UP academic Clarita Carlos: convene a team of scholars to SCIENTIFICALLY assess The Marcos Years

This is an excellent proposal by one of the few objective academicians of the University of the Philippines, retired political science professor Clarita Carlos. On a Facebook post, she articulates her idea of convening a team of scholars to mount a “scientific” evaluation of the 21 years that Ferdinand Marcos ruled the Philippines…

Quite troubling that many among us choose only certain segments of the 21 years of Marcos’ administration but make conclusions for all of the other aspects of his administration…

1. Note that Marcos ruled the country for 21 years assisted by thousands of us who continue to live to this day;

2. I, for one, had been a consultant of PM Virata and had been one of the first trainors of the Career Foreign Service Development Program at DAP, in the early 70s;

3. If we want a scientific assessment of 21 years of his administration, then, let us compose a team of scholars who will agree on ff:

a. Methodology for assessment

b. Relative potencies of variables like agriculture, education, health, foreign policy, etc

c. Data sources

d. Data analyses

4. The results of (3) shall be made public and a series of RTDs to be conducted to give way for any and all challenges to the assessment report.

Trivia: If some bright minds will again label me as pro Marcos because of my views above, you have two options:

1. Read my PhD dissertation on FM and RM

2. Find a deep lake where you can drown yourself

I hope that this initiative flies seeing that even that chi chi educational institution in Katipunan that has become a den of Yellowtardism, the Ateneo, has so far dismally failed to exhibit the same scholarship when it comes to their favourite bogeyman. Indeed, Marcos is not all good but he was not all bad either. Proof? Look at Cory Aquino’s administration! Unfortunately there aren’t many other academics who can be objective in their assessment. Why? It would debunk the narrative which has been spun for Marcos by his detractors. As Winston Churchill said “Study history, study history. In history lie all the secrets of statecraft.”

The declaration of martial law wasn’t meant to extend Marcos’s term. He already addressed that by amending the Constitution to adopt a parliamentary form of government. With or without martial law, that would’ve been the outcome of the 1971 Constitutional Convention. Martial law was brought about by Ninoy Aquino because he meant to topple Marcos through the Communist Party of the Philippines and its terrorist arm the New People’s Army (CPP/NPA) and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). Why? He was obsessed with becoming President and he wouldn’t have the opportunity for as long as Marcos was in office. Ninoy probably thought it was his birthright considering his provenance. Marcos had no provenance to speak of. He only had his brilliant mind. It is for this reason that he was cleared of the murder of Julio Nalundasan even if he was actually complicit. Jose P. Laurel thought it would be a waste of such a man if he was jailed for a crime borne out of political rivalry.

Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider where you can opt to receive by email our more comprehensive and in-depth free weekly newsletter GRP Mail. Consider also supporting our efforts to remain an independent channel for social commentary and insight by sponsoring us through a small donation or a monthly paid subscription.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

The Yellows and the Reds have been having their cake and eating it too. Why should individuals who have taken up arms against government be regarded as “heroes” as they have been glorified in the Bantayog ng mga Bayani in Quezon City? Why is Marcos being blamed for the lost youth of the 60s and 70s? Why can’t we move forward from Marcos and martial law? The simplest answer is it’s a convenient excuse for the failures of the Yellows and the Reds so history will not judge them as failures.

It has become evident that they are fuming over the election of Rodrigo Duterte to the Presidency in 2016. This is the will of the people which they refuse to respect as they did with Joseph “Erap” Estrada in 1998. They employed the same with Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) after she had a falling out with them. The Yellows and the Reds are going all-out in their vilification of Duterte and Marcos because they realize that it makes perfect sense for both to run and will likely win as a tandem in 2022, this will be the end of them.

8 Replies to “UP academic Clarita Carlos: convene a team of scholars to SCIENTIFICALLY assess The Marcos Years”

  1. if this theory of yours is correct, why was the NPA so much stronger and had more members around 1985 than 1972? the answer is activists took up arms as a direct reaction to repression and dictatorship. learn history before you spew nonsense online, lest you embarrass yourself. you’re welcome.

    ps: marcos declared martial law so he can have complete control/a totalitarian regime. don’t overcomplicate simple things.

    1. ps: marcos declared martial law so he can have complete control/a totalitarian regime. don’t overcomplicate simple things.

      So you’re gonna pretend there is no such thing as the First Quarter Storm of 1970? News flash: it happened.

      The Red Scare is no mere scare. Communists are really trying to take over this country during that time. But nope, you go with your same old tired “Marcos declared Martial law so he can have complete control/a totalitarian regime” while you’re totally fine for a Communist regime. When that happens, the United States will be left no choice but to bomb the Philippines just to stop the Communist insurgency.

      You say that we should not overcomplicate simple things but you are already overcomplicating yourself with your simpleton thinking and emoness.

      1. a few student activists and you tremble? hehe do some research and youll learn armed communists went from 2,000 to 25,000, 1972 to 1985, as a direct reaction to the repression and authoritarianism. Thats why marcos is called the number one recruiter for npa. Even general manuel yan said it was no problem.

        I am happy that the pinoy communists didnt succeed and I agree that a communist regime would have been worse than marcos, but its false to say we needed a decade of authoritarianism just to prevent them from winning. theres no evidence

        1. And those “few student activists” had become many when they decided to go radical, which caused civil unrest. And those numbers you put up from 1972 -1985 is based on a report from the International Crisis Group, an organization funded by none other than George Soros.

          On the other hand, the late Conrado Balweg begs to differ:

          “Kasi noong panahon ni Marcos malapit na kaming bumagsak noon. It was only the Cordillera Group that saved the situation. Pero noong dumating yung Cory administration, biglang lumakas yung NPA, dahil pinalakas nga nang gobyerno.”

          So it was the Cory government that strengthened the NPA, along with those numbers, and not necessarily direct reaction to the repression and authoritarianism. Unless we call Cory Aquino’s government being repressive and authoritarian under the guise of “democracy”.

          But it’s also false to say that things are better after Marcos left. And you easily fell for that.

        2. they only took up arms because unlike you they could not tolerate living under the yoke of authoritarianism. before the dictatorship they were just students.

          if we follow your logic npa would already be eradicated after 13 years of martial law since thats the stated aim correct? hehehe no research shows that npa reduced in strength during martial law. the tyranny induced many into joining, ironically.

          how can things immediately get better after marcos left, he left the economy in tatters didnt you know we defaulted on our loans 1983 idiot?? learn some history first lest you spew nonsense

        3. @greengrin:

          I never thought that Philippines went being authoritarian way before 1972. The First Quarter Storm was two years prior. And yes, they were students but there is also the Kabataang Makabayan. Like I said, there’s no Martial law if there’s no First Quarter Storm. And who led those students? It’s the Communist Party of the Philippines.

          Actually, I would rather listen to the words of former rebel than a something from an international organization who you can’t tell if they were biased or not. So what you’re saying that the late Conrado Balweg is a liar? Too bad he was assassinated by the NPA. The best research is to hear on people who are actually there, and not some “data”.

          Nice you put up 1983 stuff right there because after Ninoy was assassinated, it caused political instability and any political instability can cause an economic crisis. Funny that you say Marcos left the economy in tatters but refused to admit that the 1987 Constitution tattered the economy even further due to its policies that lasted for 30 years.

          I’ve learned history a lot. But not from Yellow-colored history books or written by crackpots.

      2. You do understand that due to the Cold War and the rising global thread of communism, it’s not only the Philippines who declared martial law at that time right? South Korea (Gwangju Uprising), Taiwan (38 yrs) and Indonesia all had martial law in those era. Even Singapore and Malaysia was not spared by the threat of Communism at that time so they launched Malayan Emergency with the British Army to quel the rebellion. This is the problem with the brainwashed yellow zombies, they are only tunnel visioned on the leftist doctrines propagated by the Communists and the CIA economic hitmen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.