Mirage
By Farah G. Decano
I am trying to understand why some Filipinos have not been outraged by the atrocities of the Marcos Regime despite the glaring truth.
What more is credible than facts proven in court, here and abroad, where both parties have a chance to debunk the claim of the other? In general, the following statements are based on court rulings: Imelda Marcos has been convicted of several graft charges; the Marcos family has billions of unexplained wealth; the Philippine government has successfully recovered a significant portion of that wealth; Marcos Jr., as his father’s estate administrator, has been fighting decades-long legal battles in order to keep the rest of the unexplained wealth for their family; and that Marcos Sr.’s administration had committed human rights abuses.
Some say that Ferdinand Marcos Sr. was innocent because he was not convicted of any crime. The late strongman could not be convicted because he died too early after being deposed from power. By law, the dead cannot be convicted. Hence, the poor wife, Imelda, faced all the criminal charges by herself.
Some conspiracy theorists say that the patriarch Marcos had earned big time from gold shares invested around the world or that he found the Yamashita treasure. I question these theories because these shares or these gold bullions were never declared in his Statement of Assets and Liabilities.
Before Marcos Sr.’s ascent to power, our country was an economic tiger with a number two rank in South East Asia. He left the Philippines in 1986 with the tag, “the sick man of Asia.”
It was during Marcos’ time that Filipinos started to seek greener pastures by working abroad. They suffered the pain of separation from their families to make both ends meet.
Meantime, those who spoke their minds during that time were silenced. Student activists vanished. Some eventually surfaced dead. Some of the women, who returned alive after days of disappearance, brought with them gruesome tales of torture and rape. Remember Archimedes Trajano, Primitivo Mijares, Lilisa Hilao and Aida Santos, among many others.
Yet, some of us still choose to romanticize the Marcos Regime and the return of his son to the presidency. Why?
What is their basis? Supporters insist that during Marcos’ time, the economy was good and the country was peaceful and orderly. If their claim is based on their memory of the past, then let us go back why they seem to differ in their recollection.
Please remember how our perception of the Marcos government was molded during that time. Not only was dissent punished, there was massive mind conditioning too. During the 1970s and 1980s, there were only about four television channels. The government controlled what could be shown on these channels. I remember viewing propaganda news about Marcos’ achievements airing simultaneously on all these TV channels for many years. As a kid, I could not watch my favorite Sesame Street whenever Malacañang decided to show a real time coverage of a Marcos event. Our view of what was happening in the world was limited to what Malacañang allowed to be exhibited. The movie houses were also required to run videos of Marcos achievements. Indeed, our memory of a golden regime must have been embedded strategically during those times.
It was in 1986 when the truth of the country’s situation was revealed to the Filipino people. There was, indeed, so much news that were suppressed. In fact, I thought then that the snap elections were peaceful until the videos of violence were aired right after the EDSA revolution. The people again enjoyed their right to freedom of expression. No president from then on became immune from severe attacks from the media. And no president ever again forced memory on the people.
Again, I ask, “Why do some romanticize a monstrous regime?” As we go further away from the Marcos period and with the present proliferation of fake news, some Filipinos tend to remember what was not really there – a memory mirage.
Share your Comments or Reactions
Powered by Facebook Comments
