We often speak lowly of so-called 'dumb voters’, mga bobotante, but honestly, it's naive to expect an intelligent vote in a country with poor comprehension levels and a broken education system.
The notion of “maging matalino ka” is both restrictive and naive.
As children, we were indoctrinated with adjectives deemed “suitable” for us: “si (insert name), yung maganda”, “matalino yang bata na yan”, “ah, yung matangkad?”, etc. Often, you're assigned the most outstanding trait you possess and this is reinforced when you get to elementary school. In a classroom, who are usually considered smart? Usually, it’s the top 10 students. That doesn't mean that the rest are dumb; it’s just that they wouldn’t be the first to come to mind when someone asks, “sino mga matalino dito?” So, what group do they belong to if they’re not with the smart bunch?
They are the average. The Average Filipino.
The average Filipino is not dumb. The average Filipino is average. This is a label that is embraced wholeheartedly—"di naman ako matalino, normal lang." The “matalino” is a social class of its own, with mores and privileges clearly visible in school settings. Teachers tend to favor smart students. They receive perks. And along with these perks come unwritten social codes. There's a distinction between “the smart group” and “the others.” These distinctions are embedded in the top ten lists and the honour rolls. And so, as young as elementary school age, we had already absorbed these social codes; which eventually led us to the problem that we face today: anti-intellectualism.
The rise of anti-intellectualism in the Philippines is not an attack on critical thinking. It is a response to this preferred social class.
Let's admit it, there’s a tendency among the “smart people” to forget that those outside their circle are average but not dumb. Hindi ka matalino, so bobo ka. This triggers pushback. Anti-intellectualism didn’t stem from hatred of smart people but from the elitist culture associated with intellectualism itself. That’s why we shouldn’t be surprised when people who have never considered themselves outstandingly clever will never try to be part of that group. If your whole life you’ve been told you don’t belong to the “matatalino” then there’s nothing appealing about wanting to join it.
So, the phrase “bumoto nang matalino” is not encouraging. But you know what is? Bumoto nang tama.
Of course, using that phrase requires us to accept that “tama” is relative.
Earlier today, I had a conversation with a habal-habal driver. I had just voted and was walking home when he asked if I wanted a ride. He asked if I had voted, and I said yes. I asked him if he had, too. He said he would get a few rides in so he’d have money to buy rice for the day; and then he would go vote. At some point in our conversation, we talked about senatorial candidates. He said he was a “Duter-10” voter but might drop Quiboloy and replace him with Brocita. For the remaining two slots, he was considering Villar or Imee. So, of course, I told him, “Wag si Camille Villar please” and explained my stance. He asked for alternatives so I showed him my lineup and explained each one’s advocacies. He was most drawn to Heidi Mendoza because she’s an independent candidate and her advocacy is anti-corruption. He listed her down and erased Villar on his kodigo. He said he’d think about whether to include Bam Aquino.
He didn’t have a party list yet, so I asked what advocacy he supports. He said he wants habal-habal to be legalized in Cotabato City, just like Angkas or Joyride in Manila. So we googled party lists that promote transport reform. Turns out, he had been a consistent supporter of 1-Rider party list. He just thought they were not in the running because Brocita, their representative, was running for senator. I explained how party lists work and then we went back to the discussion on who could fill the last slot in his senatorial lineup.
Kuya Sergio was very clear that he doesn’t like ‘the Left’ and that he is solidly pro-Duterte because he believes Duterte is the only president who enacted reforms that directly benefited Mindanao. Most Philippine presidents are from Luzon or Visayas and, for him, whether they did good things or not, Mindanao did not feel the effect of which. But someone from Mindanao might make a difference. In his words: “Wala naming perpekto pero naniniwala ako na mas malapit ang puso nila sa lugar kung saan sila nanggaling”.
Some might disagree with this thinking (myself included), but for Kuya, that is what’s tama. And to tell him that he’s wrong for thinking that way would be insufferably self-righteous. For someone like Kuya Sergio, whose biggest concern is the legalization of habal-habal in Cotabato, the West Philippine Sea, drugs, divorce, or LGBTQ+ rights are the least of his worries.
So what does this tell us? It means everyone is a rational voter. We cannot win against what is personal, especially for the marginalized. The ability to consider the “greater good” is a privilege. And while it should be encouraged, it is naive to impose it on people who are just trying to survive on a daily basis. It is unfair to hold them accountable for what should be the best for the country when they remain at the lowest level of the food chain.
Does this mean we give up? No. But the fight does not begin and end with elections.
Before we ended our supposedly-five-minutes-but-turned-into-an-hourconversation, I encouraged Kuya to join a people’s organization so he could push for reforms that matter to him.
If we wish for people to vote wisely, we must understand and reach out to what speaks to them the most. Conversations must continue and people’s trust in democracy must be restored. To do that, we need to find neutral ground for engagement and accept, first and foremost, that people can be rational and misinformed; they can be thoughtful and limited by their realities.
Walang bobotante. Ang meron ay kawalang-pagasa at kawalang-tiwala.
No comments:
Post a Comment