Article contents
Philippine Values and Martial Law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 April 2011
Extract
When President Ferdinand E. Marcos of the Philippines proclaimed martial law on 22 September 1972, it looked as though this signified the abandonment of American values and influence. Indeed, his foreign minister, Carlos Romulo, justified the new dictatorship on the grounds that democracy was not viable in a country like the Philippines which lacked a substantial middle-class population, and he hailed the Marcos regime as a step away from American ideals ill-suited to a developing Oriental country. As Romulo indicates, the Marcos government is a major shift from the democratic practices inherited from the American period.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1980
References
Adapted from a paper delivered at a meeting of the Philippine Council of the Association of Asian Studies, Toronto, 20 Mar. 1976. This article was received by the Journal of Southeast Asian Studies in Sept. 1979.
1 Carlos P. Romulo in an interview reported by the United Press, 4 Feb. 1973.
2 Kann, Peter R., “The Philippines Without Democracy”, Foreign Affairs 52, no. 3 (1974): 612–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Estrella, Conrado F., “Agrarian Reform: Key to Asia's Development and Freedom”, Solidarity 10, no. 1 (1976): 33–41.Google Scholar
4 This is aptly expressed by Overholt: “Martial law is a revolt of the city against the countryside, a revolt of efficiency against stability, a revolt of foreign training against local customs, a revolt of synoptic planners against incrementalists, a revolt of the modernizer against the democrat.” See Overholt, William H., “Martial Law, Revolution and Democracy in the Philippines”, Southeast Asia 2, no. 2 (1973): 179.Google Scholar
5 Kann, , op. cit.Google Scholar
6 Overholt, , op. cit.Google Scholar
7 Jose, F. Sionil, “You Dont Have to be Maoist to Make Revolution”, Solidarity 5, no. 3 (1970): 1-2,68.Google Scholar
8 “Victory for Marcos”, Time, 2 Nov. 1969, p. 39.Google Scholar
9 Grossholtz, Jean, “Philippines 1973: Whither Marcos”, Asian Survey 14, no. 1 (1974): 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 “Marcos Millions”, Time, 13 Aug. 1973, p. 42.Google Scholar
11 Avila, Charles R., “The Struggle for Liberation and National Democracy”, in The Filipino in the Seventies: An Ecumenical Perspective, ed. Gorospe, Vitaliano R. and Deets, Richard (Quezon City, 1972).Google Scholar
12 Carmen, Rolando V. del, “Constitutionalism and the Supreme Court in a Changing Filipino Society”, Asian Survey 13, no. 11 (1973): 1050–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Kann, , op. cit.Google Scholar
14 Marcos, Ferdinand E., The Democratic Revolution in the Philippines (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1974), p. 65.Google Scholar
15 Ibid., p. 154.
16 Ibid., p. 90.
17 Rizal, Jose, La bidolencia de los FilipinosGoogle Scholar, trans. Derbyshire, Charles in Craig, Austin, Rixal's Life and Minor Writings (Manila, 1912)Google Scholar.
18 Osias, Camilo, Philippine Social Life (Boston, 1940), pp. 40ff.Google Scholar
19 Bulatao, Jamie, Split-Level Christianity (Manila, 1966)Google Scholar; Fox, Robert B., “The Study of Filipino Society and Its Significance to Programs of1 Economics and Social Development”, Philippine Sociological Review 7 (1939): 2–11Google Scholar; Guthrie, George, Six Perspectives on the Philippines (Manila, 1968)Google Scholar; Hollnsteiner, Mary R., “Commentary on ‘Barrio Institutions and Their Economic Implications’ by Agaton P. Pal”, Philippine Sociological Review 12, nos. 1 & 2 (1959): 63–64Google Scholar; Jocano, F. Landa, “Conversion and the Patterning of Christian Experience in Malibog, Central Panay, Philippines”, Philippine Sociological Review 13, no. 2 (1965): 96–119Google Scholar; Kaut, Charles R., “Utang na Loob: A System of Contractural Obligation Among Tagalogs”, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 18, no. 3 (1961): 256–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lande, Carl H., “Political Attitudes and Behavior in the Philippines”, Philippine Journal of Public Administration 3, no. 3 (1959): 341–65Google Scholar; Lynch, Frank, “Social Acceptance Reconsidered”, in Lynch, Frank and Guzman, Alfonso de II, Four Readings on Philippine Values, ed. 4th ed., (Quezon City, 1973), pp. 1–63Google Scholar; Pal, Agaton. P., “The People's Conception of the world”, Social Foundation of Commtmity Development:Readmgs on the Philippines, ed. Hunt, Chester L., and Espiritu, Socorro C. (Manila, 1964), pp. 390–98Google Scholar; Riggs, Fred W., “A Model for the Study of Philippine Social Structure”, Philippine Sociological Review 7, no. 3 (1959): 1–32Google Scholar; Stoodley, Bartlett H., “Normative Attitudes of Filipino Youth Compared with German and American Youth”, American Sociological Review 22, no. 5 (1957): 553–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also in Stoodley, Bartlett H. (ed.), Society and Self(New York, 1962)Google Scholar; Warriner, Charles K., “Myth and Reality in the Social Structure of the Philippines”, Philippine Sociological Review 8, nos. 3 & 4 (1960): 26–32Google Scholar.
20 Crisol, Jose M., Toward the Restructuring of Filipino Values, Office of Communications Research, Philippine Army (Manila, 1973), p. 10.Google Scholar
21 Crisol, , op. cit., p. 10.Google Scholar
22 Appleton, Sheldon, “Overseas Chinese and Economic Nationalism in the Philippines”, Journal of Asian Affairs 19, (1960): 151–62.Google Scholar
23 McCarthy, Charles J., “The Chinese in the Philippines Today and Tomorrow”, Fookien Times Yearbook, 1975, pp. 348–51Google Scholar; Hunt, Chester L. and Houston, Charles O., “Changing Status of Chinese in the Philippines”, International Quarterly for Asian Studies 10 (1979): 53–66Google Scholar.
24 Lynch, Frank, “Philippine Values II, Social Acceptance”, Philippine Studies 10 (1962): 82–89.Google Scholar
25 Crisol, , op. cit., p. 46.Google Scholar
26 Marcos, , op. cit., p. 180.Google Scholar
27 Hart, Donn V., “The Philippine Cooperative Movement”, Far Eastern Survey 24, no. 2 (1955): 27–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jeremias Montemayor, an active farm leader, comments on the ACCFA, the largest Philippine cooperative venture to date: “we all know that ACCFA has been a gigantic and expensive failure.” See Montemayor, Jeremias, Philippine Socio-Economic Problems (Manila, 1969), p. 186Google Scholar.
28 For a discussion of the limitations of vocational education, see Sharing in Development: A Programme of Employment, Equity and Growth for the Philippines, International Labor Office (Geneva, 1974).Google Scholar
29 Noble, Lela Garner, “The Moro-National Liberation Front in the Philippines”, Pacific Affairs 49, no. 3 (1976): 405–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Schinner, Daniel B., “Marcos-Sophisticated Dictator”, Commonweal 102 (1975): 44–46.Google Scholar
31 However, some foreign clergy have been expelled from the country and some Filipino clergy have been imprisoned; Gould, Frank, “Cracking Down on the Pulpit”, Far Eastern Economic Review, 8 July 1976, p. 10Google Scholar. For an exposition of the Marxist tendency of some clergy, see Rosario, Simeon G. Del, Facing the Underground: The Church and State Today (Quezon City, 1975)Google Scholar.
32 Myrdal, Gunnar, Asian Drama (New York, 1968), p. 66.Google Scholar
33 Jones, Tom, “Philippine Report: President Marcos and Martial Law”, Matchbox, Winter 1977, p. 12.Google Scholar
34 Ibid., p. 13.
35 Melegrito, Jonathan, “U.S. Aid Cutoff to Human Rights Violators Unlikely”, Philippine Times 7, 16-31 Jan. 1976, p. 1.Google Scholar
36 BWideman, ernard, “FM Calls Report on Torture an Insult: Considers Break in Military Ties With the United States”, Philippine Times 7, 16-31 Jan. 1976, p. 1.Google Scholar
37 Ocampo, Sheila, “The Year of the Puppets”, Far Eastern Economic Review, 8 Jun. 1979, pp. 37–38.Google Scholar
38 Pieris, Ralph, Social Development and Planning in Asia (New Delhi, 1976), p. 1975.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by