Two steps forward, ten steps back

Ang artikulong ito ay mga sipi mula sa panayam ni Glen Christian Tacasa kay Prof. Veronica Alporha ng UPLB Department of Social Sciences

Alam natin na ang salitang “kasaysayan” ay mula sa salitang ugat na “saysay”.  Nangangahulugan na mas binibigyang diin ng ating historiograpiya ang kahalagahan at kabuluhan ng ating mga naratibo kaysa sa dayuhang konsepto ng history na may pagpapahalaga sa oras, panahon at chronology.

Magiging mahirap para sa mga historyador, at mga nag-aaral ng ating kasaysayan na kilatisin ang kasaysayan ng Pilipinas habang patuloy itong binabaluktot ng mga Marcos. Ang pagbabalik ng mga Marcos sa Malacañang ay isang napakabigat na manipestasyon ng kanilang tahasang pagsisinungaling at pagbabago sa naratibo ng kasaysayan. Mula sa mga nangyari nitong mga nakaraang buwan, ano na nga ba ang saysay ng kasaysayan ng Batas Militar na binaka at ipinaglaban ng hene-henerasyong pilipino?

---

Bilang historyador, ano ang inyong inisyal na reaksyon noong nakita n’yong nangunguna na sa bilangan si Bongbong Marcos sa pagkapangulo?

Bilang isang historian, it felt like, ano ‘yung ginawa namin for the past years. Ako, relatively, bilang mas batang historyador, nandun din ‘yung panghihinyang [at] ‘yung feeling that we could really have done more. I mean maraming mga material conditions ‘yung nag-determine nung resulta ng eleksyon, pero mahalaga talaga ‘yung factor nung tagumpay ng mga Marcos when it comes to reconstructing their image. And, consequently, when it comes to distorting history, marami naman nang pag-aaral at artikulo na lumabas tungkol d’yan, tungkol sa proyekto nila. I think ‘yung devastating victory ng anak ng diktador talagang sinementuhan ‘yung tagumpay ng maraming mga taong efforts ng mga Marcos at kanilang mga friends, kanilang mga kaalyado, dun sa pagbabalik nila sa kapangyarihan at pagbabaluktot nila ng kasaysayan.

Anu-ano ang implikasyon sa kasaysayan ng pagbabalik ng mga Marcos sa kapangyarihan?

Ako nakita ko talaga ito bilang isang; parang ano tayo e ‘two steps forward, ten steps back’. So I think that when it comes to the history of the nation, as a whole, this Marcosian victory really set us back for, I don’t know, we can say for at least fifty years. I think, what really devastated me, you know, the knowledge that, una wala akong kahit kaunting benefit of the doubt na kayang ibigay dito sa papapasok na administrasyong Marcos. Pangalawa, nakakalungkot isipin na akala natin uunlad ‘yung Pilipinas, at least in terms of governance, [or] in terms of our chances for a more progressive country, economically speaking [and] socially speaking, parang mukhang hindi mangyayari sa lifetime natin. 

It might be too early to say that, I might sound very pessimistic, pero definitely it made our fight harder. Kasi ‘yung fact na mayroon namang resistance coming from many groups and many sectors, as was the case during the first Marcos presidency lagi naman s’yang nand’yan. Even post-Marcos, ‘yung mga EDSA presidents [mula kay] Cory Aquino hanggang kay Rodrigo Duterte, lagi naman nand’yan ‘yung resistance, lagi namang mayroong struggles. But I think, mas mahirap s’ya ngayon. 

Ano ang implikasyon ng Marcos restoration para sa mga historyador?

It definitely made our job harder, kasi ‘di ba, imagine mo paano mo ituturo ‘yung EDSA [People Power]? Paano mo ituturo ‘yung 1986? Paano mo ituturo ‘yung First Quarter Storm? Paano mo ituturo ‘yung Diliman Commune? Paano mo ituturo ‘yung mahabang kasaysayan ng anti-dictatorship struggle [at] ng democratic resistance with another Marcos at the Malacañang? How will you teach the assassination of Ninoy Aquino? How will you teach about the suffering of the anti-Martial Law activist during that time, ‘yung mga nawala, ‘yung mga tinortyur, ‘yung mga pinatay, at pinakulong? Paano mo ituturo ‘yun sa mga tao na mayroon isang buong henerasyon ang nagsakripisyo ng kanilang buhay, ng kanilang husay, [at] ng kanilang kagalingan para laban ‘yung diktador at para manumbalik ‘yung demokrasya noong 1986. And then, 36 years later, ito na naman tayo. Sobrang hirap ipaliwanag n’on ngayon. 

Our very constitution, ‘yung 1987 Constitution, ‘pag binasa ‘yung dokumento, talagang makikita na maraming mga bahagi non ay inilagay d’yan precisely to prevent another Marcos. Halimbawa, ‘yung provision on presidential term limit, so from two-terms-six-years [naging] one-term na lang, precisely because they were afraid of another Marcos extending ‘yung kanyang kapangyarihan sa Malacañang. So how will you teach that the very foundation of our government, which was the legacy of the People Power, kung sa isang iglap ay naririyan muli ‘yung mga Marcoses. 

Marami ‘yung mga points of reflection dito, and at the same time, tingin ko as historians, it will be very hard to speak truth to power. Ngayon pa lang, the presumptive National Security Adviser, Clarita Carlos mayroon na s’yang mga pinaghahandang libel cases sa kanilang mga kritiko. Usually, ang mga targets ng mga iyan ay mga journalist, mga human rights activists, pero ‘yung mga historians hindi malabo na kung ‘di man tahasang i-repress, ay sirain ang kredibilidad or i-silenced into irrelevance.

For a lot of us historians, personal ‘yung struggle. Hindi na magiging ganun kadali ‘yung pagsusulat tungkol sa kasaysayan ng Batas Militar, [at] ng struggle. Ako personally, ang [research] interest ko din ay nandun rin sa period na ‘yun: the contemporary history of Martial Law, [and] of the mass movements that fought it for many decades. Totoo, na med’yo nakakatakot. The academe or the university really cannot cushion you forever, there will always be some threats to it. And speaking truth to power should not be hard, but with the current context, it will definitely be [hard].  

Anong magiging implikasyon ng Marcos restoration at ng kanilang Historical distortion sa mismong field ng History at sa pag-aaral ng kasaysayan?

Alam mo kasi, ‘yung academic na mga disiplina, scholarships and academic disciplines, we do not exist in a vacuum. There are certain political, and material conditions that actually dictate the truth that we say, or the scholarship that we produce, [or] the narrative that we tell. Lagi s’yang determined nung konteksto. With the Marcos at the helm, I think that wouldn’t be a very friendly context, to write about it, [and] to be critical about it. 

Pero tingin ko kasi, hindi naman kami faultless dito. Ang kritisismo nila para sa aming mga historians ay we didn’t do enough, we became complacent after EDSA. Parang pagkatapos mapatalsik ng mga Marcos, nawala na ‘yung conversation about it. Akala panalo na tayo, panalo na ‘yung liberal democracy [at] galit na ‘yung mga tao sa diktadurya, pero hindi ganun. And because of that, the Marcos were able to warm through their way back to Malacanang. As early as 1998, Bongbong Marcos was already in the local government of Ilocos [Norte], tapos si Imee [Marcos], tapos ‘yung nanay nila. So nandyan sila lagi, and yet hinayaan lang, parang kibit-balikat. By 2010, Bongbong Marcos was back in national politics. And yet we were so absorbed with the victory of Noynoy Aquino during that time, we felt that the EDSA narrative was strong, but no. Pinapakita na hindi, kasi after 6 years, Bongbong Marcos almost clinched the vice-presidency. 

This is a very hard context to work in. The threat for our lives, for our career is actually more real [and] more tangible with a Marcos president. Kung hindi man ire-repress ‘yung mga akademiko na kritikal sa isang Marcos presidency, maaring mawalan sila ng kredibilidad, saysay at relevance given the way that they systematically operate propaganda.

Ano ang ‘Martial Law Nostalgia’ o ‘Authoritarian Nostalgia’ at paano ito ginamit ng mga Marcos sa pagbabalik sa kapangyarihan?

In the Philippine setting, at least, we can say that this nostalgia to a fabricated memory of a golden age could really come, not from the ignorance of the people, not from their gullibility, but from the general disillusionment that they felt during the EDSA Republic, from Aquino the mother, hanggang kay Noynoy Aquino. Kasi ang ganda nung mga naririnig nila, umuunlad ang ekonomiya pero ‘yung mga manggagawa hirap na hirap pa rin. Strong daw ‘yung ekonomiya ng Pilipinas nung panahon ni GMA [Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo] pero ang mahal ng bilihin, nakapila sila sa NFA [National Food Authority] rice.

Journalist Glenda M. Gloria would say that ‘the greatest enabler of the Marcos restoration, was no other than Rodrigo Duterte’ not only because he was allied with Marcos for most of the time. For example, his government allowed for the burial of Ferdinand Marcos in the Libingan ng mga Bayani, [and] not only it was Sara Duterte run as the running mate of Marcos Jr., but because it was Rodrigo Duterte who legitimized the bastardization of EDSA. He gave language to the silent grievances of people against the EDSA Republic which was supposed to be republic, which was supposed to give opportunities to everyone. 

Si [Rodrigo] Duterte naman talaga ‘yung unang explicitly nagsabi na ‘mas mabuti ang diktadurya’ or ‘sobra sobra tayo sa demokrasya, and here I am I will limit democracy but it would be for everyone’s good’—that discourse came from Rodrigo Duterte and that made everything easier for the Marcoses. […] Iyon ‘yung nagbigay ng Authoritarian Nostalgia sa mga tao. It wasn’t so much [because] of the ignorance about history, I mean there should be a reason why people had the inclination to believe in these false Martial Law narratives, and this is it. Dumadami ‘yung pera ng mga tao, kasi technically lumalaki ‘yung ekonomiya natin, they have more money in their pockets but also they are very insecure. Kapag mayroon kang ganong social anxiety, kanino ka kakapit? Kakapit ka sa isang leader like Rodrigo Duterte and therefore like the Marcoses. 

***

Isa sa pinakahuling katagang binitawan ni Primitivo Mijares sa kanyang akdang ‘The Conjugal Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos’ ay sinabi n’ya na “in spite of the evidently tightening noose of circumstances pointing to an adverse historical verdict on his regime, Marcos will seek to maneuver around in the vain hope that history would deal with him kindly”. Sang-ayon dito si Prof. Alporha, matagal na talagang plano ng mga Marcos na linisin at pabanguhin ang kanilang pangalan sa publiko mula 1986 pa lamang. 

*** 

As early as 1990s, mga sampung taon palang since nangyari ‘yung EDSA, mayroon nang mga efforts talaga ‘yung mga Marcoses, especially Imelda Marcos, to launder their name. Kasi they were humiliated to exiled noong 1986, so nandoon ‘yung desire. Makikita mo naman ‘yan dun sa mga recent interviews ni Imee Marcos ‘di ba? Talagang explicitly sasabihin n’ya na para [ito] sa pangalan, para [ito] sa apelyido na Marcos. Pero these are just old talks, for example, ‘yung historical revisionism na nangyayari online [ay] matagal na ‘yan hindi naman ‘yan bago, mas productive lang ‘yung mga espasyo ngayon. 

Pangalawa, mayroon din tayong problema, bilang publiko [at] ‘yung media natin mayroon ding problema, and I would argue [that] even our historians, and even our academics, we also have problems. We didn’t really make it difficult for the Marcoses to come back. Halimbawa, sila Imee Marcos, ‘yung mga pamilya ng mga Marcos, why were they welcome in social events? Why aren’t they being shamed? Their money clearly came from our country’s money, from corruption. Mayroon mga magazine feature kay Imee Marcos. In [2015], Imee was on the cover of Tatler [Philippines]. As if we treated them like they’re normal citizens, when they are not. Their family languished with our people’s money, [pero] hinayaan iyan at binigyan pa ng espasyo ng Philippine [mainstream] media. 

***

Bukod dito, matatandaan noong 2018, mismong si UP President Danilo Concepcion ang nagbigay ng espasyo para sa reunion ng Kabataang Barangay (KB) na kasama si Imee Marcos, sa UP Bahay ng Alumni sa UP Diliman. Kung saan nakatanggap ito ng matinding kritisismo mula sa UP community. Mariin itong kinundena ng sektor ng kaguruan at alumni, sinasabing “accommodationist” ang UP admin sa restorasyon ng mga Marcos. Samantala, hindi tinanggap ng UP Departamento ng Kasaysayan ang paliwanag ni Concepcion sa pagdalo sa pagtitipon (BASAHIN: Faculty, alumni shun UP prexy’s attendance at KB reunion; Pahayag ng UP Departamento ng Kasaysayan sa Naganap na Pagtitipon ng Kabataang Barangay sa UP Diliman).

***

Sa side ng mga scholar, [at] ng mga academics, we actually became very complacent after what happened. ‘Yung mga Marcos apologist pinagtatawanan lang iyan years ago. There wasn’t really a serious attempt to combat [Marcos’ historical revisionism] tapos nagising na lang tayo isang umaga na nanalo na si [Bongbong] Marcos bilang senador, at muntik na s’yang manalo bilang vice president. At the same time, [ang] problema kasi sa academe [ay] ‘yung public history [na] wala masyadong nag-engage sa publiko. It made a lot easier for the Marcoses to distort history to their advantage nang walang masyadong pushback, kung magkakaroon [ay] huling huli na [and] it’s very late. Sa Tiktok pa lang, countless ‘yung content glorifying Bongbong Marcos and [his son] Sandro Marcos, for reasons that I can’t really understand. 

The overwhelming Marcos victory this 2022 [elections] is really the most tangible manifestation of the success of all of their endeavors to distort history. Marcos Sr. was actually very conscious of how history would portray him. Itong ganitong post-truth presidencies […] talagang makikita natin how it is sponsored and buttrest by propaganda. Malakas ‘yung propaganda method ng gobyerno, and I would expect the same pattern dito sa incoming Marcos presidency. Si incoming PCOO [Presidential Communications Operations Office] Secretary Trixie Angeles sinabi n’ya [na] dapat daw i-debate ‘yung Martial Law, so ngayon pa lang ‘yan, hindi pa nagsisimula ‘yung termino ganun na. So come June 30 pagsimula ng term n’ya, definitely I would expect more from them. Maybe, it won’t be a distortion of history itself, pero the way that they project the government, [and] the way that they produce propaganda to serve their image as the incumbent government. 

Masyado bang ikinulong ng mga akademiko ang kanilang sarili sa kani-kanilang ‘echo chambers’? 

To be fair, ayoko din naman i-dump lahat ng blame sa amin. Hindi rin naman kasing enabling ang environment, [at] konteksto ng mga akademiko to engage in a serious research about the dictatorship. Halimbawa, wala naman masyadong space for us to really do research as employees of the state university, and at the same time, ‘yung kasing pagbaka sa diskurso ng pasismo, diktadurya, at mga anti-democratic ideology [ay] it will also take political mandate to do that. What I mean to say is that: kahit gaano pa kadami ang mga progressive na intelektwal sa UP, sa Ateneo [at] ibang pang state universities sa Pilipinas, kung hindi kami ine-enable ng policy to proliferate the real lessons Martial Law [ay] walang mangyayari. Halimbawa, sa mga bansa sa Eastern Europe [katulad ng] Germany, mandated na topic na pag-aralan ang holocaust. May mga ganitong policy that really enabled teachers of history and historians themselves na idikdik talaga sa consciousness ng kanilang lipunan na nangyari ‘yung holocaust una sa lahat, at mali at hindi maunlad ang Germany noong panahon ni Hitler. Sana may ganon [mandato] din sa atin.

May malaking banta ba ang Marcos restoration sa historical facts hinggil sa rehimen ng Batas Militar ni Marcos Sr.?

Katulad ng nabanggit ko kanina, hindi tayo nagtatrabaho bilang mga scholars sa vacuum, we are empowered, and at the same time, disempowered by the political context in which we move. Meron tayong panata sa katotohanan bilang mga historyador. At naniniwala ako na we will hold the line, we have been holding the line since Marcos was buried in 2016. I would like to believe that we will continue to do so. The challenge would be how do you persuade others, paano mo lalampas ‘yung ‘echo chambers’ at maging warriors of truths in this age, in the age where lies actually won. It would be challenging, [but] you really cannot change history. You can change how it’s packaged, you can lie, at the end of the day, you really cannot change what happened 50 years ago. I would be hard, pero naniniwala ako, mas mapaapigting pa ‘yung passion ng mga kasamahan natin sa disiplina. 

Anong mga hakbang ang p’wede nating gawin upang mapreserba ang mga historical facts hinggil sa rehimeng Marcos Sr.?

May calls ‘yung mga kasamahan natin sa history na ‘mag-digitize kayo ng mga libro’, ‘scan n’yo’, ‘i-restore n’yo’, sa ngayon it’s putting cart before the horse, pero why not? Let’s do that as well. More than that, kahit marami kang natagong mga libro, kahit marami kang natagong mga pelikula at dokumentaryo, kung hindi ‘yan papanoorin ng mga tao, walang may pakialam d’yan [ay] aamagin lang ‘yan sa library mo. The challenge really is not just into storing and keeping this resources safe; the challenge would be: how would multiply the message of anti-Marcos, or how would you amplify and multiply the democratic message in our time right now. Ibigsabihin ‘yung libro hindi lang ‘yan tinatago, iyan ay binabasa at iyan ay ipinagkakalat. Maybe in contents that are more accessible, more comprehensible to more people. We’re not saying that the masses cannot read books, tayo bilang may mga kapital, [at] bilang may puhunan [at] kakayanan, we really need to be instruments and vessels of historical justice by propagating and proliferating these massages, the truth and the narrative against the Marcoses. 

Mula sa mga nangyari, bilang historyador, ano ang kahulugan at bigat ng panawagang ‘Never Again, Never Forget’?

‘Yung ‘Never Again, Never Forget’ tingin ko may dahilan bakit hindi ‘yan nag-resonate sa publiko. Matagal nang call iyang ‘Never Again, Never Forget’, I think at least 10 years na iyan, pero hindi s’ya nag-resonate. Tingin ko kailangan nating i-revisit bakit [hindi nag-resonate sa publiko]. Kailangan nating tingnan din na hindi ito tungkol sa paglimot; it’s not only about forgetting, it is also about giving them something to remember. What are the things that we should remember from our Marcosian past, I think kailangan nating maalala ‘yun inspirasyon at idealismo ng mga nakaraang henerasyon na lumaban din sa diktadurya. We should not only clamor against forgetting, we should also clamor for the things that are worth remembering.

How spectacular it was in 1986, when the people ousted a dictator after 25 years in power. Siguro ngayon ang hirap i-imagine na matatalo natin ‘yung pinagsanib na pwersang Marcos at Duterte, pero noong 1970s at 1980s, mahirap rin i-imagine na matalo ang mga Marcoses. If there’s one thing that history tells us or history allows us to do–it actually reminds us of the things we are capable of, as a people. In 1986, we have proven that we are capable of ousting a dictator, despite everything on his side [such as] the military [and] the economic elite. I believe we can do it again. 

---

Kaakibat ng panawagang ‘Never Again, Never Forget’ ang responsibilidad sa bayan, at hamon sa atin ng panahon. Sa mga susunod na buwan at taon, magiging mahirap ang ating laban. Kaakibat rin nito ang pagpapaalaala sa atin na mayroong buong henerasyon noong panahon ng diktadura na silang nagtibay ng kampanya kontra Batas Militar at kontra sa mga Marcos. 

Sariwain natin ang naratibo ng Southern Tagalog 10, kagaya nila Rizalina Ilagan, Gerry Faustino, Jessica Sales, Cristina Catalla, at ang dating punong patnugot ng Aggie Green and Gold na si Leticia Ladlad, ilan sa mga nagmula sa UPLB na humanay sa masa, at nag-alay ng kanilang buhay upang laban ang diktadurya ng mga Marcos. [P]

Ang artikulong ito ay mga sipi mula sa panayam ni Glen Christian Tacasa kay Prof. Veronica Alporha ng UPLB Department of Social Sciences

Si Prof. Veronica Alporha ay isang assistant professor mula sa UPLB Department of Social Sciences, na nagtuturo ng HIST 1 – Philippine History at KAS 4 – Ang Kababaihan sa Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas.