Flipfloping: DDS Way of Life

In the intricate theater of Philippine politics, few phenomena are as paradoxically amusing and intellectually stimulating as the public’s polarized reactions to the Makabayan Bloc’s impeachment moves. 

On one hand, when the Makabayan Bloc attempts to impeach President Bongbong Marcos (BBM), they are hailed as heroes by their supporters—champions of justice and accountability.

 On the other hand, when they turn their sights on Vice President Sara Duterte, these same actors suddenly become pariahs, reviled and ostracized by many. 

This curious flip-flop in public sentiment encapsulates what can only be described as a “DDS mentality,” a term that has come to signify a particular brand of political allegiance marked by selective outrage and an almost tribal adherence to favored figures.

The humor inherent in this mentality lies not just in its inconsistency but also in how transparently obvious it is.

 Imagine cheering for someone who demands accountability from one politician but then vilifying them for holding another equally powerful figure accountable. 

It’s akin to applauding a referee for calling fouls on your opponent but booing them when they call fouls on your own team. 

The Makabayan Bloc’s dual role—venerated or vilified based solely on who they target—exposes a cognitive dissonance that is both frustrating and comical. 

Such behavior underscores how political loyalty can often trump principles, with supporters wearing blinders that filter information through partisan lenses.

Adding another layer of amusement are the so-called “NPA” references thrown around by critics whenever the Makabayan Bloc acts against their favored politicians. 

Accusations linking these lawmakers to insurgent groups serve less as substantive critiques and more as ad hominem attacks designed to dismiss dissenting voices outright. 

This tactic reveals an intellectual laziness disguised as vigilance—a refusal to engage with arguments on their merits, instead opting for guilt by association or simplistic labeling.

 The result is a political discourse that often resembles playground taunts rather than mature debate.

Ultimately, reflecting on this DDS mentality through an academic lens brings us face-to-face with broader questions about political identity and democratic engagement in the Philippines. 

The oscillating admiration and hatred directed at the Makabayan Bloc highlight how deeply entrenched partisanship can distort reasoned judgment. 

While it may be tempting to chuckle at these contradictions from afar, understanding them is crucial for fostering a more informed electorate capable of transcending knee-jerk reactions. 

After all, democracy thrives not on uncritical loyalty but on principled critique—and perhaps learning to laugh at our own absurdities might just be the first step toward achieving that ideal.