Anger is not an easy emotion to carry. We are taught to understand, forgive, and let go. Not to dwell on the anger, and certainly not to wield it.
Even on Facebook, people often click “Haha” instead of “Angry,” even when they disagree with what they see. But after Typhoon Tino’s devastation in Cebu on Nov. 4, 2025, anger becomes necessary. It is what keeps us from forgetting, from falling for the usual sympathy, promises, and investigations cycle; and then nothing.
Last week, I wrote about anger as the right response to what happened in Bacayan and in many other communities drowned by the floods and by years of neglect. This week, the question is: What do we do with that anger?
Purposeful anger means asking questions and knowing. What happened to the billions of pesos in flood-control funds? Who approved and inspected these projects? Why were subdivision projects and land conversions approved despite the known risks? Which development projects posed dangers in Bacayan, Liloan, Consolacion, and Talisay? These are not rhetorical questions; these point to decisions made by real people in positions of authority and who must be held to account.
Once communities know who the developers are behind the slicing of our mountains, they have somewhere to direct their demands for accountability. Monterrazas de Cebu was the first identified for alleged violations, there are others.
Anger also means making demands through petitions going around, calling for accountability. Adding your name to a petition tells the government you are watching. One such petition is by the Movement for a Livable Cebu that is calling for a Cebu Floodwater Management Office, an institutional way to prevent this tragedy from happening again. Check the group’s Facebook account.
A planned National Coalition for Climate and Environmental Justice is preparing to invoke the Writ of Kalikasan, a constitutional remedy to protect communities and the environment. As political analyst Antonio Contreras said on Facebook, advocates in Cebu aim to file charges against those responsible for upland land conversion, watershed mismanagement, and regulatory failures.
Anger with a purpose also shows up in climate defiance, through protest actions or public shaming of officials, such as the display by two people in Liloan of a placard that said, “Duke and Christina Frasco, how was your trip to London? We’re falling down.”
It was not sarcasm. It was a reminder that leadership requires presence, empathy, and accountability. If they want to travel to broaden their knowledge, they can do an educational tour of the areas devastated by Typhoon Tino. The stories of people who lost loved ones or those left homeless will teach them more than any foreign visit.
These actions—petitions, coalition-building, protest, public shaming, tour of devastated areas—matter. They will force explanations and a change in priorities.
I’ve started clicking on the “Angry” reaction on Facebook as an act of civic pressure. It may seem small. But when officials see public anger on their own posts, it tells them that people are watching and that impunity is no longer acceptable.