Ferdinand Marcos developed a cult of personality in order to stay in power for 20 years as president of the Philippines, a dictatorshipRoot, Hilton L., Three Asian Dictators: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (January 16, 2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2716732Mark M. Turner (1990) Authoritarian rule and the dilemma of legitimacy: The case of President Marcos of the Philippines, The Pacific Review, 3:4, 349–362, DOI: 10.1080/09512749008718886 marked by political corruption and human rights violations. His administration’s personalist ideology and policies, combining veneration and idolization of Marcos himself with extreme populism and ultranationalism, have been compared to those of other totalitarian and authoritarian leaders such as Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler, as well as to those of more recent dictators and autocrats such as Suharto in Indonesia, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and North Korea’s Kim dynasty.Raymond, Walter John (1992) Dictionary of Politics: Selected American and Foreign Political and Legal Terms.
The propaganda techniques used, either by himself or by others, to mythologize Ferdinand Marcos began with local political machinations in Ilocos Norte while Ferdinand was still the young son of politician and Japanese collaborator Mariano Marcos and persist today in the efforts to revise the way Marcos is portrayed in Philippine history. According to members of his administration, such as Adrian Cristobal, Marcos's intent was to project an image of himself as "the only patron, the king" of Philippine society, which he still saw as a society of tribes." Cristobal furthers that "Marcos and the First Lady wanted more than anything else [...] to be king and queen. They wished to shape the kingdom in their own image; [...] Marcos wanted to be able to say, 'L'État, c'est moi.'" In some extreme cases where Marcos encouraged the formation of cults so that they could serve as a political weapon, Marcos came to be thought of as a God.
These propaganda narratives and techniques include: using red scare tactics such as red-tagging to portray activists as communists and to exaggerate the threat represented by the Communist Party of the Philippines;newsinfo.inquirer.net, Alston report: AFP behind killings, Report rejects RP claim of Red purge (archived from the original on January 25, 2008) using martial law to take control of mass media and silence criticism;San Juan Jr., E. (1978) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03064227808532787 the use of foreign-funded government development projects and construction projects as propaganda tools;Lico, Gerard (2003). Edifice Complex: Power, Myth, and Marcos State Architecture. University of Hawaii Press. creating an entire propaganda framework around a "new society" in which he would rule under a system of "constitutional authoritarianism"; the perpetuation of hagiographical books and films;Curaming, Rommel A. Power and Knowledge in Southeast Asia: State and Scholars in Indonesia and the Philippines McCallus, J. P. (1989): "The Myths of the New Filipino: Philippine government propaganda during the Early Years of Martial Law." Philippine Quarterly of. Culture and Society 17(2): 129–48. the perpetuation of propaganda narratives about Marcos's activities during World War II, which have since been proven false by historical documents; the creation of myths and stories around himself and his family; and portrayals of himself in coinage and even a Mount Rushmore-type monument;Cimatu, Frank; Santos-Doctor, Joya (January 1, 2003). "Philippines's 'Ozymandias's still haunts". Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved February 27, 2015. among others."
Since Ferdinand Marcos's death, propaganda efforts have been made to whitewash his place in Philippine history, an act of historical negationism commonly referred to using the more popular term "historical revisionism."
Terminology While the widely used term for a supporter of Ferdinand Marcos or the other members of the Marcos family is "Marcos loyalist,". The term "cult of personality" as applied to Ferdinand Marcos refers not to his supporters but more broadly to the mechanisms, techniques, and structures used to construct an idealized or heroic image of Marcos as a leader. This includes the use of propaganda, media control, and symbolic representations designed to shape public perception and elevate his status beyond ordinary political leadership. Meanwhile, the terms "Marcos revisionism" or "Marcos Historical negationism" have been used to refer to the Marcos family's propaganda after their return to Philippine politics, specifically to those materials intended to distort or reframe the historical facts of Marcos's life and rule.
Characteristics Marcos is primarily characterized by authoritarian governance, systemic corruption, and political patronage within state institutions. Under Ferdinand Marcos, independent democratic institutions—including the judiciary, the press, and legal opposition—were systematically subverted and coerced. This concentration of executive power facilitated widespread crony capitalism, enabling the Marcos family and their political allies to amass vast fortunes through state-sanctioned monopolies. Furthermore, the regime relied heavily on political patronage within the armed forces, which critics argue eroded professional military standards and exacerbated regional anti-government insurgencies.Mark M. Turner (1990) Authoritarian rule and the dilemma of legitimacy: The case of President Marcos of the Philippines, The Pacific Review, 3:4, 349–362, DOI: 10.1080/09512749008718886
History Early political career (1949–1965) Clientelism
As with most Philippine politicians of his era, Ferdinand Marcos achieved success largely by taking advantage of the client-patron relationships that dominated Philippine politics after Philippine independence.
Among Ilocos politicians Once he achieved government authority, he used it to reward his supporters while limiting the power of other social groups and institutions. He styled himself as the Ilocos region's ticket to political prominence. In his first campaign, running for congressman of his family's already-established bailiwick, Ilocos Norte, he stated, "This is only a first step. Elect me a congressman now, and I pledge you an Ilocano president in 20 years." In fact, Elpidio Quirino became the first Ilocano president 17 years before Marcos.
In the Philippine military On a more personal level, Marcos established relationships with the graduate officers and junior officers of the Philippine Military Academy early on. When he became president, Marcos appointed mostly Ilocano commanders to head the armed forces, such that 18 out of 22 generals of the Philippine Constabulary came from the Ilocos region, and House Speaker Jose B. Laurel was alarmed enough to file a 1968 bill calling for the equal representation of all regions in the armed forces.
Among the Marcos cronies
He also established a small group of supporters in the business sector, whom he would later enable to establish monopolies in key economic sectors, wresting control from the political families which held them prior.
Exaggerations of WWII exploits
One early propaganda technique used by Marcos was to exaggerate his wartime activities during World War II.
Marcos claimed to have led a guerrilla force called Ang Mahárlika (Tagalog, "The Freeman") in northern Luzon after the fall of Bataan. According to Marcos's claim, this force had a strength of 9,000 men. His account of events was later cast into doubt after a United States military investigation that exposed many of his claims as either false or inaccurate. Meanwhile, Marcos claimed that he was able to get the United States Adjutant General to recognize 3,500 individual claims of soldiers then under his command. Marcos also used Maharlika as his personal nom de guerre, and in 1970, a film entitled Maharlika was produced to feature his "war exploits."Quimpo, Nathan Gilbert. Filipino nationalism is a contradiction in terms, Colonial Name, Colonial Mentality and Ethnocentrism, Part One of Four, "Kasama" Vol. 17 No. 3 / July–August–September 2003 / Solidarity Philippines Australia Network, cpcabrisbance.org Communications from American military officers detailed their disapproval in recognizing the guerrilla unit. A memorandum sent to the Adjutant General, Lt. Col. Parker Calvert relayed the order of Col. Russell Volckmann to inform Marcos that his request for release from the 14th Infantry to rejoin his guerrilla group was disapproved. This was precisely because the "Ang Manga Maharlika" was not among the units recognized by the higher headquarters of the military.National Historical Commission of the Philippines. "Why Ferdinand E. Marcos should not be Buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani." 8–9. July 12, 2016. RetrievedAugust 26, 2021. This was reiterated by Major R.G. Langham on behalf of the Regimental Commander of the 5th Cavalry. In a May 1945 memorandum, Langham wrote to the Commanding General for Ang Mga Maharlika not to be "recommended for recognition because of the limited military value of their duties."Maj. R.G. Langham. "Recognition of Guerrilla Unit." In National Historical Commission of the Philippines. "Why Ferdinand E. Marcos should not be Buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani." 9. July 12, 2016. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
In 1962, Marcos would claim to be the "most decorated war hero of the Philippines" by garnering almost every medal and decoration that the Filipino and American governments could give to a soldier. Among his 27 supposed war medals and decorations were the Distinguished Service Cross (allegedly pinned by General Douglas MacArthur) and the Medal of Honor (allegedly pinned by General Jonathan M. Wainwright).
Researchers later found that stories about the wartime exploits of Marcos were mostly propaganda,Bulatlat piece questioning the Marcos exploits during the war: being inaccurate or untrue. The following discredit the claims made about his supposed exploits: Marcos was not on General Douglas MacArthur's "List of Recipients of Awards and Decorations" issued from December 7, 1941, to June 30, 1945, that was compiled in Tokyo, nor on General Jonathan Wainwright's list of 120 Americans and Filipinos who were awarded during the Bataan campaign by the War Department shortly before his surrender. August 15, 2016 Colonel Manriquez and Adjutant Captain Rivera, who were the commanders of the 14th Infantry, whom Marcos claimed to have served under, attested that Marcos was not a soldier but was a noncombatant and a Civil Affairs officer. Marcos only received campaign ribbons given to all combatant and noncombatant participants "in the defense of Bataan and in the resistance." Marcos's claim of having received the Order of the Purple Heart has also been shown to have been false. His name does not appear on the official roster of recipients.