Category: 2022

Marcos Jr.’s mantra: Unity, dialogue, respect

SATUR C. OCAMPO  

Those words, or that mantra, got repeatedly mentioned by Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in his inaugural speech Thursday, after being sworn into office as the Philippines’ 17th president, at the façade of the National Museum in Manila.

“We shall seek, not scorn, dialogue, listen respectfully to contrary views, be open to suggestions coming from hard thinking and unsparing judgment but always from us Filipinos. We can trust no one else when it comes to what is best for us,” he said, adding, “Past history has often proven that.”

“Let us all be part of the solution that we choose [in resolving our national problems]. In that lies the power to get it done, always to be open to differing views but ever united in our chosen goal,” he stressed. Elsewhere in his speech, he recalled his reflections during the presidential campaign that led to his resolve “never ever give up hope for reconciliation.”

Oddly, while reiterating his campaign stance “not to talk about the past” but about the future, Marcos Jr. repeatedly referred to some of what his father had done during his prolonged authoritarian rule and which he vowed to emulate.

“I once knew a man who saw what little have been achieved since independence in a land of people with the greatest potential for achievement. And yet they were poor. But he got it done, sometimes with the needed support; sometimes, without. So will it be with his son,” he declared. Quickly, he added, “You will get no excuses from me.”

One action with long-term devastating consequences that Marcos Sr. took without the people’s support, without even pre-warning to them, was his declaration of martial law on Sept. 21, 1972.

Can, therefore, the Filipino people feel assured that these pronouncements by the son would remain firm – and conscientiously adhered to – throughout the Marcos Jr. presidency?

Let’s go over other excerpts from the text of the inaugural speech provided to the media:

• “By your vote, you rejected the politics of division. I offended none of my rivals in this campaign, I listened instead to what they were saying and I saw little incompatibility with my own ideas about jobs, fair wages, personal safety and national strength and ending want in a land of plenty.”

So where comes the “politics of division” Marcos Jr. alleged was rejected by the voters? And would the pursuit of reconciliation pertain only to his rivals in the presidential election?

• “You picked me to be your servant to enable changes to benefit all. I fully understand the gravity of the responsibility that you’ve put on my shoulders. I do not take it lightly but I’m ready for the task. I will need your help. I want to rely on it but rest assured I do not predicate success on the wider cooperation that’s needed. I will get (the task) done.

“There are hints of a road not taken that could get us out of here quicker, to something better, something less fragile. There is also what you, the people, did to cope [with the pandemic and its harsh economic impacts] but this time empowered by new technologies and more resources. You got by, getting some of what you needed with massive government help. And for this I thank my predecessor for the courage of his hard decisions. But there is a way… more means and choices in your hands. I trust the Filipino.”

• “But again, I will not predicate my promise to you on your cooperation. You have your own lives to live, your work to do and there too, I will help. Government will get as much done alone without requiring more from you. No excuses. Just deliver. It was like that, once upon a time.” He was referring to how supposedly it was during his father’s regime.

Marcos Jr. promised to tell the Filipino people in his forthcoming State of the Nation Address later this month “exactly how we shall get this done.”

• “Our future we decide today, yesterday cannot make that decision anymore, nor can tomorrow delay it. The sooner we start, the surer and quicker the prospect of achieving the future. We are presently drawing up a comprehensive all-inclusive plan for economic transformation. We will build back better by doing things in the light of experiences that we have had, both good and bad; it doesn’t matter.”

This, of course, requires looking back seriously to identify the weaknesses and errors that need to be strengthened or rectified. Marcos Jr. clarified:

“No looking back in anger or nostalgia. [But can that be the case if there’s no admission of misdeeds nor apologies, to say the least?] In the road ahead, the immediate months will be rough but I will walk that road with you…”

Marcos Jr. heaped fulsome plaudits on his father and his predecessor for having built “more and better roads” than those of all the administrations ahead of them. Following their steps, he said, his administration “will continue to build, I will complete on schedule the projects that have been started, without taking credit for doing so.”

His administration will present a comprehensive infrastructure plan to be carried out during his six-year term. “No part of our country will be neglected. Progress will be made wherever there are Filipinos, so no investment is wasted,” he assured.

He also assured actions to address food self-sufficiency, which he noted had been the “key promise in agriculture by every administration. None, but one, delivered,” he said – again referring to his father as the one who delivered during the early part of his 20 years in power. As for the rest, it was another story.

Deafeningly silent, however, was Marcos Jr. on national security management and its criminal consequences: foremost of which is the impunity enjoyed by state security forces in perpetrating massive human rights violations, under all administrations beginning with the Marcos dictatorship.

*     *      *

Email: satur.ocampo@gmail.com

Independence Day 2022

By AMELIA HC YLAGAN

It had to be clarified in Memorandum 2022-066 dated May 22, 2022 by the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) that directed the Independence Day flag-raising to local government units that it was the 124th Independence Day, reckoning from June 12, 1898 when Emilio Aguinaldo declared from his residence balcony in Kawit, Cavite that Pilipinas was free from the colonizer Spain. The DILG Memo is based on “Republic Act No. 4166 (An Act changing the date of Philippine Independence Day from July 4 to June 12 and declaring July 4 as Philippine Republic Day”).

But here we go again, debating and quarreling about when Filipinos really gained their independence. Perhaps the rise and fall of self-doubt are urged as historical events are celebrated (or generally ignored) such as Independence Day, the most significant marker of nationhood. But history is about concluded events more than emotional assumptions about the whys and wherefores that made it happen. Nor can post-facto emotions or changed principles and values justify any revision of what had already happened in history.

What better written history is there than the Official Gazette to review the events leading to the granting of Philippine Independence:

“The Philippine Revolution of 1896 was led by the Katipunan, a secret society led by Andres Bonifacio, which aimed to attain independence for the Philippines. The Katipunan expanded and affiliated with other revolutionary groups in Manila and other provinces in the Philippines. Due to political and other differences among the leaders, divisions arose in the organization. The Magdalo group headed by Emilio Aguinaldo of Cavite soon controlled the revolutionary movement. In the power play, Andres Bonifacio was accused of treason against the combined organization, and was arrested and sentenced to death in Maragondon, Cavite.”

When the Revolution was failing, “Aguinaldo entered into negotiations with the Spanish government. This resulted in an agreement under which Philippine Revolutionaries would go into exile in Hong Kong and surrender their arms in exchange for financial indemnities and pardons” (Official Gazette, “Araw ng Republikang Filipino, 1899”). That was just about the time that Spain was very busy, besieged and embattled by the United States of America, who came in to assist in the war for Cuban independence from Spain. That was the 10-week Spanish-American War for the colonies, fought in both the Caribbean and the Pacific, including the Philippines.

“The war ended with the 1898 Treaty of Paris (signed Oct. 1, 1898), negotiated on terms favorable to the United States. The treaty ceded ownership of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippine islands from Spain to the United States and granted the United States temporary control of Cuba. The cession of the Philippines involved payment of $20 million to Spain by the US to cover infrastructure owned by Spain” (Benjamin R. Beede, The War of 1898 and US Interventions; 2013).

“Aguinaldo had returned to Manila on May 19, 1898 and declared Philippine independence on June 12. When it became clear that the United States had no interest in the liberation of the islands, Aguinaldo’s forces remained apart from US troops. On Jan. 1, 1899 following the meetings of a constitutional convention, Aguinaldo was proclaimed (by a rebel junta) president of the Philippine Republic. Not surprisingly, the United States refused to recognize Aguinaldo’s authority and on Feb. 4, 1899 he declared war on the US forces in the islands. After his capture on March 23, 1901, Aguinaldo agreed to swear allegiance to the United States, and then left public life. His dream of Philippine independence came true on July 4, 1946. He died in Manila in 1964.” (US Library of Congress: The World of 1898: The Spanish-American War: Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy 1869-1964)

“During the American occupation of the Philippines (1898-1946), the Filipinos were governed by the Commonwealth of the Philippines (since Nov. 15, 1935) and earlier by the Government of the Philippine Islands or PI, both under the Americans” (pna.gov.ph, July 4, 2021). Meantime, World War II broke out, and the Japanese Army overran all of the Philippines during the first half of 1942. “On Oct. 14, 1943, Japan symbolically granted independence to the Philippines by establishing a new government headed by its Filipino president, Jose P. Laurel. The government was branded by historians as a ‘Puppet Government’ because of the tight control that the Japanese wielded over its affairs.” (esquiremag.ph, June 7, 2019).

“The United States and Philippine Commonwealth military forces fought together to liberate the Philippines until the Japanese forces were ordered to surrender by Tokyo on Aug. 15, 1945.

“On July 4, 1946, pursuant to the provisions of the Tydings-McDuffie Law or the Philippine Independence Act, the Commonwealth of the Philippines became the Republic of the Philippines — the Third Republic. It was on this date that the United States of America formally recognized the independence of the Philippines and withdrew its sovereignty over the country.

“The independence of the Philippines — and the inauguration of its Third Republic — was marked by Manuel Roxas, third president of the Commonwealth, re-taking his oath, eliminating the pledge of allegiance to the United States of America which was required prior to independence, this time as the first President of the Republic of the Philippines. The Congress of the Commonwealth then became the First Congress of the Republic, and international recognition was finally achieved as governments entered into treaties with the new republic.” (officialgazette.gov.ph).

Yet despite the tight chronology of events that built up to the sure pinpointing of when is the factual date of Philippine Independence, President Diosdado Macapagal issued Proclamation No. 28 in 1962, moving the anniversary date from July 4 to June 12 — the date independence from Spain was proclaimed in Emilio Aguinaldo’s home in Kawit, Cavite. In his proclamation, President Macapagal cited “the establishment of the Philippine Republic by the Revolutionary Government under General Emilio Aguinaldo on June 12, 1898, marked our people’s declaration and exercise of their right to self-determination, liberty and independence” (Ibid.).

The Official Gazette says it for the record, “the move was made in the context of the rejection of the US House of Representatives on the proposed $73 million additional war reparation bill for the Philippines on May 28, 1962. The rejection, according to President Macapagal, caused ‘indignation among the Filipinos’ and a ‘loss of American good will in the Philippines.’ He explained that he deemed it the right time to push the change of the independence date, a political move he was planning even before his ascent to the presidency.”

There is surely no further protest or even the last whimper to review and possibly change Independence Day back to July 4, or to again consider yet another anniversary date. But it is still important that historical facts and events are accurate so that the remembering of a nation of its history is always in the context of the experiences, good or bad, that have shaped its soul and spirit.

It is thanks to President Corazon C. Aquino, president after the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution, who by Executive Order No. 200 revived the Official Gazette that was stifled in Ferdinand Marcos’ martial law dictatorship 1972 to 1986. The Official Gazette, which is printed by the National Printing Office (NPO), is the public journal and main publication of the government of the Philippines. Its website only uploads what has been published; it is managed by the Presidential Communications Operations Office [PCOO] (based on the attribution found in the footer of the Official Gazette website).

Look it up, it’s there: “A History of the Philippine Political Protest — Official Gazette.” (www.officialgazette.gov.ph)

The 1898 proclamation of independence

By RANDY DAVID

One hundred twenty-four years after our elders proclaimed the Filipino people’s independence from Spanish colonial rule, we may perhaps view with more understanding, and even admiration, the seemingly strange manner in which they performed that defining act. More specifically, why they invoked “the protection of the Powerful and Humanitarian Nation, the United States of America,” even as they were declaring their emancipation from Spanish subjugation.

Were they merely expressing a readiness to trade one colonial master for another? If so, then it was logical that Spain would cede the country to the new power, the United States of America, in exchange for a few million dollars — instead of acknowledging the freedom that the Filipino people had justly earned.

The situation was clearly far more complex than that. Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo, under whose leadership the June 12, 1898 proclamation of independence was conceived, was certainly no fool when it came to American intentions. He and his companions in the Hong Kong junta anticipated America’s moves in the Pacific region and its wish to take over the possessions of a weakened Spanish empire. They saw in that strategic plan an opening they could use to speed up the revolution against Spain. And for this, they needed to disarm the new conquerors through fawning gestures of flattery.

They were under no illusion that the United States would forgo the opportunity to take possession of the entire archipelago once its ships destroyed the limping Spanish armada in the battle at Manila Bay. Indeed, they saw that they were racing against time to establish the first organs of a new government in as many provinces as the revolutionary forces could cover. By doing so, they aimed to show the American public and the rest of the world that a colonized people that had successfully liberated themselves were equally worthy and capable of self-rule.

The Americans, of course, saw what Aguinaldo was up to, and they played along — until they could bring in enough US troops into the country. They would not be inveigled into supplying arms they might later use against the US itself. Assigned to review the captured documents of the revolution, US Capt. John R.M. Taylor (whom historian Renato Constantino accurately dubbed a “quasi-lobbyist” for annexation) portrayed it thus in his voluminous work, “The Philippine Insurrection Against the United States”:

“The insurgents were not to have American rifles placed in their hands to fight the battles of the United States. The soldiers of the United States were to be charged with that duty, and Aguinaldo saw that he was not to be given the opportunity of employing American rifles against the soldiers of the United States as his friends in the militia were about to employ Spanish rifles against Spain… The arms he received from Hong Kong on May 23 enabled him to begin an insurrection, not as an ally of the United States, but on his own account.”

One week before the proclamation in Kawit, Aguinaldo’s forces had gained enough ground in the surrounding provinces to justify holding a formal ceremony proclaiming the country’s independence from Spain. Invitations to Admiral Dewey and other American officers were sent. But, of course, these were simply ignored. The affair’s organizers had to make do with the presence of “a citizen of the U.S.A., Mr. L.M. Johnson, a Colonel of Artillery.”

Taylor writes about this event with an air of contempt: “From this time on there was no question as to the intentions of Aguinaldo and his followers. There did remain, and continued to remain, a grave doubt whether Aguinaldo really represented the people of the Philippines, and whether he would be able to keep his bit in their mouth…. ‘Colonel’ Johnson, ex-hotel keeper of Shanghai, who was in the Philippines exhibiting a cinematograph, kindly consented to appear on this occasion as Aguinaldo’s chief of artillery and the representative of the North American nation.”

Summoned to serve Aguinaldo as adviser, Apolinario Mabini arrived in Kawit on June 12, just in time to listen to the reading of the Act of Proclamation. The 34-year-old “sublime paralytic” must have at once noted some of the awkwardness and inconsistency in the longwinded document written in Spanish by Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista. In a June 23 proclamation signed by Aguinaldo, Mabini excised all reference to the United States and replaced “Dictatorial Government of the Philippines” with the simpler “Revolutionary Government.” Mabini read America’s moves with great accuracy. But he could neither save the revolution nor the fledgling republic established at Malolos on Jan. 23, 1899. Barely two weeks later, the Philippine-American War began.

It is extremely useful to revisit these crucial events in our nation’s history because, while our founding fathers were flawed individuals, most of them rose to the occasion with all the wisdom and moral strength they could muster — like all great heroes do — when summoned by a purpose larger than them. Aguinaldo, in particular, was at the center of these momentous events. But he had received such a bad rap from history for his role in the murder of the Bonifacio brothers and of Antonio Luna that it took more than 50 years before he could offer an account that tried to express “the purity of my intention.”

Many of our heroes died young; others like Aguinaldo, who died at 95, lived long enough to see the country’s passage through another war — a war that once more tested our leaders’ ability to discern the nation’s true interests at different stages in a rapidly changing world.

On Tiktok, Marcos was winning long before voting ended

Katrina Stuart Santiago

I’ve lived on the Marcos Tiktok algorithm since February this year, a deliberate effort to understand better what was happening on the platform that seems to evade whatever kind of fact-checking, quick responses, and take-downs we see of Marcos content on Facebook. It was easy to get on the algorithm: all content I posted had the most consistent Marcos hashtags; all videos I watched, liked, and saved were pro-Marcos.

Soon enough, the algorithm surfaced what were clear content buckets — a set of digital content categories for any given project. There was standard funny meme content as response to anti-Marcos articles from media, and anti-Marcos statements from celebrities, the Liberal Party, and the Left, where the standard strategy is to dismiss the material as dilawan-Liberal (yellow-Liberal) or terorista (terrorist).

Another bucket focused on disinformation, whether videos of purported crowds at Marcos-Duterte rallies that were so obviously from other events, or criticism of Robredo that builds on the narrative of her as incompetent and unpresidential, one they’ve sustained for six years.

But what surprised was how majority of what went on my feed was of the third bucket that focused primarily on fan content. Here, the Marcos family is re-framed as an aspirational one, re-imagined for a contemporary audience that’s hooked on reality TV and celebrity and influencer culture on social media. Here, Ferdinand and Imelda are called Papa FEM and Mama Meldy, and their children are Manang Imee (older sister Imee), Tita Irene (Aunt Irene), and Bongget (Ferdinand Jr., aka Bongbong).

So named, they are defamiliarized and decontextualized from existing historical accounts of the Marcos regime — its violence, plunder, and corruption. So decontextualized, they are reintroduced and re-contextualized into a present space on Tiktok, where they are a family we aspire to, a wish-fulfillment as they are impossible dream — it’s exactly the same kind of appeal that celebrity lifestyles have on fans, including the push-and-pull between access and distance.

All of these create a completely different universe that’s happening right under our noses, and as we know now, it is a world-building that can affect — and win — elections.

And election day might be the best proof of how separate and distinct this universe is. We woke to election day on May 9, 2022 hearing news of vote counting machine (VCM) malfunctions. We watched our Facebook and Twitter feeds fill up with stories of voters suffering through lines growing longer by the hour, with people leaving and returning to their polling precincts only to find that VCMs had yet to be fixed or replaced. We heard the COMELEC insist that there was nothing irregular about voters being told they should just fill up their ballots and leave it behind for mass feeding into VCMs, never mind that this means voters are unable to ensure their votes are counted.

But election day looked very different over at the Marcos Tiktok algorithm. For one thing, they already had vote counts that started as early as 8:20 a.m., only a little over an hour after the polls opened at 7:00 a.m.

The account @mf posted an image of purported 8:20 AM results spliced with an image of Bongbong Marcos in line to cast his votes. That tally read 504,791 votes for Marcos, and 178,923 votes for Leni Robredo. This was viewed 629,000 times.

@EditsMrcos Araneta had a video slide show of purported election results from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. showing Marcos consistently in the lead across purported results for 11:30 a.m., noon, 12:30 p.m., 1:30 p.m. Posted at 3:00 p.m., this is given the background music of “We Are The Champions,” and the caption claiming that these are CALABARZON numbers. This was viewed 1.6 million times.

There were still four hours to go before polling precincts were to close at 7:00 p.m.

The 6:48PM results would be released by another account @Edgar Calma, with Marcos’s number at 22,259,467, and Robredo’s at 10,425,315. The text warns of brownouts, insinuating that this is how Marcos can be cheated. This was viewed 76,200 times.

As is the nature of the Marcos Tiktok campaign, these types of content appeared over and over across accounts, none of which are influencer in the sense that they are owned by “known” or “(in)famous” people. The same content appeared in different forms, with different music, and diverse captions. Some accounts posted the card showing numbers for an 11:00 a.m. count, where Marcos has over 1.17 million votes and Robredo over 978,000 votes, and simply caption these with variations of “Pray for BBM-Sara.”

Another account that on election day was @BBM?????? and a day after had become @Nantez?????? posted the same card with a deepfake video of the three Spiderman actors dancing to the music of Ghostface Playa that has one line: “Oh Shit.” The account captions the post with: “ez win na guys.” This had been viewed 86,000 times.

The same account also posted a video for the purported count for 3:30 p.m., showing Marcos with 4.88 million votes and Robredo with 3.11 million. The form is exactly the same as the previously mentioned post, but the caption reads: “Update guys. Sana di na magbrownout. HAHAHAHAHA” This one was viewed 1.9 million times.

As is on Tiktok, when you are on an algorithm such as that of the Marcoses’, this type of content is interspersed with fan content videos. For May 9, this meant election day content showing footage of Marcos at the voting precinct, Imelda arriving and being assisted by daughter Irene, and footage of the family waiting to vote, seated at the precinct.

Footage of Irene just shifting in her seat was created as content for account @RIRI, with the music from Shanti Dope’s “Nadarang,” and captioned: “the way she turn her feet.” This has had more than 110,000 views.

Video just showing Imelda arriving with Irene, asking what they are doing today, and Irene responding by putting up her index finger to indicate that they are voting, has garnered 913.8 thousand views. Account @irenemarcossimp captions it: “ang cute na naman ng hand gesture ni irene.”

Footage of Marcos falling in line and feeding his ballot into the VCM posted by @MarcosDuterte???????????? garnered 2.4 million views, and 375.7 thousand likes. The music is Zeus’s “A Thousand Years,” and the caption reads “Lord ibigay muna sa amin itong taong toh! Ang tagal po naming naghintay! ??????????”

On election day, that fan content was interspersed with a fake, baseless electoral count, while voting was still going on. Those on the Marcos-Duterte algorithm would’ve seen this content and arguably been bolstered by the “sure win” they were seeing on their screens — fake as it was. All day, this Marcos algorithm was setting the stage for a win. By the time those unofficial, partial results started being shown on TV, the people on their algorithm were pumped for it, their dream realized long before the count even becomes official.

While it is easy to dismiss this as proof of how disinformation on platforms like Tiktok (and Facebook) have ruined democratic institutions like the elections, the more analytical, important point to be made here is that people made this happen. The platforms are one thing, and certainly could do better at helping control the spread of disinformation; but this has always been about the people who know to use these platforms to serve the interests of those who will pay premium for specific outcomes.

Fan content is interesting because it surfaces actual people, on accounts that have faces on them, using diverse voices, cutting across generations, with different perspectives, all believing in the Marcoses’ inevitable and rightful return to power. It is a particular public that it surfaces, one that we should want to understand and speak to, not dismiss and deem as zombies or victims with no opinion, creativity, or point-of-view.

As with Duterte propagandists the past six years, these are real people who actually believe in Marcos, his family, and all that they now stand for, refashioned and reframed as they are for Tiktok.

And while the communication strategists responsible for the creation of this universe have yet to surface, there is no reason to blame this all on these public actors whose sincerity and agency are difficult to question — even as they are on the other side of the democratic space we all inhabit. What we can do for now is to understand better what the battlefield looks like, so we can finally and really take part in the battle.

Otherwise, this algorithm is also poised to win 2028 for Sara Duterte. They’ve also been churning out content for that the past six months.