THEY LINED UP under the scorching sun, armed with nothing but their kodigos and a quiet hope for change. Yet, even before the ink could dry on their ballots, blame had already been cast—not on the powerful, but on those disillusioned by the very system meant to empower them.
The 2025 Philippine midterm election saw a troubling resurgence of the “bobotante” (a portmanteau of “bobo” and “botante”) narrative of blaming the marginalized for supposedly “ignorant” choices leading to undesirable results. This reasoning not only undermines their capacity to make decisions reflective of their lived experiences, but it also overlooks some of the longstanding political pathologies that may have influenced their vote.
We can see this bobotante culture come into play especially during the 2022 presidential elections. With the nation split between Kakampinks and Marcos loyalists, each side sought to delegitimize the other—often framing Kakampinks as rational middle-class voters and Marcos supporters as ignorant, reinforcing classist and divisive rhetoric.
“They lined up under the scorching sun, armed with nothing but their kodigos and a quiet hope for change. Yet, even before the ink could dry on their ballots, blame had already been cast—not on the powerful, but on those disillusioned by the very system meant to empower them.”
The same can be said of this year’s elections, with most newly elected senators either linked to political dynasties or embroiled in controversies and questionable actions, giving rise to commentators and citizens using the ordinary people as scapegoats to dodge accountability.
However, there is a fundamental flaw in such a mindset, as to blame the masses is to absolve and perpetuate elite rule. Have we forgotten that it is the same culture of patronage, disinformation, and personality politics cultivated by those in power that kept us, the people, in check?
Those who continue with the bobotante label fail to recognize how not all voters operate within idealistic democratic expectations. Unfortunately, good governance and democratic rhetoric pale in comparison to material needs—especially for the average Juan and Juana who are only thinking about what food to put on the table.
Applying Karl Marx’s historical materialism, it is evident that voters’ economic and social conditions influence their ideas, including political behavior. What they do and have control over are shaped by pre-existing societal structures and their ordinary, day-to-day experiences.
It is safe to assume that there is no such thing as an ignorant or uninformed vote at all.
Instead of shifting the blame to the marginalized for not “voting right,” we must channel our anger and frustration towards those in power for creating an education system that leaves little room for civic engagement or critical thinking. And perhaps, we must learn to deal with our own biases, for it is easy to mock those who vote differently when we conveniently ignore the reason why they vote the way they do.
The bobotante narrative antagonizes and alienates the marginalized by implying that their votes are less valid than the so-called “rational” choices of the self-proclaimed enlightened. In doing so, it effectively excludes them from the promise of genuine participatory democracy.
It is only when we abandon these elitist ideals can we confront the more uncomfortable and necessary task of dismantling the very system that produces these outcomes.
Until then, in the imperfect exercise of democracy, we turn to the disillusioned voters who, despite the scorching sun and a failed system, still showed up—to tell us, in no uncertain terms, what kind of nation they demand.
Email me at thebedan_associateeditor@sanbeda.edu.ph