The Tamesis
May 13, 2026
Manila – Ferdinand Marcos Jr. may be one of the most misunderstood presidents in recent Philippine history. This is not because of his apparent intelligence, or his dramatic charisma, or his Duterte-like assertiveness. In fact, a lot of the confusion comes from the opposite situation. Marcos Jr. is usually quiet, low-key, avoidant, and difficult to pin down. He doesn’t usually speak like a strongman. He didn’t always fight in public. He rarely used anger as a political expression.
Because of this, many Filipinos underestimate him. His critics first assumed that he would be a simple copy of his father: autocratic, repressive, overtly coercive, eager not only in memory but in method to restore martial law. This fear is understandable. The name Marcos carries the burden of dictatorship, plunder, repression and distortion of history. No serious Democrat should forget this.
But so far, the president we’ve seen hasn’t ruled as a direct reincarnation of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. He has not yet declared martial law. He did not rule through naked terror. He allowed democratic space to continue to exist, albeit imperfectly. On foreign policy, particularly on the West Philippine Sea, he took positions that many in the opposition found reasonable and even admirable. Some who once viewed him solely as an heir to authoritarianism now see him as a useful defender of sovereignty against China.
But his allies also misread him. Vice President Sara Duterte and the Duterte camp appear to believe that the United Alliance is an equal deal and may even be a temporary vehicle that will ultimately return state power to the Duterte family in 2028. They help Marcos win in 2022. They bring institutions, regional strength and the aura of Duterte’s populism. But they may mistake electoral partnership for permanent protection.
Marcos did not remain trapped in this bargain. As the Duterte family has become more aggressive, he has not responded with public anger. He allowed agencies, allies, budgets, investigations and political distance to do the job. As a result, VP Sara, once an indispensable partner, has now become a core opponent.
His sister Imee may have also misread him. She behaves like a guardian of the old Marcos’s emotional world: combative, bombastic, resentful, and content with Duterte’s proximity. But her brother appears to be pursuing a different political image: less overtly vengeful, more internationally respected and more institutional in tone. Imee may have thought she was protecting the family legacy. But for Marcos Jr., she could be a heavy liability — useful to the grassroots, harmful to the brand.
Then there’s former Speaker Martin Romualz. For a while, Romualdez seemed to embody the perfect dynastic vehicle: cousin, speaker, coalition manager, legislative operator, possible government option in 2028. He stands near the center of power. He helped save the House. He is very useful.
But usefulness does not equal immunity. Now that a flood control corruption scandal has hit him, Romualdez appears to be about to be sacrificed. Whether he is guilty or innocent must be determined through due process. But politically, his predicament taught a cruel lesson: Marcos might tolerate allies while allowing them to strengthen his hand, but he might also bring them down when they threatened to bring him down.
This is where Filipino critical thinking must begin. We don’t bother to put political labels on it. We say “Marcos” and assume one thing. We say “Duterte” and assume another. We divide politics into heroes and villains, yellow and red, loyalists and critics, patriots and traitors. But power is rarely that simple.
Leaders can be dynastic and still defend national sovereignty. The president can take a defensive stance in the West Philippine Sea while controlling elite impunity at home. Even with valid criticism, opponents can be dangerous. An ally can be useful until abandoned.
Little Marcos was not redeemed. He’s not just a rebirth of his father, either. This makes him harder to object to and harder to trust. The task of citizens is not to love him blindly or hate him. Just read him accurately. When he distances himself from Vice President Sala, is he defending democracy or eliminating his opponents? Is this liability or damage control when Romualdez is allowed to weaken? When Marcos confronted China, was it principle, strategy, survival, or all three?
Philippine democracy will mature only when citizens become harder to fool—not just by loud strongmen but also by quiet survivors. Marcos Jr. is testing whether we can still think beyond slogans.
