In Philippine history, there are periods that stand out for their difficulty and the incredible courage of ordinary people. One such time was the period of the Marcos dictatorship, especially the years of Martial Law from 1972 to 1981, which extended until 1986. This was a time when basic freedoms were limited, political opponents were silenced, and fear gripped the nation. But even under such harsh conditions, the spirit of resistance remained alive. And surprisingly, one of the key battlegrounds for this resistance was not just the streets or political arenas, but also the classrooms, campuses, and informal learning spaces across the country. This article will explore how education and organizing against the Philippine dictatorship became a vital force, showing how learning wasn’t just about books and lectures, but about empowering people to stand up for their rights and fight for freedom.
When Ferdinand E. Marcos declared Martial Law in September 1972, he aimed to control every aspect of Philippine society. This included institutions that shape people’s minds and ideas, like schools, universities, and the media. The government shut down newspapers, radio stations, and TV networks that were critical of the regime. Academic freedom, the idea that teachers and students should be free to discuss and research ideas without fear of punishment, was severely restricted.
Universities and colleges, which had often been places of vibrant discussion and student activism before Martial Law, suddenly faced strict surveillance. Soldiers and intelligence agents were present on campuses. Curfews were imposed. Student publications were censored or shut down. Protests, which were a common way for students to voice their concerns, were banned. Many student leaders, professors, and even ordinary students were arrested, jailed, and some even disappeared or were killed. The goal was clear: to suppress dissent and ensure that no ideas challenging the government could spread.
Under these conditions, traditional education became difficult, if not dangerous. Textbooks were checked for content that might be seen as subversive. Teachers had to be careful about what they taught and discussed in class. A climate of fear made open discussion about the country’s problems almost impossible within the formal education system.
When Classrooms Close, Learning Finds New Homes
But the desire to learn and understand the truth didn’t die out. Instead of stopping, learning and organizing went underground or found new, unexpected homes. This was the beginning of “resistance education.” It wasn’t a formal system with report cards and diplomas. It was about:
- Learning the Truth: Finding and sharing information about what was really happening in the country – the human rights abuses, the corruption, the true state of the economy – beyond what the government-controlled media reported.
- Critical Thinking: Developing the ability to question the government’s narrative and analyze the political situation deeply.
- Empowerment: Realizing that even under a dictatorship, people had the power to understand their situation and work together for change.
- Organizing: Using shared knowledge and understanding to build networks, plan actions, and mobilize people for the cause of freedom and democracy.
This form of resistance education was crucial because the dictatorship relied on keeping people ignorant and isolated. By learning and organizing together, people broke through the fear and the control.
The Role of Students: Youthful Fire and Fearless Actions
Students were often at the forefront of this resistance. Universities like the University of the Philippines (UP), Ateneo de Manila University, and De La Salle University, among others, became centers of critical thought and activism despite the dangers. Student councils, youth organizations, and informal groups continued to meet, discuss, and plan.
Before Martial Law, student activism was already strong. Events like the “First Quarter Storm” in 1970, where students and other sectors held massive protests against the government, showed the power of organized youth. Martial Law aimed to crush this spirit, but it didn’t succeed completely.
Students used creative ways to resist. They would:
- Hold secret meetings and discussions: Gathering in dorm rooms, private homes, or off-campus safe houses to talk about the political situation, share information, and plan activities.
- Produce underground publications: Typing or mimeographing newsletters, poems, and essays that circulated secretly on campus and beyond. These publications carried news, analysis, and calls to action that couldn’t be found in regular newspapers.
- Organize “teach-ins”: Informal sessions, often held in hidden locations or disguised as social gatherings, where professors, guest speakers, or knowledgeable students would discuss topics like human rights, social justice, Philippine history from a critical perspective, and the nature of the dictatorship. These were vital for political education.
- Stage lightning rallies: Quick, unannounced protests in public spaces, designed to appear suddenly, deliver a message (like holding banners or shouting slogans), and disperse before the police or military could fully respond. These were risky but kept the flame of public dissent alive.
- Use cultural forms: Creating plays, songs, and poetry that contained hidden or symbolic messages of protest and resistance. These could sometimes bypass censorship or resonate deeply with people on an emotional level.
The risks for these young activists were immense. Arrests, torture, and even death were real possibilities. Many students were detained and subjected to harsh treatment. Yet, the desire for freedom and justice fueled their actions. Their energy and willingness to take risks inspired other sectors of society.
Here’s a look at some key forms of resistance learning and organizing during the dictatorship:
| Method of Resistance Learning/Organizing | Description | Participants & Spaces | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Underground Publications | Secretly produced newsletters, pamphlets, books, and manifestos. | Students, faculty, church groups, political activists; private homes, campuses, safe houses. | Provided alternative news and analysis, countered state propaganda, built solidarity. |
| Teach-Ins and Study Groups | Informal, unsanctioned discussion sessions on political and social issues. | Students, professors, community organizers; dorms, churches, private residences. | Developed critical awareness, shared forbidden knowledge, facilitated organizing. |
| Cultural Resistance | Use of music, theater, poetry, and visual arts to express dissent. | Artists, students, cultural workers; small gatherings, disguised events. | Conveyed messages emotionally, sometimes bypassing direct censorship, built shared identity. |
| Street Protests / Lightning Rallies | Public demonstrations, often quick and unannounced, to raise awareness. | Students, labor groups, urban poor, activists; campuses, public squares, streets. | Kept public dissent visible (despite risks), galvanized supporters, disrupted normalcy. |
| Community Organizing | Building networks and solidarity groups among different sectors (labor, peasants, urban poor). | Activists, church workers, students; communities, factories, farms. | Connected specific grievances to the larger political struggle, built a broader resistance base. |
| Documentation & Information Dissemination | Recording human rights abuses and other violations; spreading information through informal networks. | Activists, human rights lawyers, church workers; various informal channels. | Exposed the regime’s true nature, provided evidence, sought international support. |
This table shows that resistance learning was not limited to traditional academic settings but was a broad, multifaceted effort involving many different groups and methods.
The Courage of Teachers and Academics
Professors and teachers also played a crucial role, often at great personal risk. Some openly criticized the regime and were subsequently fired, arrested, or forced into exile. Others stayed within the system but subtly introduced critical ideas or protected their students. Many joined the resistance movement, participating in teach-ins, writing for underground publications, or providing intellectual guidance to activists.
Academic freedom became a battle cry. The fight for the right to teach, study, and discuss controversial topics without fear was directly linked to the larger fight for political freedom. Universities that tried to maintain a degree of autonomy became important sanctuaries for dissent. For example, UP Diliman was known for its vibrant (and often defiant) intellectual atmosphere, culminating in events like the Diliman Commune in 1971 (just before martial law was declared, but indicative of campus militancy that continued in adapted forms), where students, faculty, and residents resisted the military’s entry into campus.
The Church and Resistance Education
The Catholic Church, a powerful institution in the Philippines, also became a significant force in resistance education and organizing. While some parts of the church hierarchy initially cooperated with the regime, many priests, nuns, and lay workers became involved in social justice work and human rights advocacy.
They organized Basic Christian Communities (BCCs) in poor areas, which, while religious in nature, also became spaces for discussing community problems, human rights, and the political situation. These BCCs often incorporated elements of popular education, using simple language and relatable examples to help people understand their rights and the injustices they faced.
Priests and nuns provided sanctuary for activists fleeing arrest. Church institutions helped document human rights abuses and disseminated this information through church networks, both locally and internationally. Publications by church groups, even if they were not overtly political, often carried subtle messages or reported on social issues in a way that highlighted the regime’s failures. For instance, the Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines (AMRSP) published documents and reports exposing human rights violations, acting as a vital source of truth.
Connecting with the Grassroots: Labor and Peasant Organizing
Resistance education wasn’t just happening among students and the educated elite. It was also crucial for organizing workers and peasants. Activists, often from student or church backgrounds, would go to factories and rural communities to live and work with ordinary people. This “integration” process was a form of mutual education.
Organizers learned about the specific problems faced by workers (low wages, poor working conditions, suppression of unions) and peasants (landlessness, exploitation by landlords, lack of government support). They then helped these communities understand how their struggles were connected to the larger political system and the dictatorship.
- They would hold workshops and discussions on labor rights, agrarian reform, and human rights.
- They would help workers and peasants form unions or organizations to collectively bargain and protect their interests.
- They used simple educational materials, like comics or flip charts, to explain complex issues in an accessible way.
This grassroots organizing was essential for building a broad-based resistance movement that went beyond the urban centers and included ordinary Filipinos from all walks of life. The connection between intellectual resistance (critical thinking, information sharing) and mass organizing (mobilizing large numbers of people) was a powerful synergy.
The Power of Information and Documentation
In an era before the internet and social media, controlling information was a key tool of the dictatorship. Therefore, gathering, documenting, and spreading accurate information became a vital act of resistance.
Human rights lawyers, church workers, journalists (working secretly), and student activists diligently documented cases of arrest, torture, disappearance, and extrajudicial killings. This documentation was risky work, as those involved could easily become targets themselves.
This information was then shared through:
- Underground networks
- Church channels
- International human rights organizations
- Alternative publications
Sharing this information served multiple purposes:
- It kept the truth alive among Filipinos.
- It countered the government’s propaganda that peace and order reigned.
- It rallied support for victims and their families.
- It brought international attention to the human rights situation in the Philippines, putting pressure on the Marcos regime.
This flow of information was a form of education – educating the public, educating the international community, and educating future generations about the realities of life under the dictatorship.
The Dangers and Challenges Faced by Resistance Educators and Organizers
Engaging in resistance education and organizing under a dictatorship was incredibly dangerous. The state security forces were pervasive and often ruthless.
- Surveillance and Infiltration: Activist groups were constantly under surveillance. Informants were present in communities, campuses, and workplaces. Trust was hard to build and maintain.
- Arrest and Detention: Being identified as an activist, organizer, or even someone simply attending a teach-in could lead to arrest without warrant. Detention often involved interrogation, psychological abuse, and torture.
- Torture and Abuse: Security forces used brutal methods to extract information, break the spirit of detainees, and discourage others from joining the resistance. Accounts of torture during this period are harrowing.
- Forced Disappearances and Extrajudicial Killings: Many activists were abducted and never seen again (“desaparecidos”). Others were killed by state forces or paramilitary groups under suspicious circumstances. These acts were meant to terrorize the population and eliminate key leaders.
- Propaganda and Vilification: The government media consistently painted activists as subversives, communists, or enemies of the state, justifying the harsh measures taken against them and isolating them from the general public.
- Internal Challenges: The resistance movement itself faced challenges, including disagreements on strategy, personality clashes, and the psychological toll of constant fear and loss.
Despite these immense risks, people continued to learn, organize, and resist. Their resilience is a testament to the power of conviction and the deep desire for freedom.
The Impact and Legacy of Education as Resistance
The resistance education and organizing efforts during the Marcos dictatorship had a profound and lasting impact on Philippine society.
Firstly, they kept the spirit of dissent alive during a period of intense repression. While public protests were suppressed and traditional political opposition was jailed or exiled, the underground and informal networks of learning and organizing ensured that critical thinking and opposition to the regime continued to exist and grow.
Secondly, this process trained a generation of activists, leaders, and engaged citizens. Many individuals who cut their teeth in student groups, church-based communities, or labor organizing during the dictatorship went on to become leaders in various fields after 1986, including in government, civil society, education, and human rights advocacy. They carried with them the lessons learned about organizing, solidarity, critical analysis, and the importance of fighting for justice.
Thirdly, the constant flow of information and the persistent organizing, even under the most difficult circumstances, contributed significantly to the conditions that made the People Power Revolution of 1986 possible. The revolution, which peacefully overthrew the Marcos regime, was the culmination of years of simmering discontent and active resistance by many different sectors, many of whom had been politicized and organized through the very methods discussed – teach-ins, community organizing, underground publications, and the networks built during the dictatorship. The information shared through resistance channels helped people understand the extent of the regime’s corruption and abuses, weakening its legitimacy and fueling the demand for change.
Finally, the experience of resistance education has had a lasting impact on the understanding of education itself in the Philippines. It highlighted that true education is not just about acquiring knowledge from authorities but about developing critical consciousness, understanding one’s place in society, and being empowered to act for the common good. It underscored the vital connection between education, human rights, and democracy.
Today, the legacy of this period continues to shape discussions about history, memory, and the importance of vigilance against authoritarianism. Efforts to teach the true history of Martial Law, often facing attempts at historical revisionism, are themselves a continuation of the fight for truth and critical education that began under the dictatorship.
The spaces where resistance education happened – universities, churches, community centers, and even humble homes – became symbols of courage and the unwavering belief that learning and working together could challenge even the most powerful oppressive forces.
“We did not have classrooms in the traditional sense. Our classroom was the streets, the factories, the farms. Our textbooks were the lives of the people and the problems they faced. Our teachers were the masses themselves, and fellow activists who shared knowledge and experience.” – An unnamed activist reflecting on resistance education during Martial Law.
This quote captures the essence of how learning was transformed from a formal activity into a lived experience deeply intertwined with the struggle for liberation. It was education not for personal advancement within the system, but for collective empowerment to change the system itself.
Key Takeaways:
- The Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines suppressed traditional education and academic freedom to control information and prevent dissent.
- In response, Filipinos developed “resistance education” – informal and often underground ways of learning the truth, developing critical thinking, and organizing for change.
- Students, teachers, academics, church workers, labor organizers, and ordinary citizens were key participants in this resistance.
- Methods included secret meetings, underground publications, teach-ins, cultural work, and community organizing.
- Information gathering and documentation of human rights abuses were vital acts of resistance learning.
- Participants faced extreme dangers, including arrest, torture, and death.
- These efforts kept dissent alive, trained future leaders, and were crucial factors leading to the 1986 People Power Revolution.
- The experience highlighted the power of critical education and organizing in challenging authoritarian regimes and continues to influence discussions about history and democracy.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ):
Q: What was the main goal of resistance education during Martial Law? A: The main goals were to counter the government’s propaganda by seeking and sharing the truth, to develop critical thinking skills among the population, and to empower people to organize and resist the dictatorship.
Q: Who were the main groups involved in resistance education? A: Key groups included students, university professors, teachers, church workers (priests, nuns, lay people), labor organizers, peasant leaders, human rights advocates, and various community organizers.
Q: How did resistance education differ from regular school? A: Resistance education was informal, often held in secret locations, and focused on topics suppressed in regular schools, such as human rights, social justice, political analysis of the dictatorship, and organizing methods. It was directly tied to the goal of political change.
Q: Was it dangerous to participate in resistance learning or organizing? A: Yes, it was extremely dangerous. Participants faced surveillance, arrest, detention, torture, and even extrajudicial killings or forced disappearances by state security forces.
Q: How did underground publications work without modern technology? A: Activists used typewriters, mimeograph machines (which make copies using stencils), and manual presses to produce newsletters, pamphlets, and books. These materials were then distributed secretly through trusted networks.
Q: What was the impact of this resistance education on Philippine history? A: It played a crucial role in keeping dissent alive, informing and mobilizing people about the regime’s abuses, training a generation of activists, and ultimately contributing significantly to the People Power Revolution in 1986 that ended the dictatorship.
Conclusion:
The story of education and organizing against the Philippine dictatorship is a powerful reminder that even in the darkest of times, the pursuit of truth and the spirit of collective action can become potent forces for change. When formal institutions were controlled and censored, Filipinos found alternative ways to learn, discuss, and connect. Students bravely led the charge, teachers risked their careers and lives, churches offered sanctuary and critical perspectives, and organizers connected with ordinary people in factories and farms.
This period showed that education is not confined to classrooms; it is a lifelong process deeply intertwined with our rights, our responsibilities, and our capacity to build a better society. The “classrooms” of the resistance were varied – hidden rooms, church halls, crowded streets, and quiet community gatherings. The “lessons” were about courage, solidarity, justice, and the unwavering belief in freedom. The sacrifices made by those who engaged in this struggle paved the way for the restoration of democracy in the Philippines. Their legacy continues to inspire Filipinos today to value critical thinking, protect fundamental freedoms, and recognize that an informed and organized citizenry is the strongest defense against any form of oppression.