[OPINION] Why Do Some Filipino Boomers Insist that the Marcos Years Were Under a "Parliamentary System"

 

This is a screenshot I got on Facebook. The Tweet is courtesy of Raissa Espinosa-Robles, who I hear is a marites or a gossiper. I'm not denying that there are some truths in what she said. It's true that the Marcos Years have their well-documented human rights abuses. However, Mrs. Robles still continues to insist in the myth of a parliamentary system under Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s regime. It's not just Mrs. Robles but also some Filipino boomers who keep saying, "Are you crazy? We had a parliamentary system under Marcos." 

I could show them some evidence like Marcos' severe lack of legitimacy to disprove the parliamentary systme. I even wrote about the snap elections because Marcos was a president with powers (read here). Under a parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. The president is just a door opener and credentials receiver! Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. and Salvador "Doy" Laurel both challenged the legitimacy of Marcos' regime. Marcos was never formally installed as president or prime minister. Cesar Virata was nothing more than an executive assistant. That's why I challenge them to go ahead and tell that to parliamentary countries, that the Philippines truly had a parliamentary system during the Marcos Years!

There's always such a thing as being stuck in a comfort zone 

Come on, Mrs. Robles unfortunately shot her own foot when she said the following:

On the part of Marcos, his 1973 Constitution provided for a Vice-President but this post was only made available during the snap election in 1986. Marcos was allergic to vice-presidents, having quarreled with his vice-president, Fernando Lopez, whom he accused of plotting against him. Sounds familiar?

The 1986 Edsa People Power put an end to Marcos’ semi-presidential-parliamentary set-up and restored the presidential form of government with all its checks and balances.

Duterte has made no bones about his deep dislike for checks and balances. In August last year, Duterte threatened to declare Martial Law if Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno stopped his war on drugs. In the same month, Duterte also threatened to shut down Congress if it bungled his plan to change the Constitution and set up a parliamentary-federal system.

The fruit of the 1986 Edsa people Power is the 1986 Constitution.

Robles already mentioned it was semi-presidential. It was still a presidential system nonetheless. Just because there was a prime minister, doesn't mean that there was a parliamentary form of government (read here). Robles already had the details that it was still a presidential government. The prime minister's role in Marcos' government wasn't the same as Lee Kuan Yew. It's a shame how Filipinos quote LKY on the Marcoses but not follow his sound advice for the rest. 

A good example of a comfort zone is the Chiong Sisters Case. The narrative heard back in 1997-1999 wasn't even complete! I watched this episode of Case Unclosed on YouTube (above). I was shocked when somebody told me that Francisco Juan "Paco" G. Larrañaga was innocent of the crime. Paco still had the right to defend himself. Sadly, Paco wasn't given the right to testify. Josman Aznar whose offenses weren't that huge, is still in jail over a crime he never committed. Some people still believe in the "testimony" of Davidson V. Rusia (read here) instead of the evidence that proved Paco's innocence. Just because someone is a bad boy and a possible suitor of the victim (which Paco denied courting Marijoy). They ignored the overwhelming evidence that Paco couldn't do the crime. They were too used to Davidson's daily "testimony", which had several inconsistencies.

The same went for Hubert Jeffry P. Webb's wrongful conviction, during the Vizconde Massacre Trial. Some people still believe Hubert was guilty, probably due to whatever wrongs he did in the past. Some people still believe in The Tolentino Blunder. Atty. Amelita G. Tolentino refused the DNA test--something that could've helped solve the case. If the DNA sample was tested, it could've pointed ot a different suspect. However, some people still wholeheartedly chose to believe in Jessica Alfaro's lies (read here).

Given the two crimes I mentioned (both in the 1990s), some people are still stuck with whatever narrative they get. Remembering my Civics and Culture up to Philippine History subject (Grade 1-First Year High School) in the 1990s, things are rushed. We're often told about how Marcos used charter change to become a dictator. After that, charter change is viewed as "evil" because of Marcos. However, that's a guilt-by-association fallacy. Charter change isn't necessarily evil. Not even Maria Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino intended that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, be the "forever constitution" of the Philippines!

Some people refuse to get out of their comfort zone of knowledge. It may be because they're stroking their ego. After all, they have a high grade on that exam. They may have gotten high scores reporting about the Vizconde Massacre Case or the Chiong Sisters Case. They may have perfectly enumerated the suspects. They may still be clinging on to that high grade in the exam. The same may go if they cling to their high grade in the quiz about the Martial Law years. I'm not saying that the books are completely wrong. The books aren't completely right either! That's why there's always room for correction and updates! Any good teacher continues to learn. A bad teacher stops learning and seeks to stick to the status quo.

An article from Linkedin points out to this critical truth:

There are several reasons why some baby boomers may resist learning or changing:

• Cognitive rigidity: As people age, their cognitive abilities may decline, making it more difficult for them to learn new information or adapt to change.
• Fear of the unknown: Baby boomers may feel uncomfortable with new technologies or social norms that challenge their worldview and way of life.
• Resistance to criticism: Baby boomers may feel that they have already achieved a certain level of success and do not want to be criticized or challenged by others.
• Cultural and social influences: Baby boomers may have been raised in a culture that values conformity and stability, which can make it difficult for them to embrace new ideas or behaviors.

Some people may think that just because they graduated cum laude from 19-forgotten that they know everything. That's why there are some cum laudes who never did anything significant with their lives. I blame the reasons above more than I blame their being cum laude. Some cum laudes are still doing well even after school. However, some cum laudes fail when they refuse to adapt to change, fear the unknown for the sake of it, become resistant to criticism (believing their successes made them invincible), and influences can cause that behavior.

It's also the reason why some businesses fail. Take Nokia for example. They used to be leading brands. That's why it can become useless to tell children, "When your father was your age, he was already this and that." What year was that? It's 19-forgotten? It's 20-forgotten? Schooling was easier during their time compared to today. They may have succeeded with their Flintstones technology (an exaggeration) but can they still do it now. 

In insisting on the comfort zone, the Philippines continues to decline in failure. Staying with the Marcos parliamentary system narrative is just one of them. How can people who claim to fight against fake news, spread that fake news? If they're serious about fact-checking, why not fact-check the Marcos Years all over again to check if it was a real parliamentary system?