The Aftermath of Pride

I watched the news on 23 August in front of my TV, after my dad hysterically messaged me of a live-footage of Manila hijack on TV. It was about 720 pm.

I remembered watching the news, seeing the gunshots, and blood spilled on the windscreen and the side windows of the bus. I do not know if it was shot inward or outward.

The event was seemingly dramatic. I almost double-guessed my vision, to see if I was actually watching live footage, not some 'documentary-like' movie show.

It was a bleak Monday.

I remembered having a strong thought in my head, especially when the gunman was shot down, close to 8 pm. And the slumped body struck onto a sharp shrapnel of the bus door, instantly killed him through the heart.

It was bleak, very bleak.

And when I looked at the entire footage, I have strong thoughts that gripped me into reality.

"This is the visual, physical effect it had when we pushed our agendas too hard on each other, and no one wants to come to a common consensus, peacefully."

I read a bit of the history of the footage, and what triggered the event. 

Poor police officer. He had no intention to gain leverage through the hostages. He merely wanted his position reinstated, and he chanced upon a tourist bus, which could be a good ground for announcing his intention. Perhaps, if he had hijacked a normal commuting bus, the dramatic effect would not have commemorated. 

And he had asked the driver to provided food for the hostages, and ensured to have air-conditioning. He 'leveraged' on the hostages by establishing bond with them. 

The police almost had all the hostages saved. In the earlier part of the negotiations, they were willing to consider the reinstatement of Mr. Rolando Mendoza into the police force. He used to be a good soldier of justice, just that one misgivings on drug and extortion accusation.

I am not saying that he is innocent. Neither am I saying that there's someone innocent here. On theological background.

But I am saddened by the fact that as the night fall, the police insisted on 'judging him fairly', but denying his reinstatement.

That's when the hell broke loose. Bus shut down, door closed, and the hijacker declared, "I will shoot 2 Chinese. Just to prove my point. Anyway, you guys will kill me in the end."

From 2 to 9 hostages, all in the name of 'pride - and fairness'.

I looked at this event, and how it eerily resembled our daily activities in life. 

"Eye for an eye."

When we have our agendas being challenged, especially when we stood strong ground thinking that our agenda is well-intended and for the better, we argued our way out.

I dare say that many times, in my working place, I tried very hard to assert my point, to let people see my view of which I think is the best for the company's interest, only to find that I have to actually exert anger and strict command on my colleague.

I may have succeeded in doing something in the end, but the succession is short of relational aptitude. At worst, I may have done a good job, but I lost the focus, and possibly a friend.

In the event of the hijack, both the police and the hijacker would want their ideals met. Both clashes. And in the end, no compromise, and 9 hostages were killed in the process.

This may not be an easy reflection, especially when we know that our agendas are as important. 

Therefore, I looked into the event as a whole, understanding the context, to grasp the lesson learnt.

We hope to have our agendas met, but how often do we see the big picture of the event itself?

21 tourists, coming to Philippines, with the hope of knowing more of the country, and possibly enjoying themselves there, ended up in misery. Especially when the 9 were killed. 

These tourists probably may have contributed to the country's impoverished financial state. Tourism is definitely a definite boost. Already 3 years back, a similar hijack happened. It is fortunate that no casualties were resulted. And few days back, during the weekends, robberies across Manila with gunshots on foreigners were reported.

Hong Kong declared, in the aftermath of this hijack, that Philippines will be under the 'blacklisted country' for tourism. Such declaration is abnormal. Hong Kong would have a list, but that is consistent with the British Columbia's (or the Commonwealth community) list of blacklisted countries, like Iran, North Korea, etc. 

If both the police and the hijacker thought about this, looking at the bigger picture - and realized how much damage they would incur solely based on this event (perhaps not the blacklist, but the hurting of the tourism industry is definitely within the grasp of their imagination at that time), would they resort to 'stood their ground and not giving way to the other'?

Neither of the two parties were thinking straight. 

But that should not be limited to only them. I, too, fall into this many times.

When I do evaluations on my home theater sets, when I have certain design standards I want to keep, I pushed very hard on the other group to comply, and even to do what is necessary to keep the schedules and the deadlines. However what I often forget, in the end, is that does all these design matters when we consider the big picture of what our company originally intended? Our founder's motto can be summarized in a life of servitude to the people of Japan. If, by asserting that the other team should comply to our demand became our motto, then we are selfishly asserting our authorities in order to get something done.

But it could have been that we are the ones who should be doing something pertaining our position. For example, if some part of our design we can help the other department to solve, why not on our side? Yes, it may have been more difficult, but the end result could have conjured a better scenario than us choking on each other's throat.

I believe there are some other design that the other teams have to do, and we should not give way to their leniency. However, the guide for such discernment should always be consistent to the bigger picture of the company's interest - the act of servitude.

How often we forget... how often we let loose... only to see ourselves in the worst state of situation, despite us upholding our agendas - in our sticks and bones.