UNPOPULAR OPINION | Has UP’s critical thinking fallen for CPP propaganda?

In a statement released on April 27 regarding the deaths of UP students Alyssa Alano and Maureen Santuyo during an armed encounter in Toboso, Negros Occidental, the University of the Philippines expressed sadness over the deaths of the two students and several others killed in the military operation. The statement emphasized assistance for the victims’ families, support for an independent investigation by the Commission on Human Rights, and the right of students to engage in lawful and peaceful activities. It also appealed to the public not to judge students merely for their presence in underserved communities. The statement concluded by declaring that “The University shall remain a beacon of critical thinking, conscience, and courage.”

That final line is precisely where the problem begins.

The UP administration invokes “critical thinking,” yet its own statement reflects a selective and incomplete narrative that dangerously mirrors the propaganda lines of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). Critical thinking requires examining all available facts, especially inconvenient ones. Instead, the university’s statement focused almost entirely on portraying the students as community organizers and victims, while completely omitting reports and intelligence findings from government authorities linking the two individuals to the New People’s Army (NPA). Is it so much of a stretch of imagination for the premier university to suspend judgment and entertain the possibility of two of its students having sworn allegiance to the armed struggle of the CPP-NPA? 

Whether one agrees with the government’s assessment or not, the absence of any acknowledgment of these allegations reveals an institutional bias. A university that claims to champion critical thinking should encourage scrutiny of all sides, not present a one-dimensional narrative that conveniently aligns with the messaging strategy of the CPP and its allied organizations.

For decades, the CPP has targeted universities as fertile ground for recruitment and ideological influence. Student activism, in itself, is not the issue. Dissent is part of democratic society. The real concern emerges when militancy turns into terrorism.

The tragedy in Toboso should force universities, especially UP, to confront uncomfortable questions. Why do young students from one of the country’s premier institutions repeatedly end up in conflict zones where the NPA operates?

What makes the situation more alarming is the administration’s apparent unwillingness to acknowledge the CPP’s continuing presence and influence within the university environment. Instead of confronting the issue directly, UP often defaults to defensive rhetoric whenever concerns about communist infiltration are raised. Any attempt to discuss recruitment networks is quickly dismissed as an attack on academic freedom.

But academic freedom should not become a shield for organizations that manipulate students into supporting or participating in terrorism. There is a profound difference between encouraging critical discourse and tolerating ideological machinery that places young Filipinos in harm’s way.

UP’s leadership seems to project moral outrage whenever students die in encounters with government forces. Yet where is that same outrage toward the CPP-NPA for placing students in dangerous environments in the first place? Does the UP subscribe to the national democratic line that only armed insurgency can resolve the ills of our society? Where is the condemnation of an armed movement that has repeatedly used youth recruitment as part of its revolutionary strategy?

The deaths in Toboso are tragic. But tragedy should not be used to sanitize the role of the CPP-NPA in putting the youth there in the first place. A truly critical institution does not blindly echo propaganda from any side. It confronts facts honestly, even when they are politically uncomfortable.