Time and again, in practically all media outlets, contrary or according to law, camouflaged political campaigns in one form or another are openly heard, printed and/or displayed – without the least remorse on the part of the candidates but with big election costs spent. As a matter of principle, it can be said with rhyme and reason that the said self-selling electoral propaganda only attract and possibly even convince but the gullible. The thinking electorate are by and large amused by it – at most. Meantime, the world of media is raking in the profits. And why not?
Among the almost innumerable political advertisements in favor of this and that candidate for election, there is one that merits attention on account of its inherent self-contradiction. Here: There is the clear and loud cry against the vice of drugs – with however the also subliminal campaign for the vice of gambling by the mere figure of the candidate. It can be said that the otherwise meritorious anti-drug campaign slogan is neutralized if not actually ridiculed by a well known pro-gambling promotion. This particular interesting election campaign phenomenon is in effect self-defeating. To be against one vice but in favor of another vice is patently unacceptable among decent families, in upright communities, and in sober society as a whole.
The election slogan says something like this: If drug is done away with thoroughly, the Filipinos are thereby rendered free. There is a good amount of truth in this thought pattern. This otherwise ethically sound proposition is however seriously undermined whereas the proponent himself is well known for the promotion of gambling. Expressly condemning one vice while categorically promoting another vice, does not make sense. To say the least, it is a bare self-contradiction.
The standard song that there is a whale of a difference between legal and illegal gambling – unlike prohibited drugs that are all illegal – finds its futility on the following premises:
One, legalizing the vice of gambling does not make this a virtue. Two, legalizing the vice of gambling is legalizing as well a cruel addiction with its gross personal and serious family liability. Three, legalizing the vice of gambling is sanctioning deceit and corruption usually associated with gambling addiction.
In other words, an election campaign against drugs would be more credible and honorable were the campaigner not known for the promotion of gambling all over the Country – with the proud claim and campaign too that the national gambling institution is going international. It is definitely not enough that local gamblers are earnestly enticed to lust for easy money. It has even become convenient if not necessary, to avidly invite foreign gamblers to foment their addiction – usually together with money laundering. Wherefore, it is a given that drug intake is taboo. At the same time: “Kapag sugal ay nawala, and Pilipinong and pinagpala”.
December 23, 2009