"Trying to defend their ridiculous 'vanguard'"

"Trying to defend their ridiculous 'vanguard'"

(or: Notes after Duterte Supporters 

and their fanatical support for their dear leader 

in his State of the Nation Address)

It all started by seeing busloads of supporters, it seems that these people are being cared by their admin-backed mayors, knowing that be it really fanatical or being paid just to participate, these people are claiming to be supports of the regime, and at first trying to outnumber those who oppose their dear leader in regards to their number- especially in a day where he face his constituent if not his subject, and telleth about the state of the nation with all his myriad of achievements, promises, and even adlibs.

They may be described cringy at first citing that they fanatically support their dear leader and his style of work as president; and it doesn't matter for them (except for a few who are embarassed) to be maligned or chided all for being "diehard" in supporting- what more that they themselves also been known for cussing those who oppose their dear leader's moves, describing them as "yellows", "undesirables", to those of blaming them altogether for the nation's woes-not knowing that their dear leader himself as representing the order that oppresses them; but again, it doesn't matter.

And to think that they all came from various towns particularly in Metro Manila and it's neighbours, paid by their organizers as they rode from airconditioned buses to the assembly site near Batasan, some of the buses did pass through Commonwealth avenue where they did chide those who oppose their dear leader waiting for their march near UP Diliman, that again calling them "yellows", "communists", anything just to describe those participants whose "People's SoNA" as a counterpart to those of their dear leader.

***

Because of what this person sought in Commonwealth from that early morning, as well as those been seen in news reports, he would say that no matter how ridiculous their dear leader is, still, he is the forefront of their 'struggle'. He may wouldn't be surpised that for these "Dutertists" (sorry for the term), would say fanatically that their leader should serve as a vanguard, a manifestation of a political power against its enemies, and a benefactor of grace and justice to its constituents, regardless of his controversial image- and it is also for them that regardless of being described as a dictator if not those of his controversial actions that brought criticism, that the style of leadership is what Filipinos wanted: a benevolent despot that's appointed by god through popular will.

Strange if not worthy to ridicule, for as their fanaticism being shown be it in IBP road or in social media, these fanatics cling to their view that the as they wanted to create an impression that the government prioritises order, they have to rally behind their dear leader Duterte to safeguard the country within the particular circumstances presented by entrenched interests particularly those of its rivals. For sure some did read Lenin especially from those once-activists turned apologists of the regime; if not Agpalo whose 'Pangulo principle' showcasing a benevolent despot in times of crisis; all in making Duterte a leader of their own 'revolution'. That in their yearnings for a 'revolutionary government' requires a vanguard to defend their state against internal and external elements, if not to transform the state into a tool of order they desired as such, the Duterte they know the man who, right or wrong, is still "right" in his deed in an attempt to "transform" Philippine society by restoring order. 

And because of this, very few, including yours truly, observed that based from their comments, posts that their leader is himself a vanguard of their imaginary 'struggle'- and wouldn't be surprised that despite legitimation from all Filipinos would only hinder from the outset their actions, and thus like Herzl would say that:

'we cannot all be of one mind; the gestor will simply take the leadership into his hands and march in the van'. 

And it did happen. Like-minded orderists they wanted an orderist to lead their way even at the expense of others thinking that these 'others' as useless beings hindering their intended direction. Their leader's speech did invoke numerous achievements surrounding his rule and therefore be continued till the end of his term, and thus be praised by his supporters regardless of how controversial would it be like his war on drugs (that caused many deaths), his infrastructure programs (regardless of being debt-driven) and his tax reforms (, or the issue over the disputed isles (knowing that he acted like a vassal while his neighbors defending their country regardless of being weak against China); after all, it is their leader that obligedly meant to be praised and supported "right or wrong" for he represents if not embodies the country- and his actions justifies the ends that for them, "for the country's good".   

If so, wouldn't also be surprised that in their view may meant demanding an enabling act to consolidate further their 'Dutertist' dream, if not wanting an unlikely (or likely) scenario to advance further their 'Dutertist' ends- like Hitler and his Nazis did made a Reichstag Fire to proceed their actions, or how Enrile made a fake ambush in order for Marcos to proceed in his martial rule.

***

Anyway, with all the administration-led events coming and going, of all the fanatic-led posts read and screenshot'd by others concerned, their pseudo-vanguardist-like escapade may appear to be successful, but, knowing that they are at the side of interests, then wouldn't be surprised that they are the same as its predecessors: a continuity of sorts, sworn to upheld an existing social order while making some piecemeal changes.