Duterte’s narrative
THE dominant political narrative today is that we’re a nation under siege from narcopolitics and the drug menace. Thus, we should support President Duterte’s war on drugs and accept all of its consequences.
According to the likes of Assistant Secretary Mocha Uson who is the de facto spokesperson of Duterte, we are a nation divided merely between Diehard Duterte Supporters (DDS) and Yellows. This supposedly means that those who back Duterte are anti-drugs, pro-police, pro-progress — while the rest allegedly take the opposite positions.
Uson and her ilk further divide the nation by launching a campaign against certain media outlets. She has demanded that Secretary Martin Andanar turn over to her “office” the accreditation of all journalists who happen to use digital media. It is not only a blatant overreach based on the same Department Order that originally meant to pave the way for DDS Bloggers to undergo a “process” to justify their presence at presidential events. It is actually a war on media and press freedom, with Uson threatening to abuse her powers in order to cancel media accreditation of journalists whose “crime” is to critically report on it.
Uson’s memo to Andanar and her latest Facebook tirade against certain media outlets aren’t about accreditation. It is part of a march towards tyranny: It is a call on media to blindly cover and obey Duterte. Otherwise, they face the wrath of the unruly mob of DDS online army.
Same with the language and tactics of tyrants everywhere, the Duterte narrative is as opportunistic as it is aggressive.
Take a close look at how they use the Hacienda Luisita and the plight of farmers to bash the political opposition led by the Liberal Party and also even the Reds and activists who have long advocated land reform. True, the hacienderos rule the LP and these same hacienderos have a brutal record. But this cannot erase the facts: that Duterte has reneged on his promise of free land distribution; that Duterte is also supported and surrounded by hacienderos; and that Duterte has not taken action to order an investigation into past and continuing bloody attacks against farmers and farm workers.
The DDS’ only use for farmers is to turn their issues into a wedge against Duterte’s political opponents and to pretend that Duterte is profarmer. They have never campaigned for land reform, and even deprived Rafael Mariano of support in his confirmation battle.
This hypocrisy is also obvious in the fight against corruption, supposedly a part of the Duterte narrative. But like Uson, the DDS is only anti-corruption if it involves political opponents. Uson would be quick to turn a vague corruption accusation against Yellows into a frenzy, but quiet if involves Pulong Duterte or the husband of Sara Duterte. Lest we forget, these “anti-corruption” champions don’t find anything wrong with being champions too of the Marcoses — a world record-holder in plunder and brutality.
If you are a commuter and wonder why Duterte has failed to fix the mass transportation mess in Manila, the Duterte narrative tells you to blame the past administration for everything, and be blind to the incompetence of the current administration. You can only denounce the delivery of incompatible train units ordered by the previous administration, but you cannot condemn the present administration for not doing anything to return them and to order new ones.
If you are a jeepney driver or operator, you can only agree to buy new modernized jeepneys worth more than a million pesos. But you cannot raise issues such as your ability to pay for them, or the fact that governments past and present have never provided assistance to maintain and upgrade your jeepneys, or simply object to the planned sellout of the mass transport to Big Transport and Big Banks.
If you are an overseas Filipino worker, you are presumed to be part of the DDS and to help proudly proclaim change has come to the Philippines. In the DDS Manual, you can only express pride that the Philippines is “safer” now, and that he has approved the establishment of an OFW bank. But you cannot remind Duterte about his unfulfilled promises of removing the OEC, and of helping them come back home because jobs should now be a-plenty and wages competitive to what they receive abroad. You cannot stand in solidarity for the OFW mothers of victims of extrajudicial killings.
The hypocrisy is transparent to the people of Marawi and a growing number of Mindanaoans. The DDS waves the flag and honors the fallen soldiers, but get instantly angry when reminded of repercussions of the war and the destruction of the Philippines’ only Islamic city. Nothing matters to the DDS except to make Duterte look good. Yes, nothing else matters, even 500,000 internal refugees and the apparent unintended consequence that ISIS can lay siege to a Philippine city for months in an open challenge to Duterte.
In the same breath that they deny Duterte’s drift to tyranny, the DDS would harass critics, intimidate the media, seek to behead the Supreme Court, demand the Ombudsman’s removal, defund the Commission on Human Rights, and portray Duterte as an infallible leader. They claim “hindi diktador si Duterte” but go on doing and clamoring what dictators and their fascist henchmen do.
The issue now is that if the Duterte narrative is problematic, what are the alternative narratives that could unite and move the nation forward? And how would we win over the majority of our people behind them?