cripples freedom in many ways.

First, we all can visualize a situation wherein we would be among the 1% of the population
having no other choice but to conform to some demand of the other 99% of the community, in this
case, freedom of those among 1% is undermined. This is in fact the reality. This is what democracy
wants. We are in a scheme where in one vote for a policy that we are very passionate about will
never make a difference, because technically majority does rule in a democracy which results to
infringement of the freedom of the minority. Another example is during this pandemic, if a
democracy enacts a law about mandatory vaccinations and it passes through a democratic process
even though some citizens did not vote for it, then in that very moment, democracy undermines
freedom. Minority are left with conforming the said law out of fear. This has been characterized
as the tyranny of the majority. If the majority want more rules restrictions than they will have less
freedom as well. In all these cases, freedom is sacrificed to the growing opinoin of lawless
majorities.
 Second, are people do really have the freedom in electing representative? The question of the
relationship between democracy and freedom in electing representatives is incompatible with
freedom. Democracy involves political competition and power play. In today’s world, the average
person votes based on emotions and lack of information. Freedom of people are bought by these
politicians, such involves corruption by electoral campaigns and results to corruption of the
freedom of people. There is a need to educate the people about properly exercising their voting
rights and be secured of their freedom. What really is happening behind is that democracy has
never be truly compatible with freedom.

Third, this is in relation to my second argument. Socrates has pointed a flaw in democracy long
time ago. He has given analogy of a ship sailing on a stormy day and asked whether the person
who knows about sailing should be incharge of the vessel or someone who don’t have any
knowledge of sailing but has been voted as a captain? Now, given that peoples freedom are bought
then an inadequate person would take a such position gives conclusion that the country would be
deprived of something great as freedom.

Generally, democracy limits freedom. Our rights as an individual are necessarily limited in
order to protect the rights of other individuals. As the saying goes, your right to swing your fist
ends where my nose begins. We have constitutional freedoms, and we need a very good reason to
make any laws that infringe on those freedoms, and usually this needs to be in defense of other
freedoms.

2. Prove that this is RED:

“Your eyes can deceive you, don’t trust them.” - Obi Wan Kenobi. But your feelings won’t
deny you.

Strictly speaking, we did not invent color, as we just saw things and named their color. Then
there we associate colors with how we feel and every one learned the same name, but we all
interpret it differently, no one else would know because they don't see what someone else feels.
Colors are not properties of objects or atmospheres like the sky but of perceptual processes, it is
an interactions which involve psychological subjects and physical objects.

I was wondering how you feel right now, but one thing is for sure, that there is love pouring
out of you as of this moment. These are either you are inspired, motivated or moved both in your
work, studies or in any occasions you’re into. There, we named it red as we associate colors with
how we feels.
 That color you’re seeing is red, because everything is in fact red. Red has a range of symbolic
meanings, including life, health, vigor, war, courage, anger, love and religiousness. The common
thread is that all these require passion and when associate it with color that we named, what you
are feeling right now is red even if looking to any object with different color. So long as there is
love and passion in you, then everything you see is red which symbolizes and represents your
feelings. Furthermore, to strengthen my contention, have you ever realized that when we become
angry our faces become flushed with reddish color. When we are nervous we tend to get red all
over our face. Same when we are happy and healthy, seemingly we’re having natural rosy cheeks
more specifically when we are in love or inspired. Therefore, in all cases, red manifests in
connection to passion. Thus, if any of the following is how you feel at the moment, then that proves
that whatever you are seeing is red.

Are you in pain or have you ever been in pain? Mostly do, especially when we lost an important
person in our life, or could even when we feel like nothing is going in our way.

Are you overwhelmed righ now? Because there is so much work to do and so much is
happening and the world is moving so fast and that you feel like you can’t catch up from all
different directions.

Are you feeling lost and confused and can’t think straight. As being said, red is the color that
pierces your tiny little bubble and makes everything explode and shatter around you while your
insides heat up with frustration and anxiety. Describing red is describing the feeling of being lost
and discombobulated and having worry of what will happen next (Quora).

Are you pressured? Feels like your heart is burning and so heavy. Do you feel like it’s so loud
as if gunshots are everywhere around you and that your heads hurts so much or that you feel like
everything is spinning and that you can’t get up yourself. Perhaps, it is anger. Anger is red when
it becomes the sheet that blinds you from living in anything other than the fire that is burning
before you.

Are you confused? To the point that you don’t know how to describe red anymore, or that you
don’t know if should you be convinced that it is red, or that you are even confused as how you feel
right now or that you are lost of words, at the moment, what you are seeing is red. Accordingly,
Red is the realization that some things in this world are beyond our reach. Red is the feeling of
being speechless, of being mysterious, of being shocked. Red is the feeling that evokes creativity
and curiosity and beauty in the world because of how versatile red is. Describing the color red is
different every day, every minute, and every moment because describing red is describing what is
on your heart. Describing red is describing the beauty that fills your world through feelings and
emotions and using words that aren’t in daily vocabulary. Isn’t red astonishing, red is exhilarating,
red is all the letters and words in the world exploding and falling down slowly, hitting each of us
in its own special way.

Red, can only be fully grasp when associated with your feelings. Even if without seeing
“red” or somebody tells you that he is seeing blue, what matters is how you feel and that would
lead you to see everything as red.

3. Bar examinations should be abolished.

The bar examination tests the ability to take tests, not the ability to practice law. It is of no
doubt unfair and discriminatory. As Atty. Tanya said, "bar exams are not entirely fair, and they do
not really measure whether an examinee has the competence and moral fiber to be admitted to the
legal profession". Hence, bar examinations outlived it’s usefulness and should be abolished.

Under Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, the Supreme Court conducts the bar examinations,
a month-long examination every year. The Constitution grants it the power to promulgate rules
governing admission to the practice of law. Indeed, Philippines bar examination is the most
difficult in the world for all the wrong reasons.

Do you believe that bar examinations are designed to test knowledge and skills that every
lawyer should have before becoming licensed to practice law? Would you agree that it is practical
and realistic?

The use of bar examinations as a condition for a law license is definitely impractical and
unrealistic. In bar exam, examinees are expected to know everything in a month long examination
which should not be and would be unfair and discriminatory. That one month long examination
does not test on the kinds of skills a good lawyer should have, it is a mere test of memory and not
of competence. It is not really something a lawyer should do in actual practice of law. It has nothing
to do with functional mastery of subject areas, with compassion, judgment, or preparation to help
clients. Thus, bar examination is unnecessary.

The best way to learn the legal profession is through tried experience and practical training.
As cited in a study entitled "Survey of the Legal Profession" by former UP College of Law Dean
Merlin Magallona and lawyer Manuel Flores Bonifacio, “Actual practice of law is the best index
of legal competence”. Law students have already gone through four to five years of classroom
lectures, exams, case digests, some are with clinical experiences and interaction with brilliant law
professors which produces a comprehensive legal education. What needs to be done is a practical
training because they are already intellectually qualified to become lawyers. They don’t have to
prove themselves by a month-long bar examination. Hence, bar examinations should be abolished.
As according to Jay Reeves, “There doesn’t have to be a bar exam. It’s just that we’ve done it that
way for years”. Indeed, just because it has become the norm and a law is of no moment, such all
wrong reasons could still be corrected by abolishing bar examinations.

Bar examination is an unproductive waste of time. After all, passing the bar examination is a
matter of chance and luck, being said, it is impractical and unnecessary. With all this unrealistic
scheme, it keeps qualified, brilliant, and dedicated aspirants in misery by consuming their energy,
enthusiasm, brains, or knowledge benefit the profession. Their opportunity were taken of from
them to learn practical skills necessary in legal profession. Time wasted when they devoted their
days to memorizing legal rules which eventually, they’ll forget all of those after bar examination.
Aren’t we that typical student who will forget most the things we studied for days, months and
years? Yes, we are right? Because I do. On the other hand, we tend to retain all the information if
we learned through actual experience or through reflection of doing. So why make bachelor of
laws and juris doctors graduates do it? Why not, let them experience such legal rules on hand? The
bar examination consumes so much of wasted time. It could have been used in helping out the
community by rendering legal assistance especially to the underprivileged. It could be spent
productively by extending a hand given that they were already equipped with all those four to five
years of studying law.

Passing the bar examination is never been a guarantee of successful practice of law. What’s
worse is that it abuses those qualified, brilliant and dedicated aspiring lawyers by questioning their
own self, wondering whether to accept such statistics from bar examination or to repeat the misery.
Bar examinations does not serve as an accurate measurement on how good a lawyer is, or how
knowledgeable and skilled he is in law. Hence, with all the wrong reasons and purpose of
conducting bar examination, it give to a conclusion that bar exam should be abolished.