I totally understand many in the liberal opposition that have decided to deepen the political divide and decided to just live in their echo chambers. It is easiest thing to do. And certainly, at this point, maybe the mental and emotional well-being of many depend on this cutting off from the real.

But I draw the line at disbelieving the loss. I draw it at insisting that the 31 million isn’t real, then insisting that we are proud of being one of the 15 million. This defies logic and reason: you cannot believe one number but disbelieve the other. And if you decide you disbelieve both (and even say that the 2016 results were false as well), then you’ve got a problem: the powers were different in 2016, but Duterte won anyway. And really, if we cease to believe electoral results, then elections also cease to be an important democratic exercise for you. Turning anarchist is good, if you’re conscious that you’re doing so. Too: if the elections are not credible to you, then there is no reason to engage in it as an exercise.

I’ve said this often enough: choosing to be blind is a terrible thing. Especially when blindness means practically disassociating ourselves with what’s real. And right now what’s real is this: Marcos is President, and he is making very interesting appointments if we’re looking at all. These appointments are also very important, as these people will dictate what kind of leadership we will see the next six years. They are interesting because they are of course more than just people, but what they actually represent.

The strategy is clear in many of these appointments, if only we were looking.

For example, the appointment of the Aquino administration’s economic guys. That isn’t just some superficial act that sought to prove the ability of the Marcos leadership to go beyond political divides and push for unity. It is also a pretty effective way to paralyze criticism from the liberals—after all, how can they be critical of Marcos’s economic policies when it is being dictated by the same guys who led the economic team of their own leadership from 2010 to 2016?

But this appointment of PNoy’s economics team (and Duterte’s, if we are to include Diokno’s appointment) is interesting because it also means that with the liberals unable to criticize the same neo-liberal economic policies, it will further isolate the left in its critique of the same.

Two things make this a fantastic strategy. First, it fuels the divide between the left and the liberals, which Duterte’s strategy has been able to do so well the past six years (a divide that exists regardless of whether they admit it or not); and second, it allows for the anti-left propaganda line that’s been oft-repeated the past six years that goes “wala kayong ginawa kungdi umangal, tumulong na lang kayo.”

This divide, if it’s not clear yet, is important to maintain for the next leadership, because we have seen how useful it’s been for Duterte the past six years. It also arguably enabled the 2019 and 2022 wins of Duterte-Marcos-Duterte. (Yeah, excluding Neri Colmenares in the opposition slate was the worst idea for the Leni-Kiko slate. It was good for the Marcos-Duterte side who could claim unity.)

While many were aghast at the Sara Duterte appointment to the Department of Education (DepEd), I think it’s a pretty solid move for Marcos. While many saw this as an affront to our teachers, I thought it would be interesting to watch Sara deal with a notoriously inept department. And we’re talking ineptitude that on the surface is revealed through our textbooks and modules—those badly written, un-edited lessons? That’s a by-product of a system that’s at the mercy of inefficient, ineffectual government workers who cannot be fired despite utter incompetence. It’s also indicative of a  systemic crisis that includes the refusal to do better.

If Sara is her father’s daughter—and what we see on the surface is that she most certainly is that combination of charm and iron-fist—then she will take it personally each and every time a textbook foible appears on our feeds. And if she is the woman that she has been sold as during the campaign, that woman who cares about our children in the way she cares about hers, that older sister who will fight for us in the way she fights for her own brothers, then she will want to do better.

Sure, she will have first pick on how history will be taught (or if it’s taught at all), but that’s a battle that we should all be ready to fight anyway, regardless of who becomes Dep Ed chief. That it’s a Duterte should mean we can do battle better—after all we’ve experienced that kind of leadership for six years. One hopes historians and academics are already figuring out what weapons to use, and new strategies, for doing battle better and differently.

And Erwin Tulfo in DSWD? Probably the best move so far. And no, it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not he even knows what DSWD is for. It has everything to do with the fact of the liberal (and left?) opposition pinning its hopes on the creation of an NGO to be led by Robredo. And this is where the Tulfo appointment gets its power: this man can and will single-handedly and consistently discredit whatever work this NGO seeks to do. On the one hand, I do think that it will just put in the work to be at the forefront of relief operations—which is a tiny part of the DSWD work, but the one that gets the most mileage. On the other, it will also work on a propaganda strategy to strategically wipe-out whatever work an opposition-NGO seeks to do. Anyone who still doubts the effectivity of this combination is obviously still blind to how Duterte has stayed in power the past six years, and how 2022 was won by Marcos-Duterte.

And lest you think that the blame will fall squarely on Marcos for any criticism you have of his leadership, let us remember that none of the things we have thrown at Duterte has stuck. Instead, his communications strategy has effectively ensured that whatever mishaps and messes of governance, blame falls only on his men. It’s a strategy so well executed that this president is ending his six years with such high approval ratings.

Here’s why willful blindness, a deepened political divide, and the lack of a proper and effective propaganda strategy will be the death of us: when you decide you will not even look at what is unfolding thoughtfully and carefully, no one loses but us. Basically, you are giving them all the space to do what they want, because you’re deciding what they do does not matter—except that of course, in the real world outside those pink echo chambers, all of it does.

And no NGO, least of all one named after a failed political campaign, will make much difference.***