“A vote that could be “boat” but shouldn’t be bought”
A question for a title, yet an “enTITLEment” dependent of our discretion as much as it’s a taken-for-granted prerogative that we might as well address...
Consequently, nowadays, “self-entitlement” pretty much sums up our dependence on imposed rights and privileges as if we aren’t suppose to sensibly play a role in it... We usually complain about issues, yet, do we do something about it. We depend too much on others, more so, on elected officials. Chances are, we rave about their failure for that motive to “play the blame game”. Or do we just rely on rants expectedly falling on deaf ears as we’re only after the overly used and usually misconstrued “freedom of expression” irresponsibly conveyed for all its possible likes and reactions?
One manifestation of this is that complaints are aimed at discrediting the same recipients many times over because these same people get voted every time and assume power nevertheless. This being the case, any censured public official would most likely care less, as they get elected anyway. You complain and so do they - they still “COME, PLAIN (& simple)”; I guess, they don’t comply but they “come play”. And we get “played (around)” every time. If that’s not some kind of a “welcomed, well-scammed” likelihood, I don’t know what is...
Yet, are we to take that against them or we only have ourselves to blame? Don’t get it all mixed-up like how people are as gullible over fake news. We acknowledge that there are also good public servants caught up in all these brouhaha and negative publicities; most of which are even maliciously fabricated... Whereas, there are also the real ones and hard facts, countered by their minions and bootlickers and they brush it off as a mere undermining scheme or, sadly, it’s justified even; putting a whole new meaning to “DUMBfounded” yes-men.
Come next election (actually, even prior to it), there’ll be such dirty tactics again as a manipulative storyline leading to its climactic end for an agenda of turning things around in their favor. Worse, given the lack of the already rare ‘common sense’ for the propriety to verify, blind loyalty out of these supporters find gratification in spreading these false stories as their twisted way of venerating their supported candidate. Worst is that it’s so effective, candidates go to the extent of investing on these smear campaigns from which trolls, fake accounts, keyboard warriors, “blah-ggers” as much as paid news articles, cyberbullies, scammers, even hackers and what-nots fiscally thrive in multitudes.
Whatever happened to real credentials as one candidate’s presumed persuasive strongpoint (rather than via black propaganda against an opponent)?
Whereas, coming up with platforms and programs seem to be a whole new undertaking (read: taking it under). Apparently, it eventually sets off an underwhelming effect out of an overwhelming promise. Either it ends up as an unfulfilled commitment or sometimes even (if not often), it involves “under the table” dealings. Indeed (or in deed) an “undertaking”.
There are also the overly opinionated individuals/supporters who seem to know everything. While they may have basis, it’s the undiplomatic approach that triggers a ripple effect of negativities.
Given how we’re suppose to foster unity and maintain (if not bring back) Baguio people’s amiable nature and diplomatic disposition, it’s now about someone else’s selfish motives that initiates animosity and it sparks off a divide among/between us... Instead of resorting to these detrimental fakery, why can’t we focus on real good points as a workaround...
All these said, it’s not even about what/how dirty politics is deemed to be:
There are so much more to be discussed/shared being part of that “enTITLEment”, however just a few of what was expressed here, we will probably share with you (in other posts) detailed justifications as per subject matter if only to point out how posts or arguments that are political in nature should rather be conveyed. We could likewise consolidate a list of people’s expectations and preferences. But that too will depend on our “no self-entitlement” to apathy and slanderous "self-expression"... Nonetheless, it’s time for that right to “boat” ~ yup, “mamamangka po tayo sa ilang ilog... Row, row, row your vote! Gently down the mainstream”
A question for a title, yet an “enTITLEment” dependent of our discretion as much as it’s a taken-for-granted prerogative that we might as well address...
Consequently, nowadays, “self-entitlement” pretty much sums up our dependence on imposed rights and privileges as if we aren’t suppose to sensibly play a role in it... We usually complain about issues, yet, do we do something about it. We depend too much on others, more so, on elected officials. Chances are, we rave about their failure for that motive to “play the blame game”. Or do we just rely on rants expectedly falling on deaf ears as we’re only after the overly used and usually misconstrued “freedom of expression” irresponsibly conveyed for all its possible likes and reactions?
One manifestation of this is that complaints are aimed at discrediting the same recipients many times over because these same people get voted every time and assume power nevertheless. This being the case, any censured public official would most likely care less, as they get elected anyway. You complain and so do they - they still “COME, PLAIN (& simple)”; I guess, they don’t comply but they “come play”. And we get “played (around)” every time. If that’s not some kind of a “welcomed, well-scammed” likelihood, I don’t know what is...
Yet, are we to take that against them or we only have ourselves to blame? Don’t get it all mixed-up like how people are as gullible over fake news. We acknowledge that there are also good public servants caught up in all these brouhaha and negative publicities; most of which are even maliciously fabricated... Whereas, there are also the real ones and hard facts, countered by their minions and bootlickers and they brush it off as a mere undermining scheme or, sadly, it’s justified even; putting a whole new meaning to “DUMBfounded” yes-men.
Come next election (actually, even prior to it), there’ll be such dirty tactics again as a manipulative storyline leading to its climactic end for an agenda of turning things around in their favor. Worse, given the lack of the already rare ‘common sense’ for the propriety to verify, blind loyalty out of these supporters find gratification in spreading these false stories as their twisted way of venerating their supported candidate. Worst is that it’s so effective, candidates go to the extent of investing on these smear campaigns from which trolls, fake accounts, keyboard warriors, “blah-ggers” as much as paid news articles, cyberbullies, scammers, even hackers and what-nots fiscally thrive in multitudes.
Whatever happened to real credentials as one candidate’s presumed persuasive strongpoint (rather than via black propaganda against an opponent)?
Whereas, coming up with platforms and programs seem to be a whole new undertaking (read: taking it under). Apparently, it eventually sets off an underwhelming effect out of an overwhelming promise. Either it ends up as an unfulfilled commitment or sometimes even (if not often), it involves “under the table” dealings. Indeed (or in deed) an “undertaking”.
There are also the overly opinionated individuals/supporters who seem to know everything. While they may have basis, it’s the undiplomatic approach that triggers a ripple effect of negativities.
Given how we’re suppose to foster unity and maintain (if not bring back) Baguio people’s amiable nature and diplomatic disposition, it’s now about someone else’s selfish motives that initiates animosity and it sparks off a divide among/between us... Instead of resorting to these detrimental fakery, why can’t we focus on real good points as a workaround...
All these said, it’s not even about what/how dirty politics is deemed to be:
- Politics isn’t dirty, it’s of those kind of “traditional politicians (TraPo)” and their supporters who are dirty.
- It’s not about “napakong pangako” but what’s realistic and workable plans and programs should be. And it shouldn’t be an “impossible” come-on but for us to scrutinize and realize if it’s possible/doable... The overused “Pagbabago” has been promised many times over, yet it’s ironically the oldest campaign enticement; which remains to be “bago” as it was never employed. What’s not new is their concept of wanting to remain in power to protect and sustain their vested interests.
- It’s also about voters getting swayed into believing sugar-coated promises as much as getting smitten by the sweet talker.
- It shouldn’t even be about name recognition as these old politicians’ name may ring a bell, however, the “contempt bred out of familiarity” sounds off an alarming call... While newbies and independent candidates not standing a chance is not the issue, but the political machinery that positions their eventual ally and sometimes (if not too obvious), they field in a “pawn” (newbie) whom they’ll use and sacrifice...
- It’s not even about the people’s support to whoever gets voted nor should it be that apparent partisan allegiance of loyalists to their candidate/politico. Our loyalty and support should be for the motherland (in our case, Baguio), not to those “falsely” representing it.
- Thus, even if we are fond of these people, we should not tolerate their wrongdoings; as much as their shortcomings shouldn’t be justified. One problem is that those who voted for these candidates-they’ve-deemed-to-be-the-right-fit are outwardly too proud to admit their “wrong choice” as it would seem to reflect on them. On the other hand, not because we didn’t vote for an elected official, it shouldn’t mean that we can’t work hand in hand for the sake of Baguio
- Whereas for the elected ones, it’s not about “demanding respect” (and abuse of power as well as power-tripping) as some kind of self-enTITLEment as well due to their given position/title.. but it should be about earning respect out of living up to being of service; as it’s not about being a “politician” but a public servant.
- While yes, we need those with “may puso, may paninindigan, may malasakit, etc.,” it may prove to be “soft” qualifications amidst hardcore discreditation and repudiation; much like a lamb in a wolves’ den... and that’s why we should also be like (both) “shepherds and hunters”
There are so much more to be discussed/shared being part of that “enTITLEment”, however just a few of what was expressed here, we will probably share with you (in other posts) detailed justifications as per subject matter if only to point out how posts or arguments that are political in nature should rather be conveyed. We could likewise consolidate a list of people’s expectations and preferences. But that too will depend on our “no self-entitlement” to apathy and slanderous "self-expression"... Nonetheless, it’s time for that right to “boat” ~ yup, “mamamangka po tayo sa ilang ilog... Row, row, row your vote! Gently down the mainstream”