Although 30 years have passed since the Marcos years ended, emotions still run high whenever accounts of those years are discussed and people remember things differently when they are highly emotional.
Marcos’ noon time burial yesterday flooded Facebook news feeds with angry status updates both for and against the burial. On one hand, there were those who mocked the burial, with one prominent politician quoting scripture comparing it to the “thief in the night” — which is really a poetic description of death.
On the other hand, there were those who appeared tolerant of peoples’ angry out bursts but warned of dire consequences should certain lines be crossed.
Still others derided the outrage of those against the burial.
All these views taken together prove that a truly objective recollection of the Marcos years will not be widely acceptable and come into currency for a little more time or until people can look at those years with rigorous dispassion.
United in division, still sharing in the miseries of underdevelopment.
What we are witnessing right now is the politics of the divided and we fail even in describing the boundaries of those divisions.
And here is the reason why those divisions are hard to define, none of them are actually meaningful or even distinct in terms of achieving any of the following phrases below:
- “…a just and humane society…” (For some.)
- “…promote the common good…” (Sometimes.)
- “…conserve and develop our patrimony…” (Diminished, for the most part.)
- “…secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law…” (Hardly.)
- “…a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace…” (Again, for some.)
(If you don’t recognize it, these are more or less the phrases that describe the ideals consecrated in our present as well as previous constitutions.)
These ideals are so high and so difficult to attain that only the deluded will claim that these ideals were attained as a basis for bolstering the position that one political faction deserves a title to lord it over the others.
Move on or get left behind.
The tide of political turmoil that swept the Marcoses out of Malacanang and brought in the political regime shaped by the Aquino-Cojuancos is ebbing.
Most members of the generation born after the Marcoses left the seat of power will have world views less rooted in the realities of the political turmoil
I would speculate that, for post Marcos generations, it would be unlikely for them to identify Marcos with oppression in the same way as people who actually experienced it.
Likewise, I would also speculate that post Marcos generations would be hard pressed to identify the Aquino-Cojuancos with greater freedom.
For how much freedom can you enjoy when you have little choices when it comes to employment, or when even the necessity of traveling anywhere takes a good part of their day, or when they can’t even go out without fearing that they’d become a victim of some random crime? (Certainly, I can go on and on about the various ways our so-called freedoms are restricted by various practicalities.)
This generation isn’t going to wait for the Aquino Cojuanco versus Marcos conflict to be finally resolved before they deal with the exigencies of their present lives.
Roughly comprising 37 percent of the voting population, this generation defined the country’s politics in terms that lay outside of the views that emerged from the conflict between the Marcoses and those that put them out of power.
The reality that stares before us is clear: People who insist on clinging to the past will be left behind or shoved out of the way.
The best recourse is to figure out where this generation is headed and adjust to suit the spirit of the times.