Admitting Defeat: A Concept Lost in Transmission

An alert reader asked me this question.

Who are we going to believe, ABS-CBN or GMA? Or Nielsen vs. Kantar? All of them claim they are number 1.

The question is who tells the truth and who is peddling fake news? The audience understands the business of propaganda, but being also in the business of selling truth, does the audience deserve to know the truth?

If we demand accountability and transparency from the government, why can't these TV companies admit who wins ... and who is second? Does being second make you a lesser person?

Welcome to the ultimate arena of creative mathematics, where the laws of arithmetic go to die, and everyone lies and masks their insecurities by posturing as the one to beat.

The much-anticipated primetime clash between Coco Martin’s Sigabo and Dingdong Dantes’ The Master Cutter has officially started. And according to the subsequent press releases, both ABS-CBN and GMA are absolutely, indisputably Number 1.

How is this geometrically possible? Let us pull back the curtain on the magical world of media propaganda and data manipulation.

If you ask the data gatekeepers, reality depends entirely on which spreadsheet you decide to worship. It’s a beautifully confusing ecosystem:

The GMA / Nielsen Strategy: GMA proudly waves the Nielsen Phintam flag. Under this metric, the Master Cutter slashed its way to a single-station victory of 9.9 over Sigabo’s 8.2. To the Kapuso network, this means the case is closed. Boom. Winner.

The ABS-CBN / Megaphone Strategy: But wait! ABS-CBN doesn't just broadcast from a single tower anymore; they operate like a multi-headed media hydra. Sigabo aired simultaneously on TV5, A2Z, ALLTV, and the Kapamilya Channel. If you use Aggregate Math™ (adding the ratings of all four channels together like a frantic grocery shopper counting loose change) or point to the 404,124 peak concurrent viewers streaming online, then Sigabo is the undisputed King of the Archipelago.

It is the only business on earth where you can come in second place on a chart and confidently release a graphic with a giant "THANK YOU FOR MAKING US NUMBER ONE!" banner.

"We demand accountability and transparency from our politicians, but expecting a TV network to admit it lost a timeslot is like expecting water to flow uphill."

In the high-stakes world of corporate ego, admitting you are "second place" is a hard pill to swallow.

To admit you "played second fiddle" is treated like a corporate felony. If a network executive were to ever say, "Hey guys, we fought hard, but they beat us by 1.7 tonight. Good job to them!" the universe might actually collapse.

Instead, they treat the audience to a masterclass in spin-doctoring.

If the ratings are low, they talk about "online engagement." If the online views are low, they talk about "rural household penetration." If everything is low, they release a statement about "trending worldwide on X."

Why Can’t We All Just Get Along (And Share the Spoils)?
The funniest part about this entire numbers war is that the gap isn't even a Grand Canyon—it's a crack in the pavement. The Master Cutter is doing great; Sigabo is pulling massive crowds.

Why is it so impossible to just say: "Both shows are wildly successful, one just had a tiny bit more luck on traditional television tonight"?

Because in the entertainment business, truth is a product, and propaganda is the marketing budget.

The audience understands the game, but as consumers who buy the very truth these networks claim to report, maybe we deserve a little less corporate math and a little more honesty.

But until then, let us enjoy the spectacle. Congratulations to The Master Cutter for being Number 1 in the ratings!

And congratulations to Sigabo for being Number 1 in the universe! Truly, we are blessed to live in a country where losing simply does not exist.

Then and Now: The Tale of Two Marcoletas

It is a scientific fact that the human body cannot perform a true 360-degree turn without ending up exactly where it started. 

But in the magical realm of Philippine politics, Senator Rodante Marcoleta has achieved a rhetorical miracle: a 360-degree political spin that somehow defies both geometry and gravity.

Let us take a trip down memory lane to witness the spectacular evolution of a man done in by his own favorite pastime: bragging.

Once upon a time, in a galaxy not so far away, Congressman Marcoleta possessed the supreme confidence of a man who believed he was utterly untouchable. 

Armed with a microphone and an irresistible urge to flex, he essentially went on air and declared to the nation:

"Yes, I accepted 75{ million} pesos from three very generous people! Look how influential I am! People just hand me sacks of cash because of my undeniable charm and legislative prowess!"

It was a beautiful, cinematic moment. He didn't just admit to it; he celebrated it. 

He wore that $75 million like a badge of honor. It was the ultimate "flex" to show the world that he wasn't just any ordinary public servant—he was a public servant who could attract multi-million peso "donations" like a magnet.

At that exact moment, lawyers across the country—including Atty. Levito Baligod—probably spat out their coffee, grabbed a copy of Republic Act 6713 (The Code of Conduct for Public Officials), and pointed frantically at the text that reads, in very clear, un-sentimental English: BOYS, IT IS ILLEGAL FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO ACCEPT GIFTS. ANY GIFTS. PERIOD.

Fast forward to the present. The legal system, slow as it is, finally caught up with the audio recording. Suddenly, the brag became a liability. The trophy turned into a smoking gun.

And what does the honorable lawmaker do? He activates the Ultimate Gaslight Protocol.

With a straight face and an Oscar-worthy look of persecution, he now proclaims: "This is a witch hunt! They are inventing cases against me! They just want to throw me in jail because they are jealous of my righteousness!"

Hold on. Pause the tape.

"They" invented it? By "they," does he mean the voice box inside his own throat? Because last time the public checked, the primary witness who pinned Marcoleta to the $75\text{ million}$ gift was... Rodante Marcoleta.

This isn't a conspiracy by the opposition, the media, or deep-state matrix operators. This is a classic case of Kadaldalan and Kayabangan (Extreme Loquacity and Hubris).

If you are going to violate RA 6713, the golden rule of being a corrupt politician is supposed to be: Keep your mouth shut. 

You don't stream your violations in high definition. You don't brag about the loot while standing next to the vault.

But Marcoleta chose the path of the storyteller. He wanted the applause. Now that the Ombudsman is holding the script he wrote, he’s trying to claim it’s a fictional novel.

So let us applaud the Senator for his contributions to Philippine law. He has proven that while the law says public officials cannot accept gifts, the universe ensures that if you brag about those gifts long enough, the law will eventually give you the ultimate gift: an iron-clad accountability checkmate.

Not to mention RA 3019 (The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), which treats multi-million peso "presents" to lawmakers less like a birthday celebration and more like a felony.

But back then, who cared about laws? He had the stage, he had the microphone, and he had the unshakeable urge to gloat and brag.

When Implementation of the Law is Twisting The Law.

Happy Tuesday from the People Power Monument, where thousands of deeply spiritual citizens have gathered for an unannounced, completely permit-free flash mob.

Why? To defend the ultimate martyr of modern legislative eloquence: Senator Rodante Marcoleta.

As commuter traffic slowly grinds to a halt all the way to Guadalupe, Iglesia Ni Cristo Spokesperson Edwil Zabala stepped to the microphone to deliver a statement that should officially be registered as a weapon of mass confusion.

"We are against twisting the law!" Brother Edwil proclaimed with a straight face. "We do not oppose the implementation of the law, but we oppose twisting it to cover up corruption!"

It is a beautiful, dazzling piece of rhetorical art. Let us dissect the pure, unadulterated satire of this historic announcement.

According to the church, filing a plunder case against Senator Marcoleta for accepting $75\text{ million}$ pesos from private individuals is "twisting the law."

Netizens, however, are pointing out a slight structural flaw in this logic: The law didn't twist; Marcoleta’s tongue did.

The prosecution's entire evidence folder doesn't consist of secret wiretaps or forged documents.

It consists of Marcoleta himself, standing in front of a microphone during the 2025 elections, bragging about how much money people were shoving into his pockets.

To claim the government is "twisting the law" by using a politician's own loud, voluntary confession against him is spectacular.

In this new legal system, reading the actual text of Republic Act 6713 (which strictly bans public officials from accepting any gifts) is considered an act of aggression.

If the law says "bawal," and you say "ginawa ko," prosecuting you isn't twisting the law—it's just basic reading comprehension.

The climax of Brother Edwil's statement deserves an award for Dramatic Irony:

"Even if they imprison Senator Marcoleta, we will not stop demanding justice for our fellow Filipinos who have been robbed!"

The internet immediately exploded into a collective facepalm.

As netizens quickly noted, the irony here is heavy enough to collapse the EDSA flyover.

If you want to find the people who have been robbing the Filipino people, you usually don't start by holding a massive rally to defend a guy facing a non-bailable plunder case for taking millions in illegal cash.

The strategy is breathtaking: We are going to fight the thieves by blocking the highway to protect a guy who admitted to taking the money, because clearly, the real crime here is the Ombudsman doing his job.

For years, the public was told that the bloc vote was just a private, spiritual matter.

But as thousands of members shut down major thoroughfares on a workday morning over a standard anti-graft case, netizens are officially filing for a change of status on social media:

Old Status: Religious Organization.

New Status: Highly disciplined, traffic-stopping political party with a really great choir.

When a religious group's official doctrine becomes "We support whatever Senator Marcoleta upholds," the separation of church and state doesn't just get blurred—it gets completely run over by a fleet of rally buses.

So, let us salute the spokespersons and the strategists. They have taught us a valuable lesson in modern democracy: No one is above the law unless they can mobilize 7,000 people to block the Tuesday morning rush hour.

To the daily wage earners who lost their pay today because they were stuck in traffic: Do not worry. The rallyists are out there demanding justice for the "robbed"—even if your time, your wages, and your sanity were the first things taken.

Rodante Marcoleta: Faith: The Ultimate Teflon Shield

 

In a vibrant democracy, we must always defend the sacred, constitutional right to assemble, protest, and completely paralyze traffic in the name of righteousness.

Every citizen, including the fiercely united members of the Iglesia Ni Cristo, deserves the freedom to take to the streets.

But as the old saying goes, freedom of speech is a two-way street—even if that street is currently blocked by thousands of rallyists.

While one group exercises its right to chant, the rest of us are exercising an equally exhausting right: the right to scratch our heads and ask incredibly awkward questions.

Let us take a moment to marvel at the latest masterclass in political theology involving Senator Rodante Marcoleta.

The Senator, in an admirable display of absolute transparency, publicly and voluntarily admitted to receiving substantial sums of money from private individuals while serving in the government.

No coercion, no truth serum, no hidden cameras. Just a man and his microphone, casually redefining public ethics.

Naturally, the response from his faithful backers wasn't, "Wait, isn't that a textbook violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act?"

Instead, it was: "Quick! To the rally mobiles!"

It is a breathtaking new legal doctrine: The Transubstantiation of Cold, Hard Cash.

Through the power of a divine endorsement, a legally questionable financial transaction is miraculously transformed into a "blessing," completely immune to the probing eyes of secular investigators.

We must applaud the sheer, inventive genius of the human mind. For centuries, humanity has struggled to find a way to escape the grueling reach of accountability.

We tried hiding in caves; we tried offshore bank accounts; we tried claiming we forgot.

But the ultimate shield was right in front of us all along: Organized Devotion.

Why bother hiring expensive defense lawyers when you can just invoke a higher power? The formula is beautifully simple:

1. Get elected.

2. Admit to something that would get any ordinary government clerk fired and jailed.

3. Have a massive religious organization declare that scrutinizing you is an attack on them.

In this system, allegiance to truth and the rule of law are treated like outdated fashion trends—quaint, but terribly impractical.

Why be sentimental about the Constitution when you can be sentimental about your favorite politician?

It must be a wonderful feeling to live in a reality where the size of your congregation determines the depth of your immunity. It gives a whole new meaning to "safety in numbers."

Unfortunately for the rest of society, the law is supposed to be notoriously unfeeling, blind, and profoundly lacking in religious fervor.

The blindfold on Lady Justice isn't there so she can ignore who is breaking the law; it's there so she doesn't care how many voters they can mobilize on a Tuesday afternoon.

So, let the rallies continue! Let the banners fly! But as the chants echo through the streets, remember the golden rule of modern democracy: No one is above the law—unless, of course, they have a really good choir backing them up.

When accountability is treated like an option rather than a rule, it makes you wonder: do you think these institutions genuinely believe in their own defense, or is it just a strategic flex of political muscle?

Satire: Did INC Have Permit?

Welcome to the newest episode of Philippine Legal Physics, where the laws of the land operate entirely on a slider scale based on how many buses you can lease before dawn.

Today, Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) experienced a complete reality breakdown.

Ordinary Filipinos know the drill: if you so much as stop your car on the EDSA yellow lane to pick up a text message, an MMDA officer will appear out of nowhere like an angry anime character to fine you.

If a small student group tries to hold a peaceful rally with cardboard signs, they are instantly met with anti-riot shields, water cannons, and a lecture on Batas Pambansa Blg. 880.

But on this spectacular Tuesday morning, 10,000 members of a highly disciplined organization magically bypassed the entire legal framework.

No coordination. No advisory. No permit. Just pure, unadulterated "surprise" choreography.

Let’s look at the satire, the reality, and the legal gymnastics of how this went down.

Is the Iglesia Ni Cristo a Special Group of People, and is the Government Afraid to touch them with a 10-foot pole?

To answer the question: Yes, and yes. (It is just how we feel.)

In the Philippines, there are two types of citizens subject to the Public Assembly Act:

Normal Citizens: Bound by the laws of physics, the local government, and the PNP. They need permits.

The Bloc-Voting Elite: Blessed with the divine right to create spontaneous gridlock.

When the MMDA and the Quezon City government woke up at 3:00 a.m. to find White Plains Avenue completely shut down and buses blocking the EDSA Carousel busway, their response wasn't a swift enforcement of the "No Permit, No Rally" policy.

Instead, they activated the highest tier of government strategy: Extremely Maximum Tolerance. Which is almost a cliché to us.

While daily wage earners were stranded in traffic, losing their daily pay, officials pleaded on the radio for the rallyists to "please respect other people's rights."

It turns out, when you possess a unified voting base that politicians rely on to get elected every three years, "illegal assembly" is reclassified as a "spontaneous festival of expression."

The government isn’t just afraid of them; they are actively auditioning for their future endorsement.

Can They Be Sued? Technically, yes. In a parallel universe where the law is blind and un-sentimental, the organizers and participants could face a mountain of legal trouble.
If a brave soul actually decided to file a case, they could do so on several distinct grounds:

1. -Legal Ground/Law - Batas Pambansa Blg. 880 (Public Assembly Act)

-What It Covers - Section 13 penalizes holding a public assembly without a written permit, carrying a penalty of imprisonment.

-The Irony - The law explicitly states the rally is illegal, but police spent the morning negotiating with organizers rather than serving citations.

2. -Legal Ground / Law - Article 351 of the Revised Penal Code (Grave Public Nuisance)

-What It Covers - Any act that annoys, offends the senses, obstructs, or interferes with the free passage of any public highway.

-The Irony - Shutting down the EDSA Ortigas Flyover on a Tuesday morning is the literal textbook definition of a public nuisance.

3. -Legal Ground/Law - Article 2176 of the Civil Code (Quasi-Delict / Torts)

-What It Covers - Suing for actual financial damages caused by negligence or intentional disruption.

-The Irony - Thousands of daily wage earners lost their hourly pay today because they couldn't get to work. Millions of pesos in economic productivity vanished in the Ortigas split.

4. - Legal Ground/ Law - Land Transportation Rules

-What It Covers - Illegal parking, blocking the EDSA busway, and obstruction of traffic by the transport buses.

-The Irony - One bus driver was almost arrested, leading to a scuffle where protesters chanted "We are one," effectively using collective unity as a shield against a traffic violation.

Ultimately, today's EDSA event successfully updated the legal precedent for protests in the Philippines. Moving forward, the rule of law has been simplified into a handy mathematical equation:

Severity of the Violation
Legal Liability = ------------------------------------
Number of Voters in Your Congregation

If the number on the bottom is large enough, the legal liability drops to zero, traffic laws become mere suggestions, and the highway becomes your stage.

So, to all the commuters who were late, docked of pay, or stranded in the heat: just remember, your constitutional right to travel is incredibly important—it’s just slightly less important than a politician's need to stay on the good side of a non-bailable plunder defendant’s support group.

(Just In Report: Nakakuha na raw ang INC ng permit.) The question remains ... di ba dapat sa simula pa lang ng rally nandiyan na ang permit ... hindi yong pinahabol na lang?)

The Supreme Irony of 2026: "Thanks for the Precedent, Dad!

When the Vice President openly, colorfully, and repeatedly hints at existential termination clauses for President Bongbong Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez, they reach for the most sacred, pristine constitutional shield available: Freedom of Speech.

"It’s just hyperbole! It’s political discourse! It’s an expression of pure frustration!"

It is a beautiful, inspiring dedication to democratic liberties—provided you fully implement a localized memory wipe of everything that happened between 2016 and 2022.

Unfortunately for the VP’s defense team, the concept of legal consistency has entered the chat, and her "Free Speech Defense" is currently collapsing faster than a poorly built flood-control project.

To fully appreciate the breathtaking grandeur of the current double standard, we must hop into our legal time machine and revisit the peak pandemic era of May 2020.

Back then, under the administration of former President Rodrigo Duterte, the state’s definition of "online hyperbole" was slightly less... accommodating.

Let us review the historical receipts of ordinary citizens who attempted to use the "it’s just an internet joke" defense:

1. The Content Creator - Ronnel Mas

-Socio-Economic Status - 25-year-old teacher (Zambales)

-The Online Post - Joked on Twitter that he would give a ₱50 million reward to anyone who could assassinate the President.

-Immediate State Response - Immediately arrested by the NBI without a warrant and slapped with "inciting to sedition."

2. The Content Creator - Ronald Quiboyen

-The Socio-Economic Status - 40-year-old Construction Worker (Aklan)

-The Online Post - Commented on Facebook that he would "double the reward" offered by Ronnel Mas.

-Immediate State Response - Tracked down by local police and swiftly jailed under the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

3. The Content Creator - Maria Ceron

-The Socio-Economic Status - 26-year-old Citizen (Cebu)

-The Online Post - Frustrated by lockdowns, posted a fictional ₱75 million hit job offer against the Chief Executive.

-Immediate State Response - Immediately locked up by authorities as an existential threat to national security.

The math here is spectacular. In 2020, a public school teacher who clearly did not have fifty pesos in his wallet—let alone fifty million—was treated like a global cartel leader for a tweet.

But in 2026, the ironic double standard comes to form when the second-highest official of the land uses her actual, physical microphone to broadcast threats; it is suddenly rebranded and passed on as a "sacred exercise of democratic expression."

This brings us to the ultimate chef's-kiss plot twist of the current NBI investigation. As the bureau reviews the verified videos of the Vice President's statements, they aren't looking at American constitutional law or European human rights treatises.

[ THE LEGAL LOOPBACK ANOMALY ]

* THE 2020 STANDARD: The Duterte administration establishes a fierce legal precedent: Online threats against top state officials are serious, non-bailable state crimes, not jokes.

* THE 2026 REALITY: The NBI officially utilizes the 2020 Ronnel Mas case to dismantle Sara Duterte's "free speech" argument.

* THE RESULT: The family's historical iron fist has boomeranged officially into their faces.

In the world of public morals and legal ethics, there is a beautiful doctrine called Estoppel. (It is a legal principle that bars VP Sara from arguing a fact or claiming a right that contradicts PRRD's previous actions, statements that online jokes and threats are indeed a kiss of death - jail time is waving.

It prevents them from changing their story to the detriment of others who relied on their original claim. In simple terms, it is a legal safeguard against unfairness, often summarized as "it's a done deal.

If PRRD said that threatening a President is a serious non-bailable crime ... it cannot be undone or changed.

In layman's terms: You cannot spend six years building a legal machine designed to lock up poor people for hyperbole and freedom of expression, and then act deeply offended when that exact same standard turns its gears toward your own family.

The Duterte family didn’t just break the "free speech defense" for online threats—they personally built the prison cell for it back in 2020.

If an ordinary construction worker or teacher uses hyperbole or labis na pananalita, the law is a sword to crush them instantly. If a powerful official with massive political machinery does it, the law magically transforms into a shield protecting them from accountability.

This is dynamic hypocrisy at its absolute finest. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the entire machinery of the Duterte camp doesn't actually care about the constitutional rights of the Filipino people.

If they genuinely believed in Freedom of Speech, they wouldn't have allowed ordinary workers to rot behind bars for pandemic-induced social media rants.

The Constitution is being treated like a designer jacket—only worn when it looks fashionable for your specific legal crisis.

Someone needs to gently whisper a fundamental truth into the ears of the VP's legal defense team: Freedom of Speech was designed as a right for the powerless to speak truth to power, not as an executive privilege for the powerful to put out verbal hit contracts without legal consequences.

You cannot spend years treating the law as a personal playground, mocking the judicial process, and executing selective justice on the poor, only to cry "political persecution" the moment the exact same rulebook applies to you.

Try as you might to rebrand grave threats as a constitutional luxury, the receipts of May 2020 remain firmly printed. The law might have a velvet glove for the powerful, but the paper trail doesn't li

Satire: The DDS Guide to Cognitive Blindness

The 2026 academic year has brought us a brand-new, highly educational curriculum, and former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV is acting as the guest lecturer.

Trillanes recently pointed a giant, unmissable finger directly at the patriarch of Davao, Rodrigo "Digong" Duterte, identifying him as the primary architect behind the current culture of violence exploding inside Philippine classrooms.

Naturally, the hardcore DDS fanatics are in a state of absolute, total bewilderment.

They are scratching their heads, staring at the ceiling, and looking at the classroom shooting in Tacloban with the blank expression of a student facing a quantum physics exam.

“How did this happen? Why are the youth like this? It must be the Pangilinan Law! It must be the lack of mandatory ROTC!”

It is a truly spectacular level of cognitive immunity. To help our beautifully unbothered fanatic friends connect the dots, let us look at the "Leading by Example" framework that our children have absorbed over the past ten years.

For an entire decade, children didn't grow up in a moral vacuum; they grew up watching the nightly news. And what was the premier evening programming broadcast straight from the highest podium of the land?

[ THE AUDIOVISUAL TEXTBOOK OF THE LAST DECADE ]

* LESSON 1: CIVIC DISCOURSE "P@t@ng In@ mo, Pope! P@t@ng In@ mo, obispo! Ang Diyos niyo ay istupido!" (Result: Children learn that basic respect for spiritual and institutional authority is an outdated concept for losers.)

* LESSON 2: CONFLICT RESOLUTION "Kill them. Shoot them dead. I will congratulate you if you drop them in the bay." (Result: Children learn that if someone inconveniences or angers you, tactical elimination is proof of pure, unadulterated toughness.)

* LESSON 3: GENDER SENSITIVITY *Insert high-profile, nationally televised rape joke followed by raucous applause from a stadium full of adults.* (Result: Children learn that human dignity is just a punchline for the powerful.)

The absolute comedy of the DDS fanatic is their ability to watch a child pull a police-issued firearm out of a backpack and act like the motivation came out of nowhere.

-The National Atmosphere (2016–2022) - Thousands of bodies drop in a bloody, highly celebrated drug war where children are labeled "collateral damage."
-The 2026 Comment Section Analysis - "Grabe na talaga ang kabataan ngayon, kulang sa takot sa Diyos at disiplina!"

-The National Atmosphere (2016–2022 - The President proudly boasted on television about shooting a fellow student on a university campus in 1972.
-The 2026 Comment Section Analysis - "Bakit naman may baril sa eskwelahan? Siguro kasalanan ito ng DepEd curriculum at ng mga Dilawan!"

-The National Atmosphere (2016–2022) - Cruelty is normalized, memed, shared, and cheered by millions of adult followers online. -The 2026 Comment Section Analysis - "Sana ibalik ang bitay para sa mga 14-year-old na 'yan!"\

-The Behavioral Science Equation: You cannot spend a decade feeding a generation a steady diet of political bloodlust, teaching them that violence is the ultimate expression of power, and then act surprised when they finally start speaking the exact language you taught them.

The logic of the fanatic is simple: when Duterte said "kill," it was a masterful, high-level geopolitical strategy that required a brilliant mind to understand.

But when a 14-year-old child actually takes that lesson to heart and decides to eliminate an enemy in a classroom, suddenly it’s an isolated incident caused by a single senator's rehabilitation statute.

Trillanes isn't dropping a radical conspiracy theory here; he’s just pointing out basic atmospheric science.

When leaders talk like executioners and crowds applaud, the children are always the ones sitting in the front row, listening closely.

They absorbed the lesson perfectly, graduated with flying colors, and brought the final exam right into the classroom.

So, to our dear, bewildered DDS fanatics: put down the Facebook comment templates and stop looking for alternative explanations.

The culture of violence isn't a mystery. You cheered for it, you voted for it, you memed it into reality, and now you’re looking at the harvest.