From ‘Us-vs-Them’ back to ‘Just Us’

By Michael Henry Yusingco, LL.M

For Filipinos, “online toxicity” is normal. Interactions on social media remove the cues that regulate behavior in face-to-face conversations. There is no eye contact, no immediate social feedback, and often no real sense of accountability. Add perceived anonymity and physical distance, and people begin to act differently. The ugly, nasty side of users emerges with ease.

Yet the problem goes deeper than individual conduct. Incivility is likewise strategic. Political actors have learned that outrage drives attention. Content that provokes anger or indignation travels faster and reaches farther than calm, reasoned argument. Politicians and influencers are rewarded for being combative rather than constructive. The more divisive the issue, the more engagement it generates.

The more engagement, the stronger the political base becomes. Over time, this reinforces partisan identities. Supporters rally not around shared solutions, but around shared enemies. The result is a political culture defined less by deliberation and more by confrontation. Political communication now equates to bardagulan and bangayan.

This runs directly against the principles of a healthy democracy. Democratic deliberation requires more than just participation. It requires citizens to engage one another in good faith, to exchange insights, and to remain open to persuasion. It assumes that people are capable of listening, reflecting, and adjusting their views. Sadly, social media undermines these conditions.

If this continues unchecked, the consequences are serious. Trust will erode unhindered. And social fractures will be impossible to heal. Public discourse will remain a contest of noise rather than a search for solutions.  And a society that cannot talk to itself cannot govern itself effectively. We must find a way from this “Us vs. Them” purgatory back to the blissful plane of “Just us!”

Of course, the answer is not to abandon social media. It is too embedded in daily life for that. The answer is to rebuild the habits of democratic engagement elsewhere—and then bring those habits back online. Filipinos need to return to meeting each other as part of regular community life. Not just during elections or crises, but as an ongoing communal exercise.

There are simple but powerful rules that can guide this effort.

First, respect yourself. Do not say or do anything that would embarrass you, your family, or your friends. This is not about censorship. It is about self-awareness and dignity.

Second, respect others. Speak your mind, but remember that you are speaking to fellow citizens, not enemies. The person you disagree with is still part of the same community.

Third, respect the collective. Public discussion is not about winning arguments for personal satisfaction. It is about strengthening the community. The goal is not individual victory, but mutual benefit.

Equally important is the discipline of listening. Not listening to respond but listening to understand. This requires effort. It means setting aside assumptions and taking seriously what others are saying. It also means reflecting on one’s own views before speaking. Not every discussion will end in agreement. That is not the point.

Sometimes the best outcome of a community meeting is consensus. Sometimes it can even be simply agreeing to disagree without hostility. What matters is preserving the ability to continue talking. Social problems will not run out, but the community needs to be always in a position where it is able to find workable solutions.

In the Philippine context, there is already a built-in mechanism for this kind of engagement: the Barangay Assembly. It is meant to be a space where communities come together to discuss issues, share concerns, and build common ground. Yet it is rarely used to its full potential. Instead of being a living forum for democratic deliberation, it often becomes a procedural requirement or is ignored altogether.

This is a missed opportunity. Properly used, the Barangay Assembly can counter the fragmentation caused by social media. It can bring people back into direct, human interaction. It can remind citizens that beyond the noise of online debates, they share the same streets, the same problems, and the same future.

Rebuilding democratic discourse will not happen overnight. But it begins with small, consistent efforts to treat one another not as avatars on a screen, but as members of a community. Without the collective-mindset, online connectivity will never lead to solidarity. If partisan echo chambers online and offline persist, then democratic decay endures too. Societal collapse will soon follow.