By now, you’ve noticed how onion-skinned President Benigno S. Aquino III is. He has become alarmingly combative of his critics, as if he’s in a shooting rampage in a target range. And the list of individuals and institutions he has attacked is growing longer each week, including TV broadcasters, corrupt senators, former justices, a New York-based newspaper, and even an independent, co-equal branch of government.
If he continues this combative stance, it might even become the only legacy he leaves behind. “The Complaining President”, we might read in textbooks in the future, for being such whiner, like a slacking, blue-collar worker complaining to his “Boss” when his indolence is pointed out.
The proliferation of Noytards
I don’t worry at all if this is what he leaves behind. What I am more worried about is his loyalists, these so-called “Noytards”, are becoming more like him each day. If PNoy was a god, then he had created these clones in his “image.”
These imbeciles loiter the hallways of social media, bullying or picking a fight against any netizen expressing their disgust or disapproval of Aquino. To be fair, there are a lot of imbecile anti-PNoys out there who disapprove without knowing exactly what to disapprove of and why. But these imbecile pro-PNoys do not discriminate their targets; they attack anyone, even those with reasonable grounds for dissent.
Take the case of one Noytard who came lingering in my blog’s Facebook page the other day.
He responded to my comments regarding a piece of news about Aquino’s comments regarding the passage of the Anti-Political Dynasty Bill (APDB). He is questioning if I had taken Aquino out of context when I opined how shameless the President is for questioning the scrutiny politicians like him could get once the Anti-Political Dynasty Bill.
Let us take another look at what PNoy said in the article:
"Ang hirap nga nito 'yung kawawa na rin kaming mga pulitiko kung tutuusin," Aquino said. "Kapag pulitiko ka dapat bawasan 'yung karapatan mo, dapat mas mataas 'yung scrutiny sa'yo, 'di ba? 'Pag papanatili ng magandang pangalan, 'pag sa pulitiko ka, mali [ang] dynasty," he added. (Source: PNoy on anti-dynasty law: “Kawawa kami”)
Why is this statement shameless? Because the President is using a defensive tone and wording in favor of politicians like him when it comes to public scrutiny of their actions. He described politicians like him as, "kawawa" (pitiful) once their right or "karapatan" are limited by the potential passage of APDB.
What made his statement even more defensive is what succeeded the aforementioned quote, which did not come out in the Philippine STAR article, but in a GMA News Online article:
Pero kunwari, sa medicine, magretire ang doktor mo. Doktor ang anak niya. Una mong susubukin ang anak niya," he added.
If the President is really committed to reform, he wouldn't use examples like this one. If a doctor retires, even if the successor child is a doctor, you wouldn't want to be treated by that person if you don't know his or her professional track record, right? Some apples fall far from the tree, just as the current president has exhibited in refusing to certify APDB as urgent and allowing it to linger in a Congress dominated by political dynasties. Aquino's actions are as doubtful as the bill's passage in the House of Representatives.
The intolerance of others' opinion
Back to the Noytard: Perhaps he has limited understanding of contextualization, that's why he was shameless enough to question if I interpreted Aquino's statements correctly. He also accused me of being "subjective" in my opinion for calling the President shameless and not true to his word. This is despite the fact that both the Philippine STAR and GMA News Online noted PNoy's apparent defense of politician's rights.
This Noytard must have been unaware that as we look at facts from different realities, there can be no single, comprehensive, and correct interpretation of a statement. Subjectivity is the very nature of opinions, and while opinions are informed by facts, I have not failed to state such facts.
As his comments are already offensive and bordering towards personal, I opted to delete them and ban the user from my Facebook page. Instead of stopping, he resorted to attacking my blog in his timeline.
This is just one evidence that Aquino is breeding netizens as shameless as him. When he is banned for his inappropriate actions on Facebook, this imbecile netizen calls me an enemy of democracy, even as he himself bastardized democracy by opting to silence my opinions.
Opinions as hallmarks of democracy
What every Noytard and even President Aquino has to realize is that in a true democracy, opinions are crucial and tolerated, regardless if they're positive or negative. It is a feedback mechanism from which the government can draw ideas for improvement of performance.
Tolerance means allowing something, such as a belief, to exist even though we dislike or disagree with it. Tolerance does not mean never disagreeing with anybody. The word implies disagreement. True tolerance means allowing differing views to coexist without necessarily agreeing with them or claiming that all views are true.
But if a President has the nerve to dismiss criticisms, it should be worth questioning if he is indeed listening to his "bosses." In a true democracy, a president is humble enough to admit mistakes and lapses committed, instead of stubbornly defending policies that have been declared unconstitutional and making excuses for his allies and political party.
With the number of netizens adopting Aquino's combative stance growing each day, having second thoughts on posting one's opinions is now becoming a grim reality. This kind of intolerance is a form of bullying and dictatorship, as it pushes one's opinions down another's throat and proclaims a sense of infallibility among those imposing their frame of mind.
Hence, a reminder to my readers: it is your choice to visit and read my opinions in this blog. You are free to disagree and express your disagreement to my opinion as long as you maintain your decency in expressing so. In a tolerant world, there are no negative or positive opinions, just opinions.