tête-à-tête

With the virtually melodramatic ads by some known personalities and ordinary people on the boob tube, you would think they are harbingers of good news. And by good news they mean that Filipinos are about to reach some kind of a finish line in our quest for excellent leadership and corruption-free bureaucracy. At least at first blush. These are sham movements in true form that advocate "change" in favor of some politicians eyeing higher positions. They appeal to our thirst for reforms by associating their image with our cause. In that way, we identify with them and support them by voting for the candidate they tacitly endorse. Such propaganda is not very different to how advertisements work. They are premised on swaying public perception through emotion rather than reason. Have you ever wondered why whitening products sell like hotcakes in the Philippines? Because cosmetics companies tell us white is right. It is the way to go. You are unattractive if you aren't on the bandwagon. So, you end up buying their products that guarantee you a spot in the world of melanin-haters. In the same way that politicians come up with ingenious electoral campaigns in the guise of love of country. They create a bandwagon of "nationalists" of which they are the leaders we can count on. Or count in at the time we cast our votes.

The elections are barely a year from today. I wouldn't be surprised to see more footages of politicians serious-talking with a comedian or comedienne, or maybe running across EDSA in slow motion to save a kid from...say, a cat, or perhaps giving relief supplies to residents of...Makati, or desperately mud-slinging their opponents, or resorting to marital help which sometimes doesn't work. These are cheap shots. What aren't are debates where candidates lay their cards and go through the dynamics of argumentation. It's a way where people can clearly discern conscientious candidates from the nefarious, qualified candidates from overrated ones, visionaries from illusionists. The series of US Presidential debates in 2008 were a great display of how democracy empowers people to make sound choices because they get to know their options. Obama, Clinton, Biden, McCain, Edwards, Richardson, Kucinich, and Dodd were courageous enough to address tough issues through nationally-televised debates. Why don't we have those here? If candidates have the caliber and patriotic intents, why of their own volition not get into it?

Just like the proverbial false prophets, political trickery takes different forms. But we should know better now. Are we going to vote for a candidate just because he sponsored a concert and gave us free shirts? Are we going to support a candidate just because he is an eloquent speaker? Are we going to favor a candidate whose pictures and initials are in every corner of our city? Are we going to retain a candidate in power just because he did "fine" during his term? We may have different criteria for choosing but my goodness our country cannot afford to have another posse of parasites!

Copyright © 2009 by DenniSinned2. All rights reserved.

Labels: ads, biden, candidate, clinton, debate, dodd, edwards, elections, makati, obama, philippines, propaganda, richardson, voters