Leni Robredo is a Filipino lawyer who became vice president in 2016. She became known as an opposition leader, unafraid to raise criticisms of the Duterte administration. In 2021, Robredo declared her candidacy for the position of president as a response to Bongbong Marcos, son of former dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr., running for the same position. The campaign period became a heated battle between these two candidates.
“It is more radical to love”—Robredo’s campaign slogan.
Ironically, this radical love wasn’t much shown in the way her supporters behaved towards Marcos Jr. supporters. Their actions may have even intensified polarization.
Satirical Posts
One of the strategies of the Bongbong Marcos camp was to glorify the regime of former dictator Marcos Sr., adding factually incorrect details and denying the atrocities. The “Tallano gold” myth particularly drew lots of attention. Through it, Marcos Jr. gained more support.
Supporters of Leni Robredo poked fun at this and created their own posts about the Marcos family, which were initially shared satirically by Robredo supporters themselves and were spread to other people thinking that those posts were indeed true.
What was originally done “for fun” didn’t have a very fun outcome (more on this later).
Us vs. Them
Robredo supporters mocked the gullibility of Marcos Jr. supporters, calling them “dumb” and “stupid”. Because of this behavior, a lot of non-supporters of Robredo, especially supporters of Marcos Jr., labeled her supporters as elitists.
Some Robredo supporters even blocked Marcos Jr. supporters. What happened was, it was mostly just co-supporters of Robredo seeing their posts—creating an echo chamber. Some even went as far as totally cutting off friends and family who supported Marcos Jr. Furthermore, businesses that showed public support to Marcos Jr. were also avoided by Robredo supporters. In a way, Marcos supporters were seen by Robredo supporters as enemies that have to be isolated and eliminated.
Denying Data
When a survey conducted by Pulse Asia revealed that the leading candidate was Bongbong Marcos with around 56% likely voters and Leni Robredo was second with only 23%, the supporters of Robredo could not accept it. They were convinced that Robredo was leading because of Google Trends. In disbelief of the survey results posted by Pulse Asia, they then proceeded to call the public opinion research company “False Asia” and accused it of being bought and infiltrated by partisan groups. The company denied these and said that such accusations would only increase polarization and contribute to the erosion of Philippine democracy.
In the end, Bongbong Marcos did win as president, garnering a majority of the votes. All the other candidates, including Leni Robredo, were behind by a huge margin.
This is alarming. Philippine democracy is compromised.
Here are some things the pro-liberal-democratic opposition should learn from what happened—to avoid stretching polarization further and to prevent democracy from eroding more:
1.) Be open to opposing ideas
Different people believe in different things. When it comes to things that we believe are right and some people think otherwise, we get more defensive of what we believe in.
Both sides think that they are on the right side.
This certainly happened too in the 2022 elections.
It’s easy for us to assume that when other people do not have the same political values as we do (which we believe are correct), they are automatically bad people. A lot of times, when we face people with different opinions from ours, we shut them off right away. We are not willing to hear them out.
If this is our attitude, what makes us think they would want to hear us out?
My dad taught me the importance of asking the question why.
“Why do you believe so?”
“Where are you coming from?”
Listen without immediate judgment.
We may still not agree with them, but this way, we would have a deeper understanding of what their standpoint is. Perhaps we could work around that new information, share our thoughts, and allow them to think for themselves.
After all, democracy allows us to freely express our ideas—but we should do this with respect and openness. When we’ve shared the things that we believe in and another person doesn’t agree with them, we often grow bitterness and resentment towards the person. Others may even verbalize these feelings.
2.) Do not add fuel to the fire
Some people curse and call other people names out of frustration or annoyance. The truth is, using demeaning words will most likely not win them over. It will only lead them further away.
Speak the truth in kindness, not in pursuit of superiority.
“It is more radical to love”
—this means to love even those we find hard to love, not just those we find agreeable.
Perhaps this slogan can be more than a mere slogan but an action towards real change.
Hi, Julienne!
For me, reading your article is like taking what Catholics call examination of conscience. It has allowed me to recall how I also cut off family and other relatives who supported Marcos Jr and to be repentant about it. I refused then to have respectful dialogue with them and instead imprisoned myself within what you mentioned as “echo chamber.” I have realized the hypocrisy behind what I (and others like me) did and failed to do — supporting a particular ticket for the sake of democracy and yet turning my back on those who held views different from mine.
The lessons you have identified call to mind the solutions offered by Dr. Jennifer McCoy regarding how to depolarize, particularly addressing the need for belonging and for respect by avoiding denigrating others and through bridge-building. Carrying these out, of course, is easier said than done. Nonetheless, you strikingly write something that political science students like us and other scholars should always bear in mind: “Speak the truth in kindness, not in pursuit of superiority.”
Hello, Julienne!
Your article is a wake-up call to the opposition to do better next time. That includes me, because I am equally guilty of these avoidant behaviors during the 2022 election campaign period. To be fair, I believe that some of the roots of these behaviors may be related to the race against time. Robredo announced her filing for candidacy just a day before the deadline. While other candidates have already established their campaign, Robredo’s team was scrambling to catch up. Other supporters like me felt like we do not have enough time to patiently persuade others. Having patience and tolerance took us a lot of time and energy. Even though many of us tried to civilly talk with others, the surveys told us that the campaign for Robredo was not making any progress. Hence, frustrations hit many supporters which inevitably turned into resentment towards the BBM supporters, resulting into a more polarized environment.
This “radical love” mantra isn’t as simple as it seems. It requires us to transcend societal structures and human emotions that hinder our compassion for others. This entails recognizing and understanding how the real enemies of democracy traps us in a cycle of frustrations and resentment towards each other. Considering our current political environment, it is still better to choose kindness and explore creative and empathic ways to help others realize that those they have put on top won’t save them.
Hi, Mx. Magbanua!
Your article might be a tough pill to swallow for the Kakampinks if it were published during the 2022 Philippine presidential election. Everything you have mentioned, though, well on an emotive level, is rather true. The opposition, through the aggressive tactics employed by some of its supporters to persuade the Philippine electorate, has exacerbated divisions in the political landscape and turned what could have been healthy political discourse into hostility. I am reminded of the time when I tried to convince a Marcos supporter to rethink her initial choices for the electoral posts. She was open to listening but has been traumatized by the condescension of some Leni supporters in her Facebook feed.
All the more, there is truly a need to depolarize by addressing the bare minimum need for respect in civic society and remove the looming presence of hostility in constructive political discussions that prove beneficial in safeguarding our democracy.