Originally published October 31, 2015
Archive note: This article was originally written in 2015, during the period when Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. was seeking the vice presidency. It is preserved here as part of my early blogging history. Some of my views, arguments, and understanding of Philippine history have developed since this was first published.
This is a response to the Inquirer.net article “‘Never Again’ Is Not Just About Marcos.”
I do not claim to be an expert on Philippine history or politics. I write simply as a Filipino citizen who believes that political issues should be examined critically rather than accepted according to one political narrative alone.
Should Filipinos Forget Martial Law?
The article argued that Bongbong Marcos wanted Filipinos to forget—or even deny—the abuses committed during his father's rule.
I disagreed with presenting his position that simply.
Remembering history is important. A country that forgets its past risks repeating its mistakes. But remembering should also involve reading, questioning, comparing sources, and understanding the larger context rather than merely repeating slogans from either political camp.
“Moving on” should never mean erasing history.
At the same time, remembering the past should not prevent people from independently evaluating present-day political candidates.
The challenge is to do both: remember history and judge today's leaders according to evidence.
A Son Is Not Automatically His Father
One point in the Inquirer article with which I agreed was that children should not automatically be held responsible for the crimes of their parents.
Bongbong Marcos was not Ferdinand Marcos Sr.
That distinction mattered to me in 2015, and it remains a reasonable principle when evaluating any political family. A candidate should be examined according to his own actions, statements, record, policies, and character.
That does not mean family history becomes irrelevant.
If a candidate publicly defends, minimizes, or misrepresents actions associated with his family's political history, those statements can legitimately become part of the public's evaluation of him.
But criticism should still focus on evidence rather than guilt merely by association.
“Never Again” Should Be Bigger Than One Family
The strongest point of the phrase “Never Again” is not that a particular surname should forever be prohibited from holding public office.
Its deeper lesson should be that Filipinos must remain vigilant against the concentration and abuse of political power.
That principle should apply regardless of surname, political party, region, ideology, or family.
If we condemn authoritarianism only when it comes from politicians we dislike but tolerate abuses committed by politicians we support, then we have misunderstood the lesson.
“Never Again” should mean never again to dictatorship.
Never again to abuse of power.
Never again to violations of people's rights.
Never again to political institutions becoming tools of one person or one family.
And never again to citizens surrendering their responsibility to question those who govern them.
Social Media and the New Political Generation
Another issue I raised in 2015 was the growing role of social media.
Many younger Filipinos were already receiving political information through Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other online platforms rather than traditional history books and newspapers.
That created both an opportunity and a danger.
Digital platforms can make history more accessible. They can introduce younger people to political debates they might otherwise ignore.
But they can also spread misleading information much faster.
This means that political participation online should involve more than sharing memes, slogans, edited videos, or partisan posts.
Read beyond the headline.
Check the source.
Compare opposing claims.
Study history beyond Facebook.
And question politicians—even the ones you support.
History Is More Complicated Than Political Loyalty
When I originally wrote this article, I strongly resisted what I perceived as the assumption that anyone willing to support Bongbong Marcos must be ignorant of history.
I still believe political disagreement should not automatically become an accusation of stupidity or ignorance.
Filipinos can study the same period and reach different political conclusions.
But disagreement also does not make every historical claim equally valid.
There are facts that can be investigated through documents, court decisions, government records, testimonies, scholarly research, and other evidence.
Critical thinking therefore requires something more difficult than simply choosing between “pro-Marcos” and “anti-Marcos.”
It requires being willing to challenge information even when it supports our own political preference.
What Should “Never Again” Mean?
The phrase should not belong exclusively to one political group.
It should serve as a warning to every generation.
Never again should Filipinos blindly surrender power to political leaders.
Never again should loyalty to a politician become more important than loyalty to truth.
Never again should history be reduced to propaganda—from either side.
And never again should political disagreement prevent Filipinos from examining evidence for themselves.
We cannot change what happened in the past.
But we can decide how carefully we study it, what lessons we learn from it, and how those lessons influence the leaders we choose in the future.
Remember the past. Question the present. Think for yourself.
— JP Abecilla, October 2015
