Heroes, Villains, and the Burden of Perspective in Philippine Political Life

Posted by Karl Garcia on February 27, 2026 · 23 Comments 

By Karl Garcia

Philippine political discourse has long been shaped by moral binaries. Individuals and movements are frequently cast as heroes or villains, rebels or revolutionaries, patriots or threats. Yet beneath these labels lies a more complex reality: perception is inseparable from perspective. History, geography, class, trauma, and memory all shape how Filipinos interpret power, resistance, and legitimacy.

The struggle to reconcile these competing narratives is not merely intellectual. It influences elections, justice, social cohesion, and even family relationships. In a nation marked by colonial subjugation, dictatorship, insurgency, and democratic restoration, the politics of perspective becomes both unavoidable and volatile.

The Fluidity of Heroes and Villains

Heroes and villains are rarely fixed categories. They are products of historical interpretation.

People Power Revolution, also known as EDSA, is celebrated globally as a triumph of nonviolent resistance. It restored democratic institutions after years of authoritarian rule. For many Filipinos, it symbolizes civic courage, moral clarity, and collective agency.

Yet even EDSA is not immune to reinterpretation. Critics argue that it replaced one elite faction with another, failed to dismantle structural inequalities, and produced democratic forms without fully resolving oligarchic influence. What one generation views as liberation, another may see as incomplete transformation.

This does not diminish the revolution’s historical significance. Rather, it illustrates how political memory evolves alongside lived experience.

Martial Law: Order, Trauma, and Contested Memory

No period better demonstrates the clash of perspectives than Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos Sr..

For survivors and historians, Martial Law evokes censorship, arrests, torture, disappearances, cronyism, and economic decline. It represents a cautionary tale about concentrated power and democratic fragility.

For others, particularly those who recall perceived improvements in infrastructure, discipline, and security, the era is remembered with ambivalence or even nostalgia. Social media has amplified revisionist narratives emphasizing “golden age” imagery.

The divergence is not purely ideological. It reflects generational distance, regional experience, economic circumstance, and the uneven distribution of both repression and development. Memory, like politics, is contested terrain.

Rebellion, Resistance, and Legitimacy

Armed movements complicate moral categorization.

The Hukbalahap, initially formed to resist Japanese occupation during World War II, later confronted the postwar Philippine state over land reform and peasant rights. To sympathizers, the Huks embodied anti-feudal struggle. To the government, they represented insurgency and instability.

Similarly, the Communist Party of the Philippines and its armed wing, the New People’s Army, framed their struggle as revolutionary transformation against inequality and imperialism. Supporters cite enduring rural poverty and governance failures as root causes. Critics point to decades of violence, extortion, civilian harm, and ideological rigidity.

The rebel-versus-revolutionary debate reveals a deeper tension: When does resistance become justified? When does it become destructive? Perspective shapes the answer, but violence imposes consequences that transcend rhetoric.

Victimhood, Agency, and Political Identity

Political actors often invoke victimhood. States claim victimization by destabilizing forces; activists claim victimization by repression; communities claim victimization by both.

Victimhood can illuminate genuine suffering — human rights abuses, displacement, poverty, discrimination. But it can also become politicized, used to deflect accountability or monopolize moral authority.

In polarized environments, narratives of harm compete rather than converge. Empathy becomes conditional: one group’s tragedy is another’s exaggeration. The danger lies not in acknowledging victimhood, but in weaponizing it.

The Duterte Divide: Governance and Moral Fracture

The presidency of Rodrigo Duterte exemplifies the power of perspective in contemporary politics.

For supporters, Duterte represented decisiveness, anti-elite rhetoric, and a promise of order amid crime and bureaucratic inertia. Many perceived tangible improvements in local safety or governance style, particularly in Mindanao.

For critics, his administration symbolized extrajudicial killings, weakened institutional safeguards, normalization of violent rhetoric, and democratic erosion.

Neither perception can be dismissed as trivial. Each is anchored in lived realities, values, fears, and priorities. The resulting divide fractured public discourse, academic debates, and personal relationships — often within the same families.

Why Perspective Matters — and Why It Is Not Enough

Perspective helps explain disagreement but cannot alone resolve moral questions. Understanding why people support controversial leaders or movements does not require endorsing all outcomes. Likewise, condemning abuses does not require caricaturing supporters as irrational.

Democratic maturity demands holding tension between:

  • Empathy and accountability
  • Context and principle
  • Pluralism and human rights

Some actions — torture, corruption, indiscriminate violence — resist relativism. Perspective contextualizes judgment; it does not erase ethical boundaries.

Policy Implications: Bridging Divides Without Erasing Truth

If perception shapes political conflict, reconciliation requires structural as well as cultural responses.

1. Strengthening Civic and Historical Literacy

Educational reforms should deepen critical engagement with Philippine history, media literacy, and constitutional principles. The goal is not ideological conformity but analytical capacity — enabling citizens to evaluate claims, sources, and narratives.

Historical distortions flourish where institutions of memory are weak.

2. Protecting Institutional Credibility

Courts, electoral bodies, human rights institutions, and statistical agencies must maintain independence and transparency. When institutions lose legitimacy, citizens retreat into partisan realities where perspective hardens into dogma.

Trustworthy institutions moderate polarization.

3. Encouraging Deliberative Public Discourse

Media, universities, and civil society can promote forums for structured debate rather than outrage-driven exchanges. Polarization intensifies when discourse rewards emotional extremity over reasoned dialogue.

Democracy requires arenas where disagreement remains humanized.

4. Addressing Structural Inequality

Persistent poverty, regional disparity, and governance failures fuel both insurgency narratives and strongman appeal. Reconciliation cannot succeed if underlying grievances remain unaddressed.

Economic justice is political stabilization.

5. Human Rights and Accountability

Accountability mechanisms — transitional justice, truth-telling initiatives, reparations — help societies confront harm without perpetuating cycles of vengeance. Forgetting is not reconciliation; denial is not unity.

Healing requires recognition.

Conclusion: The Discipline of Nuance

Philippine political life resists simple stories. Heroes have flaws. Villains have defenders. Rebels may carry both ideals and violence. Leaders inspire both loyalty and fear.

Perspective explains divergence but should not imprison judgment. The challenge for Filipinos is not to eliminate disagreement — an impossible task — but to cultivate a political culture capable of complexity, memory, and ethical clarity.

In an age of algorithm-driven outrage and historical revisionism, nuance becomes an act of civic responsibility.

Perhaps the most stabilizing force in a divided democracy is not louder conviction, but deeper understanding — anchored not in relativism, but in truth, dignity, and shared constitutional ground.

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments
23 Responses to “Heroes, Villains, and the Burden of Perspective in Philippine Political Life”
  1. Irineo B. R. Salazar's avatar Irineo B. R. Salazar says:
    February 27, 2026 at 11:10 am

    https://www.facebook.com/pablovirgilio.david/posts/pfbid0A49jjCGq9wyo53Zvmeq8XuT2YL5QpCeBe3HZiahcagqG7SSU3yuFMkzJdX3fxmMAl leaving this here, not quite OT:

    A NATION UNDER TRIAL
    It was not easy listening to the ICC hearings these past two days.
    The prosecutors laid out their case with clarity—carefully documented, tightly argued, impossible to dismiss. What emerged was not merely a pattern of violence, but the chilling revelation that the killing of suspected criminals—especially the poor, those accused of involvement in drugs—had been elevated into state policy.
    And what was most damning?
    Not speculation. Not hearsay.
    But the accused’s own words. The Tagalog saying is correct, “Nahuhuli ang isda sa bibig.”
    By his own mouth, he incriminated himself. Again and again. What happened on the streets merely proved that he meant what he said. He was not joking. He even declared, more than once, that he was ready to take responsibility. In fact he made it part of his campaign promise—that what he had done as a local chief executive, he would implement nationwide if he was elected.
    His defense tried to argue political motivation behind the arrest. But the judges were not distracted. The real question was clear:
    Was he, or was he not responsible for the thousands who died?
    Even the attempt to dismiss his words as jokes, sarcasm, or hyperbole collapsed under the weight of the evidence. The videos of the accused’s public speeches spoke for themselves:
    “Do nationally what I did locally and I will reward you.”
    “If they resist arrest, kill them.”
    “If you don’t, I will kill them myself.”
    “Plant evidence if necessary.”
    “If you go to prison, I will pardon you.”
    “Don’t worry about human rights, human rights, I will protect you.”
    No need to repeat the expletives. The message was clear.
    But perhaps the most painful part was not the words of the accused; it was the applause of his audience, the kind of people who voted him into power.
    The laughter.
    The approval.
    The cheering crowds.
    The lawyer for the victims was right: something happened to us as a people. Many who were once peace-loving Filipinos were slowly shaped into clones of their idol. They became mirrors of the very violence they were witnessing. Brutality became entertainment. Threats became punchlines. And they echoed the chilling threats of their cult leader by trolling for him in the social media.
    And then it struck me.
    As I watched, I realized why it was so difficult.
    Because while the accused chose to remain in his cell and waived his right to face the court, he was actually not alone on trial.
    With him stood an entire nation.
    Not only those who applauded.
    Not only those who approved.
    But also those who kept quiet.
    Those who looked away.
    Those who knew—but chose silence.
    Whether out of fear, or indifference.
    Archbishop Soc Villegas spoke with painful honesty when people began to applaud him in his homily:
    “Palakpak kayo nang palakpak! We squandered EDSA! We have failed. Shouldn’t we bow our heads in shame instead?”
    Yes. This is not a moment for applause. It is a moment for an examination of conscience.
    I hesitate to imagine how this trial will end.
    But one thing is certain:
    We cannot say we did not know.
    The world is presently watching.
    And with the accused,
    we—yes, all of us—stand on trial.

    Reply
    • Joey Nguyen's avatar Joey Nguyen says:
      February 27, 2026 at 2:18 pm

      I donate to a group called “Leaving MAGA” formed by former high level MAGA operatives who “saw the light,” morally reformed themselves, and are trying to reform others still stuck in the MAGA cult.

      What the group has observed is that MAGA adherents were originally drawn in by an emptiness within — financial hardship, relationship problems, isolation. There is a common misconception that MAGA are mostly “rednecks” and stupid people, but just like DDS, MAGA has quite a lot of educated people, middle class people within. A doctor I personally know, who after graduating a few years ahead of me was a kuya to me, helping me out by feeding me when I was a poor Berkeley student, became MAGA due to his personal life issues.

      It is amazing how in a hyper connected world of social media humanity seems to be less personally connected more than ever. People are fed what they already believe through personalized algorithms. Those sucked in too far are affected by what some have termed “algorithmic psychological warfare.” DDS is quite good at weaponizing the algorithm, and so is MAGA.

      The only way out is something that shocks the conscience of a nation. The two incidents of murder in broad daylight by federal agents in Minneapolis in recent weeks seemed to have woken a lot of Americans up, including MAGAs who are now searching for a “way out,” which is reflected in Trump’s polling dropping well below his assumed hard baseline he has enjoyed for a decade. I wonder what it will take to wake the Philippines up.

      Reply
      • JoeAm's avatar JoeAm says:
        February 28, 2026 at 7:31 am

        Wake the Philippines up to what? The nation has a sane leader, is growing economically, is wrestling forthrightly with issues. Yes, there are bad actors, the Dutertes and China, yes social media is flooded with nonsense, as it is in the US. Yes, people have an emptiness that cannot be solved with education. What magic awareness is there, to fill subconscious struggles?

        Reply
        • Joey Nguyen's avatar Joey Nguyen says:
          February 28, 2026 at 8:07 am

          I implied that DDS must wake up. Apologies for the confusion as that was not clear.

          Reply
          • JoeAm's avatar JoeAm says:
            February 28, 2026 at 8:43 am

            Ah, that I agree with. DDS is really a propaganda initiative though, and the people who buy into it are like MAGAs and Republicans, either uniformed or so emotionally needy as to censor out sense and accountability for their choices. The wake-up may come with Sara Duterte impeachment, or pushback against China, to whom she is attached.

            Reply
    • kasambahay's avatar kasambahay says:
      February 28, 2026 at 5:09 am

      silliest thing, With him stood an entire nation, not with him but against him and that is why only duterte is on trial. he is not the nation, never was.

      Reply
  2. Albert M G Garcia's avatar Albert M G Garcia says:
    February 27, 2026 at 12:56 pm

    Well before Martial Law, September 21, 1972 there is another very significant event, Marcos suspended the writ of habeas corpus on August 21, 1971 which meant that anyone could be arrested thrown in jail without court proceedings. Albert M G Garcia

    Reply
  3. kasambahay's avatar kasambahay says:
    February 27, 2026 at 1:14 pm

    yeah, the author speaks for himself, so where was he when duterte went on killing spree! de lima certainly stood up and got degraded to lowest denominator, our ex chief justice sereno stood up and was rightly shown the door, her job taken over by her most ardent (not!) and much detested duterte supporter. trillanes lost his amnesty too. thousands accused were taken out of circulation and once dead, their voices could no longer be heard, though their families were crying out for justice, while we could only pray to god to offer them consolation. we reached out and offered the victims’ families our utmost condolences and many times though, we could only offer our presence. united in sorrow. we did not cheer, nor did we fist pump with the rest!

    the then vice president leni certainly showed her mettle too, tru her kindness, benevolence and tireless good work, advocating for the helpless and the needy. and for all her efforts, leni was duly ridiculed, mocked and even threatened. it was a miracle she escaped summary execution, her personal bodyguards did a very thorough work of keeping her safe.

    if what we went tru did not make for sensational face book pages and if we made for poor showing for anyone to greedily gloat at, that’s their problem.

    we have already justified ourselves to god, the rest can bugger off, haha!

    Reply
  4. CV's avatar CV says:
    February 27, 2026 at 1:19 pm

    “For survivors and historians, Martial Law evokes censorship, arrests, torture, disappearances, cronyism, and economic decline.” – Karl

    And don’t forget: PLUNDER!!!

    Reply
    • kasambahay's avatar kasambahay says:
      February 28, 2026 at 5:30 am

      termed as the golden years, while makoy was busy putting the opposition in jail, his wife was just as busy and between them, the philippines got stitched up.

      AI Overview

      Imelda Marcos built the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) and other similar infrastructure projects primarily to serve the political and personal interests of the Marcos regime, a pattern often referred to as the “edifice complex”. Beyond altruism, these projects were used as tools for propaganda, political legitimization, and the cultivation of a specific image for the regime. 

      Here are the specific reasons, according to historical accounts:

      • Political Propaganda and Image Management: The structures were intended to project a sense of grandeur, modernity, and prosperity to both domestic and international audiences, masking the deepening poverty and economic decline occurring in the country.
      • “Edifice Complex” and Self-Advertisement: The term was coined in the 1970s to describe her practice of using public funds for massive, often Brutalist, construction projects as a form of “personal branding” and “propaganda”.
      • Legitimizing the Regime: The CCP was inaugurated just before the 1969 presidential elections to showcase the achievements of the first Marcos term.
      • Hosting International Events: Projects were often built for specific international events designed to boost the regime’s global reputation, such as the 1974 Miss Universe Pageant (which led to the construction of the Folk Arts Theater in 77 days).
      • “Therapeutic” Political Strategy: The CCP was framed as part of a “therapeutic” cultural policy, where the regime would “heal” the disempowered masses by revaluing their culture, thus building loyalty and a sense of pride under the “New Society” (Bagong Lipunan) ideology.
      • Distraction from Corruption: These monumental projects often diverted public attention from allegations of “rape and pillage” of the national treasury by the dictatorship. 

      The construction of these buildings was often financed through heavy foreign loans, leading to significant national debt. 

      Reply
  5. CV's avatar CV says:
    February 28, 2026 at 6:51 am

    “The challenge for Filipinos is not to eliminate disagreement — an impossible task — but to cultivate a political culture capable of complexity, memory, and ethical clarity.” – Karl G.

    I submit an alternative challenge for us Filipinos to eliminating disagreement – learn how to reach consensus, and then act on that consensus.

    Reply
  6. Irineo B. R. Salazar's avatar Irineo B. R. Salazar says:
    February 28, 2026 at 11:13 am

    The ICC is now publishing stuff about the Duterte trial in English, Tagalog – and Cebuano.

    https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/icc-concludes-confirmation-charges-hearing-duterte-case?lang=Filipino

    https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/icc-concludes-confirmation-charges-hearing-duterte-case?lang=Cebuano

    they are even Tweeting in Cebuano:

    https://x.com/IntlCrimCourt/status/2027354465892811197

    Reply
    • Karl Garcia's avatar Karl Garcia says:
      February 28, 2026 at 11:33 am

      Thanks for that.

      Reply
      • Irineo B. R. Salazar's avatar Irineo B. R. Salazar says:
        February 28, 2026 at 12:00 pm

        welcome. adding this as well from Nuelle Duterte:

        I wrote this in 2019, right before the midterm elections.
        THE DAVAO TEMPLATE
        No, I’m not talking about the war against crime and drugs that killed over a thousand in the city, waged by Rodrigo when he was still the mayor. I’m talking about the kind of model Davao has become to the rest of the Philippines — a community largely silent on extrajudicial killings and open corruption, who helped a tyrant reach the highest position of power in the country.
        Of course, it must be said that not everyone in Davao is a fan. There are actually a good number of people who don’t like him, who don’t agree with him, and who don’t tolerate him. Some were, and are still, vocal. But the majority was, and still is, not. If I had to pick our greatest sin as a community, I’d have to say it was our silence and our tolerance of the atrocities he and his men committed as soon as he was elected. For some, it was fear that made them keep their own counsel. For others, like me, it was the desire to go unnoticed. I had other plans and goals to keep me busy, and I didn’t want to take the time and put in the effort to make any kind of noise about something I thought I couldn’t change anyway. Selfish? Absolutely. We’re all selfish, in our own ways. I would never begrudge anyone the choice to prioritize themselves, their lives, and their peace of mind. It’s how we have to survive sometimes, in this often harsh world.
        But looking at what’s happening now, and what’s been happening for the past three years, I’m struck by the gravity of the consequences of my choice, and the choice made by others who thought like I did. Thousands upon thousands of dead bodies. A culture of impunity among the people tasked to serve and protect. Shameless and open corruption (see: the Teo-Tulfo debacle, the Calida security company government contracts, the PCIJ report on Bong Go’s family business, the PCIJ report on the rise in the Duterte family wealth, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera). The willingness of the government to hand over resources to China for a fee. The outrageous rise of disinformation from government communication agencies. The persecution of political rivals and enemies. The attack on a free press and free speech. The subversion of democratic institutions. And the government itself perverting the law.
        We as a people, as a community, dear Davao, have failed. We knew what he was, who he was, and what he was capable of, whether we acknowledge it out loud or not. We were not blind. We knew. And yet, whether it was by campaigning and voting for him, or whether it was by keeping silent about what we knew, we unleashed him onto the rest of the country. We justified it by saying our city improved and became safer, by saying that our economy flourished, and by saying that his no-nonsense, shortcut methods were effective. We justified it by saying it was too risky to speak up, by saying we didn’t want to get involved anymore because it was just too much of a hassle, and by saying all politicians are the same anyway so what difference would it really make if he won. And yes, all of these justifications have kernels of truth in them.
        But we cannot deny, no matter how much we plug our ears or close our eyes, that what we did and didn’t do led to so much death and tragedy for so many, regardless of whether they deserved it or not (they didn’t). We cannot deny that his rise to power led to the proliferation of corrupt officials back in business (see: Marcos, Enrile, Estrada, Revilla, and many more). We cannot deny that our seas and our lands are being given away in exchange for quick cash and profit, with little regard to sustainability and the long term effects of debt. We cannot deny that violence and violent rhetoric is on the rise among the citizens, and respect for others is at an all time low. We cannot deny that lies and disinformation are spreading like wildfire, some of which are even being instigated by the president himself (see: those poorly conceived matrices). These things are happening, and avoiding ‘biased’ mainstream media stories because they don’t fit our personal convictions and narratives won’t change that.
        Because of what we did and what we didn’t do, the phrase ‘Davao template’ can no longer just be about Rodrigo’s crusade against crime and drugs, which isn’t even the success story many would like to believe, given the statistics. The ‘Davao template’ is actually the example we, as a community, have set for others. The enthusiastic supporters teach the world that benefiting from the patronage of someone like Rodrigo is tantamount to unswerving loyalty — whether the gain came from a booming business whose permit was fast-tracked with kickbacks, the guarantee of personal safety from kidnapping because any kidnappers would be automatically killed, the aesthetic and practical improvement of roads leading to private properties, the provision of free medications to those who can little afford them, the cleaned up streets at the expense of the riffraff we didn’t want to see running around because we considered them a blight to society, and the special treatment we received just because we were closely associated with him. While the cowed silence of the rest sends the message that submission and apathy are the easiest and safest ways to survive a tyrannical and oppressive environment intact. Not exactly the best template to brag about, and definitely not an ideal one for the country to follow, is it?
        There are those who would disagree, I’m sure. There are those who continue to be proud of Rodrigo’s achievements, real and imagined. There are those who still swear undying loyalty, despite knowing the truth of his crimes and misdeeds. There are those who will quietly resist the downpour of facts, because to do otherwise would mean looking inside themselves and reflecting on their choices. And to them I would say, it’s okay. You’re free to think and feel however you wish. But it’s important to remember that regardless of how you feel and what you think, and despite Rodrigo assuring you that he’s willing to be held accountable (yeah, right) for all his crimes, you still hold some responsibility for the affliction he is heaping upon the country right now. Because you and I had a part in his rise to power. We played a role in the making of him. Therefore, we will also have to, one way or another, pay for his sins.
        How that payment will be exacted remains to be seen. But there will be a reckoning, for him and for us. Your vote on Monday is going to be essential in determining what the outcome of that reckoning will be. So, choose wisely.

        Reply
        • kasambahay's avatar kasambahay says:
          February 28, 2026 at 1:13 pm

          noelle duterte ought to update to the current year. 2026 saw her uncle digong in the hauge and not in a very good light he is too. as mental health professional, noele is mum about her uncle’s plea of mental incapacity and unfit to stand trial.

          Reply

Leave a reply to Irineo B. R. Salazar Cancel reply