Institutions fail to teach lessons of martial law
INQUIRER.net interviewed two respected political analysts and academicians Ramon Casiple and Clarita Carlos to understand the results of the survey conducted among students, street vendors and workers two weeks before the commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the martial law declaration.
MANILA, Philippines—When people say that life was better during martial law than today and that Marcos was right in imposing authoritarian rule, it suggests that something is shockingly wrong with the country’s key institutions, political analysts told INQUIRER.net.
They say the academe, media and the government have all failed to educate the public well about the evils of military dictatorship.
INQUIRER.net interviewed two respected political analysts and academicians Ramon Casiple and Clarita Carlos to understand the results of the survey conducted among students, street vendors and workers two weeks before the commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the martial law declaration.
Why do you think the people today, especially students, have little or no knowledge of martial law?
Ramon Casiple: Unang-una, talagang ipinanganak sila after martial law. That’s a given. Pero yung malaki ritong kasalanan, yung pagtuturo sa ating formal
education system kaugnay ng martial law period. Nakabase ito sa mga libro na either napaka bland nung handling ng panahon…Yung nakikita mo lang usually sa description nila, yung mga bagong infrastructures na itinayo, yung CCP. Hindi yung social impact ng martial law.
(First and foremost, they were born after martial law. That’s a given. But the big mistake here is the teaching in our formal education system about martial law.
Ramon Casiple and Clarita Carlos INQUIRER.net photo
The text books are bland. What you can usually see is the description of new infrastructures built during that time, like the Cultural Center of the Philippines not the social impact of martial law.)
Before martial law kasi or before Marcos in 1965, isa tayo sa mga better off economies sa buong Asia. By the time nag-end ang martial law, nasa bottom na tayo. Ang tagal mag-recover, in fact nagrere-rekober pa rin tayo hanggang ngayon. So yung mga ganun, hindi mo makikita kasi intangible yun e. Ang nakikita ng mga bata ngayon, mas mahirap ang buhay, mas magulo.
(Before martial law or before Marcos in 1965, we were one of the better off economies in the entire Asia. By the time martial law ended, we hit the bottom. It took us years to recover. In fact, we’re still recovering until now. You don’t see those things like that because they are intangible. What the young people see now is the hardship – that we are more chaotic now.)
May similar na kakulangan ang media kasi very strong ang impact ng media sa ating kabataan. Ni hindi nila dini-discuss
ang martial law, only if there’s a celebration halimbawa, anniversary ng people power. But then wala naman in depth discussion.
(The media has its shortcomings, too. They have a very strong impact on the youth, but news organizations did not fully discuss martial law, only a token mention if there’s a celebration like people power anniversary. But then, there is no in-depth discussion.)
Clarita Carlos: Not surprising [people have little or no knowledge of martial law because] that’s a whole new generation after martial law. If you ask me about Japanese occupation, of course I will not have memory of something which I did not experience…And that’s 40 years ago.
But you know, in Philippine history, in Philippine government, depende sa teacher kung pahapyaw lang nyang iti-treat yun e…
(It depends on the teacher if he or she would just treat the topic in passing).
There’s a variety of exposure to this particular topic.
Should there be a need to remember martial law each year?
Carlos: But why it is important that one should remember this part of history? What about the other part of our history, equally important if not more important? In fact that you’re zeroing in on that particular part of our history, already tells you something that created a selection.
Selective yung memory mo kung ano yung tatanungin mo sa mga bata. Bakit hindi mo tatanungin yung Japanese
occupation (You have a selective memory of what you will ask to kids. Why not also ask about the Japanese occupation?)
It also happened long before their time. Why don’t you ask about the Vietnam War, which also happens long before their time? Why don’t you ask the rice crises, the oil prices, equally important, di ba?
Casiple: Hindi remembrance ang usapin dito. Ang usapin din
yung ma-internalize noong mga tao yung lessons ng martial law at hindi mo makukuha sa selebrasyon lamang ’yan. Dapat
’andu’n yung partisipasyon ng tao sa actual democracy para makita nila yung actual benefits.
(The issue here is not about the commemoration. The issue here is that the people should internalize the lessons of martial law and you can’t just get it through a simple celebration. The
people should participate in actual democracy to be able to see and experience the actual benefits of it.)
Why do some people say they prefer the martial law period
than the present?
Casiple: Well unang-una, ang tingin ko malaking
usapin dyan ang poverty. Kasi nandun yung expectation na right after martial law, bubuti na ang buhay ng mga tao. Of
course, alam natin na complex ang poverty. Hindi naman martial law lamang ang pinag-uugatan nito.
(First and foremost, I think the bigger issue is poverty. Because there is big expectation that after martial law, the people’s lives will get better. Of course, we know that poverty is a complex issue. Martial law is not the only the root of it.)
Ang malaki talagang na-address, yung question ng demokrasya and to a large extent, yung accountability.
(What was really addressed was the question of democracy and to a large extent, the question of accountability.)
Sa pagbagsak ni Marcos, hindi automatic na gaganda ang buhay nila. Ang ginawa lang sa tingin ko ng pagbagsak ni
Marcos, tinanggal mo yung isang tinik na nagpapahirap sa
tao na harapin ang problema sa buhay…Hindi mismo yung ugat ng kahirapan ang na-address.
(With the downfall of Marcos, there was no guarantee
that life will get better. What his downfall did to us, I think, was that the thorn that was causing all our miseries disappeared. But it did not really address the root of poverty.)
Carlos: Yeah because for me, siguro ’pag tinanong mo rin ako, ako din yung martial law period [is my preference] except yung one instance na nag-intrude sila (military) sa academic freedom namin. Kasi minsan nagtatanim sila ng estudyante tapos merong isang professor dyan ng history na nagsabi ng against Imelda Marcos, e na-preso din sya dahil hindi nya alam may nakatanim pala sa klase nya.
(If you’d also ask me I also vote for the martial law period except that one instance when they intruded into our academic freedom. Because they sometimes planted students in schools. There was a history professor who said something against Imelda Marcos and soon found himself in jail because he did not know that there was a spy in his class.)
Bukod dun, siguro all the rest was all right. Yun nga ang mahirap, nag-husga na agad tayo kay Marcos hindi pa natin sinasaliksik bakit nya ginawa yun . E talagang ang gulo-gulo ng bansa natin and only a martial law regime can people be really disciplined.
Like yung maliliit na bagay, hindi sila nagji-jay walking, maliliit na bagay but bigger things for the discipline of the nation, di ba?
(That’s the problem, we were quick to judge Marcos without digging deeper why he did it. The country was really
in chaos and it was martial law regime that made people practice discipline. Those little things like pedestrians finally using designated crossing lanes; it’s a small thing but bigger things for the discipline of the nation, right?)
For Carlos, “Marcos really is our best President.”
“Because it was very peaceful, it was very orderly,” she said, noting it was during under martial that the country’s crime rate made a dramatic drop.
It was also only during the Marcos administration that bureaucratic reforms, she said, went in full swing.
In 1965, Carlos said, Marcos started reforms in the bureaucracy but department heads opposed the move.
“Ten years later, saka n’ya (Marcos) nabalasa yung gobyerno. It really takes a martial law regime to do bureaucratic reform,” she said.
She said that the Edsa1 revolt in 1986 that ended the 14-year-old dictatorship was triggered only by the collective sentiments of the people in Metro Manila.
Stressing that the people power is basically a Manila event, Carlos asked: “What about the rest of the country?”
Carlos, however, acknowledged that people may view martial law differently based on how it affected them or their loved ones.
For those who suffered during that period –either because their loved ones were killed, jailed or became victims of human rights abuses –they would fight moves to impose martial rule again.
“Definitely kasi kasama kami dun sa lumaban sa martial law at marami kaming kasamang namatay, na pinahirapan na na-torture (because we were part of those who fought martial law. Many of our companions were killed or tortured),” Casiple said.
“Alam mo yung epekto sa mamamayan, kaya talagang hindi ka na babalik sa period na yun. Kaya nag-people power (You know the effect to the people that’s why you will never return to that period. That’s why we had people power),” he said.
Casiple said corruption in the government during the Marcos regime was systematic, the peace and order was in shambles but unreported in the media because the press was censored.
This was the reason, he said, some people think that the country was more peaceful during martial law than today.
“Kung may nangyayaring mga krimen at that time ay hindi naman talagang nababalita kasi sinong magbabalita e yung nagbabalita nasa loob ng kulungan? (If there are crimes being committed, they were not really reported because who will report them when the true journalists are in jail?)”
