History & Words: ‘Prevarication’ (September 21)
Welcome to ‘History & Words.’ I’m Prashant, founder of Wordpandit and the Learning Inc. Network. This series combines my passion for language learning with historical context. Each entry explores a word’s significance on a specific date, enhancing vocabulary while deepening understanding of history. Join me in this journey of words through time.
🔍 Word of the Day: Prevarication
Pronunciation: /prɪˌværɪˈkeɪʃən/ (pri-var-i-KAY-shuhn)
🌍 Introduction
On September 21, 1972, Ferdinand Marcos, the sixth president of the Philippines, signed Proclamation No. 1081, officially placing the entire country under martial law. While the proclamation was publicly announced two days later on September 23, the date of signing—September 21—has been etched into Philippine history as the beginning of a 14-year period of authoritarian rule characterized by human rights abuses, corruption, and the systematic dismantling of democratic institutions.
Central to Marcos’s seizure of extraordinary powers was a calculated campaign of prevarication—the deliberate distortion of truth through evasive and deceptive language. Marcos and his administration fabricated a narrative of imminent communist threat and civil unrest to justify the suspension of civil liberties and the concentration of power in the president’s hands. The supposed communist insurgency and alleged assassination attempt on Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile (later admitted to be staged) served as the primary justifications for declaring martial law.
This historical moment illustrates how prevarication, when wielded by those in positions of power, can transform from mere dishonesty into a dangerous tool for undermining democratic governance. Marcos’s strategic deceptions not only enabled his initial power grab but continued throughout his regime as he maintained the facade of constitutional governance while systematically enriching his family and suppressing opposition through violence and intimidation.
🌱 Etymology
The word “prevarication” derives from the Latin “praevaricari,” which combines “prae” (before) and “varicare” (to straddle or spread the legs apart). It originally referred to the act of walking crookedly or straddling a line, particularly in the context of a plowman deviating from a straight furrow. In Roman legal terminology, it came to describe a lawyer who colluded with the opposing side—one who was not walking a straight path of advocacy for their client.
By the 16th century, the term had evolved in English to describe the act of speaking or acting evasively to avoid the truth, capturing the sense of “walking crookedly” around factual matters rather than addressing them directly. This evolution from physical to verbal crookedness aptly reflects the deceptive rhetorical strategies that characterize political prevarication.
📖 Key Vocabulary
- 🔑 Martial Law: A system of rules that takes effect when the military takes control of the normal administration of justice
- 🔑 Authoritarianism: A form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms
- 🔑 Propaganda: Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view
- 🔑 New Society (Bagong Lipunan): Marcos’s term for his vision of a reformed Philippine society under martial law
🏛️ Historical Context
The use of prevarication as a political tool has ancient roots. Throughout history, rulers have distorted truths to justify wars, persecutions, and power grabs. From Roman emperors fabricating threats to medieval monarchs exaggerating divine mandates, the manipulation of information has long served those seeking to expand or maintain power outside normal constraints.
The 20th century saw the refinement of political prevarication through modern propaganda techniques. Totalitarian regimes in Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union demonstrated how systematic distortion of truth could enable mass repression. The Cold War further normalized government deception as national security concerns were regularly invoked to justify secrecy and extraordinary measures.
The Philippines in 1972 was experiencing genuine social and political turbulence. Student activism, labor unrest, and a small but growing communist insurgency challenged the established order. The country’s elite democracy, dominated by powerful families, had failed to address widespread poverty and inequality. Marcos, elected president in 1965 and reelected in 1969, faced constitutional term limits that would have ended his presidency in 1973.
Against this backdrop, Marcos and his allies began constructing a narrative of escalating crisis. Government-controlled media amplified reports of violence and subversion, while staged incidents created an atmosphere of emergency. The August 1971 bombing of a Liberal Party rally at Plaza Miranda—long suspected to be the work of government agents rather than communists—marked a significant escalation in this strategy of tension.
⏳ Timeline
- 1965: Ferdinand Marcos elected president of the Philippines
- 1969: Marcos wins unprecedented second term amid allegations of electoral fraud
- 1970: First Quarter Storm—period of intense student protests in Manila
- 1971, August 21: Plaza Miranda bombing during Liberal Party rally
- 1972, September 21: Marcos signs Proclamation No. 1081 declaring martial law
- 1972, September 23: Martial law publicly announced
- 1973: New constitution ratified through questionable “citizens’ assemblies”
- 1981: Martial law formally lifted, though Marcos retains emergency powers
- 1983, August 21: Opposition leader Benigno Aquino Jr. assassinated upon return from exile
- 1986, February: “People Power Revolution” forces Marcos from office
- 1989, September 28: Marcos dies in exile in Hawaii
🌟 The Day’s Significance
September 21, 1972, marks the culmination of Marcos’s strategic prevarications and the beginning of their institutionalization as state policy. Though the actual signing of Proclamation 1081 was done in secret, with the public announcement delayed for two days, Marcos would later insist on September 21 as the official date of martial law’s declaration—reportedly due to his numerological belief in the significance of the number seven (2+1=3; 9+7+2=18; 1+8=9; 3+9=12; 1+2=3; 3×7=21).
The proclamation itself was a masterwork of political prevarication. It cited a supposed state of rebellion requiring “extreme measures,” claiming that “there is throughout the land a state of anarchy and lawlessness, chaos and disorder, turmoil and destruction of a magnitude equivalent to an actual war.” These claims grossly exaggerated the actual security situation in the country.
The most blatant prevarication came in the form of the alleged assassination attempt on Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile on September 22, 1972. According to the official narrative, Enrile’s car was ambushed by communist rebels, proving the imminent danger facing government officials. This incident provided the immediate pretext for implementing martial law. However, in 1986, during the final days of the Marcos regime, Enrile himself admitted that the ambush had been staged.
The immediate effects of martial law implementation demonstrated how prevarication served as a prelude to repression. Within days, Marcos had arrested opposition senators, representatives, and journalists; closed newspapers and broadcasting stations; imposed curfews; and banned public assemblies. While claiming these measures were temporary responses to an emergency, they became the foundation for a 14-year authoritarian regime.
💬 Quote
“The Filipino nation, Filipinos of all ages and all creeds, have had to endure the travail of revolution, not the revolution of arms but a revolution of their spirits, a revolution from which has emerged a New Society that we have founded together and which we must maintain and develop for ourselves and our children.” – Ferdinand Marcos, describing martial law in his 1973 State of the Nation Address, exemplifying his prevarication by framing authoritarian control as a popular revolution.
🔮 Modern Usage and Reflection
Today, “prevarication” describes the deliberate evasion of truth without technically lying outright—a nuanced concept reflecting how deception often operates in contemporary politics. The term captures the sophisticated ways political actors mislead through half-truths, contextual omissions, and strategic ambiguity.
Marcos’s use of prevarication offers valuable insights for modern citizens navigating a complex information environment. His success in establishing martial law demonstrates how skillful manipulation of public fears—particularly fears of disorder and external threats—can justify extraordinary concentrations of power. This pattern has repeated in numerous contexts globally, from responses to terrorism to reactions to civil unrest.
Digital technology has transformed the landscape of political prevarication. Social media can amplify misleading narratives at unprecedented speed, while sophisticated techniques like deepfakes create new avenues for deception. However, these technologies also enable fact-checking and counter-narratives that might have prevented Marcos’s deceptions had they existed in 1972.
🏛️ Legacy
The legacy of Marcos’s prevarications extends far beyond his time in power. The Philippines continues to grapple with the consequences of his 14-year rule, which left lasting damage to democratic institutions and political culture. The vast wealth accumulated by the Marcos family through corruption—estimated at $5-10 billion—remains only partially recovered.
More troublingly, the effectiveness of Marcos’s prevarications created a template for subsequent political deception in the Philippines and beyond. The strategic amplification of security threats, the demonization of opposition as enemies of the state, and the promise of order through strong leadership continue to feature in authoritarian playbooks worldwide.
The historical rehabilitation of the Marcos legacy represents perhaps the most concerning dimension of this continuing prevarication. Despite extensive documentation of human rights abuses, corruption, and economic mismanagement, efforts to reframe the martial law period as a “golden age” of development and security have gained traction. The election of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to the presidency in 2022 demonstrates the enduring power of carefully cultivated historical narratives, even in the face of documented facts.
🔍 Comparative Analysis
In 1972, prevarication operated primarily through controlled information channels—government statements, censored newspapers, and state television. Marcos’s government could manage narratives by restricting information flow and eliminating alternative voices. The prevarications that justified martial law required coordination among relatively few actors and media outlets.
Modern prevarication occurs in a fundamentally different information ecosystem characterized by information abundance rather than scarcity. Today’s political deceptions must compete with countless alternative narratives and fact-checking resources. However, this abundance can itself become a tool of prevarication through what scholars call “flooding the zone”—overwhelming the public with so many competing claims that distinguishing truth becomes exhausting.
Additionally, contemporary understanding of prevarication has expanded beyond factual misrepresentations to include sophisticated techniques of framing, distraction, and emotional manipulation. We now recognize that the most effective political deceptions often operate not by stating falsehoods but by activating existing biases and emotional responses that undermine rational evaluation of evidence.
💡 Did You Know?
🎓 Conclusion
The declaration of martial law in the Philippines on September 21, 1972, stands as a powerful historical illustration of how prevarication can serve as the foundation for authoritarian rule. Ferdinand Marcos’s strategic distortions about security threats and his promises of reform allowed him to dismantle democratic safeguards while maintaining a veneer of legitimacy. The consequences—thousands of human rights violations, billions in stolen wealth, and damaged democratic institutions—demonstrate the profound harm that can result when political prevarication goes unchallenged. As societies continue to face leaders who evade truth for political advantage, the lessons of this historical moment remain urgently relevant. The ability to recognize and counter such prevarications may determine whether democratic systems can withstand the authoritarian impulses that periodically threaten them.
📚 Further Reading
- 📘 “The Conjugal Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos” by Primitivo Mijares
- 📗 “Some Are Smarter Than Others: The History of Marcos’ Crony Capitalism” by Ricardo Manapat
- 📙 “Days of Disquiet, Nights of Rage: The First Quarter Storm and Related Events” by Jose F. Lacaba
