In his book, The Life of Reason, philosopher and novelist George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Germans are not proud of what happened during the Holocaust and, to ensure that their people will be constantly reminded of its horrors and atrocities, and that no one will dare toy with the idea of following in Adolf Hitler’s footsteps, museums and memorials are erected all around Germany.

In the Philippines, no such museum or memorial is built to remind us of the dark days of Martial Law.

No serious efforts to educate the youth about what really transpired during Martial Law are launched.

No major actors have been put behind bars for their abusive and oppressive roles in the execution of Martial Law.

To aggravate the situation is the Filipinos’ propensity to easily forgive and forget. And those who are either “enlightened” or who have first-hand experience of the tyrannical rule of the dictator sit in complete, comfortable and prolonged silence, complacent with the assumption that Filipinos must have already learned their valuable lessons from the past and thus would, at all costs, avoid it from ever happening again.

How naïve could we be, right?

Three decades after the country succeeded in overthrowing the dictatorship, we watched in utter shock and horror as Bongbong Marcos, the scion of the late strongman and kleptocrat Ferdinand Marcos Sr., was almost elected as Vice President –a position that is a heartbeat away from the seat his father held with an iron fist for more than twenty years. Through clever deception, half-truths and outright lies, the Marcos family, their die-hard loyalists and shameless cronies managed to delude more than 14 million Filipinos into thinking that Martial Law, as we knew it, never existed.

But, of course, we know better.

We know that Martial Law is not merely a figment of someone’s wild and delusional imagination. It is not some legend or an old wives’ tale. Martial Law is real. And it is up to us to join hands and counter the revisionist accounts being peddled and spread in social media.

In a humble effort to answer this urgent call, I hereby listed some statements and frequently-asked questions that aim to discredit the truth, and answered them to the best of my ability.


Shouldn’t the Marcos rule, which was characterized by a great economy, a myriad of infrastructure projects, and peace and order, be considered the golden era of the Philippine history?

No, the Marcos years should not be considered the golden age of our history!

From 1962 to 1986 (the period before Marcos became president up to the year he was ousted from Malacanang), the country’s total external debt grew from $360 million to $28.3 billion –debts we will pay until year 2025. Peso-dollar exchange rate also surged from P3.50 to a dollar in 1966 to P20.53 to a dollar in 1986. Poverty rate when he first took office in 1965 was 41%. It was 58.9% in 1985, a year before he was ousted. Moreover, our gross domestic product (the total amount of products and services produced in the country) dropped from 3.4% in 1966 to 1.4% in 1986. We fared poorly compared to our Southeast Asian neighbors. From the second richest nation in Asia, we became “The Sick Man of Asia”.

To justify the country’s skyrocketing external debt, the regime embarked on an infrastructure spending spree. All those infrastructure projects, though, were over-priced to accommodate the Marcoses and their cronies’ kickbacks. They also blatantly and wantonly plundered the public coffers and ransacked and sequestered huge local companies until they had almost drained the country and its people of all their resources. PCGG pegged at US$10 billion the total amount of the ill-gotten wealth amassed by the Marcos family during their 21-year reign of terror. Of that amount, only US$4 billion had been confiscated and returned to the treasury. The remaining US$6 billion is yet to be recovered.

Industrialization was neglected under Marcos. Although the Marcos era is remembered by many as an age of industrialization, it was characterized by “crony capitalism” where Marcos’ closest allies were awarded industries and ambitious industrial projects, many of which ended up being inefficient or bankrupt. International Monetary Fund’s Philip Gerson said, “Only Marcos cronies got rich during his rule. The rich got richer, while the poor got poorer.”

Also, the martial law years resulted in poor work conditions as testified by the sharp rise in underemployment which, at one point, afflicted a third of the employed. This dissatisfaction in the labor force (especially among skilled workers) later gave rise to the widespread growth of the OFW phenomenon after 1986. (Read this.)

Prior to his declaration of Martial Law, Marcos suspended the writ of habeas corpus (The writ serves as a safeguard against warrantless arrests and illegal detentions). Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly were suppressed. Political leaders, student activists, journalists, church personalities, and virtually anybody who dared challenge the people in power or were simply deemed enemies of the state were arrested, tortured, raped or killed. Friends and relatives of the 882 desaparecidos or victims of enforced disappearances gave up hope of ever seeing their loved ones again.

Why is Marcos portrayed as a villain? He is the country’s greatest president ever!

No, he is not! He was a despot, a tyrant, a demagogue, a dictator, a mass murderer, a torturer and a plunderer.

Under Martial Law, 70,000 were incarcerated, 35,000 were tortured, and 3,257 were killed. Historian and writer Alfred McCoy wrote, “the Marcos government appears, by any standard, exceptional for both the quantity and quality of its violence.”

According to the Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2004, Marcos is the world’s second most corrupt leader of all time.

Marcos only declared Martial Law to enforce law and order.

Limited by the 1935 Constitution to only two terms, Marcos declared Martial Law in 1972 and made a new Constitution to legitimize his extended rule. He ruled as the Philippine president for 21 years. His claim that he felt the need to declare ML because the country was threatened by the Communist and the Moro rebels was without basis. From only a handful in 1969, the number of NPA rebels reached 25,000 during his regime because of the human rights abuses and the worsening socio-economic condition during that time.

The Marcoses were rich even before FM became president.

Marcos was not born rich. His father was a lawyer-politician in the province allegedly killed by the Philippine troops for being a Japanese collaborator (Makapili or Filipino traitor) during the war. Regarding the Marcoses’ claim that he made his fortune from the gold taken from the Japanese, former Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Gov. Gabriel Singson had this to say. “It was impossible for the Marcoses to have had 4,000 tons of gold as Imelda once claimed in a newspaper. The BSP only had 650 tons of gold reserves during the Marcos years.

Marcos has been dead for 17 years now. Can’t we just forgive him?

It is easy to ask someone to forgive, especially if you have not been a victim of the same offenses committed against that person. It is easy to tell someone to move on if you have not experienced the same physical pains, emotional trauma and psychological anguish that that person had been forced to endure. It is easy to advise someone to forget if you have not been arrested, abducted, detained, tortured, raped or stigmatized, or if you have not lost a loved one to a heinous crime.

More so, it is difficult to heal without justice.

What we need before we, as a nation, can really forgive and heal from the horrors and nightmares of Martial Law is a full accounting of the perpetrators’ sins (stolen money, corruption of our social institutions, economic sabotage, and human rights violations). Then, we demand from them (or their families) acceptance or acknowledgment of the injustices perpetrated during Martial Law. We also demand remorse and restitution and, finally, retribution. Those are the basic prerequisites for forgiveness.

It is only then that we can accord the Marcoses and their cronies the benefit of human forgiveness, and only then can that forgiveness lead to national healing, reconciliation and peace. And, yes, closure.


Why should we even care about this issue? (Apathetic:) We were living a comfortable and peaceful life during Martial Law! (Millennial:) It happened years before we were born!

To the apathetic:

I can’t actually find the words that won’t betray the extreme disgust and revulsion I feel towards your kind. The world is much worse and much more dangerous because of people like you. You should just be grateful that you and your family were spared, that someone else took up the cudgels on your behalf, that people sacrificed their lives so that others like you could continue living in your little world of apathy and indifference. There’s a special place in hell reserved only for you.

To the millennials:

You are now enjoying all these liberties and rights (to watch your favorite tv show, to express your opinions on social media, to stay out until the wee hours of the morning, to criticize any official of the government, to meet with your friends, to join rallies and demonstrations, and many others) because people dared to fight the Marcos dictatorship. The least you could do is to make sure that you acquaint yourself with the country’s history –not the revised version but the accurate one, the one penned with the blood of the countless Martial Law victims. And if it’s not too much to ask, share those facts and verifiable truth with your friends.

Since the ouster of Marcos in 1986, our country has not progressed much. Weren’t the presidents that came after him equally guilty of betraying the people’s trust?

If you think that our life today is comparable with that during Martial Law, you must be reading only the revisionists’ accounts of history. I suggest that you expand your horizons. Or, better yet, scroll back up and read again.

All the other leaders –before, during or after Martial Law– have their own shortcomings and lapses in judgement. Whatever the post-Marcos presidents did is theirs to answer to the people. They would have their time, with history as the ultimate judge of their respective leaderships. Right now, though, the issue at hand is that of Marcos.

Why all this noise? Isn’t LNMB just a place for dead people?

The LNMB is no ordinary cemetery. It was established as a fitting resting place for deceased

  • Medal of Valor awardees
  • Presidents of commander-in-chief, AFP
  • Secretaries of national defense
  • AFP chiefs of staff
  • Generals/flag officers of the AFP
  • Active and retired military personnel of the AFP (including active draftees and trainees who died in line of duty, and active reservists and CAFGU Active Auxiliary who died in combat-related activities)
  • Former members of the AFP who laterally entered or joined the Philippine Coast Guard and the Philippine National Police
  • Veterans of Philippine Revolution of 1890, World War I, World War II, and recognized guerrillas
  • Government dignitaries, statesmen, national artist and other deceased persons whose interment and re-interment has been approved by the commander-in-chief, Congress or the secretary of national defense
  • Former presidents, secretaries of defense, dignitaries, statesmen, national artists, widows of former presidents, secretaries of national defense and chief of staff (Read this.)

LNMB, as its name implies, symbolizes heroism. It is in our best interest to recognize and value symbols and what they stand for. Otherwise, the flag would just be a piece of fancy cloth, the Noli and El Fili just storybooks, and the monuments and statues just overpriced slabs of rocks.

Ferdinand Marcos’ family should not be held accountable for the late president’s transgressions.

Yes, they should be. And they owe the Filipino people an apology over the Martial Law atrocities. Big time!

 According to the Campaign Against the Return of the Marcoses to Malacanang (CARMMA), Imelda Marcos was the biggest Marcos crony, whose free rides in the Philippine Airlines made its debt balloon to $13.8 billion in 1986. She was also the head of the Metro Manila Commission (precursor of the Metro Manila Development Authority) which, by the end of 1985, had accumulated debts of P1.99 billion (which included $100 million in foreign loans) in its 10 years of existence.

Bongbong, meanwhile, continues to whitewash the Marcos dictatorship’s crony capitalism, of which he had been a part. In 1985, when he was 26 years old, his father appointed him chairman of the board of the Philippine Communications Satellite Corporation (Philcomsat), receiving a monthly salary of anywhere between $9,700 to $97,000. (This, despite that fact that he rarely went to the Philcomsat office.) In 1986, government auditors discovered that Philcomsat was one of the many corporations and organizations used to siphon ill-gotten wealth out of the country.

When the Marocses fled to Hawaii, US Customs inspectors found around 300 crates filled with jewelry, gold, as well as 1,500 documents described by then US Lawmaker Stephen Solarz as “an encyclopedia of corruption.” The documents included a Marcos memo to the PNB that ordered transfer of P20 million to him, a list of expenses for Imelda’s overseas trips, a memo showing deposits and interests in overseas banks amounting to $30 million, around $11.2 million in commissions from Westinghouse (the designer and builder of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant), a listing of precious gems, deposit certificates and bearer bonds worth $4 million, as well as stock transfer deeds, bank documents, financial information about hotels,  and payments made directly to the former dictator and his wife for “Disaster Relief Projects.” Marcos was indicted in the US in 1988 for racketeering. He was accused of stealing more than $100 million to buy buildings in New York. He died later, before any verdict was handed out. (Watch this.)

Bongbong once said that, “The sins of the parents, if there are any, are not for the children to inherit.” That may be correct. It is not correct, however, to shamelessly live off the fruits of the legendary Marcos plunder while arrogantly peddling the lie that his father’s unbelievable wealth is legitimate. He also committed a grave injustice to the Martial Law victims when he said, “Pera-pera lang ang habol ng mga ‘yan”, referring to the 9,539 human rights victims in the Hawaii class suit who won the case against the Marcos estate. (Read this.)

Recently, Imee Marcos said that she cannot make a categorical admission of guilt over what happened during Martial Law because she was still “too young” then. I think, we should help Ms. Marcos refresh her failing memory by reminding her of Archimedes Trajano’s unfortunate fate. Trajano, a 21-year-old Mapua student in 1977 questioned Imee, during an open forum, on the latter’s appointment as the national chairman of the Kabataang Barangay. He was seized and dragged out of the venue by the presidential daughter’s bodyguards and, hours later, “his body was found severely tortured and beaten to death.” (Read this.)

As a former president and soldier, doesn’t Marcos deserve to be buried at the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani?

No, and I have four arguments to support my unequivocal answer.

First, according to no less than the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP), Marcos is unfit for a hero’s burial, stating that his records as a soldier during World War II “is fraught with myths, factual inconsistencies, and lies”. Based on the NHCP study, Marcos “lied about receiving US medals (Distinguished Service Cross, Silver Star, and Order of the Purple Heart). His guerilla unit, the Ang Mga Maharlika, his leadership of it, and his claimed rank promotion from Major to Lt. Col. were never officially recognized by the US officials. Most importantly, some of Marcos’ actions as a soldier were officially called into question by the upper echelons of the US military.” These include:

  • his command over the Allas Intelligence Unit (described as “usurpation”)
  • his commissioning of officers (without authority)
  • his abandonment of USAFIP-NL presumably to build an airfield for Gen. Roxas
  • his collection of money for the airfield (described as “illegal”)
  • his listing of his name on the roster of different units (called a “malicious criminal act”)

NHCP added that, “A doubtful record does not serve as sound, unassailable basis of historical recognition of any sort, let alone of the burial in a site intended, as its name suggests, for heroes.” (Read this.)

Secondly, according to the rules of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFPR G 161-375 dated 11 Sept. 2000)), Marcos, as a former president, is entitled to a cemetery plot at the LNMB. Stated on that same regulation, however, are two important conditions under which qualified personnel can be disqualified to be interred in the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani. These are:

  • Personnel who were dishonorably separated/reverted/discharged from the service
  • Personnel who were convicted by final judgement of an offense involving moral turpitude (Read this.)

Marcos cannot be disqualified on the basis of the second condition because he was never convicted by final judgment of any offense involving moral turpitude (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary defines moral turpitude as anything “which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals”). Although we can cite countless offenses involving moral turpitude committed by Marcos, he died before he could be charged, tried and convicted.

But the first condition is an altogether different matter.

There is only one way for any president to be dishonorably separated, reverted or discharged, and that is by revolution of the people who, as the sovereign authority, had temporarily vested its governmental powers in that official. The EDSA or People Power Revolution of 1986 “dishonorably discharged” Marcos not only for conduct unbecoming of an officer but, most significantly, for the slew of crimes he committed during Martial Law.

Thirdly, Section 1 of the Republic Act No. 289, the statute that provides for the creation of a national pantheon for Presidents of the Philippines, National Heroes and Patriots of the country, states that a pantheon which shall be the burial place of their mortal remains (in this case, the LNMB) shall be constructed “to perpetuate the memory of all the Presidents of the Philippines, national heroes and patriots for the inspiration and emulation of this generation and generations still unborn.

The question to be asked then should be, What is it exactly about Marcos that would be worthy of inspiration and emulation?

Prof. Winnie Monsod has this to say. Is it “his forcing himself on the Filipino people for 13 more years after his last term had expired? His stealing from the people (P170 billion, and still counting)? His being considered the second most corrupt leader in the world? His abuse of powers to incarcerate his opponents? His violations of human rights? His cheating in the 1986 “snap” election—the final straw for the Filipino people?”

Finally, Imelda Marcos was made to sign an agreement with the government when they were allowed to bring to the country the late dictator’s remains in 1992. The four conditions thus expressly stipulated in the agreement were:

  • the body was to be flown directly to Ilocos
  • Marcos would be given honors as a Major, his last rank in military service
  • Marcos’ body was not to be paraded in Metro Manila
  • Marcos was not to be buried at the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani, but in Batac, Ilocos Norte, beside his mother (as apparently requested by him)

We all know that the Marcoses, being Marcoses, did not feel the need to comply with those conditions.

The body was not buried but put on a refrigerated display for more than 13 years. Apparently, the family was waiting for a “friendly” president to come along –a president who would grant their wish of immortalizing their patriarch at the Libingan. Well, they finally got it when Duterte won the presidency. On November 18, 2016, in a sneaky attempt to elude the outrage of the Filipino people, the Marcoses snuck in into the LNMB the late dictator’s  body for a secret burial. According to anti-Marcos activists, it was clearly an unscrupulous move to preempt their appeal of the SC’s decision. (The group already filed with the Supreme Court a manifestation that they will be appealing the latter’s decision to allow the burial, and the petitioners were supposed to have 15 days to do it.)

According to Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, “This is a continuing deception and underhandedness of the Marcos family and they are just continuing the abuses and atrocities committed during Martial Law.”

Sen. Risa Hontiveros couldn’t have said it better. “There is no grave, no mausoleum, no decision of any court or order from any president that will keep the truth that Marcos is not a hero.” Also, I wonder what the Marcoses would have felt when, at the end of the military gun salute and when the triangular-folded flag was handed over to them, these words were spoken, “on behalf of a grateful nation…”


The Supreme Court has already decided. Shouldn’t that decision put an end to all these protests?

I read this somewhere. “Apartheid was legal, the Holocaust was legal, Slavery was legal, Colonialism was legal.” And now, with the nine SC justices’ affirmative votes, the burial of the late dictator Marcos at the LNMB is also legal. Clearly, legality does not establish morality.

The Supreme Court decision is an utter “disregard to the historic truths and legal principles that persist after Marcos’ death,” Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno said.

The SC, as well as the international judicial tribunals, in several decisions in the past have acknowledged and documented the plunder and human rights violations committed by Marcos. It was because of this very acknowledgment that our present Constitution was framed in such a way that out rights are tightly safeguarded, democratic practices and principles are ensured, and the possibility of another Martial Law would be subject to the most stringent of requirements. It was also because of this very acknowledgment that the State recognizes its moral and legal obligation to provide reparation to the Martial Law victims through the RA No. 10368 or the Reparation of the Human Rights Victims Law. Finally, it was because of this very acknowledgment that the PCGG was tasked to recover the billions of dollars that comprise the Marcoses’ ill-gotten wealth.

With its controversial decision, SC had somehow contradicted all their earlier decisions that suggest that Marcos was a plunderer and human rights violator.

Also, the Supreme Court chose to scrutinize the technicalities of the petitioners’ arguments rather than contemplate the latter’s fervent appeal for truth and justice when the SC asserts that the case should have been filed first with the proper RTC and when it maintains that the LNMB is not a national shrine but is merely a military shrine. It also claims that the interment will not, in any way, confer upon Marcos the status of a hero because the purpose of LNMB, despite its name, is “neither to confer to the people buried there the title of hero nor to require that only those interred therein should be treated as a hero.” It also alleges in its decision that the matter of contention has become a political issue.

How could the Supreme Court be that insensitive? Part of their mandate as an independent, impartial, effective and efficient Judiciary is to defend the welfare of the people and to protect their rights.

The Supreme Court further declares that “Marcos should be viewed and judged in his totality as a person. While he was not all good, he was not pure evil either. Certainly, just a human who erred like us.” (I know, I also had difficulty believing that these words were penned by our judicious magistrates.)

But we have to remember that the SC justices are just men and women who could be as fallible and corruptible as any of us. They could also commit grave mistakes. And, definitely, they and their decisions are not beyond reproach.

Pres. Duterte has been elected into office by an overwhelming landslide win. We, the voters, through our votes, authorized him to do what he promised during the campaign he would do should he win.

I swear, this argument did not come from an unsophisticated mind of a troll. This came from no less than Salvador Panelo, the Chief Legal Counsel of Pres. Duterte (yes, he is the same man who lawyered for these personalities: Marcoses on the cases of ill-gotten wealth against them, Andal Ampatuan, Jr. on the Maguindanao massacre case, Bong Revilla, Jr. on his PDAF plunder and graft cases, former Laguna Mayor Antonio Sanchez on the double murder case of two UPLB students, former Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos on the electoral sabotage case, Philip Medel on the murder case of actress Nida Blanca, Deniece Cornejo on her rape case against Vhong Navarro, Dennis Roldan on the kidnapping case of a Chinoy boy, and of course, Pres. Duterte on the case of hidden wealth filed against him by Sen. Trillanes.)

Anyway, to answer his argument, I did not vote for Duterte, and his vocal position on the Marcos burial at the LNMB was one of the reasons why. However, when he won the election, I endeavored to respect the choice of the greater number of voters while making a vow to be vigilant with my duties to question, to guard, to challenge and to seek truth and justice at all times.

It is in keeping with that vow that I am questioning the reason behind the President’s decision to allow that burial.

According to the SC decision, it is because of his desire for national healing and reconciliation (which I wrote above is not feasible without meeting the basic requirements for forgiveness) –- a statement which is not in harmony with his public pronouncements on the subject. His decision is borne out of his desire to fulfill his promise to the Marcoses during campaign and as a payback for his debt of gratitude to Imee Marcos for financially supporting his presidential bid.

He also said that the issue over the burial is a fight between two families. With that single carelessly-thrown statement, he was able to reduce the Filipinos’ struggles for two decades, the fear and horror and nightmare of Martial Law, the lives lost and the billions of dollars plundered from our coffers, into one inconsequential, capricious issue that requires minimum scrutiny and deliberation.

Another one of his reasons is because Marcos “was a soldier. He was there to fight for his country. Even if he is not a hero, he is a Filipino and he is, once upon a time, a president. That’s the law, we cannot go out of the law. I am not dwelling on his exploits.” Let me answer this with a statement from someone who is adept at history. Maria Serena Diokno, the Chairman of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) who resigned following the controversial burial, said “The justice of history, anchored on historical truth, is far greater than that which any court, including the highest court of the land, can render (or in this case, fail to render). As President of our Republic, you have the unique opportunity and obligation to heed the demands of the justice of History, and thereby lead the way to true healing.”

As for me, let me leave the President with this image


…and the readers with this message:

Wake up, kabayan! Fight historical revisionism NOW.

Tomorrow may be too late.





    1. Paki translate po para sa mamamayang Pilipino na hindi nakakaintindi ng wikang banyaga. Sino ka man po, masyado mo rin tinangkilik ang banyagang salita. D ka po ata totoo at purong Pilipino..


      1. Sukatan na pala ng pagiging totoo at pagiging Pilipino ang pagiging matatas sa pagsasalita ng Tagalog? Nakakatawa! Don’t undermean the capacity of the Filipino to understand what was written above. *smh


  1. Question ko lang doon sa “Personnel who were dishonorably separated/reverted/discharged from the service” napanood ko kasi sa news na retired na raw si Marcos kaya hindi siya na-discharge sa service. As a part of the military lang ba to applicable or as a president din?


    1. As commander-and-chief; however being deposed by the sovereign will of the people does not mean a dishonorable discharge as there is no law stating such. That’s just an opinion.

      The regulations for both dishonorable discharge and moral turpitude require a military tribunal, something which never happened.


    2. It is also worth noting that the blog creator made many straw-men arguments in many parts of the post.

      I can’t even begin to point out the number of fallacies she made.

      Eg. “As a former soldier and crowned with multiple war medals”

      Being crowned multiple war medals in the first place does not constitute a hero’s burial. But a medal of valor is.

      Did you notice how the author is quiet about it?

      Because it is undisputedly true that Marcos did receive a medal of valor award. (which is given by the state, btw)

      For the past 30 years or so, Marcos has remained in the AFP’s hall of heroes.

      And for that time not even during the regime of Noynoy has anyone spoke about it. And not that it wasn’t an issue… Noynoy even delegated the burial issue to Binay.. like WTF? Right?

      What does that mean? That PNOY himself acknowledge Marcos’ eligibility of the Medal of Valor

      And what happens to Medal of Valor receipients? I don’t know what kind of mental and semantic acrobatic the yellow camp is going to throw out here… but Medal of Valor awardees are technically heroes, you know.


  2. Whatever “figures” you put we cannot deny that majority of the people felt that their life is much better during the time of Marcos, economically and peacefully. He has done more infrastructures than those presidents after him. During his time, we have good public schools, with free books and snacks once/twice a week. Now, everything and in all levels are corruptions. People hoped that life will be much better after People Power but it turned out it became worst. Now, can you blame many people who tried to look back and compare?


    1. You mean the Marcos friends and loyalists who were able to accumulate more wealth during their time? Yes, their lives were so much better then. Disregard the victims of torture and their families who until now, bear the memories of the painful past, besides as the son of the dictator said once about those who are protesting and saying they were abused… “pera pera lang yan.” Pustahan tayo, wala kang kamag-anak na na torture that time.


      1. You mentioned we were spared by those who were abused and tortured for a figth, but their figth is not ours as law-abiding citizen who wanted to live peacefully, their figth is to take-over the duly established government, and replace it by their own which is communism. No but thanks, FM is not Hitler or may not be even in comparison in terms of magnitude of killings. I am very certain that those who received the receiving end of martial law imposition were from the militants, the leftist or communist-oriented people who wanted to topple the existing government and sow widespread disorder, but thanks they did not succeeded.


    2. Were you there during the martial law years? Cannot understand why people would say life was so much better then. We lived in an apartment, used public transport, and attended public school. Now I have a 3 bedroom house, 3 cars, and all my children go to the top private schools. Maybe then prices were lower, lesser traffic, lower crime rate, etc. but all things go up in the course of time.


      1. Ano po ba ang hanap buhay niyo sa kasalukuyan? Kasi ako kumikita ako ng 130K monthly as OFW which is more equivalent to a salary of a current bank manager in the Phils and more than a politician holding high position in our goverment. But I only have 1 new car which was purchased recently only which is for necessity use. Although I can send my two kids in a prestigious college in Manila still I cannot survive due to high cost of living as of to-date. We are a siblings of 13 before the 70 era which I can say to you that we live during Martial law and our late father is just a Master Sgt of Phil. air force yet he was able to feed us and sent us to schools till we finished college although from public schools only.
        Think of our situation before if it is today? does any one think that he/she can survive like we did as big family on the current generation? I don’t think so.


  3. Siguro po mas mauunawaan ng milyon milyong mamamayang pilipino kung sa salitang pilipino mo po inilahad ang napakahaba mong kasaysayan, kasi di lahat ng pilipino ay nakakaunawa ng malalalim na salitang banyaga. maaring abogado ka o mass com graduate dahil sa mga gamit mong malalalim na salitang banyaga pero mas nakararami ang di maalam sa malalalim nasalitang banyaga.
    At sana po kung me koneksyon kayo sa gobyerno maari po bang isalibro ang mga inilahad ninyo para sa kaalaman ng nakararaming mamamayang pilipino mula sa mga pulubi na marunong magbasa hanganng sa nakatapos ng PH degree.

    Yun lamang po,


  4. Saw this on my feed.

    Okay i’ll bite..

    Narratives do not work in the courtroom as proven by Leni Robredo. (She’s a lawyer no-less.. the incompetence.. can you believe it?)

    Because the narrative of ‘murdered, criminal, etc’ does not work against the law…

    And NO ONE is above the law. As many protesters might think and may make you think.

    Regardless of the other qualifications, Marcos was unequivocably a former President and also the defacto commander and chief.. thus qualified.

    Now, the only 2 regulations that may make him disqualified have the same requirement… which is to be put under trial. SOMETHING THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

    Thus both dishonorable discharge and moral turpitude does not apply in his situation.

    He was exiled and died three years later… He was never court-martialed because Philippine law forbids trials in abstentia unless the reason is unjustifiable. “If i come back they will kill me” or ” He’s already dead/in his deathbed” are not unjustifiable alibis.

    Under Rule of Law, Marcos is, innocent until proven guilty.

    Unless you have evidence that prove otherwise… you’re just another crybaby who are law-abiding when it is comfortable.

    I repeat, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. NO ONE. Check THAT fact.

    I didnt even have to read the entire article to obliterate your narrative. Imagine that.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’ll bite.

      Just because Marcos didn’t go to trial doesn’t mean he’s innocent — it only means he didn’t go to trial!

      Leave the words “innocent” and “guilty” in the courtroom. How can you find someone innocent or guilty if he is not tried? There’s a reason he was avoiding it in the first place.


      1. You’re not very bright are you? He is qualified under a legal loophole and your fervent zeal on the issue, your opinions or your goddamn feelings does NOT fucking matter!

        “Just because Marcos didn’t go to trial doesn’t mean he’s innocent — it only means he didn’t go to trial!” — the justice system of any democratic society says otherwise…

        If you like judgements without any trial so much move to fucking North Korea… you undemocratic troglodyte


      2. @Oh I see… Exactly! Marcos wanted to go back and was willing to give 90% of his fortunes to the filipino people. Which he only asked was 10% for his family and to be able to die next to his mother..

        But the greedy fuck Cory Aquino that she is, actually wanted double of what Marcos took… She didnt even grant a dying man’s wish.

        Further irony here is that the symbol of democracy, Cory Aquino signed the AFP regulations in the first place… More so that the LP controlled the political spectrum of the country for 30 years with the Aquino dynasty having 8+ family members in office. None of them gave a fuck.


      1. I repeat… The issue here is not about his actions… You can claim “murderer, criminal, etc”… all you want… but without any trial, under Rule of Law, Marcos is unequivicably innocent until proven guilty.

        And i repeat again, you cannot do any proving because he was never under trial. And that he is dead.

        Take the red pill. Fuck.


    2. I beg to disagree that “majority of our people” felt their lives were better! You must be talking to those who benefited (the corrupt n the cronies). Can’t imagine how some peoplè can be sooo blind to the truth and believe lies from the pit of hell! I call this delusion! God through the prophe Isaiah said, “Woe to the màn who càlls evil good, and good evil!” (Isàiah 5:20). And “Whatever a man sows, he will surely reap.” God’s judgment awaits the wicked.


    3. Imagine that ka ng imagine that ka para kang tangaa ,”innocent until proven guilty ” ang the best argument mo para kay Marcos para kang inutil as if there is any other bases to say Marcos is innocent from the billions of dollars stolen and all tortures and murders during his term. di mo nga kayang basahin ang buong article sa kaboboohan mo at mga consipiracy theories mo galing sa mga deceptive propagandist memes and facebook bposts na pinagbabasa mo. mamatay kang naniniwala sa mga kasinungalingan tanginaa ka bobo HAHA


      1. Luh bisaya.. ano pa bang basis ng pagiging innocente ng isang tao kaysa sa legal system ng bansa? Gago ka rin eh noh?

        Di ko sinabing di ko kayang basahin pero di ko kailangan basahin para malaman na narrative lang ang laman; at walang substantial argument laban sa Rule of Law mismo ng Pilipinas.

        Deputa ka ni isang argument sa comment mo ay valid puro ad hominem lang.. sino kaya inutil sa atin.


      2. At ang source dyan ay ang constitution mismo…

        Ang AFP regulation at ang pagbawal ng tril in abstentia

        Magbasa ka rin kasi ng actual sources para di ka manatiling mang-mang!


  5. I so admire your article. But let’s pretend that I’m a pro-Marcos simpleton: What would you say to comments telling that you’re an Aquino that’s why you are anti-Marcos?


  6. Maganda ang pagkakalahad dito pero kulang. Nakatuon lahat ng pahayag sa mga negatives. Maraming nagsasabi na maraming biktima ng martial law. totoo un. Pero ang mga biktima ay napakaliit lamang na porsiyento sa kabuuang populasyon ng Pilipinas na kung walang martial law malamang ay nagdurusa na ngaun sa ilalim ng komunismo. Hindi dito binanggit na bago nagdeklara ng martial ay napakagulo, halos araw-araw ay may pinapasabog na bomba sa iba’t-ibang pribado at pampublikong ahensya. Nasabat din ang barko mula sa china na may dalang libu-libong armas na sasalubungin sana ni victor corpuz at gagamitin ng mga rebelde para lusubin at maghasik ng kaguluhan sa metro manila. Ang mga biktima ng martial law ay mga biktima dahil choice nla. Ang mga sumusunod sa batas ay namuhay ng tahimik at masaya. Ang utang ng pilipinas sa loob ng 20 years ni marcos ay lumobo ng limang beses sa loob lamang ng 6 years ni aquino. Ang mga pera ni marcos na pilit kinuha ng mga aquino ay hindi naipamahagi lahat sa mga biktima ng martial law bagkos ang mga milyon ay inilagak sa acct ng mga aquino. Kay marcos, ang kuryente, tubig, lrt, love bus at iba pa ay subsidized ng gobyerno. Kay aquino, lahat prinivitized at ang nagmamayari na ngayon ay mga kamaganak at kaibigan nla. Ang resulta, sobrang taas ng bayarin at pati income tax ng mga kumpanya na yan ipinapataw sa mga mamamayan. Ang 13mo pay noon walang tax pero ngaun tumaas ang 13th mo pay pero may tax na at ang annual income tax ngaun ay mas mataas pa sa 13th mo pay kaya balewala rin.


    1. Salamat sa response mo, pero Komunismo? Pano mo na isip na yon ang dahilan kung bakit nag martial law? Di naman sangayon sa mga nangyari – ang mga biktima ng martial law ay hindi mga pasaway. Eto ay mga estudyante, mga aktibista at kung sino mang kritiko ni Marcos. Hindi sila ang bumomba ng mga gusali noon. Komunismo nga ba talaga ang dahilan?


    2. Marami tayong biktima kasi tayo ngayon ang pumapasan sa pagbabayad ng mga utang ng mga Marcos. Yang tax na binabawas sa 13th month pay mo, ang iba diyan ay napupunta sa pagbabayad ng utang nila. Tingin mo hindi ka biktima?


  7. Thanks so much for sharing this GREAT article…. many answers are now to those Marcos apologists of why MARTIAL LAW & Marcos Dictatorship failed.

    This issue has opened up the Pandora’s box… of why we have to continue educating others, especially the youth and the new generations, about one of the darkest era in the Philippines. More so, this issue has reawakened the silent majority!

    Bow ako na inyo. Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!


    PS – This is not about the Marcoses, Aquinos &/or the Yellows! This is about the Phil. society as a whole, this is about the Filipino people.

    A big 64,000 pesos question now –
    Where do each one of us TRULY stand…. do we stand for freedom, truth or justice?
    If YES, then I’m one with you….


    1. Nampota, as an na un great sa monologue ng kupal? Move on mga bitches. Mga tunay na namatayan, tama LNG na magalit. Mga nagaabang ng salapi, malapit na din kayo mamatay.

      Move on na, wag nyo na idamay mga kabataan sa mga kagaguhan nyo.


  8. Isang pagpuna kay G. Marcial Samson sa pagsang-ayon sa Martial Law, kailangan bang majority of the people ang maging biktima. Lahat ng tao sa buong Pilipinas ay nawalan ng freedom of speech. Ano ang masasabi mo tungkol dito. Yung mga
    biktima ay mga taong matatapang na lumaban sa katiwalian ni Marcos at naging
    sanhi ng pagpapatay at paggahasa sa mga babaing laban sa kanilang pamamahala. Iyan din ang sanhi ng pag-aalsa ng mga tao sa EDSA kaya umalis ang mga Marcos
    at Cronies sa Pilipinas na dala ang nilimas na kayamanan ng Pilipinas at naging
    sanhi ng paghihirap ng nakararaming Pilipino. Kung totoo ang bintang mo
    sa mga Aquino at may katibayan ka, ipaglaban mo ang karapatan ng lahat ng
    Pilipino, himukin lahat ang mamayan na mag-alsa laban sa mga Aquino para
    bawiin ang kinorakot at mapunta sa bilibid. Kailangang mabigyan ng katarungan
    ang pagdurusa ng bayan.


  9. Ang argumentong ito ay tulad sa pag-tatalo ng dalawang sekta ng relihiyon, walang gustong magpatalo. Bakit ang mga mambabatas after 1986 ay di gumawa ng akda o batas na ang sinumang pulitiko ang masangkot sa pang-aabuso at katiwalian ay mawawalan ng buong karapatan na umupo pa sa gubyerno at bumoto (Isang malaking katanungan). Kung ginawa lang nila ito ay disin sana ay wala nang pinagtatalunan pa ngayon at wala na ding pulitiko na makababalik pa sa kanilang kapangyarihan na maari nilang abusuhin na naman. Sana ay nagsasama sama na tayo sa pag bangon mula sa kinasadlakang kahirapan. Humigit 30 dekada na ay di pa din umunlad ang Pilipinas dahil sa mentalidad natin na talangka. Hindi ko sinasabing kalimutan na ang nakaraan subalit dahil sa nakaraan na ito ay tila di na tayo umusad-usad tungo sa pag-unlad.
    Talo pa tayo ng Vietnam ngayon na unti unti nang nakakabangon mula sa bangungot ng giyera.


  10. As i was reading this article, just a suggestion to complete this, from the data and analysis you made, kindly provide the data and analysis Between 1962 to 1986 and not 1980’s onward.. Given that marcos is loosing during those years..

    I would suggest, summary of accomplishments vs impact vs loss for losses for the country.



  11. My point of view:
    sa lahat ng mga nakaranas ng kalupitan at karahasan noong panahon ng Martial Law ay sila ang mga nagwelga at nag-aklas noong panahon ni Marcos.
    Samantala ang mga nakaranas ng kagandahan at kaayusan ng buhay noong panahon ng Martial Law ay ang mga hindi nagwelga o nag-aklas noon.
    in other words, you can only see one side of the story, kung isa ka sa nagpumiglas sa hawak ni Marcos, isa ka sa napagmalupitan noon, and vice versa.

    so my point is, kung sumunod lang ang mga tao at sinuportahan ang pangulo, malamang makita rin nila ang side na nakikita ng iba pang tao. kung bakit nila nasabi na maganda at mapayapa ang lansangan.

    Anti-Marcos ako dati, ngunit ng makausap ko ang iba kong katrabaho na naabutan ng Martial Law, nag-iba ang pananaw ko.

    at may mga nakausap akong ibang lahi, para sa kanila, golden era ng Pilipinas ang panahon ni Marcos.


    [Benigno Aquino, Jr. and the Communist Rebels (NPA) was the root of Philippine 1972 Martial Law.] In a privilege speech before Senate, Benigno Aquino, Jr. warned the public of the possible establishment of a “garrison state” by President Ferdinand Marcos.
    At the height of armed communist insurgency in the Philippines, Philippine Military Academy instructor Lt Victor Corpuz led New People’s Army rebels in a raid on the PMA armory, capturing rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers, a bazooka and thousands of rounds of ammunition in 1970.[13] In 1972, China, which was then actively supporting and arming communist insurgencies in Asia as part of Mao Zedong’s People’s War Doctrine, transported 1,200 M-14 and AK-47 rifles [14] for the NPA to speed up NPA’s campaign to defeat the government.[15][16] Prior to the 1975, the Philippine government maintained a close relationship with the Kuomintang-ruled Chinese government which fled to Taiwan (Republic of China), despite the Chinese Communist Victory in 1949, and saw Communist China (People’s Republic of China) as a security threat due to China’s financial and military support of Communist rebels in the country.[17]
    In a privilege speech before Senate, Benigno Aquino, Jr. warned the public of the possible establishment of a “garrison state” by President Ferdinand Marcos. President Marcos imposed martial law on the nation from 1972 to 1981 to suppress increasing civil strife and the threat of a communist takeover following a series of bombings in Manila.[18][19] However, Aquino himself rubbed elbows with leaders of Communist Party of the Philippines — first with founder Jose Maria Sison, and later with Rodolfo Salas, CPP chair at the height of Martial Law. In an interview with Ateneo De Manila University Professor Lisandro Claudio, Salas said not only did he bring wounded New People’s Army (NPA) soldiers to Aquino’s houses, but he received guns and cash from Aquino himself. He also said Aquino had a significant contribution to the expansion of NPA in the country. In another communication to the State Department dated September 21, the US Embassy sheds further light on what Ninoy told the American officials. On September 12, Ninoy had a “lengthy luncheon conversation” with two embassy officers about the “growing strength of Communist dissidence in the Philippines.” In this luncheon, the senator “readily admitted his past ties with the several Communist factions in the Philippines.” He claimed that maintaining links with Huk rebels was a “fact of life” for a Tarlac politician.[20][21] In the Philippine parliamentary election, 1978, the first parliamentary election during Martial Law, Ninoy fielded in his Lakas ng Bayan party Alex Boncayao, who was associated with Filipino communist death squad Alex Boncayao Brigade[22][23] that killed U.S. army captain James N. Rowe. All of the party’s 21 candidates, including Ninoy, lost in the election.
    On 21 August 1971, while the opposition (Liberal Party) was having their miting de avance in Plaza Miranda, 2 fragmentation grenades exploded.[citation needed] It took 9 lives and left more than 100 people seriously wounded.[citation needed] Some Liberal Party candidates were seriously injured including Jovito Salonga, who nearly died and was visually impaired. Suspicion of responsibility for the blast initially fell upon Marcos, whom the Liberals blamed for the bombing; however, in later years, prominent personalities associated with the event have laid the blame on the Communist Party of the Philippines under José María Sison.[24] In his autobiography, Salonga states his belief that Sison and the CPP were responsible.[25] Based on interviews of The Washington Post with former Communist Party of the Philippines Officials, it was revealed that “the (Communist) party leadership planned — and three operatives carried out — the attack in an attempt to provoke government repression and push the country to the brink of revolution… (Communist Party Leader) Sison had calculated that Marcos could be provoked into cracking down on his opponents, thereby driving thousands of political activists into the underground, the former party officials said. Recruits were urgently needed, they said, to make use of a large influx of weapons and financial aid that China had already agreed to provide.”[26]
    A month of “Terrorist Bombing” of public facilities in Manila and Quezon City culminated on 22 September with an assassination attempt on Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile. Citing more than 15 bombing incidences, chaos and lawlessness,[27] Marcos declared martial law, thereby suspending the 1935 Constitution, dissolving Congress, and assuming absolute power. Six hours after the Enrile assassination attempt, Marcos responded with the imposition of martial law. Proclamation № 1081 which imposed martial law was dated 21 September 1972, but it was actually signed on 17 September. The formal announcement of the proclamation was made only at seven-thirty in the evening of 23 September, about twenty-two hours after he had commanded his military collaborators to start arresting his political opponents and close down all media and retail (fashion, food, religious, sports) establishments.[28]
    The Proclamation read in part
    “ My countrymen, as of the twenty-first of this month, I signed Proclamation № 1081 placing the entire Philippines under Martial Law… ”
    — Ferdinand Marcos, September 21, 1972


  13. Masarap ba ang buhay ng mga taong hindi na iniintindi ang 3 beses na pagkain sa araw araw?…sila yung naghahanap pa ng higit sa pangangailangan at walang gustong bitawan sa dalawang kamay kapalit ang kasaganahan ng isa.

    Tama, taga bundok kami, payapa sa amin nung panahon ng martial law…ngsasaka ang mga tao, nangingisda, at umaani ng pareho…Masaya, daming piyesta, tulong tulong ung mga tao sa paghahanda.

    Pagdating ko sa Maynila at akoy nakapag-aral, nabasa ko, si Ferdinand Marcos ay isang diktador, si Ninoy ay Martyr, at si Cory ang ina ng demokrasya. Magulo sa Maynila, Presidente man si Marcos o hindi. Pati ako nakigulo, nakiusisa at nakipagtalo.

    Pagbalik ko ng Probinsya, ganun pa rin sa amin, ngsasaka ang mga tao, nangingisda at umaani. May piyestang masaya at tulong tulong pa rin sa paghahanda.

    Ang sarap ng tahimik na buhay…..sana ganun din sa Maynila..


  14. This is a good write up and comprehensive in its scope. I get the often tired remark that SC judges have already decided so lets move on. But you correctly pointed out that what is a legal decision may not necessarily a moral one.

    “Apartheid was legal, the Holocaust was legal, Slavery was legal, Colonialism was legal.” And now, with the nine SC justices’ affirmative votes, the burial of the late dictator Marcos at the LNMB is also legal. Clearly, legality does not establish morality.


    1. How dare you say that just because it is legal does not mean it is Moral? It is not only law binding under the law of the land but by Rule of Law.. The presumption of innocence.

      Are you f***ing kidding me?! The Marcos burial in LNMB is not only legally binding but above all else: moral.

      Unless you also believe that extra-judicial killings are moral? That giving someone the death penalty without due process is moral?! Giving someone life in jail because of an accusation without hearing or parole is moral?!

      That is the situation of the Marcos burial in LNMB.

      Put critical thinking first before your lofty zeal. Hypocrite.


      1. @Grace while what I stated above applies to your comment, my initial reply was towards the author not you.. I don’t know why it appeared as a reply to what you wrote.


  15. There’s a problem with this blog post, and I’m not accussing you, just the word choice, but its claiming that (all or most) millennials are ignorant of the actual history. I can agree that there are millennials that are ignorant of his regime, but a lot are affected by it through their families. It’s like you’re underestimating the youth. My younger cousin came to me one day, asking if Marcos was truly a hero because her privileged “I-Am-Here-For-The-Poor” pro-Marcos teacher was saying that “the EDSA revolution was a conspiracy to end Marcos’ regime of industrializing the Philippines, because us Filipinos hate industrialization” and some children agree because she was their favorite teacher and because their families weren’t poor (since my cousin goes to a more expensive school), especially this one girl who claimed that “her father lost everything during the regime” when in reality, he never reached the poverty line and is neutral towards the whole thing. So, there are millennials who are ignorant, but sometimes, it’s the fault of adults who were never affected at all.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s