Is it OK to Silence Mocha Uson?

Mocha Uson, Sass Rogando Sasot, and the Petition

All rights Reserved

Ahhh... now I have to deal with these two blogs, and others like it.¹ YUCK!

They are like the politically correct community. Instead of controlling how you interact with one another, these blogs sprout support materials for a president that is DESTROYING THE REPUBLIC!

First off, it is ok to support a CAREER politician. Be that as it may, you also have the responsibility to call him out whenever he does or says something that endangers OUR freedoms, and interests.

This duty to check the government, especially the politician you voted into office, springs from our right to suffrage, and free expression. We use these rights to control our government. So, if you do not check the government, then government will eat you alive! Fair right?

BUT... these blogs do not seem to care about checking #DU30. As a matter of fact, these blogs seem to be piggybacking on his fame to propel their own agendas, whatever that may be. Unfortunately, their acts unintentionally created a bunch of zombies, or those who believe in their materials regardless of its accuracy or fairness.

So when Sass wrote an article titled "Methaphysical Human Rights vs Real Human rights",² people read, liked, and shared that even though that piece is conceptually WRONG AND DANGEROUS because it tells people that human rights is conditional! Meanwhile, Mocha needs to fact check, and reveal her sources. YET, the zombies take her word as FACT, even when she is "satiring" the shitte out of a certain topic!

Imagine the power these blogs hold, and they may be using it in such a way that is compromising the very basis of the Replubic, or at the very least creating zombies who do not know how to argue and debate, fact check, or research.³

NOW you know why I am disgusted by these blogs.  I can tolerate a propaganda machine but these... these can be way out there irresponsible!

Ok, let's move on to the petition that is trying to bring the Mocha blog down.

The Sass blog shared statistics that shows the Mocha blog having a higher interaction rate than those of the media outlets. SO, THANK YOU Sass for giving me the ammo I need to defend the petition!

YES, the petition is a valid proposal because such a popular blog can be VERY dangerous in the hands of the Mocha Admins. They could easily spew materials that might cause people to lose faith in a certain entity, or slander an individual in the name of blogging! So, that is the pro-petition side of this opinion piece.

I understand the people's concern over the Mocha blog.  But, if you are the type that gets their news from blogs like these, then you deserve to be misled and controlled like a freaking puppet! So long as the blogs do not violate our laws, and I haven't done my research if they have, they should be left to the auto-correct function of free expression, that is to get "murdered" by those who know better.

Also, if they do cause a bank run, or a riot then we could easily send their glutes to jail, or bankrupt them to kingdom come.  Now, that is satire gold right there!

1Or are they satire blogs?

2

3Or maybe they are too lazy and trusting of their "source" and just spew them as if it is some magic wand!

The Tyrant

The Tyrant

All rights reserved

Earlier I wrote the piece "The Basis of the Republic", which explains why we created government. In a nutshell, we, as individuals, allowed those governing to govern us so long as they protect and advance our inalienable human rights.

The same basis for the creation of government also limit its powers, that the government cannot arbitrarily restrict an individual's human rights unless there is a constitutionally sound law, or as stated in the constitution. Once such a law is enacted and enters into effect, or once an amendment or revision of the constitution is ratified, then everyone, including the government, is bound to follow it.¹

This is the concept of the rule of law, a mechanism, a guarantee really, designed to protect the individual from the acts of other individuals, and from the strong hand of the government.

Pretty neat, eh?

Before we go further, do note that our freedoms exist because we, as a people, agree that each man is born free and equal to one another. Remove that tiny linchpin and Republic dies, taking freedom with it.

Now you know why I am writing this piece.

The Philippines is in an era of Lex Agraria, a hundred years before the fall of Rome. The era exemplifies how a democratic government spirals towards anarchy, that is when all the checks and balances against the "mob" has either failed or has been removed in the name of convinience.

We see public officials zelously pander the ideology that the people is collectively safer, or the common good is better promoted, if the government cut certain corners ala the Gracuss Brothers, and those who opposed them.

Say, heavily armed agents of the government would, out of the blue, visit the house of a certain individual that is on an arbitrary list, then make him sign a paper that states "I will not violate the law", or something to that effect, and present him as a self-confessed criminal afterwards.

Another example is when a public officer tried to incite the people to burn down the homes of a certain group of people on his mere say so.

Yeah, that kind of cutting corners!

I love to call these public officials for what they really are, tyrants.

Naturally, a tyrant, or tyrants, should NEVER occupy a public office for they erode the very basis of the Republic. The president is duty bound to IMMEDIATELY and publicly denounce such tyranical acts, and to PROMPTLY replace the public officer in question with a more level headed individual. Otherwise, the public is justified in entertaining the idea that he endorses the ideology, or the orders came from him.

A tyrant is always a tyrant no matter how he comes to power. Even if he got elected to office on the platform of tyranny, or if he got appointed because he is the Egor of the elected tyrant.

Fortunately, we can collectively keep a tyrant in check by calling him out, or to resist his oppressive and unlawful acts. Worse comes to worst, we will depose him either through legal or extra legal means.

But tyrants are common and the Republic can usually survive them. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for popular fascism.

Although fascism does not have a universal definition, we can safely assume that fascists abhor freedom and equality, like a tyrant. A public official becomes a fascist once he panders the idea that the individual's life and safety depends on adopting a policy of dehumanizing a group of individuals, say by denying them of human rights, and he uses the popular support for his reign and the government to implement the policy.

Obviously, we can deal with a LONE fascist in public office. But once fascism takes hold of a significant portion of the population, say seventeen percent,² then we have a candle inside the powder room.³ One wrong move and boom, Rome falls.

Thus, the reason why we are duty bound to always be vigilant against creeping tyranny and facism. We owe it to ourselves, and for the generations to come.⁴

1See Black's Law Dictionary (9th Edtion), Bryan A. Garner, p. 1448

2Assuming a population of 90 million.

3or a ticking time bomb.

4Remember, the Nazis, at the height of their power, were but a very small portion of the German population. Can you imagine, what seventeen percent can do?