CHAPTER I

The Problem and its Settings

Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralin Marcos, the well known Philippine Dictator in our

country's history. Many people consider Ferdinand Marcos as an evil dictator without

even considering his positive side as a leader. He ruled the country for 21 years. For

the 21 years of being a leader it was undeniable that he gave a huge contribution in

terms of our country's progress every now and then.

The fellow Filipino people suffered under his governance because of the

implementation of Martial Law during September 1972. Martial Law was a temporary

rule by military authorities of a designated area in time of emergency when the civil

authorities are deemed unable to function. The law that was believed to protect the

Filipino people from possible harm bring violence to our country. Before this law was

implemented people saw him highly because of all his achievements as a person and

as a leader. It was funny how a mistake suddenly changed all you worked so hard for.

Celoza (1997), reiterated that Ferdinand Marcos came to power in the Philippines

in a coup détat in 1972 and ruled absolutely, in the name of order, until his dramatic

overthrow in February of 1986.

Marcos (1974), stated that revolution is inevitable in his watch. He also said that

we live in an era that has long needed and often seen with a disruptive change and

like those of many other countries around the globe in this time of pain, hope, and
revolution, Philippine society must test itself by means of a drastic transformation.

Marcos (1974), also emphasized that the process will test the courage and honesty of

the Filipino, their capacity for sacrifice, above all their self-respect and sense of

purpose. He believes that revolutionary change is a test of the validity of man's claim

to humanity.

Nixon and Byroade (2012), strongly believes that Marcos is a president of the

Philippines who was trying to preserve the system against those who would destroy it

in the name of liberty and was dedicated to do everything in order to make the system

work and preserve. Nixon and Byroade (2012), also asserted that Marcos would not

be entirely motivated by national interest, cause this was something which they had

come to expect from Asian leaders.

Arillo (2018), describes President Marcos as a leader of phenomenal global vision

that dreamed of greatness and relentlessly pursued it's realization and fulfillment. Arillo

(2018), therefore conclude that, that are one of the reasons why he was often

misunderstood and unappreciated and he also believes that in time, after the winds of

hatred and vengeance would be flown away Ferdinand Marcos will be remembered

as the greatest Filipino lawgiver.

There are many studies claimed that Ferdinand Marcos gave a huge contribution

in our country's progress it was also supported by some individual such as Imelda

Orduña and Richard Negre. 'The Golden Age' of Marcos, it was a phenomenon which

describes the years of our country's economic boom during Marcos years. Based on

some study Marcos economic legacy such as government reform, infrastructure

investment, social and people-oriented reform made our country one of the fast

progressing country just like Japan and Singapore during Marcos governance. Marcos

himself said that in his watch change was inevitable.

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study was to learn more about both negative and positive side

of the well-known Philippine Dictator, Ferdinand Marcos. Most of the people see him

as a kleptocrat and a dictator based on history books or people's rumors. This study

aims to enlighten the both positive and negative side of the knowledge of mostly

Filipino people about Ferdinand Marcos. This study will showcase how Ferdinand

Marcos gave a huge contribution in terms of making Philippines before as one of the

most fast progressing country during his governance and it's state today. People used

to see him as one of the most violent and corrupt leader in the history, but what if there

are some reasons of the movements and actions that he made? The researchers aim

to look closer to the famous Philippine dictator that mostly Filipino people knows. The

researcher will provide this short narrative study about the 'Philippine Dictator'

Ferdinand Marcos in order to simply give, add some knowledge, or even change other

people's negative perception about the famous Philippine leader. But as a man of so

much courage and wisdom it was essential for most of the people to see him superiorly

and idolized him for all his achievements in life.

The aim of this study is therefore to uncover the true nature of the rule of

Ferdinand Marcos. In order to achieve this, it is essential to explore its context as well
as its effects on its 21-year rule. How Marcos took power and maintained it in his 21

years as president. Furthermore, in order to create a deeper and more complete

understanding of the Marcos regime and the historical perspectives that have

developed, it will be essential to explore the economic, political and social impacts of

Marcos.

Research Questions

1. What kind of leader was Ferdinand Marcos?

2. How did he rule the country for 21 years?

3. How did he keep his power as a President?

4. Why do people see him as a dictator?

5. What are his contributions in our country?

Review of Significant Literature

Leadership of Ferdinand Marcos

Overholt (1986), was deeply convinced that Marcos had the powerful backing of

a superpower which believed that, however serious the country's problems, only

Marcos could solve them.

 CuUnjieng (2009), was convinced that although historians often portray

Ferdinand Marcos as an exception to the reinforced political tradition of the

Philippines, she believes that Ferdinand Marcos is interpreted more accurately as the

tradition's perfection and even though previous and contemporary Filipino politicians

have flouted the same laws as Marcos they can't achieve the same extent.

Bosworth (2008), described Marcos as much smarter and ruthless than his

contemporaries which made Marcos at the point when he could not envision any future

for himself beyond being President of the Philippines.

Mayol (2019), characterized Marcos as notorious for the way he exercised overall

control over the Philippines' cultural, economic and political climate which led Marcos

set a blueprint in reference of being a truly nationalistic leader despite his

shortcomings as president. Mayol (2019), also define Marcos as skilful and

advantageous in achieving a symbolic nationalist aura from which the Filipino people

could delineate their own sense of patriotism.

Hays (2008), narrate that as the years wore Marcos became increasingly

dictatorial and which Marcos labeled his government as authoritarian not a

dictatorship. Hays (2008), also similarize Marcos as a party boss because of the way

he ruled Philippines during his regime which includes dispensing favors to loyal

followers and handing over big contracts and concessions to his wealthy friends.
 Mayol (2019), distinguish Marcos as renowned for a great number of qualities,

initially brilliant attorney known for his intellect and a decorated soldier. Mayol (2019),

also relates all of the experiences of Marcos into his acquisition of skills and

characteristics that later prove to be vital to his political career, he also cite that Marcos'

skillful talent in public speaking and his charismatic popularity have become both

domestic and world-class.

Lazaro (2008), concludes that Marcos was able to change the political and

domestic landscape in so many ways and he also believes that Marcos wanted people

to have more discipline, so he could emphasize the value of good leadership.

Mendoza (2008), assumed that Marcos practiced the same patronage politics,

but in a more sophisticated way it was because he was a leader, a dynamic leader,

and his leadership was real. Mendoza (2008), also articulated that Marcos was not

simply a leader because he was president, but because people believed in him that's

why Marcos did not have to play the usual politics of patronage that we have.

Ramos (2008), conclude that it is accurate that Marcos is the apotheosis in

hindsight, because at the time that he was in wealth and power he appeared to be the

most brilliant of all Filipinos in the 20th century which when he was still a young

student, top-notcher of the Bar, he was brilliant and patriotic and as far as Ramos can

remember he was a good example for Filipinos, but then things changed after he

assumed power and now people can't recall that in his first term he really did a good

job as President of the Philippines.

 Locsin (2008), narrate that they later found out that Marcos never actually touched

the national treasury, although they overthrew him on that condition that Marcos was

stealing from the government and they would take kickbacks from Japanese

contractors etc., but they found out that he didn’t touch the national treasury which

was another throwback of Marcos that used his power to enrich himself but never put

his hand in the public till, which is the way people think in the old Republic.

Coolidge (2017), considered Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralin Marcos as an

autocratic leader, which jumpstarted the flourishing of social, political, civil, and other

human rights.

Marcos Regime

Overholt (1986), stated that even more quickly than in South Korea and Taiwan, the

Marcos reforms expanded the regime's political support. The growth rate under martial

law appeared impressive and attracted support from foreign financial institutions and

some domestic businessmen. Overholt (1986), also cited that the land reforms, rural

infrastructure programs, and destruction of much of the landed oligarchy, along with

massive credit subsidies, attracted the support of farmers.

Hays (2008), emphasized that during Marcos’ first term, Marcos initiated

ambitious public works projects that improved the general quality of life while providing

generous pork-barrel benefits for Marcos’ friends and he also said that Marcos

perceived that his promised land reform program would alienate the politically all
powerful landowner elite, and thus it was never forcefully implemented, while early in

his second term economic growth slowed, optimism faded, and the crime rate

increased. Hays (2008), also narrate In addition, a new communist insurgency, this

time starting in 1968 led by the new Communist Party of the Philippines-Marxist-

Leninist and its military arm, the New People’s Army, was on the rise and also in 1969

the Moro National Liberation Front was founded and conducted an insurgency in

Muslim areas. Political violence blamed on leftists, but probably initiated by

government agents provocateurs, led Marcos to suspend habeas corpus as a prelude

to martial law.

Abinales and Amoroso (2008), described Marcos’ regime as the greatest

dominance of state over society the Philippines has seen.

Thompson (1995), characterized Marcos’s centralised and personalistic rule as

Sultanistic.

Mohamad and co-researchers (1986), named Marcos’ regime as Martial Law

regime which also launched several projects that had huge mass appeal.

Infrastructure projects—the building of roads, bridges, irrigation, etc—that began

during his first term continued. Despite being limited to lands planted with corn and

rice, Marcos’s land reform appeared in the eyes of many to be a serious attempt to

address the centuries-old problem of poverty and social inequality.

Sicat (2011), The recession toward the end had many reasons and could not

easily be characterized by a simple conclusion. As President, in the midst of numerous

social and political problems, including the NPA Rebellion, and later the Brave

Rebellion in the West, he was able to achieve a higher level of achievement by

increasing the nation's economic status. Many of them have been made during the

two presidential terms of office. But a considerable number of them became possible

under martial law, when all the powers of government with regard to the

implementation and passing of laws were in his possession.

Orduña (2016), said she remembers well the time of Marcos when there was no

traffic, police officers did not extract bribes and criminals were on the run. She also

said that life was easier when during Marcos years and she also said that the story of

Marcos good governance was worth sharing towards our generation today. Orduna

(2019), had claimed during Marcos regime they have this peace and order that's why

corruption was minimal.

Aquino (1989), assume that Marcos had claimed great achievements in the

economy, particularly in gross national product (GNP), export productions, foreign

investments, self-sufficiency in rice, discovery of oil, construction of roads,

expressways, bridges, hotels and other infrastructure facilities, land reform, tourism

and communication.

Ramos (2008), suppose that Martial Law was something that they could support

because they felt that it would return the rule of law and with that they would be able

to go after the private armies of the warlords in the provinces and over the first three

years they collected so many loose firearms and jailed a lot of abusive politicians who

were breaking the law.

 Mayol (2019), reiterated that Marcos from the earliest stages of his presidency

introduced significant social reforms which aimed to promote prosperity within

Philippine society and also in 1966, most notably, Marcos introduced family planning

in a time when the growth of the population was exploding which despite all of Marcos’

implementation of sweeping changes across the economic, social and political

structure of the Philippines, and, his ability to use his words to manipulate audiences

domestically and globally.

Aquino (2016), describes the atrocities of the authoritarian regime and the gains

of democracy restored by his mother Corazon Aquino and he also said that the country

of torture, murder and disappearance of scores of activists whose families still await

compensation from the Human Rights Victims’ Claims Board are memories that are

worth remembering during Marcos regime.

Marcos’ ways in order to keep his power as a President

Cu Unjieng (2009), stated that Marcos departed from the mutual understanding

that accompanied the patronage system, whereby power passed back and forth in

tacit agreement between two political parties as viewed historically, however, Marcos

merely dared further than the rest to achieve the full limit of power that the tradition

and system would allow.

 Mohamad and co researchers (1986), said that when Martial law was

implemented Within the sphere of formal politics there was no doubt for a new era and

with the full backing of the military and without a legislature to oppose him, Marcos

became the most powerful human being in the land.

Pace (1986), specified that Marcos imposed martial law in 1972 and managed to

retain broad powers after lifting it in 1981, including the prerogative of governing by

decree Marcos desired.

Szczepanski (2019), explains that under martial law Marcos had took

extraordinary powers for himself which Marcos used the country's military as a weapon

against his political enemies, displaying a typically ruthless approach to opposition.

Jazeera (2011), clarified that in 1972 Marcos declares martial law on September

21, extending Marcos rule beyond the constitutional two-term limit and also justifies

his decision with threats of Communist and separatist Muslim insurgencies, and the

allegedly staged assassination attempt of a government official. Jazeera (2011), also

said that the parliament is suspended, opposition politicians and critics are arrested

and censorship is imposed.

Romulo (2008), simplified that during martial law, the judiciary was not a shield

against the authoritarian regime, but rather, an extension of Marcos’s power and

legitimacy and Marcos clearly saw this potential, but, at least initially, also genuinely

respected the Court’s judicial powers while the Philippine public, believing Marcos to

possess a legendary legal mind, allowed Marcos great flexibility with regard to
constitutional matters and trusted expertise and this expertise allowed Marcos to

gainfully manipulate the individuals.

Ramos (2008), explained that Marcos second term was mixed in terms of the

interest of the country as a whole, because Marcos was already starting to plot how to

prolong himself in power, the result of which was martial law and It was mixed because

more and more he came under the influence of the First Lady being in the corridors of

power for four years put all kinds of ideas into his head and I think that was part of it .

Some people wrote books about the conjugal dictatorship (Romulo, 2008).

Enrile (2008), described Marcos as skillful in playing the game and that Marcos

inserted himself into the elite group because Marcos was not really a member of the

elite which Marcos was accepted and in a sense for a while he allowed himself to

become a tool of the elite at the same time, he was also planning for himself and when

the time came. Enrile (2008) said, he do not know this for a fact, but he would imagine

that Marcos wanted to try to control the elite in the country so then when he declared

martial law it leveled off the political and social playing field. But, there are many

imponderables in the life of men, he got sick and he wasn’t able to accomplish his

purpose and in the meantime, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Francisco (2016), cleared up that through various general orders, Marcos

effectively put the entire power of government under the rule of one man which Marcos

himself. Fransisco (2016), also said that Marcos was to lead the nation and direct the

operation of the entire government which Marcos ordered the armed forces to prevent
or suppress any act of rebellion and also Curfew hours were enforced, group

assemblies were banned, privately-owned media facilities shuttered.

Macaraig (2016), reiterated that in 1972, to the shock of the nation, Marcos

declared martial law, saying it was needed to save the country from communist

insurgents and by doing so Marcos could stay in power longer than the constitutionally

mandated limit of eight years.

Sicat (2011), demystify that Ferdinand E. Marcos was the Philippine president

from 1966 to 1986, a period exceeding twenty year and after serving as a two‐term

president of the Philippines from 1966‐1972, Marcos declared martial law under the

constitution to assume dictatorial powers to tame the political chaos that was then

engulfing the nation.

Aquino (1982), detailed that at the end of 1981, the Philippines was still being

governed under the autocratic rule of Ferdinand Marcos, who imposed martial law in

September, 1972 and during January, 1981 Marcos lifted it, but this did not mean a

return to democratic processes, because several amendments to the 1973 constitution

secured for the most part during the 1976 and 1981 referenda enable Marcos to

govern the country by personal decree.

Marcos as a Dictator

(Francisco 2019) Marcos effectively put the entire power of government under the rule

of one man: his own. He was to lead the nation and direct the operation of the entire

government. Because of the law of Ferdinand Marcos, some Filipinos believe that he
is a dictator of what their experience during the presidency of Ferdinand. All those

innocent people accused of wrongdoing and then killed.

Santos (2019) he added that Filipinos brought themselves on leaders who

promised quick reforms but ended up exploiting them. Ferdinand Marcos, who in 1972

, as he was nearing the end of his second term as president, declared martial law —

and then ruled as a dictator until he was toppled by popular protests in 1986. Some

Filipino thought and said that Ferdinand Marcos is a dictator because he rule the

country in 21 years for using his enormous power. During his time in office thousand's

of Filipino's tortured, jailed without due process or murdered by the regimes thugs.

Marcos later years in power were marred by rampant government corruption,

economic stagnation, the steady widening of economic inequalities between the rich

and the poor.

Prof Sison (2019) Marcos is a dictator person because he doesn't know what

happening for those people who experience the struggle and bloody one he created

during his dictatorship. He create a law for his countryman that have a bad effect for

some Filipino. Also there have a Filipino people doing doesn't like this because of what

their experience.The human right violation or the lost of freedom, abuse, torturer and

the struggle of some Filipino.

(Diokno 2014) some Filipinos believed that Marcos suspended the civil rights and

imposed military authorities it's the reason why filipino believes that he is a President

dictator of the Philippines.

According to Magkababy (2016) the campaign promise of Marcos on his people has

not happened due to the way he ruled and treat his countryman using his enermous

power. He stated also about the victim of human rights violations during the Marcos

dictatorship.

De Guzman (2005), " though I am not a Marcos Loyalist but the way the articles, books,

journals was pertaining him was full of neglected and gossip it's the reason why Filipino

think about him as a dictatorial, corrupt, fraud, deceit, and theft leader. " In addition,

Filipino's stating false accusations and pointed out biased statements to the Marcos

regime in which it triggers the youth to believe it directly.

According to Maglana (2016) the campaign promise of Marcos on his people has not

happened due to the way he ruled and treat his countryman using his enermous

power. He stated also about the victim of human rights violations during the Marcos

dictatorship.

Cullen 2011, they believe that Marcos is a certifiable dictator of the country, he had a

systematic campaign to kill dissidents , critics and anyone who opposed his iron -fisted

rules. Many gossip about his regime was marked by brutal killings, torture , the exile

of opponents. The scale of plunder under Marcos it is the shocking death toll of the

Filipinos.

Marcos love his country in which it led to all Filipino suffered in fear.( Tripoli,2017)
Castro (2015), Filipino experienced and suffered Marcos' extra judicial killings and

those who oppose about him spread neglects, through this many people especially

millennials describe him as a dictator Mao nani final

De Guzman (2005), " though I am not a Marcos Loyalist but the way the articles, books,

journals was pertaining him was full of neglected and gossip it's the reason why Filipino

think about him as a dictatorial, corrupt, fraud, deceit, and theft leader. " In addition,

Filipino's stating false accusations and pointed out biased statements to the Marcos

regime in which it triggers the youth to believe it directly.

According to Maglana (2016) the campaign promise of Marcos on his people has not

happened due to the way he ruled and treat his countryman using his enermous

power. He stated also about the victim of human rights violations during the Marcos

dictatorship.

Marcos contribution in the Country

Narag (2014) The variety of public investments undertaken was made possible by

various methods of mobilizing financing for them. Although some of the major road

projects and other public works were placed under the direct programs of some major

departments of the government, a large part were undertaken under the auspices of

many restructured government entities that took on a corporate form. So, in great

measure, the reorganization of the public agencies helped in strengthening the

capacity to undertake the projects.

Tang (2017) More than one thousand rural banks spread all over the country resulting

to the accessibility of credit to finance purchase of agricultural inputs, hired labor, and

harvesting expenses at very low interest rate.

Chiong (2017) He contributed a wasted opportunity for greatness. As a dictator, it was

all set for a new stage. He had the potential to create something wonderful. With no

one to stop him, the nation was putty in his hands. He could have changed everything

for the better but he choose to enrich himself. He could have been the father of his

country, but greed made his the robber of his country. He could have surpassed Lee

Kwan Yu and Singapore

Gargallo (2017) Well to be fair, Marcos had a lot of accomplishments during his

regime. He served for two terms. His first term was about building infrastructures. So

most of the old infra and buildings you see today in Metro Manila (and some parts of

the country) were all built during his first term. His second term was the roughest one.

He built infras (white elephant projects) created institutions, and legislated new policies

but mostly for his cronies and protection to his administration and way around for

corruption.

Karton (2019) It was during Marcos’s presidency that the International Rice Research

Institute (IRRI) was established to serve as the focal point of research efforts in rice

technology, not only for the country, but also for the rest of the world. The different

high-yielding varieties developed at IRRI soon changed the agricultural landscape in

most rice-producing nations in the Third World, including

our country.

(Anciano 2018) Ferdinand Marcos has been an outstanding achievement President,

no one has ever come to suit. He increased the exchange rate from P2:$1 to P27:$1,

which is a rise of more than 1300 percent. Where you would get in exchange for P27
in every dollar instead of P2. He has raised public debt in just five years from $8B to

$24B.

(Pimentel 2015), Ferdinand Marcos has shown us that the Filipinos should be thankful

to him. Marcos has taught us to scorn and condemn the bullies, to despise those who

brazenly cheat in the elections, to be suspicious of the politicians who claim they want

to make the constitution better and to show us the great difference between discipline

and fear. He has shown that friendship with powerful world leaders is no guarantee

that one can hold on indefinitely to power.

Theoretical Lens

This anchored on the Theory of Sultanism developed by Juan J. Linz. Sultanism

is where domination operates primarily on the basis of the right to choose what should

be done. Linz (1998,p.97). First primary of this theory, According to him, Sultanism

means " the essential reality in sultanistic regime is that all individuals, group and

institutions are permanently subject to the unpredictably and despotic intervention of

sultan and thus, all pluralism is precarious, stating that Sultanism "personal rule-ship".

In political science, Sultanism is an authoritarian government form

characterization of the Marcos government disregard it's highly personality, the ruler

exercises his power without including his collaborators.

Sultanism was also defined as a type of autocratic government in which political

power is concentrated in the hands of the ruler that was partnered by political and
legal rules. Political authority engulfs social and economic life an follows no elaborate

ideology. The regime elicits loyalty through favoritism towards its supporters, reprisals

against its opponents and the repression of civil society. Coined by sociologist Max

Weber to describe absolute and highly personalistic authority, the term sultanism was

used by political scientist for the purpose of regime classification to refer to a type of

nondemocratic political system which is distinct from typical dictatorship and

totalitarian regimes.

This study also anchored on the Theory of Clientelist developed by Carl Lande,

shows how elite leaders of local, family based functions in the village and town in the

lower-class electorate into their political clients. According to him, that politicians

exchanged their local vote for moneys and power from one national parties. In which

it triggers to the negative sides about the regime of the administration of Ferdinand

Marcos. This theory also hypothesize that the party had a much greater access to the

government and had a greater conflict to its collaborator.

According to him, “ the behavioral patterns rooted in the Philippine kinship

system, the Philippine polity is structured less by organized interest groups or by

individuals who in politics think of themselves as members of categories than by a

network of mutual aid relationships between pairs of individuals. To a large extent the

dyadic ties with significance for Philippine politics are vertical ones, bonds between

prosperous patrons and their poor and dependent client.”

He defined the Clientelist Theory that is related to the Philippine politics offers

a persuasive explanation of the opposition party’s regular success. He shows the elite

leaders of local, family based function in the village and towns made the lower-class

people who can vote in an election into their political clients. By using using his
connection by offering money, jobs, service, and other favors, the largely landowning

elite was able to deliver the votes of its primarily peasant clientele.

As we referred it to Marcos', he has approximated sultanism and he pursued

not ideological goals but personal gain, and his government was organized around

family and friends. Through his actions, he contributes a lot for the progress of our

country. The new generation will be experiencing development if the leader of the

country is an authoritarian, Filipinos suffers a lot within his term, in which those who

suffers means progression for the future Filipino. Our country is called super power

nation wide under Marcos leadership But those who against with him, says his

government made little effort to implement the social and economic policies as it

promised.

Through Marcos did a dictatorial but we believe that it is important to view his rule

as very much within the tradition, rather than as a departure from the tradition. Our

interpretation shifts the blame away from one individual operating within the flawed yet

largely healthy system and instead draws attention to the failure of the system itself.

Arguments that Marcos should be as the master of the tradition do appear in the

existing scholarship. It means that Marcos employed to maintain his power.

Marcos was able to maintain authoritarian rule of the support of bureaucrats,

business people, the military and political leaders in various regions, with the

assistance of the US government. He maintained this network of support through a

patron-client system with supporters; Marcos expanded the authority of government.

To minimize the political cost of the expansion, he maintained the legal and
Constitutional forms of democracy. To add credibility to this usurpation of power, he

claimed that economic development was impossible without centralized authority.

Those theory pertaining of how Ferdinand Marcos ruled the country that have a

positive feedback in other aspects of our economy and negative sides of being

leader in the Philippines. With regard to the political system, we instead side more

recent characterizations of John Sidel’s work on “Bossism” and Juan J. Linz that

version of Webber’s “Sultanism”, their theories the detrone-patron client framework,

which places immoderate the importance on landholders and pairings of individuals,

and also to emphasize the role of American colonialism. Their visions is to seek the

personality of how Ferdinand Marcos rule the country as the single and operate the

Philippines as a national “sultan” like a small local “boss”.

Conceptual Framework

The figure below shows the positive and negative sides of how Ferdinand Marcos

govern the Philippines.

Positive Sides of
Ferdinand Marcos

Who is Ferdinand
Marcos?: A closer
look to the
Philippine Dictator
Negative Sides of
Ferdinand Marcos

CHAPTER II

Methods
This chapter presents the research method used, the instrumentation, and the

procedure of analysis. This chapter shows the method and procedures that the

researchers have done for them to gather those data that is needed on this study. This

chapter also shows the sources of the data the researchers have collected. The

analyzing of data is also presented on this chapter.

Design and Procedure

One of the Qualitative research model more particularly narrative model has been

used in this study. As a distinct form of qualitative research, narrative usually focuses

on the study of a single person, the gathering of data through the collection of stories,

the reporting of individual experiences, and the presentation of the meaning of those

experiences to the individual. The research design involved the use of qualitative

research methods to address research issues. The methods involved examining or

analyzing people's perceptions of the famous Philippine dictator. Qualitative

methodology was used for this study because it focuses on observations, concepts,

definitions and descriptions.

As Rossman and Rallis (1998) have noted, “there are few truths that constitute

universal knowledge; rather, there are multiple perspectives about the world” (p. 29).

By exploring people's perceptions of Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralin Marcos, it was

possible to obtain "multiple perspectives" that broadened our understanding of the

subject. Each person assigns certain characteristics and attributes to a given situation.

The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of these variations in the

interpretation of the positive and negative perspectives of the people about Ferdinand

Marcos. Merriam (1998) noted that qualitative research offers "the greatest promise to

make significant contributions to the knowledge base and practice of education"

because it is "focused on discovery, insight and understanding from the perspective

of those being studied" (p. 1).

Role of a Researcher

The researcher's position in qualitative research is crucial as he or she collects data

and conducts analysis (Creswell, 2007) thus, our role as researchers is that we must

gather data or information that is as credible and as practicable, or information that is

accurate and reliable in order to avoid bias. Therefore, there is a possible bias on our

part that could have an impact on the outcome of the analysis, making it a very difficult

balancing act to be unbiased and non-judgmental in our feelings, observations, and

behavior. This possible bias may be our own opinion or interpretation of the famous

Philippine dictator, Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralin Marcos. In order to avoid this, we

must ensure that we are attentive and patient to the research we are undertaking. As

a researcher it is our work to provide relevant information in order to make our work

accurate which we also need to answer the questions set out above in a concrete and

complete detail in order to avoid confusion.

Data Collection

Before starting the data collecting procedures, the researcher assured that the data

used in the study had already been approved. The data will also be subjected for

validity and reliability test to ensure the quality of data. The researcher will also

emphasize and provide concrete details about the data gathered. Digging deeper or

looking closer about the famous Philippine dictator was such a challenge. Faux details

about the famous Philippine dictator was widely spread throughout the internet, and

with that we did our best in order to not be biased by that information we provided.
That's why in terms of collecting data the researchers must ensure the validity of each

information that was included in this study. After all the data that has been collected

and approved will make the researchers to take the next move which they will start

interpreting the data to come up with a conclusion.

Analogy

In this portion of the study, the researcher seeks to gather an accurate data and

information to hypothesize the study about Ferdinand Marcos for being a leader in the

Philippines, about how did he ruled the country for 21 years, and how did he keep his

power as a President. Some analysis of this study are based on a deeper meaning

and implications of the findings that presented on a comprehensive form. We collect

possible answer that are connected to our research questions that was shown above.

The researchers used those RSL above for this analogy in order to come up with a

conclusion for every research question that we have and with that we clearly

differentiate the similarities and differences of the answers that we provided above.

We tend to seek some answers and informations that was correlated to our research

questions.

In the first question many of the researchers above concluded about what kind of

President and a Leader was Ferdinand Marcos many of them focused on his Negative

side as a leader while others are opposite. The rsearchers above briefly explained

about what kind of leader was Marcos during his regime one of them that we highlight

in this study that gave a very interesting answer of our question was Overholt. Overholt

during 1986 conducted a study about the famous Philippine dictator and the

information that we have gained from his research in order to answer the first question
that we provided was the fact that Marcos can solve any of our country's problem even

those serious ones which was also supported by some of the achievements of Marcos

as a leader and as a person, indeed with all of Marcos' knowledge and intelligence as

a leader it is undeniable that Overholt's conclusion was possible.

In the first question, the researchers concluded about what kind of leadership were

Marcos undertaken in the nation. In which, the researcher highlights the positive side

about Marcos. As we noticed to their answer they are alike on the content, such as,

his benediction description. As what Bosworth(2008), cited that, Ferdinand Marcos

was a smart leader. In addition, it states that he is not just a brilliant ruler also he has

skillful talent in public speaking with his fascinating popularity that become a world

class (Mayol, 2019). Moreover, through his mindful intelligence he flourish the

economy, social, political, civil,and human rights. And conventionally, it's governed

and restored the normality during chaos in this nation. Majority of the researchers cite

the good side of Marcos' leadership. The researchers who've caught our attention are

Lazaro and Locsin . Lazaro believes that Marcos wanted people to have disciple.

Locsin narrate that they later found out that Marcos never actually touched the national

treasury. Locsin's narration break our belief about the reason behind the Marcos'

wealth and power.

In the other hand, the researchers who gave some informations in order to succesfuly

gave answer regarding the question number two that was about the Marcos regime

made sense in different perspectives. There’s a lot of statement that look liked

Marcos’s Regime was a big impact, for instance the statement from Abinales and

Amoroso which stated that, Marcos’s Regime made a great influence of the state over
society that the Philippines has ever seen. Abinales and Amoroso together with

Orduña’s statements were similar and wasn't contradict to each other. Their statement

clearly says that most of the issues that we have in our time today wasn’t really a

problem before because of how Marcos ruled the country. His Regime made a great

impact that there was no traffic, police officers did not extraxt bribes and criminals were

on the run. Orduña’s statement also states that the life during Marcos’s Regime was

easier and that it was worth sharing towards our generation today. These researchers

clearly judged Marcos’s Regime through how the country works before while at the

other side Orduña(2016) and Aquino (2016) have different kind of view about the

Marcos regime as for Aquino in 2016 the Marcos regime was the reason why our

country don't have peace , became country of torture but for Orduña it was the best

because in that time the Philippine don't have traffics, the police officer did not extract

bribes criminal were on run , and the life was easier when Ferdinand Marcos was the

president in that time .

For the third question about how did Marcos keep his power the researchers that

caught my attention is Mohamad and Enrile. Mohamad said that Martial law was

implemented by the sphere of formal politics and there are no doubt for a new era and

that Marcos became the powerful human being in the land and we are agree of it

because we can't deny that Marcos is the most powerful human being in this land

when he daclared the Martial law. Enrile said that Marcos inserted himself into the elite

group and we are amazed because not all President can do that only Ferdinand

Marcos. For Mohammad, he also indicate the positive side of Ferdinand Marcos. In

his statement he formulated (stated) that Mr. Marcos implemented the Law for the
formal permission of politics, so that there have no doubt for a new era and for those

military. He use his power for the concern of his country good.

Marcos as a dictator, the researcher seeks an accurate and precised information

related on the given question. The researcher's above briefly explain and concluded

the reason of the Filipino why they saw Ferdinand Marcos as a dictator of the

Philippines. The researcher's noticed to their answer, they are the same on the content

like how fraud, corrupt, luckless leader was Ferdinand Marcos. Filipino's benefited of

his deeds but a meanwhile it turns as a worst nightmare to be to his countrymen,

innocent people accused of wrong doings, tortured and killed due to his big impact of

his enormous power.

Prof Sison (2019), added that, he did these for the best for his countrymen, he create

a law, in which it led to all Filipino lost their freedom and suffered. Love is the reason

why there's pain. Marcos love his country in which it led to all Filipino suffered in fear.(

Tripoli,2017)

Also it expound the idea, the way Filipinos see him as a dictator of the Philippines,

the way he undertaken his countrymen that led to them to be fear in a treat. As what

Magkababy (2016), cited that, his promises to his people are a treat to every Filipino

disregard the people has a huge connection to him. Marcos suspended civil rights and

imposed military. ( Diokno,2014)

Cullen ( 2011), the scale of plunder under the Marcos regime was a shocking death

tool of the Filipino in which the trust of Filipino's to him was faded those results

increases the crime rate.

 Though Marcos regime has a huge impact in the history of the country, the way he

declared a systematic campaign, tremendous command, in contradictory Filipino's

think about Marcos as a fraud, corrupt, dictator, and a thief leader, they pointed out

some prejudice and biased statements that written in the history of the country about

him in which it triggers the youth to believe it directly and embraces them to dislikes

him and changed some of his good perspective that modern days contributes a lot.

In this question, the researcher seeks an accurate and precised information related on

the given question. The researcher's above briefly explain and concluded the reason

of the Filipino why they saw Ferdinand Marcos as a dictator of the Philippines. The

researcher's noticed to their answer, they are the same on the content like how fraud,

corrupt, luckless leader was Ferdinand Marcos. Filipino's benefited of his deeds but a

meanwhile it turns as a worst nightmare to be to his countrymen, innocent people

accused of wrong doings, tortured and killed due to his big impact of his enormous

power.

Prof Sison (2019), added that, he did these for the best for his countrymen, he create

a law, in which it led to all Filipino lost their freedom and suffered. Love is the reason

why there's pain. Marcos love his country in which it led to all Filipino suffered in fear.(

Tripoli,2017)

Also it expound the idea, the way Filipinos see him as a dictator of the Philippines, the

way he undertaken his countrymen that led to them to be fear in a treat.

As what Magkababy (2016), cited that, his promises to his people are a treat to every

Filipino disregard the people has a huge connection to him. Marcos suspended civil

rights and imposed military. ( Diokno,2014)

Cullen ( 2011), the scale of plunder under the Marcos regime was a shocking death

tool of the Filipino in which the trust of Filipino's to him was faded those results

increases the crime rate.

Though Marcos regime has a huge impact in the history of the country, the way he

declared a systematic campaign, tremendous command, in contradictory Filipino's

think about Marcos as a fraud, corrupt, dictator, and a thief leader, they pointed out

some prejudice and biased statements that written in the history of the country about

him in which it triggers the youth to believe it directly and embraces them to dislikes

him and changed some of his good perspective that modern days contributes a lot.

CHAPTER III

Results and Discussion

This chapter highlights the results of this study that was keenly conducted by the

researchers. In this chapter the researchers will also justify the validity and reliability

of the data that they had gathered. One-by-one the researchers will discuss each of

the data that they had gathered in order to explain its nature and capability to give

answer or solution for those questions that was provided above. In the other hand, the

researchers used some famous articles and books that you may see through offline

and online which was also proven to be a reliable or trustworthy data and information

by the researchers with the use of analytical skills that they empower.
Marcos as a leader

Ferdinand Emmanuel Marcos was a famous leader/president in Philippine history.

Many people was inspired by the leadership skills that he had been used for the rest

of his regime, one of them was believed to be the Philippines current President Rodrigo

Roa Duterte. Marcos as a leader in Philippines in the history was undeniably

beneficial. The way Marcos lead the country which was with passion and hardworking

was really motivational in nature. In this section of this chapter the researchers will

discuss both the positive and negative side of Marcos as a leader in which one by one

the data that they had gathered will be justified and explain. The researchers read

some articles that was correlated to this question. Furthermore, here are the data's

about the positive views of his leadership skills that the researchers had gathered:

Ferdinand Marcos is a brave President because he was very ready to be a leadrr of

his country. Upon of each important task held, he brought to bear the impact of his

genius, the dynamism of his leadership. On his first ascent to the presidency in 1965,

he announced obsession was to make the nation great again. Then, when in 1972 he

imposed whay he called a constitutional authoritarianism in order to establish a New

Society ( since the country was at the time plagued with several grave problems), no

mattet how controversial, would eventually be a boon to the nation. He had no fear for

the problem came, because this is the character help his countrymen.

- Marcos: Architect of the New Society

He is a President who innovative, dynamic,visionary, genius, and daring. A man who makes

his own seasons - who destiny to tge shape of his own will, his own objectives, his own vision.

Challenge into opportunity , opportunity into triumph and fulfillment. Also, Ferdinand Marcos
"did not afraid to break away from the irrelevancies of the past in order to meet the problems

of the present and the needs of the future." Marcos concentrated his efforts on two major

goals: self-sufficiency in rice and infrastructure program. In his second term, Marcos found

himself face to face with a host of public problems. He his a daring person.

- Presidents of the Philippines

While historians have branded Ferdinand Marcos as a dictator, no one has disputed his

intellectual brilliance. Many agree that Marcos had a clear, long-term vision for the Philippines,

as exemplified by the Bagong Lipunan (New Society) Movement, a movement aimed at

promoting not just law and order, but also changing the culture of the country.

- 7 Philippine Presidents, Different Leadership Styles

Based on the datas that was provided above most of it compliments and characterized

the famous Philippine leader because of empowering such amazing skills and traits.

If you would contrast the datas that the researchers had gathered it has a huge

similarities with each other specifically on that part that they talk about how genius and

innovative the famous Philippine leader was. In the other hand, many Filipino people

or even other nationalities believes and see him as a dictator because of his

implementation of Martial Law. His Regime brought a traumatic experience and bad

memory in the minds of mostly Filipino people. Here are the data which support this

statement :
Marcos was a leading member of the New Society Movement, he ruled as a dictator

under martial law from 1972 until 1981. His regime was infamous for its corruption,

extravagance, and brutality.

- Ferdinand Marcos

At the pinnacle of his political career, Marcos remained a man hungry for power and

the validation of history--a man frustrated by the limitations of democracy. Whispering

the future, his discontent would grow into the full misery of defeat and disgrace.

-The Marcos Diary : A Lust for Power, an Eye on Glory

The data that was provided above explained how Marcos was hungry or desperate

with so much power which led him into implementing martial law and empower so

much dictatorial powers which led him into downfall.

As the researchers analyzed the data that they had gathered and using their analytical

skills in understanding a certain informations well they found out that so far everything

was neutral. There are people who believes that he's a great leader and there are

others who don't. Therefore in this part of the study it was correlated with an existing

study entitled "The rise and fall of Ferdinand Marcos". Overholt (1986), highlights and

narrate both positive and negative side of Ferdinand Marcos as a famous leader in the

history.

21 years of Marcos’s leadership

During Marcos years or also known as the "Golden years" were infamous because of

the fast progress that Philippines had ever made. The country was developed from its
low economic status into its highest extent. Indeed, it was undeniably beneficial to

have Marcos as one of Philippine leaders in the history, but regardless the positivity

that he brought for the rest of his regime was known because of corruption and brutality

here are some datas that the researchers had gathered which supports this:

Marcos ruled the Philippines for 20 years, exercising authoritarian power and

undermining democratic processes. Marcos and his associates looted billions of

dollars from the government, took on enormous loans to keep the economy afloat, and

left the Philippines in a desperate financial state.

- Ferdinand Marcos- Ruler of the Philippines

Marcos lead the country with an iron fist from 1966 to 1986.

-Leadership, Ferdinand E. Marcos

Ferdinand Marcos (September 11, 1917–September 28, 1989) ruled the Philippines

with an iron fist from 1966 to 1986. Critics charged Marcos and his regime with crimes

like corruption and nepotism.

-Biography of Ferdinand Marcos, Dictator of the Philippines

Most of the data provided above talks about Marcos ruling and leading the country

with an Iron fist. An iron fist of an autocratic leader was believed to keep a fractious

society intact by everyone which includes our famous Philippine leader Ferdinand

Marcos. Therefore this section was somehow related to a research entitled "Iron cage

in an iron fist: Authoritarian institutions and the personalization of power in Malaysia".

Slater (2003), his view is based on a narrow procedural definition of institutions that
makes more sense in democratic than in authoritarian settings. While democratic

institutions consist largely of procedures that constrain the executive's despotic power,

authoritarian institutions consist primarily of organizations that enhance the regime's

infrastructural power over political opposition. The practical significance of this

distinction can be seen in the personalization of power in Malaysia. An aspiring

autocrat ironically took advantage of highly institutionalized political organizations to

enhance his personal power, even while maintaining the regime's resilience in the face

of pressures for democratization which was clearly the same as the famous Philippine

leader.

Longest running Philippine President

Marcos did everything just to stay in power. Many people believes that he was blinded

about his desires about it. Marcos can't see any future to himself than being the long

term president of his own country until he dies. Many people justify that because of

that fact he was pushed and motivated to do everything in order to keep his self in

power for 21 years. Here are some data's that explains how did he kept his power as

a President or as leader that the researchers had gathered:

Ferdinand Marcos leadership style is through his intelligence, sample of this is when

he declared marshal law. He saw a loop hole in our government rules and laws. This

helped his extend his regime

for 20 years. He also was able to get a woman of high stature because of his

intelligence which in some of biography was mentioned.And He has this charm that

most Filipino’s today even admire as he show’s power and other countries never

looked down on the Philippines during his time.

- A leadership style: Ferdinand Marcos Leadership style

Ferdinand E. Marcos was the Philippine president from 1966 to 1986, a period

exceeding twenty years. Afterserving as a two‐ term president of the Philippines from

1966‐ 1972, he declared martial law under the constitution to assume dictatorial

powers.

- The Economic Legacy of Marcos

The data that was provided talks about Marcos using Martial law as an excuse in order

for him to maintain his powers as a President. It was also stated that because of him

being hungry for powers he implemented martial law in order for him to assume more

dictatorial powers. In this section of the study it was related with a study that was

entitled "From Moses to Marcos: Individual differences in the use and abuse of power".

Lee-Chai, Chen,and Chartrand (2001) , their study discussed about recent insights

into individual differences in the effects of power are reviewed, and a new scale

measuring the likelihood to misuse power is introduced. There is more than one way

to detect individual differences in the use and misuse of power. Studies have found

that feelings of responsibility moderated the power-related behavior of stereotyping,

that individuals with more self-centered personalities are more likely to sexually

aggress, whereas those who are more nurturant are less likely to sexually aggress,

and that communal and exchange orientations may moderate the effects of power,

leading to either prosocial, responsible gestures or more self-oriented aims. The

creation of the Misuse of Power Scale, which reflects the pursuit of selfish goals and
disregard for the welfare of others, potentially provides a direct method of detecting

individual differences in the use of power.

Marcos as a Dictator

Many people see him as a dictator or an autocratic president in the Philippine history.

In school, that kind of mindset and view was introduced towards the students. The

informations that was given built curiosity not only in the minds of students but also

with some people that haven't witnessed the well-known dictatorship of the Philippine

leader and president Ferdinand Marcos. The informations that was provided or given

through rumors aren't enough to justify and explain the nature of the mindset of some

people. In this section of this chapter the researchers will further explain the reasons

why people saw him in that way. Nevertheless, here are the data's that they had

gathered:

The dictatorship of Philippine President Ferdinand E. Marcos in the 1970s and 80s is

historically remembered for its record of human rights abuses, particularly targeting

political opponents, student activists journalists, religious workers, farmers, and others

who fought against the Marcos dictatorship. Based on the documentation of Amnesty

International, Task Force Detainees of the Philippines, and similar human rights

monitoring entities, historians believe that the Marcos dictatorship was marked by

3,257 known extrajudicial killings, 35,000 documented tortures, 77 'disappeared', and

70,000 incarcerations. Some 2,520 of the 3,257 murder victims were tortured and

mutilated before their bodies were dumped in various places for the public to discover

- a tactic meant to sow fear among the public, which came to be known as "salvaging".

Some bodies were even cannibalized.

-Human rights abuses of the Marcos dictatorship

Marcos' orders gave the military the authority to arrest and detain anyone going

against the government or deemed subversive. In General Order No. 62, issued in

October 1977, Marcos allowed the defense secretary and his authorized law

enforcement officials to issue an arrest, search and seizure order (ASSO) for various

offenses ranging from robbery and arson to murder and kidnapping.

-LOOK BACK: The Philippine Constabulary under Marcos

The data that was provided above usually discuss about the human rights abuses of

the Marcos regime during Martial Law. This includes the extrajudicial killings, torture,

incarcerations, salvaging, and other brutal acts. In this section it can also be related to

the study entitled " The Fall of dictatorship" which states every single thing about the

Marcos’s dictatorial acts during his regime and narrate the things that happened in

order to end it.

Marcos contributions

Marcos gave a huge contribution in terms of our economic status, progress, and

development during his regime. He never promised for something in order for him to

provide but he was too knowledgeable to know every conflict and problems that his

country has and instead without people asking him to do he will do some action to it

and provide some solutions for those problems to solve and his country's
development. Some people believes that Marcos being a dictator was just a way for

him in order to develop discipline towards his people. We look back at the man that

caused a nation to stand up united against his dictatorship- Ferdinand Marcos. He

made a promise to make the nation great again and he did. The statement that was

provided above will be briefly explained by the data's that the researchers had

gathered:

Infrastructure is contribution of Marcos on his country especially for his people. He

build an infrastructures, so that it can provide a venue for the Filipinos to highlight

cultural heritage, propagate arts and culture, generate tourism, improve health

conditions and contribute to economic growth. There are the list of infrastucture that

built during Marcos time: Cultural Center of the Philippines, Tanghalang Francisco

Balagtas( Folk Arts Theater), Philippine International Convention Center, Makiling

Center for the Arts (National Arts Center) as a sanctuary for the young people and

aspiring Filipino artist, Nayong Pilipino was built from scatch in 1969, People's Park in

the Sky it was a place to serve as a guest house, Philippine Heart Center for those

people who had a heart failure or other illness in heart, Lung Center of the Philippines

under Presedential Decree No. 1823 by Ferdinand Marcos was providing a health care

that specifically targets lung and pulmonary disease, The National Kidney and

Transplant Institute formerly known as tge National Kidney Foundation of the

Philippines as a tertiary referral hospital that also offers voluntary blood services, and

then the San Juanico Bridge.

-Infrastucture Built During Marcos Time

A lot of Marcos' infrastructures today still stand like the Cultural Center of the

Philippines, Philippine Heart Center and the San Juanico Bridgr because the people

behind these infrastracture still believe that the mission of either providing a venue fir

exhibition or performance, giving aid to the sick and connection people is not over.

Until now this infrastructure continue to help our economy in their own aspects.

- Presidents of the Philippines

Among all the internal transformations of the New Society, the greatest deed has been

the decreeing of land reform- a program that had for decades been frustrated by a

reactionary Congress. The program will eventually benefit one million farmers who

have tilled without owning land. Agrarian reform has loosened the traditional

oligarchy's hold on agriculture. A closely related effort to socialize corporate wealth

has begun by broadening the ownership of public utilities; and there is every sign that

the government is determined " to encourage the rich in the fulfillment of their civic

responsibility."

- Marcos of the Philippines

Financial resources are being transferred, on a huge scale by national standards, from

Manila to Muslim Mindanao and the other rural areas, where the bulk ofbthe 42 million

Filipino still live. All this new money being plowed into the land and its impatient people,

in the form of water- management schemes, rural cooperative, fertilizer loans,

electrification, small industries, new scools and so forth is designed to stir latent

popular energies and generate growth that is both self-sustaining and equitable.

-The Marcos Revolution

Of all the presidents of the country ( to this time) , Marcos built the most extensive

infrastructure. The projects were interrelated and complemented sector development

objectives. He put in the major trunk line road networks within the country, linking them

from Luzon to the Visayas and then to Mindanao. These networks were essential in

bringing down the cost of transportation, thereby raising the prospects of commerce

throughout the affected regiond of the country. In his two terms in office, he

concentrated on a network of roads, simply designated and expensive school

buildings, and irrigation systems that also built farm to market roads.

- The Economic Legacy of Marcos

As you read and analyze the data that was provided above you can conclude that

Marcos was really known for his Land reforms and specially with his Infrastucture

development. Most of his infrastracture developments focused on highlighting the

venues of our cultural heritage which then increased tourism in our country. Marcos

believes that with his reforms he can build a new society that promotes new culture in

his country. Some of the projects that he made under the infrastructure developments

such as the San Juanico Bridge was up until now used by the people and still

contributes in our economic status and progress in its own aspects. Therefore,

Ferdinand E Marcos wasn't just the famous Philippine dictator that people believes

him to be. Despite his dictatorship in our country for his second term still he gave a

huge contribution in terms of our country's progress throughout his regime. He seek

solutions for the problems that our country have and successfully aid most of them

during his watch.