Street Vendors and the Forgotten Voices of the Marginalized: A Reflection on Recent Clearing Operations

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

The recent video of an MMDA clearing operation, showing a woman and her children in tears as their livelihood was destroyed, has stirred intense conversations about the government's approach to urban poverty and the struggles faced by marginalized communities. While the situation of informal settlers and street vendors is a complex issue bound by laws, regulations, and city planning strategies, this heartbreaking scene sheds light on a bigger and more pressing problem: the lack of effective, compassionate social mechanisms that genuinely protect the welfare of the poor.

The Harsh Reality of Street Vendors

Street vending is not just a business for many—it’s survival. For those with no access to formal employment or financial resources, a cart on the street can be their only source of income, their family’s home, and their livelihood. In many urban areas, the government’s repeated clearing operations, carried out by agencies like the MMDA, often seem to operate in a vacuum, with no comprehensive plan to support these people once their livelihood is taken away. It’s not just about dismantling carts; it’s about dismantling lives.

The video shows a woman, likely in her 40s, standing helplessly as government workers disassemble her cart, the only thing that might have kept her family afloat. The painful expression on her face, the desperation in her eyes, is a stark reminder of how the poor are often treated as disposable. In the eyes of the authorities, she is just another violator of the law, disregarded and demonized for trying to survive. The sight of the men destroying her cart, some even smiling, has led many to question: Where will she and her children go now? What alternatives are being provided?

The Illusion of Housing Solutions

Some of the government’s response to this issue is the provision of housing through agencies like the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). However, reports from people who have been relocated to these housing units tell a very different story. One interview featured a woman describing the facilities where people are carted off—dilapidated buildings inhabited by the mentally ill, violent individuals, and those living in appalling conditions. She explained that while these shelters were officially labeled as "housing," they were in fact places where survival, safety, and mental well-being were constantly at risk.

These facilities are far from the safety net the government envisions. The environment described sounds more like a nightmare—a stark contrast to the relative safety and familiarity of the street where many street vendors call home. For families, especially those with children, the chaotic, unsafe, and psychologically harmful nature of these shelters only compounds the despair of displacement. Moreover, without meaningful access to employment, healthcare, or other vital services, the cycle of poverty continues, leaving many to return to the streets.

The Problem with “Silo” Solutions

One of the major criticisms of the government’s approach to poverty alleviation is the tendency to apply "silo" solutions rather than holistic strategies. Shelters and relocation programs are often implemented without considering the broader context of people's lives. What good is a house if there are no job opportunities nearby? What use is relocation if it further isolates people from necessary public services, such as education, healthcare, or access to transportation?

Community leaders from organizations like ATD Fourth World Philippines have voiced concerns about this. Many relocated individuals find themselves in places with limited job opportunities, poor infrastructure, and no real means of integrating into society. They are given patches instead of solutions, resulting in many returning to the streets—sometimes worse off than before.

This disjointed approach has led to frustration and anger. Many displaced families do not just want shelter; they want security, employment, dignity, and a sense of belonging. Until these concerns are addressed, the cycle of poverty will continue, and street vendors will remain at the mercy of clearing operations that leave them without hope.

The Political Divide: Understanding the Complexity

The recent debate about the plight of the poor has also been shaped by the growing divide between different political factions. The criticisms of elitism within certain political groups, particularly those associated with the "kakampink" movement, reflect the reality that the poor are often seen as a vote bank to be educated, but not necessarily cared for. This elitist mentality fails to acknowledge that many from impoverished sectors are well aware of political issues but choose to believe in certain leaders, either because of a lack of viable alternatives or because they see these figures as symbols of hope, however flawed.

However, it’s not just political elites who bear responsibility. There is also a need to examine the wider societal attitudes toward poverty. The tendency to demonize the poor and their struggles is deeply ingrained in our culture, where the burden of guilt is often placed on those who are already suffering. The media, political narratives, and even everyday conversations often fail to recognize the complexity of poverty and instead focus on blaming the poor for their situation.

A Call for Holistic Change

What is clear is that the plight of the poor cannot be solved with quick fixes or surface-level solutions. What is needed is a deeper, more holistic approach—one that takes into account the multi-dimensional nature of poverty and addresses the root causes. From providing accessible healthcare and education to ensuring that jobs and economic opportunities are available, the government must shift its focus from punitive measures to policies that promote long-term empowerment.

There is also a need for greater public empathy and understanding. While government interventions are necessary, it’s equally important that communities and individuals stand in solidarity with those who are struggling. Instead of further stigmatizing the poor, we must start seeing them for who they are: individuals fighting for a better life in an environment that often seems stacked against them.

As for the woman in the video, she represents thousands of others who are caught in the same cycle. Until the government and society recognize the humanity behind the street vendor, and until policies are put in place that address both the immediate needs and long-term solutions, the cycle of poverty and disenfranchisement will continue.

In the end, it is not the need to survive that should be demonized—it’s the system that makes survival so difficult.

Billions Spent on Political Ads: Senators Imee Marcos and Camille Villar Preparing for the 2025 Elections

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

Although the official campaign period for the 2025 elections has not yet started, a startling revelation has surfaced regarding the spending of some candidates. According to a report by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), two senatorial candidates have already spent over P1 billion on advertisement spots on television and radio, a move that has sparked discussions about how these expenditures may reinforce political dynasties and the influence of media in the upcoming elections.

Millions Already Allocated for Political Ads

Based on data obtained by PCIJ from Nielsen Ad Intel, it is estimated that reelectionist Senator Imee Marcos and Las Piñas Representative Camille Villar have already spent over a billion pesos on their political ads, even before they filed their candidacies.

This was highlighted in a report which noted that this expenditure accounts for half of the total P4.1 billion spent by all candidates on political ads from January to September, before the filing of their Certificate of Candidacy (COC).

According to PCIJ, this estimate is based on the rate cards released by media companies, but it does not include the costs of producing these advertisements. This means the total expenditure for candidates could be much higher, especially as they seek to extend their reach and exposure to the public.

The Impact of Massive Spending on Campaigns

It is important to highlight the significance of such spending because it impacts the upcoming elections in a big way. One of the main issues that has emerged from this spending is the unequal access candidates have to funds and media, which may give an unfair advantage to wealthier politicians.

Looking at the overall spending, questions have arisen about how smaller candidates, who do not have large budgets for advertisements, will be able to compete with the likes of Marcos and Villar. The presence of big names and substantial media budgets can potentially exert a great deal of influence on voters, which could result in inequality when it comes to addressing the real needs and platforms of candidates.

The Influence of Political Ads in the 2025 Elections

Political ad spending is not just about media and exposure. Candidates with large campaign budgets invest in ad campaigns to gain support for their candidacies. However, critics continue to ask how much media plays a role in campaigns and how this affects the quality of political discourse in the country.

As the costs of political ads have risen in recent years, the risk emerges that media exposure may become a dominant factor in campaigns, rather than focusing on the real issues and solutions proposed by candidates for the welfare of the people. According to some experts, the increasing expenditure on political advertisements highlights the growing gap between those who can afford to spend and those who cannot, reinforcing the cycle of political dynasties in the country.

Looking Ahead to the 2025 Election Campaign

Despite the high spending, it is still uncertain what the impact of this will be on the 2025 elections. Experts suggest that while large expenditures provide public visibility, they do not necessarily guarantee electoral success. Issues of transparency, credibility, and genuine concern for the people will remain important factors in voter decision-making.

Therefore, the issue of spending on political ads is one that not only draws attention to individual candidates but also to the system and practices in our elections. While politicians fight for their share of media attention and voter support, it also presents an opportunity for the public to ask: where is our politics headed?

For the citizens, it is crucial to ensure that the upcoming elections are not solely based on spending but on the true intentions and services that candidates offer for the benefit of the nation.

Understanding the Magic of Duterte’s 2016 Message: A Deep Dive into Political Strategy and Relevance

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

The 2016 Philippine Presidential election stands as a testament to how a well-timed message, relevant branding, and a genuine connection to the people can propel a candidate from relative obscurity to overwhelming victory. When Rodrigo Duterte clinched the presidency with a resounding 31 million votes against Leni Robredo’s 15 million, it wasn’t just about who had the most polished credentials or the most eloquent speeches—it was about understanding the pulse of the nation and providing a solution to its deepest anxieties. Here, we’ll explore how Duterte’s campaign team captured this elusive quality of relevance, a lesson that future candidates must learn if they wish to succeed.

The Right Message at the Right Time

One of the cardinal sins in politics is misreading the national mood, and that’s precisely what happened to Leni Robredo during the 2016 campaign. While Robredo’s message of change resonated with some, the prevailing sentiment among the majority of Filipinos was the desire for continuity. Under the leadership of President Benigno Aquino III, the country had seen economic growth, but it was also rife with issues that left people yearning for a dramatic shift—crime, drugs, corruption, and an ineffective response to them.

Duterte’s campaign, on the other hand, tapped into this widespread frustration and made his message clear: “Change is coming.” This wasn’t just a catchphrase. It was an unequivocal statement that resonated deeply with voters who felt that the status quo had failed them. Duterte didn’t just promise change; he embodied it in his tough persona and direct approach. By the end of the campaign, for every Leni vote, there were two for Duterte. His 31 million votes were a clear signal that the people wanted something different from what Aquino’s administration had offered, and Duterte’s “change” was precisely what they were looking for.

Brand Identity and Relevance: The Power of “Tapang at Malasakit”

A key element of Duterte’s success was his brand identity, which perfectly aligned with the national mood. Duterte was a tough-talking mayor from Davao City, known for his no-nonsense approach to law enforcement. His success in transforming Davao from a crime-ridden city into one of the safest in the world was central to his campaign. It wasn’t just about the facts; it was about the image and narrative his campaign built around him. His team effectively branded him as the “punisher,” a figure who was unafraid to take on drug lords, criminals, and corrupt public servants.

While Mar Roxas boasted his Ivy League credentials from Wharton, and Grace Poe relied on her eloquence, these qualities were irrelevant in the face of the nation’s deeper issues. The people didn’t want a “matalino” candidate. They needed someone who would act—someone who could clean up the streets, restore order, and put an end to the rampant crime and drugs plaguing the country. The electorate wasn’t looking for intelligence on paper; they wanted action. And Duterte, with his tough persona, delivered exactly that.

Courage and Compassion: Duterte’s “Tapang at Malasakit”

What set Duterte apart from other candidates wasn’t just his fierce determination to combat crime, but his deep sense of empathy. He wasn’t just a punisher; he was a protector, a man with malasakit (care) for his people. Duterte’s campaign showcased his tough but compassionate side. From his emotional moments, such as crying over the deaths of his parents or vowing to protect children with cancer, to his actions—such as driving a cab at night to ensure the safety of Dabawenyos—his personality resonated with ordinary Filipinos. These acts of kindness, paired with his no-nonsense rhetoric, portrayed him as a leader who cared about the people and had the courage to fight for them.

During his campaign, Duterte even addressed his perceived weaknesses head-on. When questioned about his academic achievements, he openly admitted that he wasn’t the best student, but promised that he would appoint the “best and brightest” to his cabinet. This move was a brilliant strategy to neutralize attacks on his intellectual capabilities, showcasing his authenticity and honesty—qualities that resonated strongly with voters.

The Power of Storytelling

Beyond the strategies and campaign promises, Duterte’s ability to tell compelling stories was crucial to his success. Storytelling is a powerful tool in politics because it allows people to make sense of complex issues in relatable ways. Duterte was a master storyteller. His speeches, often spontaneous and raw, were filled with vivid imagery that painted a clear picture of the challenges Filipinos faced. His tale of the struggles of OFWs, for example, struck a deep chord with the audience. He spoke of the pain and sacrifice of Filipina domestic workers and how their remittances were being targeted by drug pushers, turning innocent children into addicts.

This wasn’t just political rhetoric; it was real, it was raw, and it made people feel heard. As Duterte spoke, the room went silent, and it wasn’t just the elite in that Sofitel ballroom who felt the impact. The same message resonated with millions across the country—especially among the ten million Filipinos in the diaspora. Duterte’s ability to connect emotionally through storytelling was an integral part of his campaign’s success.

The Takeaway for Future Candidates

Duterte’s victory in 2016 offers valuable lessons for future political campaigns. First and foremost, it highlights the importance of being relevant—not just in terms of policies, but in understanding the national mood and providing a message that aligns with it. Candidates must ask themselves: Does the time call for continuity, or does it call for change? Are they addressing the issues that matter most to the people, or are they simply preaching a message that fails to resonate?

Second, a candidate’s brand identity and personal traits matter. In Duterte’s case, his toughness, his reputation for action, and his compassion all came together to form a brand that was both authentic and compelling. In the end, his message was clear: he was a man of action with a heart for the people, and that’s what Filipinos needed.

Lastly, storytelling remains a powerful tool in politics. A candidate’s ability to craft stories that resonate emotionally with voters can make all the difference. Duterte was able to capture the hearts and minds of Filipinos not just through policy, but through his narrative of a better, safer, and more just Philippines.

As we look ahead to future elections, it’s clear that relevance, authenticity, and emotional connection will continue to be the driving forces in successful campaigns. Candidates who fail to understand this may find themselves on a long and difficult road, as Leni Robredo did in 2016. But those who can tap into the nation’s pulse, understand its needs, and deliver a message that resonates, will find themselves in a much stronger position.

In politics, the message is everything. And in 2016, Duterte understood it better than anyone else. His legendary status, earned through his authentic message and connection to the people, remains a defining moment in Philippine political history. As we move forward, future candidates must remember: to win, your message must be relevant, authentic, and deeply connected to the hearts of the people.