"The Stories of Teacher Jun": Simplifying the West Philippine Sea Debate for the Next Generation

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

"May exam ba after reading this..fill in the blanks?"

On January 24, 2025, Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary Sonny Angara, alongside the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), unveiled The Stories of Teacher Jun at the National Library of the Philippines. This comic book, designed to simplify the complex geopolitical issues surrounding the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea), aims to educate the youth and the broader public about the nation's sovereignty and the significance of protecting the region.

In his speech, Sec. Angara emphasized the importance of providing the youth with a clear understanding of how they can protect national sovereignty. "We must show a path for learners on how to protect our national sovereignty in their own way,” Angara remarked, highlighting the urgency of instilling a sense of duty toward the country's territorial rights. The comic book serves as an educational tool, breaking down the legal and geopolitical intricacies into digestible, engaging narratives that appeal to younger audiences.

The primary goal of this initiative is to make the concept of the West Philippine Sea and its ongoing territorial disputes more accessible. By illustrating these concepts through storytelling, The Stories of Teacher Jun seeks to foster a greater awareness and sense of national pride among Filipino students, urging them to become informed, responsible citizens.

A Mixed Response to the Educational Initiative

While the comic book has garnered praise for its innovative approach to education, it has also sparked significant debate. Critics have voiced concerns that such initiatives might serve as a form of "mind conditioning" for children. Some argue that instead of fostering a balanced, nuanced understanding of the geopolitical situation, The Stories of Teacher Jun could unintentionally promote an adversarial stance toward China. "Is the objective to condition our learners to hate China and send them to war with the giant?" one critic questioned.

The criticism points to the broader context of the Philippines' territorial disputes in the South China Sea, and the controversial adoption of the term West Philippine Sea by former President Aquino's administration in 2012. While the Philippines recognizes this designation, critics argue that it lacks international recognition, and some contend that the name holds little weight in global discussions, calling it a "pautot" or propaganda. This sentiment is echoed by those who feel that focusing on territorial conflicts might distract from other pressing issues, such as educating students on their civic responsibilities or how to responsibly manage national resources, including the national budget.

The Debate on National Sovereignty vs. Civic Responsibility

Another layer of the conversation revolves around the question of what should truly be taught to the next generation of Filipinos. Some critics suggest that the focus on geopolitical issues could overshadow more immediate concerns, such as teaching children their rights and duties as citizens under the Philippine Constitution. "Why not focus on teaching students how to become responsible citizens and introduce them to our Constitution first?" one commentator remarked, stressing the importance of understanding local governance, civil duties, and the principles of democracy.

Meanwhile, supporters of the initiative argue that the discussion on national sovereignty is just as crucial in shaping a well-rounded, socially aware generation. They contend that learning about the West Philippine Sea provides a foundation for understanding the country's position in global geopolitics, fostering a sense of pride in the nation's independence and territorial integrity. It's also seen as an opportunity to educate future leaders about diplomacy, legal frameworks, and international relations — critical subjects in an interconnected world.

A Larger Conversation About Education and National Identity

The unveiling of The Stories of Teacher Jun comes at a time when the Philippines is navigating complex challenges in both domestic governance and foreign relations. The education system, as always, plays a pivotal role in shaping how the youth perceive their identity, responsibilities, and the nation's place in the world. Whether or not one agrees with the messaging of this comic book, it is undeniable that the conversation about national sovereignty, historical narratives, and the role of education in fostering informed citizens is vital.

As the debate over The Stories of Teacher Jun continues, it prompts a larger reflection on how the Philippines can best prepare its young people to face the challenges of the future — not just through simplified geopolitical narratives, but also by equipping them with a well-rounded education that addresses their duties as citizens and their roles in building a prosperous, peaceful nation.

In the coming months, The Stories of Teacher Jun will likely continue to be a focal point of discussion, as educators, parents, and policymakers evaluate its impact on the nation's educational landscape and its potential to influence the worldview of future generations.

Boy Abunda's Interview with Bongbong Marcos: A Missed Opportunity for Real Solutions

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

During the previous presidential election campaigns, one of the most widely discussed interviews was between renowned broadcaster Boy Abunda and Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr., the son of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos. At that time, the Filipino electorate was looking for clarity, strong leadership, and detailed plans to address the country’s most pressing challenges. However, the interview left much to be desired, with Marcos offering little beyond motherhood statements and vague promises that failed to resonate with the real issues Filipinos face.

Boy Abunda, known for his direct approach and probing questions, tried to push Marcos for more specific policies and concrete plans. However, Marcos's responses remained disappointingly generic, void of substantial insight or a clear vision for the country's future. His answers often sounded like standard political rhetoric, full of buzzwords but lacking any actionable strategies that could address the nation's urgent concerns.

A Rehash of Politico Buzzwords

From the outset, Marcos’s responses were predictably broad and familiar, echoing standard political soundbites. Concepts like "unity" and "progress" were tossed around without addressing specific national issues that required immediate attention. Marcos failed to provide concrete plans on how he would address problems such as the ongoing impact of the pandemic, poverty, and inflation—issues that directly affect millions of Filipinos.

Instead of offering tangible solutions, his answers relied on vague generalities and promises of "growth" and "progress," often repeating phrases that have become staples in political campaigns. There was no indication that Marcos had a clear understanding of the complexities of these problems or the ability to tackle them head-on with innovative policies.

A Lack of Ground-Level Experience

Marcos’s responses also highlighted a noticeable disconnect from the realities faced by ordinary Filipinos. Leaders who have spent time engaging with local communities—listening to their concerns and understanding their struggles—are able to develop practical solutions that can truly make a difference. However, Marcos seemed removed from the experiences of everyday citizens, and his failure to propose real, on-the-ground solutions left many wondering if he was even aware of the extent of the challenges the country was grappling with.

In fairness to Boy Abunda, he tried to guide the conversation toward more specific policies and concrete plans. However, every time the questions became too pointed, Marcos deflected, offering no substantial answers or details on how he intended to improve the lives of Filipinos. His campaign lacked any clear vision, leaving voters questioning what exactly he stood for beyond a general promise of progress.

Revisiting 2016: "I Cannot Give What I Don’t Have"

The interview also reminded many of a controversial statement Marcos made during the 2016 vice-presidential debate. When asked about the ill-gotten wealth of his family, he famously said, "I cannot give what I don’t have." The remark, which many found evasive and dismissive, encapsulated the larger issue with Marcos's political persona—his reluctance to address his family’s controversial history and the continued cloud of corruption that hung over his campaign.

Fast forward to the 2022 presidential campaign, and Marcos’s interview continued to show that his approach to the country’s issues was just as evasive. Rather than confronting his past head-on and offering a path toward reconciliation or accountability, he continued to deflect and offer vague assurances, much to the frustration of many Filipinos seeking real change.

The WPS Debate: Another Missed Opportunity

As the interview shifted to the topic of the West Philippine Sea (WPS) and the ongoing maritime dispute with China, Marcos once again failed to provide any substantial policy or strategy. Rather than offering a firm stance or clear plan of action to defend Philippine sovereignty, his response was underwhelming and devoid of the urgency the situation demanded. In a time when the country faces increasing pressure from China in the South China Sea, his failure to address the issue with seriousness and clarity was deeply concerning.

A good friend, who is a diplomat, succinctly summarized the situation by calling Marcos "engot (idiot)" for his failure to grasp the full gravity of the situation. In an era when foreign policy and national security are at the forefront of global discussions, Marcos's failure to address these issues with the necessary depth and seriousness was a glaring weakness.

Ping Lacson's Contrast: A Leader with a Plan

In stark contrast to Bongbong Marcos, Senator Ping Lacson’s interviews during the same period offered a more detailed and thoughtful approach to governance. Lacson, with decades of experience in public service and national security, provided concrete policies and a clear vision for the country’s future. His understanding of the Philippines' national security, economic stability, and foreign relations was much more thorough, and he demonstrated the ability to think critically about solutions for the country’s most pressing problems.

Lacson’s interviews highlighted the stark differences in leadership styles, as he was able to articulate a clear plan for the nation’s future, backed by a wealth of experience and a deep understanding of the issues at hand. In comparison, Marcos’s failure to offer similar substance only underscored his lack of preparedness for the presidency.

"Babangon Muli Tungo sa Bagong Lipunan?" Not Under Marcos’s Watch

Throughout the interview, Marcos repeatedly invoked the phrase "babangon muli tungo sa bagong lipunan" (rising again toward a new society), a slogan that played into the nostalgia of his father’s regime. However, as the conversation unfolded, it became clear that the promise of a "new society" under Marcos was nothing more than empty rhetoric. His failure to offer specific, actionable plans to address the country’s challenges left many doubting whether his leadership could bring about any real change.

Marcos’s campaign was built on promises of revival and progress, but his inability to offer a fresh perspective or innovative solutions suggested that the country would only be stuck in the same cycles of underachievement and stagnation.

Conclusion: Time for New Leadership

As the 2022 presidential election campaign drew to a close, it became evident that the Philippines needed more than just a return to the past. What the country required was a new generation of leaders who could offer concrete solutions to the myriad problems facing the nation. Bongbong Marcos, in his interview with Boy Abunda, failed to prove that he was the leader capable of delivering that change. His rhetoric and lack of specific policies demonstrated that his leadership would not bring the fresh perspective needed to address the complex issues of modern-day Philippines.

In the end, the interview reinforced the belief that the country needs new leadership—leaders who are not only visionary but also capable of acting decisively and pragmatically. Marcos's presidency, which eventually won him the top office, may have promised a brighter future, but based on his performance during the campaign, many still question whether his leadership will truly bring the changes the country so desperately needs.

"Pusta de Peligro" – A Glimmer of Hope or a Dangerous Temptation?

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

"Yung madalas na announcement sa news ng winning numbers ng Lotto is actually an indirect way of encouraging people to gamble, what more a series dedicated to "gambling".

In an era where entertainment is woven into the fabric of daily life, it’s no surprise that many TV shows and films explore complex topics, such as gambling. "Pusta de Peligro", a series of short films, aims to promote self-reflection and inspire viewers to make more thoughtful, responsible gaming choices. But as much as it wants to prompt caution, there lies a stark irony: by depicting gambling as a potential route to success, the show may inadvertently encourage people to see it as an opportunity to turn their lives around—thus glamorizing an activity that is anything but a reliable path to prosperity.

The Unseen Dangers of Gambling Addiction

Gambling is rarely a recommended activity, yet it is often portrayed in the media as thrilling, glamorous, and, occasionally, a way to achieve financial freedom. This is precisely where "Pusta de Peligro" runs into a fundamental problem. Despite its efforts to showcase the possible risks and consequences of gambling, it may still leave viewers with the impression that gambling is a potential solution to financial struggles.

The reality of gambling addiction, however, is far from glamorous. Those who fall into the trap of compulsive gambling often face irreversible financial, emotional, and psychological harm. Studies reveal that over 460,000 people in the UK alone suffer from gambling addiction, with thousands more affected worldwide. In addition to the financial burden, gambling can lead to significant mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and even suicidal thoughts. It’s a cycle that can be difficult to escape once the addiction takes hold. Gambling, particularly when viewed as an escape or a quick fix, is not a solution—it’s a dangerous vice.

The Show’s Irony: Glamorous Risks vs. Real Consequences

The core premise of "Pusta de Peligro"—prompting reflection and encouraging responsible gaming choices—may unintentionally be undermined by its own narrative. By presenting gambling as a potential way to improve one’s life, even in the face of dire circumstances, the show may leave viewers with the misconception that this high-risk activity can offer a shortcut to financial freedom.

In fact, the more gambling is depicted as a means of quick wealth or success, the more it may allure those who are already struggling financially. The idea of winning big, of turning one’s life around with a stroke of luck, can be a powerful and seductive narrative. And while "Pusta de Peligro" may aim to caution viewers, the message may not be strong enough to counterbalance the allure of such possibilities.

The Appeal of “Easy Money” and the Downfall of False Hopes

Media portrayals of gambling—whether on-screen in movies or in TV shows—have long been designed to capture the thrill of the game. Movies like "Casino" and "Ocean's Eleven" paint a picture of high-stakes drama, wealth, and excitement, and even though these stories often come with consequences, the message is diluted by the allure of easy money. Similarly, "Pusta de Peligro", with its attempt to highlight the darker side of gambling, still risks painting an incomplete picture of the realities involved.

For those already facing financial difficulties, these portrayals can be dangerous. "Pusta de Peligro" might present gambling as an option for those looking to solve their problems, further embedding the idea that taking risks in this way could lead to life-changing rewards. This might encourage people to gamble in the hope that they could improve their lives, all while ignoring the possibility of losing everything in the process.

A Public Health Concern

In light of the increasing global concerns over gambling’s impact on public health, this issue is not just a moral one—it’s a growing societal problem. According to experts, gambling addiction is on the rise, with devastating consequences for individuals and society alike. Recent reports from The Lancet highlight gambling as an escalating global health threat. The mental health ramifications, from depression to addiction, are profound, and the financial costs extend far beyond individual losses.

As the media plays a significant role in shaping cultural attitudes, responsible portrayals of gambling are crucial. However, it is all too common to see the opposite—glamorous depictions that ignore the consequences and focus only on the potential for reward. Whether intentional or not, "Pusta de Peligro" is not entirely free from this issue. By focusing on gambling as a possible way to improve one’s life, the show risks sending the wrong message to vulnerable viewers.

Why Gambling Should Never Be the Answer

Gambling, no matter how it’s presented in popular culture, should never be viewed as a legitimate way to fix financial problems. It is a high-risk activity that often leads to destructive outcomes, from addiction to financial ruin. Instead of promoting gambling as an avenue for improvement, society must focus on providing real solutions—financial literacy, mental health support, and economic opportunities that don’t involve risking it all for a fleeting chance at success.

Despite the show’s intentions to promote responsible gaming, the fact remains that gambling is an inherently dangerous vice. It’s a gamble that rarely pays off in the long term and instead leads to more harm than good. The irony of "Pusta de Peligro" lies in its attempt to caution viewers about the risks of gambling while still depicting it as a potential opportunity for success.

A Call to Reframe the Narrative

If we are to reduce the widespread societal impact of gambling, we need to change the narrative. Media must evolve beyond simply showcasing the dangers of gambling while still highlighting its appeal. Shows like "Pusta de Peligro" may have good intentions, but their portrayal of gambling as a possible route to success can have unintended consequences. Gambling is not a means to improve one’s life—it’s a trap that can lead to destruction.

For the sake of viewers and society, it’s crucial that media outlets focus on responsible messaging. Gambling should never be glamorized as a quick fix, and the public must be made aware of the full scope of its risks. Only through this shift in media portrayal can we hope to change attitudes and prevent gambling from becoming an even greater societal problem.