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.
| SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY! Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us. 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.
Cook wide reader political crackpot music afficionado old soul out-of-the box thinker aspiring writer tech geek gearhead
Why are you all rehashing this crap over again? I think we all know about Marcos and enough is enough.
Brilliant Minds course through History, hope she could write a book on Politics in the Philippines.
I have copies of Professor Clarita Carlos books.
I used to have a shouting match about Marcos Sr. with my Utol, JCMARK Sereno Alegre. This is what I would tell him. What Claire Carlos has fearlessly proclaimed to the world what needs to be done. Her favorite expression also. Reminding me of Vladimir Lenin.
But what I would tell JCMark Alegre was I would need billions of salapi, preferably in the US$ currency!
And why not? We want to know … Yes, a fair and credible one.
Maybe it’s because of her advanced age or whatever cause we could only guess but she sadly missed the mark! The current issue is not at all about the performance Marcos Sr. as president or dictator at that but the capability of Marcos Jr. to lead as president in terms of intelligence, wisdom, moral uprightness and sincerity to uplift the welfare of the Filipino masses. His track record in all his experience holding various government positions fails to show that he has that. He looks more as an apple who has fallen far from the tree.
You don’t know shit and it shows.
@Rey Sanchez. And you look like a little hatchling that had fallen from a tree before you’ve gotten your wings. You don’t know anymore about BBM anymore than you know about his father or anyone who held the presidential office. You’re just speculating. Why don’t crawl back up to the nest, and wait and see what happens before you get picked off by predators?
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.
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.
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
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.
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
@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.
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.
I like Prof. Clarita Carlos. I’m familiar with her in the hundreds of TV shows I’ve seen her as expert guest sharing her professorial experience with the public. However, while liking her I also have an impression of her of sometimes being bumptious and imperious in the way she conduct herself every time the camera is on her. I mean, in the SMNI debate, for example, it was very obvious that she was hugging the limelight and competing with the presidential candidates by talking too much doing a recital that takes minutes if not hours from the real focus of the debate. She’s supposed to be there to ask questions about issues and not give a lecture or be too garrulous for comfort. Could be her experience attending too much talk shows made her too comfortable before the camera that oftentimes she thinks it all about her expertise and her intelligence. Well, enough of my favorite professor and on with the issue.
First off, what will a scientific evaluation of the 21 years of Marcos being in power do that will help uplift the life of Filipinos today? Will it bring more food to the table? Will it decrease the colonies of squatters? Will it raise the salary of the everyday salarymen? What? Frankly, what’s in there, other than experts and scientists finding a toy to play with, that we should be clamoring for it?
Will such evaluation include accountability and restitution on the part of the Marcoses if allegations of abuses, graft and corruption, violation of human rights, etc. is shown to have occurred or the commission of such are established?
I don’t mind foreigners talking about doing a scientific evaluation of the Marcos years. They’ll spend their own money, employ locals and we can hope that they will uphold utmost fairness and do an unbiased examination of that part in our history. They don’t have a choice. But Filipinos? Oh, boy, the opportunity to remake, revise, recast, rewrite, etc. is endless.
But seriously, we have to have a clear purpose on why we should do things and what’s in it for the Filipinos because it might just be another political endeavor meant to revise the past if not completely blur it. Before thinking of anything to do, let us first think of what we’re going to get out of doing a thing and why it is important for the country to have it going.
If the evaluation of the Marcos years will only be for academic purposes why not just outsource it, do it quietly and just be done with it?
Mr. Ortoll’s confession of being in cahoots to prop up the Marcos regime being a bureaucrat at the time did not make things easier, either. His decision to take sides only made matters worse because it invited curiosity about his desire for such evaluation of a regime he promptly helped and personally supported.
It’s a NO for me.
What it will do is clarify things once and for all and put within proper context all the shrill noise the Yellowtards and commies are polluting the Philippines’ political discourse with. Note in the SMNI debate the other night how participants were able to focus on issues of true national consequence? The conversation focused on the future, on solutions, on exploring the topics from different angles. As many observers noted, the lack of any Martial Law Crybaby noise enabled the group to engage in a more productive discussion.
Any scientific evaluation of the Marcos years that will be supervise by entities on either parties is just a waste of time.Those who clamor for it because the Yellowtards have twisted history is as worse as those who think a review will finally put their idol in a better light. Tit for tat. Even independent experts cannot be trusted because of the high political contamination and pollution in the country.
After more than 30 years, like Apo Ferdie’s cadaver before Digong settled it, the issues have never been given ‘appropriate burial’ to conduct a fair and neutral scientific evaluation. : (
On the SMNI debate, like I said, it was not boring but it’s half-cooked. They’ve done it and never again. I mean, I don’t want to watch a Pacquiao-Hatton 2 fight. The debate looks focus and productive because there was no excitement, no zing. In fact, the most animated person in the night were not the candidates but Prof. Carlos herself who obviously loves the klieg lights.
Like Karen Davila, Mr. Luna asks a question and he himself wants an answer of his own. And just like Ms. Davila, Mr. Luna fails big time with his ‘historical revisionism’ argument.
In one interview with Korina Sanchez, BBM was asked a similar question and the reply was, to my recollection, “How do you revise history?”.
Indeed, how do you make a murderer not a murderer or how can you make a thief not a thief? What action can you do today that can alter or make a proven thief or a murderer of yesterday not a thief or a murderer without evident new and validated proofs and evidences? What transpired had already transpired.
Perhaps, Mr. Luna should be challenged to answer the same and how exactly his impression or allegations can be regarded as the true history. Where’s the proof? Where’s the conviction?
With the presence of many validated proofs and materials all over the cyberspace: actual court decisions, relevant official documents, pertinent historical videos and real testimonies of persons who are actual players of the times, Mr. Luna will have a hard time convincing a lot of thinking people here.
The big NO is only symbolic of the old tunnel-vision, one-sided, hardheaded and sentimental Yellowtard narrative. Always afraid of being challenged, impressions and allegations vs. proofs of material evidences. The rebuttal as always is either to ignore, be in silence or go on with their perennial ‘Marcos excuse’.
@Zig
The thrust of the article was about welcoming the idea of convening a team of scholars to scientifically assess the Marcos years. I expressed my opposing opinion to it by raising issues meant to explain why such an act would be an exercise in futility.
Nothing in what I said is new. The anti-Marcos accuses the loyalist of trying to revise history so that the Marcoses could take the lost glory they had before 1986 and be placed in a more positive side of history. The Marcos loyalists, in response, accuses the other side of lying about the Marcoses by perpetually making them as escape goat for whatever ails the country and exaggerating everything that happens during Marcos’ watch. Is there anything new in that scenarios?
You asked, how do you make a murderer not a murderer? Easy, you go back to the scene of the crime and contaminate the evidence. If you cannot do that, you can plant the seed of doubt in the minds of those who will render judgment through manipulation or machination. I mean, there is nothing impossible with a depraved mind.
Do I insinuate the possibility of scholars fixing the assessment of the Marcos years in favor of the Yellow group to officially establish culpability on the Marcos side? Yes, the way that I suspect it will be manipulated also by the Marcos loyalists to protect their idol and acquit him of any wrongdoing. In short, a scientific review or assessment of the Marcos years will only be vitiated by both parties who will do everything in their power to redeem and vindicate their respective side in history.
I lived during the Marcos years. I have a pretty good idea of what happened then, hence, a scientific assessment or review is useless to me. If one was in a foreign land during those times, numerous history books about the topic may serve as a proper guidance in looking back and finding out the details of the past.
You want to waste your time, good, it’s you time. I don’t.
“You asked, how do you make a murderer not a murderer? Easy, you go back to the scene of the crime and contaminate the evidence. If you cannot do that, you can plant the seed of doubt in the minds of those who will render judgment through manipulation or machination. I mean, there is nothing impossible with a depraved mind.”
Do you consider here what you’re talking about above as being scientific? Are you even being honest? Coming from someone who claims to abhor revisionism?
I’d say, it’s a waste of time… and space!
It’s like perpetuating a history of the Jabidah massacre scenario when it’s a fake claim even Ninoy himself doubted it in a speech (“Jabidah! Special Forces of Evil?”) he delivered in 1968.
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1968/03/28/jabidah-special-forces-of-evil-by-senator-benigno-s-aquino-jr/
If we go by the father’s assessment of the supposed affair, then, the son-president PNoy’s leading of the Jabidah massacre rites on Corregidor in 2019 is just a waste of time and a true historical revisionism!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVZmvdL-wMI
It’s like blaming Marcos re Ninoy’s assassination for convenience but refusing to investigate the same despite of the two Aquinos becoming presidents. Do Yellowtards think it’s a waste of time to put closure and heal the nation in the process?
“I lived during the Marcos years. I have a pretty good idea of what happened then, hence, a scientific assessment or review is useless to me. If one was in a foreign land during those times, numerous history books about the topic may serve as a proper guidance in looking back and finding out the details of the past.”
I believe you’re not the only one who lived during that time, thus, you cannot truthfully claim to be representative for the rest. What’s this “pretty good idea” exactly? Whether or not that said history books that you’re referring to serve a proper guidance remains to be seen.
I cannot force you to understand what I’m saying or why I’m exercising my right to choose on the matter, at least you know my stand on it.
You go your way Zig, I’ll go mine.
Is it essential to have a scientific assessment for us to know if the Marcos regime is a failure or not. Let’s simplify it by comparing the past 30 years of Marcos and Yellowtard in one specific area, Quezon City. We have the Heart Center, Lung Center, Kidney Center and other structures built by Marcos and the saving grace this pandemic how about the legacy of the Aquinos for the past 30 years a “democracy” that cannot be served in the dining table. Enough lets start anew for the sake of our future generation.
I’ll paste this message of yours, @Juan Luna and I’ll quote it on what you just said:
“I like Prof. Clarita Carlos. I’m familiar with her in the hundreds of TV shows I’ve seen her as expert guest sharing her professorial experience with the public. However, while liking her I also have an impression of her of sometimes being bumptious and imperious in the way she conduct herself every time the camera is on her. I mean, in the SMNI debate, for example, it was very obvious that she was hugging the limelight and competing with the presidential candidates by talking too much doing a recital that takes minutes if not hours from the real focus of the debate. She’s supposed to be there to ask questions about issues and not give a lecture or be too garrulous for comfort. Could be her experience attending too much talk shows made her too comfortable before the camera that oftentimes she thinks it all about her expertise and her intelligence.”
SO WHAT?!?! Do you want a plain and “true” presidential debate that have no sense that it looks like it came from an elementary education just like what Jessica Soho and KBP do? And do you know that the REAL reason why Prof. Clarita Carlos do that and all of those 4 presidential candidates who’d attended the SMNI Presidential Debate last Feb 15 got almost pissed their pants off? Well, I tell you why and I would like to make a candid comment on this one that’s because:
1) She looks like a strict, disciplined and pragmatic teacher both from High School and College universities and I had met with those kind of teachers when I was in high school and college years. She will observe your intelligence and character to test your intelligence skills and your emotional standard, and yes I’d read some of the statements from social media that Prof. Carlos is a very strict teacher from the leftist dominated UP Diliman and one netizen quoted it that her exam was very difficult that you’ll gonna think that it’s a BS and WTF thing.
2) She’s doing a Machiavellian approach of thinking as what the Italian philosopher, Niccolo Machiavelli said that it is better to be feared than to be loved if you cannot be both. And she on a hunt to something on which of those 4 presidential candidates who she thinks that they have the guts, brains and knows how to win the psychological game of politics, and as for her that is the main ingredients of being a strong president who are willing to protect our country during his presidency with no BS and WTF moments!
Now if you’ll be on one of the presidential candidates who’d attended the debate sponsored by SMNI and Prof Carlos was on the panellists and you’re a very weak, idiotic and a candidate who have so much BS and WTF attitudes just like Madam LenLen and Manny Pacquaio do then you’ll better be ready for her rebuttal against you and she’ll gonna lecture you and what are the do’s and don’ts of becoming the next Philippine president. Kinda reminds me of the late Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago when she wants to rebuffed a person when there’s a senate inquiry or she’ll do a senate speech, just ask her fellow senator Juan Ponce Enrile and former PNP chief Purisima. And it’s even got better on why Prof Carlos looks that way just like MDS as I’ll gonna post a video link here on how she’d roasted a famous ABS-CBN news anchor on her interview with him and she’d braved enough on how biased on how biased that TV network is and even she’d refused to join in their presidential debate: https://youtu.be/eZsOvXUuxFU
And speaking of Madam LenLen and Manny Pacquaio, I hope that CNN Philippines would make an offer to join in their presidential debate on Feb 27 without a political biases from that TV network unlike the Katol Network in which she’d refused it in the end, then that would be a plot twist on this year’s national election who’d refused them to attend the SMNI Presidential Debate last Tuesday. I would like to see their faces to on a cold sweat and they’ll gonna feel on how Prof. Clarita Carlos grilled the 4 presidential candidates who’d attended on the said presidential debate on SMNI. I’ll pray for their safety if they’ll gonna face her or else, their hope to win on the 2022 election this May would be gone even though they’ll gonna call for help to SmartMAGIC to manipulate the counting results.
Prof. Carlos, whom I really admire, may be what you said her to be, a very good teacher, educator, etc., but that is not really where my comment was going. The party, the event was not about her. She was not there to decide or render judgment or even give grades, she was there to ask questions, prepared ones, to the presidential candidates.
There is a reason why her/their backs is turn from the audience. The panelist, which she belongs to, were mere props out there. It was not a classroom where she’s queen and master educator. It was not even a show where she was the main guest as supreme expert of the show’s subject. Actually, anybody can be in her place to ask the same question but for purposes of adding brilliance or intelligence in the gathering she was chosen to attend.
We can talk about all the excellent features and accomplishments and titles, etc. of Prof. Carlos in some other way or time but not on a presidential debate night.
There is still a lot to mine in the Marcos years despite the many literature already written about this period, including those from a political economy perspective, assessment of technocracy/technocrats etc. Convening and supporting more scientists will enrich the literature. But there are several items in this report and the good professor Clarita Carlos’s statement that must be scrutinised for being speculative or questionable as to premises, and confusing motivation with actual turn of events,notably these statements:
“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..” – the 1971 convention was practically dismantled with threatened and actual arrests of many delegates; rather the draft was finished off by a Malacanang corps, including Marcos himself who wrote down his own marginal notes on the draft; the ConCon would never have given FM unrestricted, indefinite powers as was inserted in the transitory provisions; and even with a shift to a parliamentary system had the ConCon finished its job, it would have required an election, not a takeover.
Continued:
“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.”
Only the President can declare martial law and it wasn’t in the power of Aquino to bring it upon himself even if he wanted to — and get arrested and eventually killed for it.
I will grant that this may have been a tongue in cheek statement – though hardly one that we’d expect from a scientific study.
Your name rings a bell. Are you Prof. Ferrer who chaired the government panel under the administration of former President BS Aquino that negotiated and signed the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB) with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front as represented by MILF chief negotiator Mohagher Iqbal back in 2014?
(Mr. Iqbal was believed more to be a Malaysian than a true Filipino because of his being evasive of his identity concerns.
According to Nur Misuari, in an interview with Al Jazeera correspondent Veronica Pedrosa, both MNLF and MILF groups were a creation of the Malaysian government to divert the attention of the Philippine government out of Sabah. Arms and financial support as well as military training support came from the Malaysians. When Misuari intimated his interest for a discussion of Sabah for his people with the Malaysians it lead to the formation of the MILF, being a break-away group from own his MNLF. The Malaysians earn millions (or billions?) out of the rich resources from Sabah.)
Misuari’s group felt left out in that peace agreement so to make their presence felt, the Zamboanga Crisis escalated.
Here’s a commentary back then from this website:
“Obviously, the most recent peace agreement cooked up by the government with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) was a waste of time because not only was it unsatisfactory to the original Muslim rebel group Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), it was also offensive to the latter because its leader, Nur Misuari, was left out of the conversation. He even calls members of the MILF traitors since he is still waiting for the resumption of talks to iron out some issues he has with the 1996 peace agreement he signed with former President Fidel Ramos.”
So it’s complicated. You can’t assume to be the correct or better one or have the upper hand when it comes to historical opinions. Nothing will come up that we can agree on unless of course you’re willing to reach out and collaborate with other scholars and discuss different aspects of relevant matters of historical of importance professionally.
I’m tired of every side claiming historical revisionism against each other. As an ordinary citizen, I’d really like to see history books being written about the last 50-75 years of the country. Specifically interesting to me and my Boomer generation are the verified facts on the following (for starters):
– what was the real extent of the communist threat in the Philippines in the 60’s;
– who really killed Ninoy Aquino and why; what is the cost of the last 53 years of insurgency in the Philippines in lives and government and private resources;
– how did the insurgency flourish and develop in the last 50 years;
– the facts about RAM’s participation in EDSA (it seems we just imagined their participation judging from how they’ve been made irrelevant in current books and articles; etc etc…
Please, someone please get the facts straight and put them in writing for future generations. To be successful, this has to be properly funded and IRON-CLAD neutral so that we preserve our true story. Otherwise it will be same old, same old written by the “victors” of the time and we as a country end up none the wiser.
I wish Mr. Ortoll go back at this article because it’s a very interesting topic. I was thinking that it could be our version of what they have in the U.S. called ‘critical race theory’ (CRT). I’m not sure but the thrust of the idea is all about looking back, review and talk about the past in comparison with the present, just like CRT.
The brilliant political mind of professor Carlos makes her sense of reality questionable. Its dangerous perhaps for a political analyst/ scientist who has her own perception of the events in history laced with personal biases (putting more weight on one side of truth while downplaying the other side -the corruption and oppression side of the F. Marcos story) to lead a team and create research methodologies with unconscious bias with the goal of writing the history of this country during the 21 years of FEM reign. Troubling, because a brilliant mind with pure political perspectives has the tendency to re-write history. I would agree for this propose scientific research and evaluation of the FEM’s 21 years rule if it is carried by sociologists instead who may have a more holistic view of the Marcos era in our country’s history.
I was curious about this professor so I watched some of her videos. I could not find any of her claims (mere opinions or speculations) being backed up by real data when she speaks strongly about research methodologies. The use of insulting language is unbecoming of an intellectual or academic that she professes to be. Her comments are useless and irrelevant to the current plight and fight of our country. Not far from troll thinking; just used her title and previous “achievements” to gather attention? Thus, she is cancelled from my daily news reading. Big waste of time, not even deserving of the title esteemed or brilliant, moreso ma’am or professor.
Academics are rarely relevant in the real world.
That said, they play an important role in society.
Exactly what role, i could no longer remember.
In conclusion,that Dua lipa is fine.
Ignore the above post. It was intended to be posted in the new ‘Prof. Carlos’ thread. TY ?