Martial Law

Tuesday, 27 September 2011 03:09

Written by Neric Acosta

Those of us who were born in the latter part of the 1960s would in our childhood and young adulthood be called “martial law babies.” Up until college or beyond we would know no other president but Ferdinand Marcos. In many respects our generation was marked by social upheaval, and a world divided by the so-called Cold War. We grew up understanding that we lived in a time defined by the divides of civilizational ‘isms’ -- of communism and capitalism, the ‘free world’ on one side and the countries of the Soviet bloc on the other.

When martial law was declared on September 21, 1972 – a year short of two decades ago – the country was brought into the orbit of a bipolar world. Marcos would justify the abolition of democratic rule and putting the whole country under martial law as necessary for the stemming of the rise of communism in Asia and other parts of the world. The communist insurgency, as well the Muslim secessionist movement, were both seen as a growing threat to the “stability of the republic.”

Marcos would seek the backing of the United States for this authoritarian shift and deceptively refer to martial law “constitutional authoritarianism.” The US in turn would turn a blind eye to, even tolerate, the rising number of human rights violations and unspeakable atrocities for the next 14 years – including the protracted incarceration of several political leaders and dissidents like Ninoy Aquino.

Growing up in remote Mindanao, the prevailing narrative was that of the strongman rule of Marcos defending “our way of life,” keeping at bay the wolves of communism and secessionism and making the grand promise of economic prosperity. We were told that we would be safe and secure – but we would have to trade freedom for this. We could afford to do away with free speech and free elections, the narrative went, for as long as we enjoyed the benefits of rapid economic modernization. And for as long as we remained under the wings of our former colonial master, which maintained in the Philippines two of the largest military bases in the world, we were going to be a bulwark against the “evils of communism” spreading in many parts of the region.

Democracy, after all, was too cumbersome, tedious and rambunctious. Democratic processes only served to delay development, stymie growth and progress and benefit only a favored few. Martial law was going to hasten development and usher us into an era of wealth and prosperity. Authoritarian rule was going to spell social progress. If our neighbors were on this track, like Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, we surely could pursue this development model. Or so we were all told to believe.

The reality that unfolded for us was certainly far from that visage. Over a decade and a half the Philippines had gone from a stature of being a hub of commerce and education, economic advancement, and democratic openness and vibrancy in the region -- second only to Japan we were told then -- to being in the doldrums of poverty and ill governance. The trade-off had clearly not worked. Authoritarian rule had concentrated power in one man and his cronies, emasculating the potential of the nation and depriving a whole generation of young leaders their rightful place under the sun.

Thirty-nine years since that day democracy was shut down, it behooves all of those who could remember that dark period of our history to take stock of what the country has been through. Especially from the time Ninoy Aquino was assassinated in 1983 up to 1986, the country convulsed with resistance and protest, but in the process rediscovering our collective voice, connecting with our outrage at the silencing of our liberties, and galvanizing resistance to a dogged dictatorship. Fourteen years from 1972 – and 25 years since 1986 – the country was and is defined by its reclaiming of lost democratic ground. It remains for us to ensure that these spaces of freedom widen for democratic rule to flourish and people to reach their potential.

As for the world, we moved out of the Cold War with the collapse of the communism as a global ideology, and moved into the reality of increasing engagement and interdependence. Climate change, globalization, terrorism and democratic governance will push us to build the institutions of a global order where we see ourselves as sharing a common planet and humanity.

It might be quite incongruous thinking of these larger challenges as we mark a day of infamy in the country 39 years ago. But just as we note that martial law was connected with the cataclysms that were global, so must we see that our children, born to the age of the Internet and greater democracy, are more than ever citizens of one earth.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites