What is wrong with the Philippine Opposition?

Indeed, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. The old adage evidently describes what is likely to be behind the interesting behaviour of the Philippine Opposition nowadays. After a crushingly humiliating rout in this year’s national elections, the Opposition has never been quite the same. It is no longer the revered “force of good” — a brand it once commanded in a conjugal theocracy with the Roman Catholic Church. The once powerful narrative that was forged in a “popular uprising” in 1986 that served as its philosophical underpinning is now an inert relic that lives only in quaint museums erected in desperation within tony private universities and exclusive enclaves by “thought leaders” funded by sponsors with vested interests in the old status quo.

A feeling of entitlement to political power was given a stark reality check by the Filipino people this year and a spurned Opposition has yet to come to terms with that. Unfortunately they choose to deal with this rejection by coming up with a bevy of demons that, they insist, worked against their crusade — “trolls”, “disinformation”, “enablers”, etc. Their attempts to lead Filipinos to believe that behind all these demons is a single leader — current President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr — is backed by such fury. To the Opposition, Marcos is the equivalent Great Satan that religious nuts invoke to incite inquisitions, jihads, and terrorist attacks. The fury of the scorned Opposition is indeed upon us. It is fuelled by a lack of personal accountability — personal accountability for the part their political ineptitude played in their own demise.

Unfortunately for the Philippine Opposition, neither fire nor brimstone is raining upon the “evils” of Opposition leaders’ fantasies. At best, their calls to action are heeded only by a minority albeit a noisy one — noisy because they have at their beck and call the Philippines’ mainstream media institutions. The Philippine Opposition need a new strategy that is more effective at reaching and converting Filipinos. More importantly, it needs to step up to the role of providing a good balance to the administration — not just in terms of being contrarian or dissenting for the sake of these, but more as a source of complementing ideas and points of view.

SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY!
Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us daily.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

The key challenge for the Opposition camp today is to get over the monumental butthurt of losing an important election that they are evidently wallowing in. Sure, it stings to lose, it hurts to be rejected, and it is hard to get back into the meat market and compete for attention and relevance after suffering a crushing rebuke. Thing is, the latter is what it means to contribute productively to politics (which is a lot different to merely adding noise which is essentially what the Opposition is doing today). You learn from your mistakes instead of defining yourself by those mistakes ad infinitum.

First thing’s first, the Opposition need to get themselves a new and better leader. As long as they continue to latch on to their traditional ones — Leni Robredo who turned their lot into a laughingstock, Leila De Lima who is in prison and is not very telegenic nor tiktok-genic, Joma Sison who is hiding on the other side of the planet, and all the rest who are stained with LOSER forever — the Opposition will never regain their place as mature players in Philippine democracy. Second, they need a new narrative and a new set of friends. The Yellowtard narrative is dead (literally, in fact — as all their “heroes” either lie six feet under or are headed there). Communism is a mere sad relic of the Cold War and is irrevocably associated with terrorism no matter what the suits say. And the ol’ “helping the poor” rhetoric? Filipinos are over that as well or, more to the point, they never really did care about the poor (Filipinos walk by scenes of poverty everyday and hardly raise a fake eyebrow to express even token “concern”). “Concern” for the “poor” is a mere fashion statement that only students of chi chi private Catholic schools could afford to harbour. The assumption that poverty is a key election “issue” had long been debunked as well.

Filipinos deserve a better Opposition and not the one they had put up with over the last three decades and continue to put with today. Is there a group or camp up to the task of building a new proposition for the Filipino people? One that is more forward-looking and less of retrospective fear-mongering one that they are subject to today? Only time will tell and only a wherewithal to aspire to true greatness will see that happen.

23 Replies to “What is wrong with the Philippine Opposition?”

  1. The Yellows only had the bogeyman approach going for them at first. Now, Filipinos got over that and decided that the bogeyman was the guy who should be liked. So all the Yellows could do was scream at the people who voted for the “bogeyman” and call them bogeymen or “evil.” Which is the reaction of a defeated group after all. And “Communism (Marxism) is a mere sad relic of the Cold War,” well, some people just don’t accept that and even defend against its being linked to terrorism.

  2. Eh, they’re just paid contrarians who won’t give any reasonable solution to the country other than just yelling “anti-Marcos” scripts all over again.

  3. What is wrong with the Philippine Opposition?
    – – – – –
    Nothing, they lost in the recently concluded presidential election and, unlike election deniers in the U.S., moved on to fight another day. I don’t see anything wrong other than ordinary development happening on the side of the opposition. Things have changed, or course, the real and original protagonists (Macoy, Cory, Noynoy, etc.) in the political stage are no longer around. The battle between the two sides has taken a different route or mode. The attack banners and fight slogans of the past are no longer effective and slowly getting lesser in demand for its passe nature.

    There’s a vast difference attacking Macoy himself than attacking his family as proxy. Same with the opposition, there’s no other better way of advancing against Marcos than having Cory out there in front. The situation is just different to the point of admitting it’s lost its appeal. Old faces that makes the war more rabid and vicious are no longer around. The only ones that remained have either been silenced by events (i.e. Enrile with scandals and age) or opted to remain and stay silent on the sideline (Imelda opting for more quiet life).

    “The Yellowtard narrative is dead (literally, in fact — as all their “heroes” either lie six feet under or are headed there).”
    – – – – – –
    True. The lost of the ‘originals’, on both sides, mind you, have really affected the way both camps carry the fight. The angst, the intense hate between the parties took a nosedive compared to the emotional and passionate conflicts and confrontations of the past. What we’re having right now are mere catfights, heckling and just simple acts of derision and retaliatory aggressiveness. Like in sports, the winner gets to taunt, harass and heckle the losers and vice-versa. Part of the game.

    As it is, everything looks calm and collected. We’re under the ‘honeymoon’ period allowing the new administration to settle down. It looks like everybody is hibernating, resting from the just grueling and rough campaigns. Losers healing the wounds of defeat and the winners trying to get their voices back for over celebrating. The reality will start to come back when serious and devastating social or political events occur. That I’m sure of.

    With all the fighters and warriors still in the barracks, the government should take advantage of it by working and delivering what it promised: Unity.

    1. That then tells a similar story — that critical debate never really blossoms in the Philippines’ political discourse and even those that do erupt require, as you term them, only when “serious and devastating social or political events occur”. That’s just the way Filipinos are, of course. But when you consider that the Opposition fancy themselves as having the top “intellectuals” from chi chi Ateneo and UP counting themselves as being part of their “movement”, it becomes all the more interesting to behold that not much in the way of intellectual discouse one would reasonably expect of these cohorts is so far being exhibited.

      1. Oy tanda magtrabaho ka na lang. Lapit ka na mabulok inaatupag mo e mang gaslight sa opposition. Time is running out tanda. Do something worthwhile. Lalo lang nataas blood pressure mo tanda wawa naman

      2. No real critical debate, they don’t know how to debate rationally, instead they want to use emotional pulls like “the guy you like is evil, so you’re evil,” etc. Basically, the Opposition lacks a brain these days even if they claim to be “intellectuals.” lol

      3. That then tells a similar story — that critical debate never really blossoms in the Philippines’ political discourse and even those that do erupt require, as you term them, only when “serious and devastating social or political events occur”.
        – – – – – –
        That is not exactly accurate. Filipinos are voracious debaters, critical, intellectual or otherwise. Any live-breathing Filipino will engage you in a debate at a drop of a hat. But we’re also patient people, we’re willing to give the other guy the chance to prove himself, which happens to every administration, and then pounce and criticize him if he fails.

        Every administration, as with the opposition, has with them ‘intellectuals’ that descends from those universities (Ateneo, UP, etc.) to do the workings for them. There’s no difference, the same banana.

        1. “That is not exactly accurate. Filipinos are voracious debaters, critical, intellectual or otherwise. Any live-breathing Filipino will engage you in a debate at a drop of a hat. But we’re also patient people, we’re willing to give the other guy the chance to prove himself, which happens to every administration, and then pounce and criticize him if he fails.”

          I wouldn’t generalize them if I were you because many of them are anti-intellectuals without critical thinking abilities. Voracious debaters? How so, by resorting to personal insults in civil discussions especially if they’re about to lose?

          If they really are intellectuals with critical thinking abilities, then why do they elect incompetent politicians who have zero competence in running a country? Imagine actors, celebrities and people with criminal records being elected into office. So there, why should people vote for candidates who lie to them, have criminal records and with platforms which are purely based on fame? I will never vote for a candidate who lie to us. Another question is why do many people there resort to ad hominem in civil discussions and exchange of opinions as well as debates? That’s not critical thinking at all.

          Patient people? Many of them often drive like they’re racing because they’re always in a hurry when they drive.

          “Every administration, as with the opposition, has with them ‘intellectuals’ that descends from those universities (Ateneo, UP, etc.) to do the workings for them. There’s no difference, the same banana.”
          Not all who studied in famous universities are smart. A person can graduate from a prestigious university and still be dumb and a person can graduate from an ordinary college and be smart.

        2. I wouldn’t generalize them if I were you because many of them are anti-intellectuals without critical thinking abilities. Voracious debaters? How so, by resorting to personal insults in civil discussions especially if they’re about to lose? – No Data
          – – – – – – –
          That is another inaccurate statement. I’m assuming that you are talking based on experience, a limited one. It’s true that personal insults, ad hominem and other negative reactions happen during debates but mostly these happens in blogs and political forums where everybody can join and say his piece regardless. But in general, particularly in person, we do debate decently. I don’t know if you remember the time back in the past, debates happened in Plaza Miranda in regularity.

          Remember the expression “Can we defend it in Plaza Miranda”? Yes, back in the day, Plaza Miranda is where public debates on vital issues of national importance happens. The mano-a-mano confrontation is the staple in the Plaza unlike nowadays where you sit on your chair using a computer and challenging somebody miles away for a debate. Back then, if you cannot talk the talk and walk the walk, you’ll be embarrass by your opponent. That is why the quality of debaters back then is higher that it is now.

          Today, even those who have no idea what they’re talking about take part in discussion or debate that often creates problem because of limited information and knowledge. Times have really changed.

        3. Then the internet and political forums prove how many people there have no critical thinking.

          Again, if many people in Philippines have critical thinking, then how come many officials are incompetent? One senator was even elected despite being just a person who bulls out people, not to mention he was convicted of a crime. If many people there are intellectuals and have critical thinking, do you really think persons like him will be elected?

      4. “Political debate” in the Philippines is fuelled more by loyalties to personalities and less by positions taken based on principles. This is why we see now even Dutertards and Marcos “loyalists” going at each other’s throats in social media forums and the Roman Catholic Church backing a camp that embraces communities the members of which lead lifestyles that are against their teachings. No true thinking actually underlies political camps.

        1. “Political debate” in the Philippines is fuelled more by loyalties to personalities and less by positions taken based on principles.
          – – – – – –
          That maybe partly true but the Philippines is not the only country guilty of that. Gone are the days where political parties strictly adheres to their political principles and party platform when taking positions on certain issues or engages in political debates.

          Party politics has become the symbol of the past. The mushrooming of different political parties with their usual alphabet soup acronyms and comical slogans has been buried by politics of personality. Nowadays, parties are defined by people who leads or run them. Just look at what happened to the Republican Party in the US.

        2. I don’t understand why would people put their loyalties to politicians. These politicians are public officials with functions and responsibilities imbued or impressed with public interests. So we must hold them to the highest and lofty standards because they are responsible to the duties they sworn in under the rule of law which will eventually affect the course of our nation. Hence, as responsible people giving them the power that they have now, we must account them to every action and decision they make that influences the public and the nation as a whole. It is our duty to always side with the truth no matter how ugly it is. If we put our loyalty to politicians, we will justify or defend or omit every mistake thay they made, resulting in our flip-flopping of standards that will eventually make us look stupid. If you are only a fan of politicians and they don’t know you, your name, and your existence, like you are not part of anything in their being, it is useless putting loyalties to them, when they don’t reciprocate that same feeling to you.

          This of course are with exceptions. If you are their blood relatives, close friends, or worse, a paid-hack, then one can understand why you are so loyal to them.

          Now which of those mentioned above do you belong?

        3. Jason, this is one big problem which is why Philippines will never go above third world, many people are loyal to politicians than the country itself. I even saw #defendbbm posts in twitter but not #defendphilippines, what’s worse is most of the politicians they’re loyal to don’t even care for the people.

        4. @Jason VORHEES

          “I don’t understand why would people put their loyalties to politicians. These politicians are public officials with functions and responsibilities imbued or impressed with public interests. So we must hold them to the highest and lofty standards because they are responsible to the duties they sworn in under the rule of law which will eventually affect the course of our nation. Hence, as responsible people giving them the power that they have now, we must account them to every action and decision they make that influences the public and the nation as a whole. It is our duty to always side with the truth no matter how ugly it is. If we put our loyalty to politicians, we will justify or defend or omit every mistake thay they made, resulting in our flip-flopping of standards that will eventually make us look stupid. If you are only a fan of politicians and they don’t know you, your name, and your existence, like you are not part of anything in their being, it is useless putting loyalties to them, when they don’t reciprocate that same feeling to you.”

          Well, here’s what. The PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM is based on PERSONALITY-BASED POLITICS rather than PARTY-BASED POLITICS. The parliamentary ballot requires only ONE CHECK MARK to which party you want to run the government. It will be focused on the party performance as a whole. UNITEAM over BBM-Sara and LIBERAL PARTY over Leni-Kiko. In short, the whole platform focuses on the party as a whole.

          The ugly truth is that presidentialism is nothing more than popularity politics. Notice the jingles for candidates. The ugly truth is that Marcos Sr. years weren’t a real parliament. It’s a fake. Then again you still keep insisting that it is.

          I guess no amount of information will work. I guess even if you were dragged to Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, Britain, Switzerland, Netherlands, etc. — you would still cry out that the parliamentary system will worsen our politics.

          Go ahead and whine! Your tears are very delicious Mr. VORHEES.

  4. With no remarkable or noteworthy actions done by BBM administration in the past 100 days to address simple/basic economic problems in the Philippines, but rather it showed incompetence, impunity, indifference, and extravagance, it is normal that the opposition is exposing this reality especially that BBM holds a command of 31 million voters who expect him to have at least a sound economic policies and solid platforms that is expected to be better than the past administrations. But it appears to be invisible as of this time. It looks like BBM this time is experimenting things to work out with no clear-cut and definite direction to where this country is going to be heading in the years to come. The macro-management in the past 100 days showed negative signs that the Philippines under this administration will not develop to its greater potential in the future.

    It can be expected especially that BBM won in the past elections not on competence, not on platforms, not on education, but simply because he is a Marcos and on the back of fake news and fake opinions that infested the blogs and other social media sites in the past. Marcos Sr created the opposition, which is the yellow movement nowadays because of his misdeeds in the past. He was the root cause why Cory Aquino rose to power and became president and most presidents after her. Same like the root cause of teenage poverty can be traced back to his parents and ancestors’ poor family decision making in the past, the root cause of Aquinos and yellow liberal party movement can be traced back to Marcos Sr’s abuses and greediness in the past. We will not have yellow opposition nowadays if not because of him. Hence, it is just so wrong to hate the yellow opposition. You blame the maker/creator of it (Marcos Sr) and not the made/created (Yellow party Aquino and symphatizers).

    1. And it became the reverse later on. BBM got voted because the Cory fanatics/Yellows kept on repeating “Never again Marcos, never again Marcos” until people wondered, why are they fixated on Marcos. Then the corruption of Cory fanatics/Yellows got exposed, people thought, ah maybe the fixation on Marcos is to draw attention away from their own wrongs. Then the people decided that going one end of the pole was wrong, so let’s go back to the other end. That’s the Filipino mindset, either one or the other, no third choices, isn’t it?

      1. I can’t blame the never again chant which I think is the right term because the leading opposition naturally emerged and assembled as opposition as a consequence of Marcos Sr’s bad decisions in the past. The Philippine politics had never become so polarized until after Marcos Sr postponed presidential election in 1973 which eventually led to Cory Aquino becoming president in 1986. The repercussions of Marcos Sr’s decision became the opposition. After that, people are fixated on just Marcos and Aquino and their allies. They don’t think of anyone else deserving to that presidential seat outside of the circle of these two powerful families. People’s perception on national politics were altered because of Marcos Sr. And so I blame Marcos Sr for all the mess.

      2. Then the corruption of Cory fanatics/Yellows got exposed, people thought, ah maybe the fixation on Marcos is to draw attention away from their own wrongs.
        – – – – – –
        That’s a convoluted assessment of an event which took away something important on the part of BBM: his qualification to run as president.

        He won because majority of the voters think he should be president. He won not because of some ‘fixation’ to draw attention away from something. No, he won because more people like him as president than his opponent. It is that simple.

    2. @Jason VORHEES

      I guess you’re getting ready to get a machete, wear a hockey mask, and go on a rampage insisting on your BLUNDER which you consider as FACT.

      “With no remarkable or noteworthy actions done by BBM administration in the past 100 days to address simple/basic economic problems in the Philippines, but rather it showed incompetence, impunity, indifference, and extravagance, it is normal that the opposition is exposing this reality especially that BBM holds a command of 31 million voters who expect him to have at least a sound economic policies and solid platforms that is expected to be better than the past administrations. But it appears to be invisible as of this time. It looks like BBM this time is experimenting things to work out with no clear-cut and definite direction to where this country is going to be heading in the years to come. The macro-management in the past 100 days showed negative signs that the Philippines under this administration will not develop to its greater potential in the future.”

      Looks like I’ll need to really overfeed you again. Remember when I mentioned Britain, Malaysia, Singapore, and Japan? The parliamentary system gave them better politics. However, you’ll always, “BOO F***ING HOO BUT IT’LL NEVER WORK! MARCOS YEARS WAS A PARLIAMENT! EVEN IF WAS MODIFIED BUT AS LONG AS THERE’S A PRIME MINISTER – IT’S A PARLIAMENT!” Please, Singapore used to be worse than us with corruption. I bet Lee Kuan Yew, Shinzo Abe, and Margaret Thatcher are laughing at you from the afterlife.

      This is where the parliamentary system will work better. First, BBM leads the UNITEAM Government. Now, the Kakampink Opposition will have a better cabinet. So, think about this:

      1.) Bobong Marcos leads UNITEAM with his cabinet. There are ministers for every department.
      2.) Leni Loud Robredo leads KAKAMPINK with her shadow cabinet. For every minister that Bobong has – Leni Loud will have her own equivalent SHADOW MINISTERS.

      Think of it that every week, weekly questioning isn’t just for the prime minister but also for the WHOLE CABINET. The whole opposition will be there like this…

      Debate starts. BBM opens for 7.5 minutes. The ball is passed to Leni for another 7.5 minutes. Each and every minister answers to their corresponding shadow minister. The presses are there too to broadcast the live debate between the government and the opposition. Very different from how the Marcos “Parliament” was which you love to DISINFORM people that it was a real parliament. Do you even think you are smarter than true parliamentary leaders? I dare you to go to Malaysia and look for Mahathir Mohamad. Maybe you can go to Singapore and look for Lee Hsien Loong.

      Think it over. Impeachment trials are costly. The parliamentary system would have it that if a legislator proves incompetent — a vote of no confidence is called. It would be like what if BBM keeps making excuses. Leni can declare a vote of no confidence. Just imagine if the late Noynoy Aquino kept saying, “I don’t know.” or “I didn’t know.” every time he was grilled by the Opposition. Noynoy may have not survived. Joseph Estrada would’ve been shamed by Jose De Venecia (as opposition leader). Erap’s lack of shame to still run after his scandal is proof of presidentialism’s perils.

      BBM or Bobong (take your pick) wouldn’t be able to keep partying if:

      1.) Weekly questioning between government and opposition are REQUIRED. Failure to attend may result in LOSS OF CONFIDENCE IN PARLIAMENT.
      2.) The Opposition will be able to hold BBM accountable and they’re required to give their alternatives.
      3.) Leni and her fellow shadow ministers debate the BBM cabinet live on TV. Can you imagine screwing up on live television?

      “It can be expected especially that BBM won in the past elections not on competence, not on platforms, not on education, but simply because he is a Marcos and on the back of fake news and fake opinions that infested the blogs and other social media sites in the past. Marcos Sr created the opposition, which is the yellow movement nowadays because of his misdeeds in the past. He was the root cause why Cory Aquino rose to power and became president and most presidents after her. Same like the root cause of teenage poverty can be traced back to his parents and ancestors’ poor family decision making in the past, the root cause of Aquinos and yellow liberal party movement can be traced back to Marcos Sr’s abuses and greediness in the past. We will not have yellow opposition nowadays if not because of him. Hence, it is just so wrong to hate the yellow opposition. You blame the maker/creator of it (Marcos Sr) and not the made/created (Yellow party Aquino and symphatizers).”

      Fake news? Well, here’s what. Your insistence that the Marcos Sr. Years were a real parliament was *NEWSFLASH* FAKE NEWS. You already know that Marcos Sr. was ousted as a PRESIDENT. The 1973 Constitution already made Marcos Sr. an emperor for life. You still say, “IT WAS A PARLIAMENT! IT’LL NEVER WORK! LOOK AT THE MARCOS SR. YEARS!” I bet Lee Kuan Yew is still laughing at you from the afterlife.

      Later, we had the late Fidel V. Ramos whom Lee Kuan Yew also mentioned. Ramos had to publicly differ. Ramos wanted a parliamentary government. Ramos had met with Lee Kuan Yew and the great former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad. However, gossip from people like you prevented the badly needed reforms. Worse, people like you tend to think, “THE 1987 CONSTITUTION IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD! NO TO CHARTER CHANGE!” Meanwhile, Singapore already reformed its constitution to fit the times.

      If Marcos Sr. years or better yet the Empire of Marcos Sr. under the rule of the late Emperor Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.–why wasn’t there any REAL parliamentary debate? Instead, the late Ninoy Aquino even pointed out all the INCONSISTENCIES OF THE MARCOS “PARLIAMENT”. Later, the late Cesar Virata was even considered a candidate for president to replace the emperor himself. I would rather believe Lee Kuan Yew, a man who built Singapore, than you who MISPRESENTED EMPIRICAL DATA that it wasn’t a real parliament.

      Does the term modified parliament mean anything to you? In short, as Ninoy pointed out, parliamentary without a parliament. First, there was the British type then to French type and as Ninoy called it, compare it to 80 Days Around the World. Ninoy even pointed out that in parliamentary, the president is but SYMBOLIC. Not for Marcos Sr. — he was practically an emperor, Imelda Romualdez-Marcos was an empress, and Bobong was the crown prince of the Empire of Marcos. In short, it was close to becoming more like NORTH KOREA than it was close to becoming like Singapore. What a stark contrast! Lee Kuan Yew ran a real parliament. Marcos Sr. ran a big joke. Did you not even make the comparison? Did you not read the history of Singapore?

      I bet this will be a long comment. I’m imagining you’ll just make excuses. I bet you think the 1987 Constitution is still “the best in the world” because Hilarious Davide said it. I bet you still fail to see the performance of parliamentary countries as how they’ve been more effective in curbing corruption. Sure, the parliamentary is not perfect. However, it gives the opposition better ground and a better voice. The Yellows would’ve had a better voice today in a parliamentary system.

      Why should the Yellows turned Pinklawans support the parliamentary system? As mentioned earlier, a collective and formal opposition would be there. If UNITEAM wins first place — it’s not a winner takes all scenario. Instead, Leni and her WHOLE PARTY occupies the minority seats to which they are required to question UNITEAM and hold it accountable. I wonder if you even see the beauty of that. Once again, you probably are still too busy believing in the delusion of the so-called Marcos Parliament. As Ninoy called it–a parliamentary without a parliament. Marcos Sr.’s “parliament” was nothing more than for show.

      If I were you, why not wear a hockey mask, get a machete, and maybe you can go on a rampage screaming stuff like “PARLIAMENTARY WILL NEVER WORK! LOOK AT THE MARCOS YEARS! 1987 CONSTITUTION IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD” and like that.

      Meanwhile, read this one:

      Do Anti-Reform Crybabies Even Know Why The Marcos Sr. Years Weren’t The Golden Years?

      Just think you’ll never get it but it’s fun to shoot down your fake news of the Marcos Years were a parliament and that it’ll never work in the Philippines because of it, Mr. Vorhees.

  5. “Opposition” stands for resistance, defiance, protest, and objection. Looks like Filipinos who overwhelmingly voted for BBM’s UNITY in the recent elections are sick and tired of anything to do with a word that they view to be chains and fetters keeping the country from progress. Just look at the results: Risa Hontiveros is the “Last of the Mohicans” in the Senate, a rare breed on the brink of extinction.

    Anyone who cares to still serve as “opposition” these days should simple project themselves as supportive “auditors” or “checkers” with a sincere desire to see the government succeed. At this juncture, Yellow and opposition have become synonyms (lumped with other words like terrorists and criminals) that just won’t sell.

    1. This is why the the need for originality and imagination is a lot more important to the Opposition nowadays — because they evidently are in desperate need for a new and more compelling value proposition to the Filipino people. They have worn necropolitics, woke politics, and poverty porn to tatters from overuse as fodder for their intellectually-bankrupt campaigns and rhetoric.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.