Everyone knows 1972 as the year President Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law over the land. But he was a busy guy, and while his legacy will forever be tainted by the bloody era that followed, Marcos was responsible for a lot of other things that continue to live on. Here are the other things he was responsible for that year:
The Establishment of the National Artist Award When Marcos came up with the National Artist Award, the selection process was pretty much arbitrary, and the prize was given to whomever the President pleased. However, this changed when the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) was created in under the Aquino administration in 1992. Among the NCCA’s duties was the creation of a more impartial selection process for the National Artist Awards. Today, while it is still the President who chooses National Artists, he or she selects them from a list of nominees created by the NCCA and Cultural Center of the Philippines.
The Creation of National Parks. Two areas were declared national parks that year: Balbalasang-Balbalan (try saying that 10 times, fast) under Republic Act 6463, and Guadalupe Mainit-Mabugnao Hot Spring under Republic Act 6429. The former was named after Mt. Balbalasang, and is also known as “the green heart of the Cordillera.” It’s the habitat of 39 species of birds that are endemic to the country, as well as the Philippine warty pig. On the other hand, Guadalupe Mainit-Mabugnao, as its name suggests, is known for its hot springs and caves. It’s located in Carcar, Cebu.
The Founding of the University of Makati As it turns out, the University of Makati was established in 1972. Back then, it was known as Makati Polytechnic Community College, and was founded through Municipal Resolution No. 242, Ordinance No. 64. It was renamed Makati College in 1987, and became a full-fledged university in 1990.
The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 Duterte’s idol hated drugs as well. RA 6425 was passed into law on April 4, and the Dangerous Drugs Board was created on November 14. The following year, Marcos ordered the execution of notorious drug lord Lim Seng. The Chinese businessman’s sentence was carried out by a firing squad on January 15, 1973 in Fort Bonifacio.
The Shutdown of the Media After the declaration of Martial Law, stations like ABC-5, ABS-CBN, GMA, RPN, and MBC were immediately closed down. Publications like the Manila Times, Daily Mirror, Manila Chronicle, Manila Daily Bulletin, Philippines Herald, Philippine Free Press, Graphic and the Nation were forced to cease operations as well. Several publishers and journalists were imprisoned, including Teodoro Locsin, Sr., Chino Roces, Amando Doronila, Luis Beltran, Maximo Soliven, Juan Mercado, and Luis Mauricio. The only media outlets left were those belonging to Marcos’s cronies, such as Philippine Daily Express and the Kanlaon Broadcasting System.
In a pushback against perceived memory loss and historical revisionism, several institutions are reminding us of the truths about Martial Law.
Forty-five years ago, the Philippines was put under martial law by Ferdinand Marcos. From 1972 to 1981, Marcos’ military rule resulted in 3,257 extrajudicial killings, 35,000 individual tortures, and 70,000 were incarcerations, and at least 737 Filipino Desaparecidos or the Disappeared Ones. After the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution, Filipinos took back their freedom in what was largely seen as the world’s first bloodless revolution.
To mark the 45th Anniversary of Martial Law in the Philippines, several institutions are spearheading activities and opening museums to remember that decade in Philippine history. The following are some of the most interesting things you should know about.
This year, the Jesuit institution has opened an online museum “that aims to counter historical revisionism by having an online presence that will feature works of art, lectures, essays, teaching resources, among others, curated from artists, experts, scholars, researchers, teachers and students,” according to their school’s website.
Despite the suspension of classes declared by Quezon City mayor, the institution has encouraged its students to participate in organized events within the campus on September 21.
The following are also some of the Ateneo’s activities lined up for the week:
September 18 to 22: Awareness-raising campaign: Malikhaing Protesta: Banner-making Contest
September 20: Organizing Dissent: A Workshop on Activism and the Specter of Martial Law (Faber Hall, 4 to 6 p.m.)
September 21: Sala sa Sala: Sifting through the Sins (Leong Hall Auditorium, 5 to 6:30 p.m.)
September 22:
Discussion on Political Detainees’ Experiences during Martial (Leong Hall Auditorium, 5 to 7 p.m.);
Special School Forum: Remembering Martial Law, Renouncing Extrajudicial Killings: Voice from Ateneo and Beyond (Escaler Hall, 5 to 6:30 p.m.)
Community Mass (Church of the Gesu, 7:30 to 8:30 p.m.)
GMA 7 Airs Alaala: A Martial Law Special
An original production by GMA News and Public Affairs, this biopic stars Alden Richards, who plays the role of Bonifacio Ilagan, who was arrested, incarcerated, and tortured for two years while he was a student at the University of the Philippines during Martial Law. Bonifacio “Boni” Ilagan is a recipient of multiple Palanca awards for film.
This gripping drama also stars Rocco Nacino, Bianca Umali, and seasoned actress Gina Alajar. You can watch this much-anticipated special on September 23 and 24. Running for an hour and a half, the film tackles human rights abuses during the period of Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos. The film is directed by Adolf Alix.
According to Alix, millennials are one of the audiences he hopes to capture with this film. “What Sir Boni has gone through is very difficult, to be tortured, to lose a sibling, and to have a mother who always worries about you even if you want to fight for your rights,” said Alix. “Millennials will surely learn a lesson from this.”
The Department of Education Implements Teaching of Martial Law Years
It is not only private institutions that promote awareness and guard against forgetfulness about Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos. In line with the K to 12 Curriculum, in 2016, the Department of Education started implementing the teaching of the problems and challenges that Filipinos faced during Martial Law Years.
According to their Curriculum Guide for Grade 6 Araling Panlipunan, students must be able to analyze the problems and challenges that Filipinos faced during Martial Law. They must also be able to come up with a conclusion about the effects of Martial Law on politics, economy and livelihood, and life of Filipinos.
Likewise, the Department of Education requires schools under its control to teach the students about the individual experiences of victims of Martial Law, such as Jovito Salonga, Lino Brocka, Jose “Pepe” Diokno, and Benjamin “Behn” Cervantes.
On its website, the education body reiterates its commitment to guard history against revisionism. “DepEd remains committed to highlighting the importance of learning the lessons of history and preserving the gains of democracy. We shall continue to enable our learners to remember and understand the country’s history and the impact of Martial Law to the lives of Filipinos today.”
With the DepEd at the forefront of educating the youth about Martial Law, it ensures that the following generations will always know about the mistakes of the past hopeful that they may not be repeated.
Things You Can Do on This Year’s Anniversary of Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos
On September 21, Luneta and other places around the country will be sites of massive demonstrations in protest and remembrance of the 45th Anniversary of Martial Law. A list of nationwide demonstrations and their schedules have been posted online as a guide for people who want to participate, or otherwise, avoid to stay away from traffic jams. For people who plan to stay at home, the following are things you can do:
Visit the Digital Museum of Martial Law in the Philippines
Apart from the one launched by Ateneo days ago, martiallaw.ph offers you an artful look at the realities of Martial Law through independent films produced by young Filipinos.
A statement on its website reads, “A virtual space serving as a living memorial to a pivotal period in Philippine history, the Digital Museum of Martial Law in the Philippines serves as a platform to provoke critical reflection, inclusive learning, and vigilant remembrance through the multi-faceted lens of artistic expression.”
Digital Museum of Martial Law in the Philippines was founded last year, on the 44th anniversary of the declaration of Martial Law.
Watch Classic and Modern Filipino Films about Martial Law
Among the staple films about that period include Maynila sa Kuko ng Liwanag (1975) directed by Lino Brocka, which has earned its reputation of being one of the best Filipino films of all time. The film is ripe with symbolisms, down to the names of the main characters, like Ligaya Paraiso, who represents Inang Bayan, and Julio Madiaga, a symbol for the Filipino common man, his surname playing on the word matiyaga or industrious. The film displays oppressive undertones, reflective of the milieu in which it was produced.
Dekada ’70 (2002) directed by Chito Roño, is a more direct narration of events that took place in the Philippines during the seventies. It follows the struggles of the Bartolome family, a middle-class family who finds itself torn apart by Martial Law. Its star-studded cast includes Vilma Santos, Christopher De Leon, and Piolo Pascual.
Respeto (2017) is an independent film directed by Treb Monteras II, and features the Filipino subculture of underground hip-hop. Against this backdrop, the protagonist, Hendrix struggles to live his dream of becoming a great hip-hop artist, until he meets Doc, troubled poet who can’t forget his dark past about Martial Law. The film won multiple awards at the recently concluded 2017 Cinemalaya Film Festival.
I have always imagined it to be a unanimous decision: that moment when my activist parents decided to “give away” their baby daughter for safekeeping.
I imagine their shared glances as soon as they heard Martial Law declared on the radio; they must have immediately known what to do, as if the past year of rather idyllic life—her teaching at the local public high school, him tinkering around the house while looking over the newborn baby—was more of a respite from the struggle they had come to embrace head on.
All it must have took was one look. My mother must have hugged my nine-month old self; I see her gazing longingly at my sweet, innocent face. So many questions must have crossed her mind: When will I see her again? Will she remember us when the time comes? What if we don’t make it? Who will teach her how to blow her first birthday candle?
Had I known that I would grow up without seeing them ever again, I would have willed myself to consciousness and defied the logic of biology. I would have memorized her face, captured the lullaby he always sang to me at night and find a way to imprint her on my skin. Had I known my family would end up waiting for that welcome knock that never came, I would have done so much more. Alas, what can a baby do except coo when quieted and cry when hungry and tired.
They knew as student activists themselves what was asked of them. After all, that was how they met and fell in love with each other—at a university march protesting the mounting injustices of Mr. Marcos. What Martial Law giveth, Martial Law taketh away, I often say.
It must have been decided long ago—this inevitability. Maybe as soon as she found out she was pregnant. Maybe they fooled themselves for a while that it wouldn’t come to this—their young family torn asunder.
But they knew. They knew in their hearts what went on in the country. They had listened and helped organize their neighbors against those who sought to remove them from their land and livelihood. They knew as student activists themselves what was asked of them. After all, that was how they met and fell in love with each other—at a university march protesting the mounting injustices of Mr. Marcos. What Martial Law giveth, Martial Law taketh away, I often say.
This I know to be the truth: My mother toyed with the idea of bringing me with them in hiding. But Tatay put his foot down. It would not be safe for the baby. It would not be safe for their underground group.
It took them a day to gather their meager belongings. The rest that couldn’t be packed for the baby or that they themselves could not carry were left behind to be divided among family.
From Bataan, it was a clandestine trip to Tarlac, Tarlac, where a favorite half-sister of his lived. They chose the time well, around dinnertime to avoid the stares of neighbors who always seemed to lurk nearby.
I know as a mother myself that my mother heart broke into tiny pieces when she finally handed me over. And that she probably wondered when she would be whole again. Maybe she wished briefly for a country that would let her stay and be a mother to her child. But she knew that her country needed her, needed them. That it was up to them to make sure that children like me would grow up in a just society.
My father hugged his wife, sandwiching their oblivious baby girl. I see him letting go of a sob that emanated from the pit of his stomach. He would miss this small ball of joy that had been his constant source of happiness ever since he heard the news that they were expecting. All of 23 years old, he mustered all the courage he had learned from his father to bid her daughter goodbye.
I know that they never looked back, afraid that they would change their minds and stay. And while each step away from me seemed heavier than the last, they must have tentatively smiled at each other. They had hope in their hearts. One day, they thought, they would see me again: maybe in two years, maybe in ten. They would be victorious. For my sake, they would prevail.
Lest we forget, the Marcos family has been scheming in using their assets to lure salivating government officials and other parties into an onerous deal.
With all their money, influence and newfound power under the Duterte administration, the Marcos family is still haunted by their past. If the recent pronouncement of the president that the Marcos family is offering to return part of their ill-gotten wealth in exchange for immunity is not a stir or fake news, then no amount of historical revisionism and trolling has given them peace of mind since they were unceremoniously booted out of the country in 1986. Their crimes are like ghosts that refuse to disappear despite applying massive doses of magical spells and incantations.
This is not the first time that the Marcos family proposed this so-called asset-for-immunity settlement. In fact, this is only the latest in a series of failed settlements since they returned to the Philippines from exile in Hawaii in 1992. But while previous attempts to come up with a settlement proved to be failures because the legal processes involved were contrary to Philippine laws, this latest attempt is worrisome for its vagueness or lack of details.
Where previous administrations have failed, this proposed settlement designed to exonerate the Marcos family from infamy may well be the next terrific accomplishment of the Duterte administration. After all, the apologists argue, the fabled Marcos assets may well be used for the government’s priority programs. But lest we forget, the Marcos family has been scheming in using their assets to lure salivating government officials and other parties into an onerous deal.
Allow me to backtrack a little to contextualize the issue. Two months after the creation of the PCGG in February 1986, the Philippine government sought the assistance of the Swiss government to help recover documents pertaining to Marcos assets hidden in bank accounts and foundations through the Request for Assistance in Criminal Matters (IMAC).
These documents were necessary to prosecute the Marcos family and recover their ill-gotten wealth. The Swiss government responded on May 29, 1986 by freezing bank accounts and assets in 3 shell foundations. The policy of the Cory Aquino administration was to restitute these assets to fund its agrarian reform program.
THE PAST. The Marcoses have been unable to bury their past. Photo on the left is from the Presidential Museum and Library Flickr account. Photo on the right is by Susan F. Quimpo
As requisite for the release of the Marcos assets held in bank accounts and foundations, the Swiss Supreme Court ruled that the contested assets be placed in an escrow account until a Philippine court gives a verdict on its ownership. The ruling also specified two conditions – for the Marcos family to return to the Philippines to defend themselves in court and for the human rights victims to be given some form of compensation.
These provisions likewise satisfy the standards set by the European Commission on Human Rights. In 1998, the said assets were transferred to an escrow account at the Philippine National Bank (still a government bank then) pending the resolution of the ownership issue.
For the human rights victims, however, the mechanism to put Marcos to account was prosecution. In 1987, a class suit was filed in the Hawaii District Court in behalf of Liliosa Hilao and over 10,000 other victims of human rights abuses under the Marcos regime. The case was however summarily dismissed.
It will take another 5 years, a rethinking of American laws pertaining to human rights violations, compensation and state immunity, and the replacement of the former judge at the Hawaii district court before the case was reopened and heard in September 1992. All the 3 major cases filed against Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imee Marcos, and the Marcos heirs were consolidated into one: Multi-District Litigation (MDL) 840.
In only two weeks of hearings, the jury found Marcos and his heirs guilty of gross human rights violations. Thereafter the Hawaii court awarded the victims US$1.2 billion in compensatory damages and another $776 million in exemplary damages in 1995 for a total of more than $1.9 billion. The decision was a watershed, the problem, however, was its implementation.
In the meantime, several forfeiture cases were filed by the Philippine government prosecutors at the Sandiganbayan as early as 1986. And of September 24, 1993, Imelda Marcos was convicted by the Sandiganbayan for violation of Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
As a practitioner of the “win-win” solution, the Ramos administration authorized then PCGG chair Magtanggol Gunigundo to negotiate with the Marcos family to prevent a protracted legal battle. As stipulated in the General and Supplemental Agreements, both dated December 28, 1993, the Philippine government proposed a sharing agreement on the contested assets – 75% for the government and 25% for the Marcoses. The proposal also called for the Marcoses to shell out $150 million for the Marcos human rights victims in exchange for immunity from suit.
The public backlash against the “sweetheart deal” resulted in the creation of Kilosbayan, headed by the PCGG’s first chair, former senator Jovito Salonga. In the absence of contrition and restitution, Kilosbayan argued, any settlement with the Marcos family would be a sham. This would also set a bad precedent, as this would encourage plunderers to shed just a portion of the loot and go scot-free. In short, stolen money can now be used to buy immunity for thieves!
This attempt to reach an agreement failed because the amount specified was considered too low, or a fraction of the amount awarded by the Hawaii district court. Furthermore, the legal processes involved were complicated. In addition, the timing was not auspicious. Just 9 years after the Marcoses were booted out of power, the wounds inflicted by the Marcos family were still fresh in the memories of Filipinos.
The Estrada administration almost came out with a settlement with the Marcos family. A known Marcos ally when he was still mayor, Estrada had advisers who were close to the two parties – then executive secretary Ronaldo Zamora for the Marcoses and secretary Horacio Morales and TESDA director Edicio de la Torre for the human rights victims.
To set the tone, Estrada argued for the abolition of the PCGG, noting “that litigation is fruitless and expensive, what is needed is the money for the poor!” The Marcos family too issued press statements expressing their willingness to come up with a “global settlement,” i.e., dismissal of all criminal and civil cases against them, guarantee of full immunity from further suits, and tax exemption from the assets that they may keep.
A group of human rights victims under the umbrella of SELDA (Samahan ng mga Ex Detainees Laban sa Detention), convinced the National Democratic Front (NDF) to include the issue of compensation for the human rights victims in the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL) which the Estrada administration eventually signed. Part of Article 5 of the CARHRIHL reads:
“The parties hereby respect and support the rights of the victims of human rights violations during the Marcos regime taking into consideration the final judgment of the United States Federal Court System in the Human Rights Litigation against Marcos…”[1]
But before any negotiations could begin, the proposed peace talks stalled when the NDF insisted that the framework for the negotiations be the NDF Constitution. However, then ambassador Howard Dee, the head of the government’s negotiating panel, also insisted that it should the 1987 Constitution instead.
When the proposed peace talks finally collapsed, another group of human rights victims, the Claimants 1081, picked up the pieces. The agreement may have pushed through if not for the shrewdness of the Marcos family. The Marcos lawyers inserted some provisions in Par. 5.2 of the Agreement after it was submitted by Atty. Swift, the class suit’s lead counsel. The insertion read:
“When the Judgments in this litigation are marked satisfied …. which he / she ever had, now has or hereafter may have against said parties.Imelda Marcos has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world, including in the Philippines but is released fully by this paragraph. Ferdinand R. Marcos has never been charged civilly and criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world, including the Philippines but is released fully by this paragraph. Imee Marcos Manotoc (with the exception of Trajano vs. Imee Marcos-Manotoc, HW Civil) has never been charged civilly and criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world, including the Philippines but is released fully by this paragraph, including Trajano. Irene Marcos-Araneta has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world, including the Philippines, but is released by this paragraph. The late Ferdinand E. Marcos was never charged with a Human Rights violation civilly and criminally in the Philippines. His estate is released fully by this paragraph.”[2]
When the proposed settlement was submitted to the Sandiganbayan for approval, then presiding justice Francis Garchitorena reminded the parties concerned that human rights victims did not suffer death or injury in anticipation of payment years later.
“They did not sue in order to make money or get rich; rather, they sued to affirm the wrong done to them and to have those who have done them wrong held publicly responsible for that wrong. Money was not all the lawsuit in Hawaii was about; certainly, that is not the meaning of such a judgment by the US District Court in Hawaii… The Republic cannot volunteer to pay for the injury to its own people, and then cause the release from any liability the estate of the one who caused the injury.”[3]
Finally, the Supreme Court struck down the proposed settlement for reasons contrary to law, among them: that the state cannot grant immunity to defendants but only to those who could testify against them (Marcos family); that the executive department cannot grant tax exemption, only Congress have that authority; likewise the executive department cannot dismiss cases, only the judiciary can; and lastly, the agreement did not provide a definite period for the Marcos Estate to submit an inventory of their total assets and may take a lifetime.[4]
With this ruling, the Supreme Court finally forfeited the assets held in a PNB escrow account totaling $658,175,373.60 (as of January 31, 2002) plus interest, in favor of the Republic of the Philippines. The amount was transferred to the National Treasury thereafter. Unfortunately, the following year, 2004, was general election year. I strongly suspect that part of the Marcos assets was used for election purposes, in particular, the so-called fertilizer fund scam to help Arroyo win. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Fund stipulates that proceeds from recovered Marcos ill-gotten wealth are to be used for agrarian reform.
There is no more reason to come up with a settlement with the Marcos family. The implications of Martial Law Human Rights Victims Recognition and Compensation Act (RA 10368) signed by former president Noynoy Aquino in February 2003, is that the Philippine state has finally recognized the Marcos human rights victim and that democracy and the restored freedoms we enjoyed until last year rest on their sufferings and sacrifices. But with the propensity of Malacañang for surprises, this proposed settlement may come again like a thief in the night. The sequel to the Marcos burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
If there could be one lesson from anti-Marcos writings, it should be respect, and teachers should strive to put this lesson forward.
Pressing are the current times when students are led to believe the “convenient truths” on the President Marcos debate. Despite substantial studies proving the oppression during the Martial Law period, the students’ emotions are won over by apologists whose tweaked narratives renounce common sense.
In the age of devaluing reason and glorifying propaganda, literature teachers should be among the front runners in advocating a precise reading of the national history.
Revisionism is in the heart of the post-truth era, where people resort to false information that sits well on their biases instead of wielding academic measures to pursue wider historical dimensions. Bedeviling our nation’s past allows the tyrant to seize the people’s imagination to topple the liberty our forefathers fought for. It delays discourse. It knows no respect for identity. It shatters truth, a basic element of humanity and progress. It triggers a collective amnesia.
In one way or another, the concept of post-truth is what we wish for. We acknowledge the forces of colonialism and political agenda behind historical interpretation, thus we demand legitimacy. But we begin to fret the moment the government itself initiates the practice of forgetting a memory that needs to be preserved, and replace the gaps with untruth.
In the book, A Duterte Reader, UP Manila professor Cleve Arguelles uncovers the administration’s mnemonic regime pivoting to the counter-narrative of moving on from People Power. For him, cultural institutions and the silence of history textbooks have not succeeded enough in putting across the value of Martial Law, prolonging the war on memory. No amount of apathy and denial can retrieve what we will leave behind.
Since false claims are crucial in public discourse, it has permeated educational institutions. Now, some students are proud to share their lack of curiosity, or one at the back would retort, Sir, what can you say about Marcos being able to edify architectures we enjoy today? Another kid would add (and I paraphrase badly), Our country was the Tiger Economy of Asia, until elite forces wiped out the best president we ever had. Somebody would share that Cory has a role in the Ninoy assassination. Then the bias card. How are literature teachers supposed to respond to this way of reasoning?
While mathematics teaches us that 4 is the answer to two plus two, literature is designed to be taught in an inherently political classroom. Not a single poem is devoid of ideological underpinnings, especially if it is produced in the time of authoritarian crisis.
Protest writings are hinged upon resisting the ignoble restraint of expression. Dictators are quick to harass literature for fear that stories would widen our manner of seeing. But writers persist, for in trying times art is indispensable. If this is the atmosphere of the text the teachers are tasked to deal with, teachers should uphold their integrity based on wider conceptual handle, awareness on the issue, and empathy.
In 1985, Dumaguete City lost Father Rudy Romano, and for 32 years, no justice was served for the priest-social worker who selflessly served the oppressed and the vulnerable. As a way of choosing not to forget the priest and his unfortunate plight during the Marcos administration, the community would ring the bells for him every 8 in the evening until he is found. The poem speaks about how the disappearance of one body marks a malady in society, affecting us all, more so if we are cradled with fear and silence. The constant ringing of the bells summons a memory to “keep us from decay.”
Students are a massive sector who can help impose the destiny of our nation, and it matters what type of leaders they vote, what sort of biases they cling to. In a body politic that ignores the grief of Martial Law atrocities and swaps the definition of a hero, it is not enough that literature teachers instruct students to identify metaphors.
The poem is as slender as a bell, but it must hold fire as well. To discuss this apolitically and proceed to the next chapter when difficult words are unlocked is a disservice to the message and context the poem conveys. In analyzing literary pieces, teachers must encourage students to take part in a research project encompassing different fields of social sciences. This method allows art to demystify layers of humanity which are instrumental in molding our worldview and curbing our prejudices. Besides, teachers should ask the right questions that would strengthen values and be wary of the students’ respect for human rights.
Are teachers fulfilling their primary role as shapers of young minds if students have acquired knowledge and skills but haven’t developed social responsibility? Students are a massive sector who can help impose the destiny of our nation, and it matters what type of leaders they vote, what sort of biases they cling to. In a body politic that ignores the grief of Martial Law atrocities and swaps the definition of a hero, it is not enough that literature teachers instruct students to identify metaphors.
People commonly say that democracy should start inside the class, but democracy has become an abused terminology. It is invoked as an excuse to stop listening to dissent. It is used to argue based on lies. And most of all, it is a tool for excluding ideologies that afflict one’s pride. With this, a teacher should assist the students’ attitude toward life, allowing them to ask: Does my opinion constrain justice, or does it incite false consciousness?
Should teachers be worried when students name them names? A teacher from Mindanao critical of the government’s policies is called un-Mindanawon. Disobedient. Dilawan. On false dichotomies, Arundhati Roy has this to say: “It’s a failure of the imagination. An inability to see the world in terms other than those the establishment has set out for you […] If you don’t love us, you hate us. If you’re not Good, you’re Evil. If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorist.”
If there could be one lesson from anti-Marcos writings, it should be respect, and teachers should strive to put this lesson forward.
