Strange that people associate the word " reconciliation" with the first EDSA revolt. The sight of nuns, priests and ordinary people giving flowers and food to hungry soldiers were interpreted as gestures of friendship and "reconciliation." The "presence" of God was also interpreted as a sort of sign that every Filipino back then, united under the banner of God.
Yes, I agree. People from all walks of life, among them my family and I went to EDSA to join forces with the idealistic military. We went there after Cardinal Jaime Sin sounded the call for the people to protect Enrile and Ramos. We went there because we are sick and tired of Marcos and we wanted nothing more than change.
We, the People, went to EDSA to end a regime and for Marcos to account for the harmful things he did against the People.
We were not there to forgive those who looted the public coffers and corrupted our government, no. We were there seeking Justice from all these harmful things Marcos and his cronies did to our country. We felt then, that Marcos already did enough to destroy this country. The economy was in a very bad shape. The countrysides were burning with nationalist fervor, while the urban areas were deteriorating and in chaos.
The people trooped to EDSA seeking Justice against the oppressive regime. God was even there with us as a God of Justice, not just a God of Love.
We want nothing but achieve peace afterwards, but not without Justice.
Twenty five years had past and we see the cronies of the old regime still enjoying the perks and privileges of their former dispensation, unrepentant and still spending monies which they got from the people.
Twenty five years and we see former Marcos cronies even bankrolling campaigns of politicians and even occupy sensitive posts in government.
Twenty five years and the trillions lost during the dictatorship are still being recovered and only a handful used for the benefit of the farmers.
Twenty five years and one of the biggest cronies of Marcos still lives and continues to exert a great influence in our government.
Twenty five years and graft and corruption have been institutionalized.
Instead of Truth, Justice and Peace, the leaders of this so-called revolt forgot all about the people's aspirations and went about their business, "reconciling" with the elites who backed Marcos and probably even asked these elites how to systematically loot the coffers of this country without getting prosecuted.
This is the real Truth behind EDSA. EDSA was love of country, never about loving those who prostituted this Nation. EDSA was about truth, never the truth being peddled by the elites. And EDSA was about peace, but peace with justice. These ideals were never really realized during these twenty five years we celebrate this event. This must end now, and the people must regain EDSA from the dictatorship of the elite.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Gloria Arroyo and the Traitors of EDSA I: Reconciliation, not an ideal of EDSA revolt
President Noynoy Aquino lambasted his predecessor for betraying the ideals of EDSA 1. The question really is--what was that ideal in the first place, aside from of course, the oft-repeated line of reconciliation?
Former presidential son and now Bodyguard par excellence Mikey Arroyo admonished the President for accusing his mother, Pampanga Congressman Gloria Arroyo, of being a "Traitor" of the EDSA revolt.
How would that be, when this petite pseudo-dictator was never even part of EDSA. She never went out of her house to join the thousands of people out to oust Marcos from power. Remember that her family, especially her father, supported Marcos in the first place.
Yes, it was unfair to even accuse Arroyo of being a traitor because she never believed in EDSA anyway. Yes, she was a beneficiary of an EDSA "mini-me", that is the so-called "EDSA dos", yet, personally, Arroyo was never the poster girl of any "EDSA".
What is the EDSA ideal anyway, but an elitist interpretation of what the Katipuneros fought for a century ago. Fact is, the first EDSA was a poor copy of the causes the Katipuneros espoused during their generation.
If, say, the promoters of EDSA ascribe supranatural elements in this very simple political plan which is described as a power grab, then, this is not the ideal of EDSA.
EDSA was never really about reconciliation--it was about Truth, Justice and Peace.
We struggled for Truth because we were denied this for over twenty years.
Justice, because our government was transformed into a personal treasury by the Marcos Family and peace, because we were being violated and oppressed.
How then will Arroyo betray something which she does not even believe and in which she was never even a part of?
It was also not right for Mikey to defend his mother by invoking this term "reconciliation."
Those who went out in the streets during those historic days did so out of spite against the Marcos regime. Those people who went out from their comfort zones never even thought of reconciling themselves with the regime.
The people militated at EDSA to oust a spitful and oppressive regime. The people went out and filled the streets with their true force because they want real, substantial, change. Reconciliation was farthest from the minds of the people when they went to EDSA. They were actually asking for Justice.
Who are the real traitors of EDSA?
Those who believed in change and then suddenly became the protectors of the conotic lifestyle, that degenerative lifestyle, which Martial law wanted to uproot from Philippine society.
Those who abandoned the real cause of the people and pursue "reconciliation" when the call of action was simply justice. Reconciliation meant allowing those who stole several billions from the people, to go scot-free and live a life of plenty.
Are you angry about the bargaining agreement of Major General Carlos Garcia? Of course, every single one of us is really very angry by this.
Twenty five years ago, a most heinous bargaining agreement between the Marcoses and the nouveau riche happened, which allowed the Marcoses to use their ill-gotten wealth.
Noynoy said, EDSA is not dead. Yes, the true EDSA probably is. Yet, the EDSA that they presented yesterday was definitely not the real one.
The EDSA presented yesterday was an interpretation of the elite, never of the people. The EDSA of yesterday was something of a miracle for the elite, when it was a call of the day for the People.
How many of those who took part in the EDSA celebration yesterday and were with Aquino's side really participated in the original EDSA? If you'll count them, most of those behind Aquino were even with the Marcos dictatorship. They once served at the pleasure of the dictator and now, hobnobbing with Aquino and positioning themselves as EDSA protectors?
EDSA died when the word "reconciliation" was made as part of the overaching Idea. EDSA died when the first Aquino administration abandoned the Cause of the People and supported the Cause of the militarists and the caciques in her midst.
The first Aquino administration was the first one to betray EDSA by allowing big landlords to retain their lands. The first Aquino administration was the first traitor---it allowed the oppressive relations between workers and capitalists to continue, allowed poverty to rise, allowed bourgeois compradors to manipulate the economic system and allowed a dysfunctional system to continue in existence.
It is now time for the former housewife's son to correct the path taken by his predecessors and friends shortly after EDSA 1. It is time for Noynoy to correct the wrongs taken by post-EDSA leaders and tread the true path of change.
It is time for Noynoy to abandon the greedy elite groups that still dominate the government and tread the straight path. Otherwise, the real EDSA will spring back to life and may even claim the former EDSA's moral leader's son as a victim.
Yes, good governance and the proper use of the people's monies are sweet words. What the People expect now from the Noynoy administration is simply this--give us the Truth, by prosecuting those who stole billions from the People.
Give us Justice by bringing to the bar of justice those who betrayed the People and continually steal money from the people and peace by correcting the monumental ills of this society. Short of these, no one wants EDSA.
Former presidential son and now Bodyguard par excellence Mikey Arroyo admonished the President for accusing his mother, Pampanga Congressman Gloria Arroyo, of being a "Traitor" of the EDSA revolt.
How would that be, when this petite pseudo-dictator was never even part of EDSA. She never went out of her house to join the thousands of people out to oust Marcos from power. Remember that her family, especially her father, supported Marcos in the first place.
Yes, it was unfair to even accuse Arroyo of being a traitor because she never believed in EDSA anyway. Yes, she was a beneficiary of an EDSA "mini-me", that is the so-called "EDSA dos", yet, personally, Arroyo was never the poster girl of any "EDSA".
What is the EDSA ideal anyway, but an elitist interpretation of what the Katipuneros fought for a century ago. Fact is, the first EDSA was a poor copy of the causes the Katipuneros espoused during their generation.
If, say, the promoters of EDSA ascribe supranatural elements in this very simple political plan which is described as a power grab, then, this is not the ideal of EDSA.
EDSA was never really about reconciliation--it was about Truth, Justice and Peace.
We struggled for Truth because we were denied this for over twenty years.
Justice, because our government was transformed into a personal treasury by the Marcos Family and peace, because we were being violated and oppressed.
How then will Arroyo betray something which she does not even believe and in which she was never even a part of?
It was also not right for Mikey to defend his mother by invoking this term "reconciliation."
Those who went out in the streets during those historic days did so out of spite against the Marcos regime. Those people who went out from their comfort zones never even thought of reconciling themselves with the regime.
The people militated at EDSA to oust a spitful and oppressive regime. The people went out and filled the streets with their true force because they want real, substantial, change. Reconciliation was farthest from the minds of the people when they went to EDSA. They were actually asking for Justice.
Who are the real traitors of EDSA?
Those who believed in change and then suddenly became the protectors of the conotic lifestyle, that degenerative lifestyle, which Martial law wanted to uproot from Philippine society.
Those who abandoned the real cause of the people and pursue "reconciliation" when the call of action was simply justice. Reconciliation meant allowing those who stole several billions from the people, to go scot-free and live a life of plenty.
Are you angry about the bargaining agreement of Major General Carlos Garcia? Of course, every single one of us is really very angry by this.
Twenty five years ago, a most heinous bargaining agreement between the Marcoses and the nouveau riche happened, which allowed the Marcoses to use their ill-gotten wealth.
Noynoy said, EDSA is not dead. Yes, the true EDSA probably is. Yet, the EDSA that they presented yesterday was definitely not the real one.
The EDSA presented yesterday was an interpretation of the elite, never of the people. The EDSA of yesterday was something of a miracle for the elite, when it was a call of the day for the People.
How many of those who took part in the EDSA celebration yesterday and were with Aquino's side really participated in the original EDSA? If you'll count them, most of those behind Aquino were even with the Marcos dictatorship. They once served at the pleasure of the dictator and now, hobnobbing with Aquino and positioning themselves as EDSA protectors?
EDSA died when the word "reconciliation" was made as part of the overaching Idea. EDSA died when the first Aquino administration abandoned the Cause of the People and supported the Cause of the militarists and the caciques in her midst.
The first Aquino administration was the first one to betray EDSA by allowing big landlords to retain their lands. The first Aquino administration was the first traitor---it allowed the oppressive relations between workers and capitalists to continue, allowed poverty to rise, allowed bourgeois compradors to manipulate the economic system and allowed a dysfunctional system to continue in existence.
It is now time for the former housewife's son to correct the path taken by his predecessors and friends shortly after EDSA 1. It is time for Noynoy to correct the wrongs taken by post-EDSA leaders and tread the true path of change.
It is time for Noynoy to abandon the greedy elite groups that still dominate the government and tread the straight path. Otherwise, the real EDSA will spring back to life and may even claim the former EDSA's moral leader's son as a victim.
Yes, good governance and the proper use of the people's monies are sweet words. What the People expect now from the Noynoy administration is simply this--give us the Truth, by prosecuting those who stole billions from the People.
Give us Justice by bringing to the bar of justice those who betrayed the People and continually steal money from the people and peace by correcting the monumental ills of this society. Short of these, no one wants EDSA.
EDSA and the Libyan Experience
Former president Fidel V Ramos explains that EDSA is our people's legacy to the world. Look at Libya, he says, they are now fighting among themselves, and for what? EDSA was a bloodless revolt.
Ramos is right. EDSA did paved the way for a peaceful transition of power---from a one-man dictatorship to a dictatorship of the elite.
However, we can only say that EDSA was a true legacy as a new model of change if it, indeed, led to substantial changes shortly after.
Yes, we prevented a bloodbath among soldiers and civilians during the transition but, in truth, peace was never regained after EDSA. Fact is, violence within our society continues and it remains a fixture in our lives.
We see violence in the continued oppressive relations between workers and capitalists. The post-EDSA landscape shows a country again ruled by petty warlords. The traditional elites who destroyed the moral fibre of this country prior to Martial rule, were back, with a vengeance. Farmers are still enslaved by their landlords in the provinces.
EDSA did not really solve even the most fundamental problems of this country. Fact is, EDSA only allowed the dictatorship to assume a form enjoyed by traditional elite families prior to the declaration of a strong-man rule.
If, during Martial law, we answer to just one man, post-EDSA, we answer to hundreds now who think highly of themselves as Marcos mini-mes. If there was one strong man during those dark ages, we face a thousand now. If there was just one family of thieves before, we face a mafia of thieves now, all wearing the same starched barong.
Worse, violence has now seeped within the very basic unit of our society---the family. Because of the unresolved violence stemming from the unsolved economic crisis, our families are now being threatened by violence never before seen in our history. More than 27 million Filipino families now face the twin evils of poverty and inhumanity.
We are hungrier and more desperate now than before. Worse, we are now facing an apocalypse because we don't have as many resources now as before. Most of the assets of government have been sold or transformed into private enclaves by the elite. The treasury remains dry.
And why do we say this? This is the simple truth. What was the only thing EDSA gave us? EDSA gave us back our right to criticize government. In exchange for this, those who succeeded Marcos continued the plunder in a different, more "conotic", "Civilized" and "cacique" way---using the law to steal monies from the People.
Ramos is right. EDSA did paved the way for a peaceful transition of power---from a one-man dictatorship to a dictatorship of the elite.
However, we can only say that EDSA was a true legacy as a new model of change if it, indeed, led to substantial changes shortly after.
Yes, we prevented a bloodbath among soldiers and civilians during the transition but, in truth, peace was never regained after EDSA. Fact is, violence within our society continues and it remains a fixture in our lives.
We see violence in the continued oppressive relations between workers and capitalists. The post-EDSA landscape shows a country again ruled by petty warlords. The traditional elites who destroyed the moral fibre of this country prior to Martial rule, were back, with a vengeance. Farmers are still enslaved by their landlords in the provinces.
EDSA did not really solve even the most fundamental problems of this country. Fact is, EDSA only allowed the dictatorship to assume a form enjoyed by traditional elite families prior to the declaration of a strong-man rule.
If, during Martial law, we answer to just one man, post-EDSA, we answer to hundreds now who think highly of themselves as Marcos mini-mes. If there was one strong man during those dark ages, we face a thousand now. If there was just one family of thieves before, we face a mafia of thieves now, all wearing the same starched barong.
Worse, violence has now seeped within the very basic unit of our society---the family. Because of the unresolved violence stemming from the unsolved economic crisis, our families are now being threatened by violence never before seen in our history. More than 27 million Filipino families now face the twin evils of poverty and inhumanity.
We are hungrier and more desperate now than before. Worse, we are now facing an apocalypse because we don't have as many resources now as before. Most of the assets of government have been sold or transformed into private enclaves by the elite. The treasury remains dry.
And why do we say this? This is the simple truth. What was the only thing EDSA gave us? EDSA gave us back our right to criticize government. In exchange for this, those who succeeded Marcos continued the plunder in a different, more "conotic", "Civilized" and "cacique" way---using the law to steal monies from the People.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Twenty Five Lessons at EDSA
 |
| EDSA 1 |
2. Power should not be monopolized by just one man. There should be a sharing of power among unequals.
3. It is not enough that you have an honest president. An honest president cannot really go against a corrupted system.
4. It is not enough that a president is honest when his relatives are not.
5. This country should not be ruled by just one strongman. There should be many strongmen and many warlords.
6. A revolution without bloodshed precipitates violence afterwards.
7. Do not allow elites to hijack a legitimate People's revolt.
8. CSR or Corporate Social Responsibilities are not EDSA revolts.
9. Doing little things for the country will not change the system. It just lulls the people to complacency.
10. A non-violent revolution always perpetuate a continuing cycle of violence.
11. Those who say that they led EDSA are the same ones to blame for the failed experiment.
12. EDSA is not 25 years old. EDSA ended the minute the traditional elites ascended to power.
13. Revolutions are processes, never two week affairs.
14. The people's thirst for change is dissimilar with the elite's hunger for power.
15. EDSA is a compromise among the elites.
16. EDSA saw the birth of hundreds of Marcos' "mini-mes".
17. EDSA prevented the true expression of the masses towards change. EDSA was hijacked by lesser gods, who think of themselves as successors of the dictator.
18. EDSA ended the minute the people went home and left the government under the control of the greedy.
19. Yes, freedom was regained at EDSA---the freedom of the elites to once again, enslave the Filipino People. During Martial Law, there was only one family who oppresses everybody. Now, there are 18,000 families trying to get a slice of the loot.
20. "Bakla ang dilawang pagbabago"
21. Generals steal from soldiers. Soldiers steal from the people. The people give both the soldier and the general their share of the loot. While the elites wait for their share of the loot.
22. The only change EDSA went thru was painting the town "yellow" instead of "red".
23. EDSA: from the dictatorship of one to a tyranny of the many.
24. EDSA: from galunggong to Lucky me noodles.
25. EDSA: from 65 centavo fare to 7.50 pesos.
The real EDSA---twenty five years past. And Filipinos just want a holiday
The EDSA People Power revolt will remain in our memory as an event where everyone went out of their comfort zones to express their thirst for change. After twenty years living under a dictatorship, the people went out in the streets to topple a dictatorship. Most of them who went there really wanted change.
Twenty five years past and the quest for change remains. There is no single time in the life of this nation where no one actually desires in his heart for real change to happen. Every single one who does not belong to the elite, always want change to really happen in this country.
Twenty five years and things remain the same. The stark reality can be seen at EDSA. Look at those roads. They show you the real EDSA, the real condition of this country.
The only ones harping that this EDSA was a success were those who benefited from the political succession.
EDSA started as a pure people's revolt. After the fall of Marcos, the deterioration of this country began.
The lesson of EDSA is simple---do not let the elites hijack the whole damn thing.
Instead of one, we are now fighting thousands of savage, hungry, and egotistic demons in barong all waiting to devour our precious taxes. These hungry sonafabitches prey on our weakness. They steal our monies big-time. They don't settle for millions. They are now gunning for billions of pesos worth of loot.
The real EDSA lies in every Pinoy's heart. Yet, look at this year's celebration. You don't see ordinary Filipinos really smiling and really happy about this.
Filipinos just want a holiday. We are sick and tired of the elites celebrating something as EDSA. Why are they celebrating and we, the People, are not? Because they are celebrating the time when they were able to bring themselves back to power.
Another lesson of EDSA----don't be misled by the ruse of the elite. Traditional elite families rule this country with impunity. Marcos tried to cast them out. EDSA brought them all back again. Example--the Lopezes, and all the rest of Congress and the Senate. These underachievers now rule this country, and look what is happening.
Twenty five years past and the quest for change remains. There is no single time in the life of this nation where no one actually desires in his heart for real change to happen. Every single one who does not belong to the elite, always want change to really happen in this country.
Twenty five years and things remain the same. The stark reality can be seen at EDSA. Look at those roads. They show you the real EDSA, the real condition of this country.
The only ones harping that this EDSA was a success were those who benefited from the political succession.
EDSA started as a pure people's revolt. After the fall of Marcos, the deterioration of this country began.
The lesson of EDSA is simple---do not let the elites hijack the whole damn thing.
Instead of one, we are now fighting thousands of savage, hungry, and egotistic demons in barong all waiting to devour our precious taxes. These hungry sonafabitches prey on our weakness. They steal our monies big-time. They don't settle for millions. They are now gunning for billions of pesos worth of loot.
The real EDSA lies in every Pinoy's heart. Yet, look at this year's celebration. You don't see ordinary Filipinos really smiling and really happy about this.
Filipinos just want a holiday. We are sick and tired of the elites celebrating something as EDSA. Why are they celebrating and we, the People, are not? Because they are celebrating the time when they were able to bring themselves back to power.
Another lesson of EDSA----don't be misled by the ruse of the elite. Traditional elite families rule this country with impunity. Marcos tried to cast them out. EDSA brought them all back again. Example--the Lopezes, and all the rest of Congress and the Senate. These underachievers now rule this country, and look what is happening.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
EDSA 1: A shift from Dictatorship to a dictatorship of the Elite, masked as Liberal Demcracy
In his speech before students at the Rizal High school yesterday, President Benigno Aquino III said that EDSA uno allowed a shift from dictatorship to democracy. He said that EDSA 1 was different because unlike those bloody revolts over in the Middle East, God was standing by when Filipinos trooped to the streets and demanded change. The president said it was a miracle.
It was no miracle, though that the Marcoses found themselves in Hawaii, than in Paoay though. As revealed by former Justice secretary Raul Gonzales, the US disagreed with the request of the Marcoses to be flown to Paoay as exiles. Among the elites at that time, there was a request for Macoy to just live quietly in exile in his hometown, which, according to Gonzales, was turned down by the United States.
It was also no miracle that yes, we found ourselves living in a liberal democracy than in a dictatorship. Noynoy said that it was not true that the Philippines could have turned into a "Singapore", referring to that small island state off the Pacific which turned from poor to the region's most prosperous, had Macoy continued his despotic rule. Aquino said the country was mired under billions of pesos worth of debt when Macoy left. The country, says Aquino, continues to pay off those fantabulous debts.
I don't know about this, but it seems that twenty five years hence, and we have more than US$ 7 trillion in debt, one hundred times over the billions during the Marcos regime.
Everyone know that Macoy was just a living corpse at that time, and it was just a matter of a couple of years more, and the dictator would have died silently in his sleep. Macoy was afflicted with lupus, a debilitating disease, and even without an EDSA revolt, the transition from a dictatorship to a democracy would have happened naturally.
Fact is, Macoy lifted Martial law four years prior to EDSA uno. When EDSA broke out, there was limited democratic space already. The age-ing regime allowed people to express themselves, albeit, in a limited manner. If democracy was not there, how come that Ninoy was able to return home?
Frankly, EDSA uno actually led to a transition---from a one-man rule to the dictatorship of the traditional elites, those elites whom Macoy tried to destroy in 1972.
And frankly, these so-called "EDSA heroes" were active promoters of the New Society espoused by Marcos. The reason why they defected was simply to wrest power from Marcos, plain and simple.
Admit it--former Marcos' defense secretary Juan Ponce-Enrile wanted nothing more than be declared Chief Executive. Enrile, together with other Marcos cronies, Eduardo Danding Cojuangco in particular, wanted nothing more than be declared Macoy's successor, which, during those times, was impossible since Macoy intended his wife, Meldy and his cousin, Ver, to rule the country after his death.
Yes, the elections precipitated the revolt, but, like what former President Ramos said yesterday, the people's resentment has been festering since 1971, the year when students staged the First Quarter Storm. The gains of that historic event bore fruit only after two decades.
1986 was just the right time for regime change, simply because Marcos was on the throes of death at that time. Had it been that Marcos was as strong as he was back then, the outcome would have been different.
The US saw this happening as early as 1983, when crowds began to swell during Ninoy's burial and the political opposition, composed of Marcos' enemies among the country's traditional elites, started flexing its muscles. The problem of succession began to be discussed silently among the elites, and this was never solved because the "strongman" was still very much recognized by the US as its puppet in the East. The US just realized the futility of still allowing the continued rule of Marcos simply because there was no clear succession policy and the one who Marcos intended to give his power to was a discredited political figure.
Let us admit it--EDSA is like what Egypt underwent these past few days--from the dictatorship of Mubarak to a dictatorship of a few. We are being allowed to live in a neo-liberal environment to hide the fact that political power has just shifted---from the hands of Macoy and some of his cronies, to a dictatorship of the elite.
We continually live in an elite-led democracy. We are allowed to exercise our rights provided that we allow the local caciques and their foreign backers, the right to rule us and gain tremendous profits from us.
Truly, EDSA was never, really a revolution because a true one sees the former dispensation thrown away and replaced by a new set of pro-people adherents. EDSA was a peaceful transtion--from one-man rule to a rule of many. That explains why, before Marcos ended his career, several mediators were sent to Malacang purportedly to strike a deal with the discredited regime.
It was no miracle, though that the Marcoses found themselves in Hawaii, than in Paoay though. As revealed by former Justice secretary Raul Gonzales, the US disagreed with the request of the Marcoses to be flown to Paoay as exiles. Among the elites at that time, there was a request for Macoy to just live quietly in exile in his hometown, which, according to Gonzales, was turned down by the United States.
It was also no miracle that yes, we found ourselves living in a liberal democracy than in a dictatorship. Noynoy said that it was not true that the Philippines could have turned into a "Singapore", referring to that small island state off the Pacific which turned from poor to the region's most prosperous, had Macoy continued his despotic rule. Aquino said the country was mired under billions of pesos worth of debt when Macoy left. The country, says Aquino, continues to pay off those fantabulous debts.
I don't know about this, but it seems that twenty five years hence, and we have more than US$ 7 trillion in debt, one hundred times over the billions during the Marcos regime.
Everyone know that Macoy was just a living corpse at that time, and it was just a matter of a couple of years more, and the dictator would have died silently in his sleep. Macoy was afflicted with lupus, a debilitating disease, and even without an EDSA revolt, the transition from a dictatorship to a democracy would have happened naturally.
Fact is, Macoy lifted Martial law four years prior to EDSA uno. When EDSA broke out, there was limited democratic space already. The age-ing regime allowed people to express themselves, albeit, in a limited manner. If democracy was not there, how come that Ninoy was able to return home?
Frankly, EDSA uno actually led to a transition---from a one-man rule to the dictatorship of the traditional elites, those elites whom Macoy tried to destroy in 1972.
And frankly, these so-called "EDSA heroes" were active promoters of the New Society espoused by Marcos. The reason why they defected was simply to wrest power from Marcos, plain and simple.
Admit it--former Marcos' defense secretary Juan Ponce-Enrile wanted nothing more than be declared Chief Executive. Enrile, together with other Marcos cronies, Eduardo Danding Cojuangco in particular, wanted nothing more than be declared Macoy's successor, which, during those times, was impossible since Macoy intended his wife, Meldy and his cousin, Ver, to rule the country after his death.
Yes, the elections precipitated the revolt, but, like what former President Ramos said yesterday, the people's resentment has been festering since 1971, the year when students staged the First Quarter Storm. The gains of that historic event bore fruit only after two decades.
1986 was just the right time for regime change, simply because Marcos was on the throes of death at that time. Had it been that Marcos was as strong as he was back then, the outcome would have been different.
The US saw this happening as early as 1983, when crowds began to swell during Ninoy's burial and the political opposition, composed of Marcos' enemies among the country's traditional elites, started flexing its muscles. The problem of succession began to be discussed silently among the elites, and this was never solved because the "strongman" was still very much recognized by the US as its puppet in the East. The US just realized the futility of still allowing the continued rule of Marcos simply because there was no clear succession policy and the one who Marcos intended to give his power to was a discredited political figure.
Let us admit it--EDSA is like what Egypt underwent these past few days--from the dictatorship of Mubarak to a dictatorship of a few. We are being allowed to live in a neo-liberal environment to hide the fact that political power has just shifted---from the hands of Macoy and some of his cronies, to a dictatorship of the elite.
We continually live in an elite-led democracy. We are allowed to exercise our rights provided that we allow the local caciques and their foreign backers, the right to rule us and gain tremendous profits from us.
Truly, EDSA was never, really a revolution because a true one sees the former dispensation thrown away and replaced by a new set of pro-people adherents. EDSA was a peaceful transtion--from one-man rule to a rule of many. That explains why, before Marcos ended his career, several mediators were sent to Malacang purportedly to strike a deal with the discredited regime.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Is Marcos deserving of a place in Libingan ng mga Bayani?
Libingan ng mga Bayani, a place of serenity where our beloved Sons and daughters of the Motherland rest their tired souls. These souls sacrificed their entire lives for the sake of the Motherland. They were soldiers of the Filipino People. Giving them a parcel of land as their burial place is but a small gesture from an appreciating people.
Ferdinand Marcos was a hero, for all intents and purposes, because he once fought against the foreign invaders during his youth. Marcos was part of the guerillas who, for more than four years, resisted Japanese rule. Never mind if there were doubts as to the authenticity of those medals he earned as a soldier-guerilla. The fact is clear--Marcos did serve the country and for that alone, deserves a parcel of land in the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
After his years as a soldier, Marcos served the country in various capacities--as Congressman, Senator and President. He authored several laws that benefitted most Filipinos. He served honestly as a Senator, and brought honor to the country with his wit, charisma and nationalism. His desire to improve the lot of the ordinary man catapulted him to the highest post of the land.
Yes, Marcos plunged this country into chaos and darkness during his rule as the country's first dictator in 1972. For twenty years, Marcos ruled this country with an iron fist. He defended its borders from threats coming from insurgents. He ordered the killing of many, the diminution of the powers of the traditional elite families and the destruction of freedom. Civil rights were kept, yet, political rights limited.
There are contrasting views as to the twenty year rule of Marcos. Many believe it was a period of general stability, where people can go out of their houses without minding their security, and where people enjoy the benefits of those infrastructures built by the regime.
Behind these scenes of general stability hide thousands of cases of brutality, of inhumanity and of violations of basic human rights. For some, these scenes show the true nature of the regime---a dictatorship of the malevolent kind. For those hit by Marcos' policies, those were dark eras. For the many who felt safe during that era, it was so memorable due to the stark contrast of today.
What really happened was Marcos exhibited the true character of a Machiavelli--he demolished his enemies by destroying the powers of the traditional elites who were enslaving most of the Filipinos with their inhumane rule. From a country ruled by so many pseudo-dictators and petty feudal warlords, Marcos demolished the destructive social structure and replaced it with his own. Marcos created a new set of elites which were not beholden to the traditional ones.
From a constitutional organisation to a personal army, the military became Marcos' ally in building a "New Philippines". The idea was an excellent one, but Marcos forgot one simple political fact---how to restrain the military and keep it aligned with the civilian powers. The military slowly realised its true powers and it showed when it allowed the rise of a militant group within its establishment. Had the military remained professional, it could have been a totally different fate for Marcos.
It was, however, Marcos who actually created the power that would someday bring his ultimate downfall.
Okey--so, what's the verdict?
For me, Marcos deserves to be laid to rest at the Libingan ng mga Bayani for three reasons: first, he was a soldier of the Republic. That alone deserves him a space among our country's heroes. Second, Marcos did something good during his regime---he demolished and limited the powers of the traditional elites. That brought stability to the country. And third, Marcos sacrificed his personal ambitions to build a "New Philippines". He realised that the fragmentation of the social elite structure was hampering growth. When Marcos centralized all power and placed it to the Executive, Marcos actually created a revolution from within. He just failed to realize that the task of nation building is not solitary. Had Marcos created a council of elders and lead it, it could have been a different path altogether. Those who opposed him from the elite groups only wanted to share some power, not to snatch it altogether from him. His mistrust with the elites did him in.
Ferdinand Marcos was a hero, for all intents and purposes, because he once fought against the foreign invaders during his youth. Marcos was part of the guerillas who, for more than four years, resisted Japanese rule. Never mind if there were doubts as to the authenticity of those medals he earned as a soldier-guerilla. The fact is clear--Marcos did serve the country and for that alone, deserves a parcel of land in the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
After his years as a soldier, Marcos served the country in various capacities--as Congressman, Senator and President. He authored several laws that benefitted most Filipinos. He served honestly as a Senator, and brought honor to the country with his wit, charisma and nationalism. His desire to improve the lot of the ordinary man catapulted him to the highest post of the land.
Yes, Marcos plunged this country into chaos and darkness during his rule as the country's first dictator in 1972. For twenty years, Marcos ruled this country with an iron fist. He defended its borders from threats coming from insurgents. He ordered the killing of many, the diminution of the powers of the traditional elite families and the destruction of freedom. Civil rights were kept, yet, political rights limited.
There are contrasting views as to the twenty year rule of Marcos. Many believe it was a period of general stability, where people can go out of their houses without minding their security, and where people enjoy the benefits of those infrastructures built by the regime.
Behind these scenes of general stability hide thousands of cases of brutality, of inhumanity and of violations of basic human rights. For some, these scenes show the true nature of the regime---a dictatorship of the malevolent kind. For those hit by Marcos' policies, those were dark eras. For the many who felt safe during that era, it was so memorable due to the stark contrast of today.
What really happened was Marcos exhibited the true character of a Machiavelli--he demolished his enemies by destroying the powers of the traditional elites who were enslaving most of the Filipinos with their inhumane rule. From a country ruled by so many pseudo-dictators and petty feudal warlords, Marcos demolished the destructive social structure and replaced it with his own. Marcos created a new set of elites which were not beholden to the traditional ones.
From a constitutional organisation to a personal army, the military became Marcos' ally in building a "New Philippines". The idea was an excellent one, but Marcos forgot one simple political fact---how to restrain the military and keep it aligned with the civilian powers. The military slowly realised its true powers and it showed when it allowed the rise of a militant group within its establishment. Had the military remained professional, it could have been a totally different fate for Marcos.
It was, however, Marcos who actually created the power that would someday bring his ultimate downfall.
Okey--so, what's the verdict?
For me, Marcos deserves to be laid to rest at the Libingan ng mga Bayani for three reasons: first, he was a soldier of the Republic. That alone deserves him a space among our country's heroes. Second, Marcos did something good during his regime---he demolished and limited the powers of the traditional elites. That brought stability to the country. And third, Marcos sacrificed his personal ambitions to build a "New Philippines". He realised that the fragmentation of the social elite structure was hampering growth. When Marcos centralized all power and placed it to the Executive, Marcos actually created a revolution from within. He just failed to realize that the task of nation building is not solitary. Had Marcos created a council of elders and lead it, it could have been a different path altogether. Those who opposed him from the elite groups only wanted to share some power, not to snatch it altogether from him. His mistrust with the elites did him in.
Is February 25 an Official Holiday or a "working" holiday?
February 25, in previous years, was an official holiday. People thought that this February 25 is another holiday, which, to my mind, is but fitting to be declared as such given the high significance of this date as the twenty fifth year of the EDSA phenomenon.
Come February 25, that date will remind us of two things: One, that revolutions are not two-week affairs. These are processes which take a long time to mature and for people to really see and feel its results. And second, genuine revolts are often lead by the people. Bogus ones are hijacked by the elite.
February 25 is supposed to be our time of self-reflection. People should be given time to reflect what really went wrong--why is it that the same conditions that precipitated the first revolt remain and even worsened? What are the real gains that the People got from this revolt, other than the often repeated line of "we regained our freedoms" or " we are freer now than before."
Who really got freed that time? Was it the people?
The Filipino People are still enslaved by the twin evils of poverty and inhumanity. The number of poor people tripled from a mere 7 million to its present state of 27 million. Killings against journalists remain unabated. The state remains a tool of the elite groups in perpetuating a neo-liberal economic system that oppresses the poor, especially the workers. Workers right now are still being enslaved by capitalists. The ranks of the lumpen proletariat has risen to astronomical highs due to the inability of the system to effect a trickle down effects after every economic gain.
Come February 25, that date will remind us of two things: One, that revolutions are not two-week affairs. These are processes which take a long time to mature and for people to really see and feel its results. And second, genuine revolts are often lead by the people. Bogus ones are hijacked by the elite.
February 25 is supposed to be our time of self-reflection. People should be given time to reflect what really went wrong--why is it that the same conditions that precipitated the first revolt remain and even worsened? What are the real gains that the People got from this revolt, other than the often repeated line of "we regained our freedoms" or " we are freer now than before."
Who really got freed that time? Was it the people?
The Filipino People are still enslaved by the twin evils of poverty and inhumanity. The number of poor people tripled from a mere 7 million to its present state of 27 million. Killings against journalists remain unabated. The state remains a tool of the elite groups in perpetuating a neo-liberal economic system that oppresses the poor, especially the workers. Workers right now are still being enslaved by capitalists. The ranks of the lumpen proletariat has risen to astronomical highs due to the inability of the system to effect a trickle down effects after every economic gain.
Investors see the Philippines as a “low cost, but higher risk” country. It means it is cheaper to do business in the Philippines compared with other Asian countries but the risk is definitely higher than others. Meta Group Incorporated defined that risk as political. The Philippines, says MetaGroup, is second largest IT outsourcing hub, but political instability is affecting competitiveness.[1] Since 2003, the global competitiveness of the Philippines has seen good and better days due to rampant graft and corruption, worsening peace and order situation and political instability.[2]
The World Economic Forum’s “The Global Competitiveness Report, 2008-2009” ranked the Philippines in 74thplace, lower than its neighbor Indonesia (58th) and Vietnam (73rd). Compared to Malaysia (24th place) and Singapore (8th), our country lags behind in terms of competitiveness. [3]
The latest Global Competitiveness report shows a further decline in the ranking of the Philippines. Our country is now at 85th place, even lower than Trinidad-Tobago. Vietnam is ranked well above us.
Global competitiveness is affected by poor governance. In the World Bank’s Governance Index, the Philippines performed poorly in governance, registering a negative 0.59% since 1998 to 2008, well below Indonesia’s (-0.14%). There is a high incidence of political violence (negative 1.41%, down to about negative 1.25% since 1998) compared with other countries in the region.
Governance has been largely affected by perceptions of rampant graft and corruption and crony practices.A survey of 1,400 business leaders carried out by Economic Risk Consultancy Ltd, a Hong Kong based company, found that the Philippines was considered the most corrupt of the 13 Asian economies, followed by Thailand, China, and Indonesia. The Philippines is separately ranked number 131 out of 179 countries by corruption watchdog Transparency International in its 2007 report, placing it on a par with Libya and Burundi.[4]
Global Integrity Report (2008) has this to say about the Philippines:
Despite some impressive world-class anti-corruption safeguards, such as formal "cooling-off" employment periods for senior officials leaving government, the Philippines remains challenged by the lack of a formal access to information regime and an election system that breeds cronyism and corruption in the political process. Improvements in the transparency surrounding government procurement remain promising, and civil society groups continue to play an important role in the debate around governance reforms. Restrictions on financial donations to candidates and parties from those with business before the government are an interesting and rare regulation internationally.[5]
In terms of peace and order, the Global Peace Index places the Philippines in 114th place with a score of 2.357[6], suggesting a higher incidence of political and non-political violence outbreaks in the Philippines compared with its neighbors in Asia.
According to the World Economic Forum Executive Opinion survey, the top five issues which the Philippines needs to address are the following: corruption, inefficient bureaucracy, inadequate infrastructure, crime and theft and policy instability. Furthermore, the Philippines needs to address irregular payments in public contracts, prevalence of illegal political donations and the rising business costs of terrorism.
Quality of Life in the Philippines
Good governance is basically anchored on giving the best quality of life for its citizens. Political scientist Henry Poole described government’s importance as the people’s medium to achieve a higher quality of life. He wrote that the quality of life is strongly correlated with open governments. As government opens more avenues for the exercise of basic rights and freedoms, it leads to a higher the quality of life for its citizens.
“Open government answers injustice rather than causing it. Open government exposes, and so corrects, corruption. “[7]
Philippine democracy under a regime of turmoil. Steven Rogers of the Open Democracy Society described democracy in the Philippines as under a regime of turmoil. [8] Arroyo’s failure to provide opportunities for the direct exercise of civil liberties has led to a continuous debilitation of public institutions.
Philippine democracy under extreme decay. Friedrich Stiftung describes democracy and political freedom in the Philippines as under “extreme decay.” The Heritage Foundation meanwhile gave the Philippines a score of 56.9 in its 2008 Index of Economic Freedom. The US think tank described Philippine economic freedom as “moderately unFree” placing the country in 92nd place out of 157 countries in the world.
Partially Free Philippines. The US think tank Freedom House downgraded the status of the Philippines from “free” to “partially free” The institute said that the negative status change was “based on credible allegations of massive electoral fraud, corruption, and the government’s intimidation of elements in the political opposition.”
In its overview of the Philippines in its 2009 Freedom in the World Country reports, the think-tank maintained the current status of the country as “partially free” with a score of 4 out of 10 in political freedom and 3 out of 10 in the civil liberties index due to:
High-level corruption scandals inhibited governance in 2008 and generated significant public opposition to the administration. The number of extrajudicial killings declined during the year, and a new army chief with a pledged commitment to human rights was appointed in June. However, a breakdown of peace negotiations between the government and Muslim insurgents plunged the southern provinces into the worst violence since 2003, with more than 600,000 people displaced from their homes by year’s end.[9]
Bertelsmann, a European think tank gave the Philippines 4.5 in terms of civil and political liberties, placing the country in the 46th rank out of 132 countries.[10] The Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) in its November 2008 assessment report categorized the state of political freedom in the Philippines as “under constant seize”.
The problem, says Cornell University professor Carl A. Trocki of the Southeast Asia program is that Philippine democracy continues to exhibit “cacique-type” behavior.[11] Likewise, political analysts also think that Philippine democracy is “weak” and “infantile”.
In a paper presented to the Conference Democracy and Civil Society in Asia, Joel Rocamora succinctly described the situation as:
The Philippines has the most persistently undemocratic democracy in Asia. Except for the period of dictatorship under Ferdinand Marcos between 1972 and 1986, the Philippines has had a functioning democracy since independence from the United States in 1946. At the same time, a small group of powerful families has dominated politics and kept the economic benefits of power to themselves. Many analysts use the modifier "elite" when referring to Philippine democracy. (Bello and Gershman, 1990)
Effective participation by citizens outside of elections is limited. Unlike Malaysia and Singapore (much more obviously unlike the military dictatorship in Burma) with their Internal Security Acts, the Philippine state does not impose too many formal limits to the self-organization of disadvantaged groups. But a combination of bureaucratic rules and informal means including violence continues to make organizing difficult. Without effective popular pressure, government is generally not accountable.[12]
World Bank: Governance in Philippines, a failure
The World Bank ranks the Philippines as a failure in governance. Failure of governance has been attributed to graft and corruption, cronyism and inability in providing concrete policy directions.
A confidential Friedrich Stiftung report summarizes the Philippine situation insofar as combating the twin evils of graft and corruption:
“The Philippines faces a steep battle in combating and preventing corruption among elected and unelected office holders and in discouraging officials from utilizing public positions for family and business interests. There is effectively no political party system in the Philippines–no strong and operational political parties to speak of, no discipline among parties with switching commonplace among candidates, and no clear system of accountability within the party nor between parties and the public. Prominent is the tendency of public officeholders to exhibit loyalty to families, relatives, and friends even at the expense of compromising the larger public interest.”
Political Challenges
Freedom House described the political situation in the Philippines as worsening due to rampant graft and corruption, cronyism and influence peddling, leading to what German think tank Friedrich Stiftung described as a decaying democracy.
Corruption, cronyism, and influence peddling are rife in business and government. Despite recent economic reforms, a few dozen leading families continue to hold an outsized share of land, corporate wealth, and political power. Local “bosses” often control their respective areas, limiting accountability and encouraging abuses of power. [13]
The Heritage Foundation meanwhile gave the Philippines a score of 56.9 in its 2008 Index of Economic Freedom. The US think tank described Philippine economic freedom as “moderately unFree” placing the country in 92nd place out of 157 countries in the world. Asia Barometer describes Philippine democracy as a “tired democracy”.[14]
Reporters without Borders meanwhile increased the ranking of the Philippines by 14 places (128 out of 169).
Two popular indices of civil and political rights are Freedom House’s Civil Liberty and Political Right Scores. In 2006, the Philippines scored 3 on both indices, putting it in the league of Cambodia and Thailand in the middle of the 13 East Asian countries and territories covered by the Asian Barometer. Taiwan tops these measures at 1 for both civil liberty and political rights, while China comes in last, scoring 6 and 7 respectively.
Another set of indicators that portray the state of “control of corruption”, “voice and accountability”, “government effectiveness”, and “rule of law” prevailing in a country or territory is provided by the World Bank. In 2006, the Philippines obtained a negative score on “control of corruption” (-0.69), “rule of law” (-.48), and “voice and accountability” (-0.18). It scored close to zero (-0.01) in “government effectiveness”. This puts it in the league of Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, and China as far as having no positive score on each of these measures. The rest of the East Asian bloc – Japan, Hong Kong, Korea, and Taiwan – score positively on all three measures. Mongolia and Thailand have mixed scores.
Philippines Risk Assessment: Political social economic conditions
Gloria Arroyo was inaugurated as president at the end of June 2004, taking up her first electoral mandate since assuming the presidency in 2001 from Joseph Estrada, who was forced from office by massive street protests related to charges of corruption.
Arroyo's efforts to tackle corruption and to focus on economic reform have been undermined by a string of scandals. A year after being elected, her popularity rating had fallen to a record low amid opposition claims that she cheated in the elections. She apologized to the nation for talking to an election official about her hopes for victory in the run-up to the 2004 poll but denied any wrongdoing. Because of continuing allegations of corruption against her administration, Arroyo survived the political maelstrom.
Social and economic reforms introduced during her first term did little to ease poverty or the country's debt burden. She has taken a strong line on law and order and in 2006 lifted a moratorium on the death penalty. She also has allied herself closely with the U.S.-led war on terror.
Arroyo advocated constitutional reform. She proposed to swap the country's U.S.-style presidential system for a parliamentary government before the 2010 elections. The existing constitution was adopted to prevent the president from subverting democracy by stealth after the fall of the corrupt dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos. However, any attempt to change the constitution rouses suspicion that it is the first step back toward dictatorship.
Because of budget deficits and widespread corruption, the Philippines recovered from the regional economic crisis of the late 1990s more slowly than other Asian countries. The budget deficit is forecast to widen in 2009, as revenue collection is hurt by lower economic growth and corporate tax cuts. Analysts believe Arroyo's aim to eliminate the budget deficit by 2010 is overly ambitious.
Once self-sufficient in rice, the country has lost nearly half its irrigated land to rapid urban development during the past 20 years. It is now the world's biggest importer of the crop. Recent falling global food and oil prices, together with sluggish domestic demand, are forecast to allow the rate of inflation to slow from 9.6% in 2008 to 4.5% in 2009. Owing to the deepening global financial crisis, growth in gross domestic product is expected to slow from 7.3% in 2007, its fastest rate of growth in 31 years, to 1.9% in 2009.
The New Administration
Just four months prior to his one year rule, President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III continues to face extreme challenges. There is no visible strong political opposition against Aquino so far, but rising prices of goods, gasoline and utility rates remain a very viable social and security threat against the administration.
Aquino inherited a dysfunctional society run by elite groups whose interests ran counter to the general interest. The dysfunctionalism is intentional. As the country grapples with more problems, the higher and weaker government becomes in solving the root cause of its problems.
Slowly, promises made by the Aquino administration concerning social reform remain unfulfilled. Several sectors are now slowly realizing their error when they supported Aquino during the May 10, 2010 elections. Promises of national reforms fell by the wayside, as Aquino gave way to the whims and caprices of his election funders, all members of the traditional elite groups. Aquino’s neo-liberal economic policies are giving rise to an undercurrent of social dissent. This wave of dissent will continue to fester for several years and probably will not be strong enough to topple this administration.
Comments, however, against Aquino’s governance style remain. Several groups, including the very influential Makati Business Club (MBC) had already issued statements commenting on the “easy going” work ethic of Aquino. Aquino’s failure to effect strong governance had already made a very strong misimpression among the people. The botched Manila Bus hostage crisis, the diplomatic row with Taiwan and rising criminality are signs of a growing problem, which this administration considers minor issues.
Rising poverty is slowly configuring the social structure, with more and more Filipinos falling into the lower middle classes. More than 26 million Filipino families consider themselves poor. Statistics from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) revealed that the ranks of the rich and middle income groups fell from 19,700 families to only about 18,000---lower by 1% from the previous figure. This happens despite previous government pronouncements of successes in the arena of encouraging foreign investments.
Analysts, however, remain bullish on the Philippine economy. Worries, however, are now being expressed by several businessmen, including Ramon Ang of San Miguel Corporation. Ang said that government should allow the free fall of the Philippine peso to avert a possible food crisis. Food prices are expected to further increase this year, and a strong peso could mitigate the effects of such a crisis. Ang expects the Philippine peso to reach 35:US$1 before the end of the year. It still remains however, what contingency plans the Aquino administration intends to implement given the slow deterioration of the political situation in the Middle East.
We face extreme challenges, which, to my mind, are man-made. We chose the bakla route for change, by promoting a "non-violent" revolution that further promoted violence within our own society.
We prevented a bloodbath in 1986, yet because of our "yellowish" predilection, we allowed the continued perpetuation of elite rule, to the detriment of the people. Yes, there was no life lost in that event in 1986. But, every single day, millions lose their lives and futures all because we tried to avoid the inevitable.
[1] Stacy Collett, “The Philippines: Low cost, but higher risk:Costs are low and the English is flawless, but there are pockets of political instability.” Computerworld, 15 September 2003.
[2] Michael B. Mundo, “ Growth and Business Competitiveness among 80 economies: Philippine Rankings Rise and Fall, “ Makati Business Club confidential report, No. 52 - November 2003. This is based on the 2003-2004 Global Competitiveness Report released by the Switzerland-based World Economic Forum (WEF) last 30 October 2003.
[3] World Economic Forum, “ Global Competitiveness Report: 2008-2009”, Switzerland, 2009.
[4] http://www.reportbuyer.com/
[7] Henry Poole, CivicAction.com, 3 January 2007.
[11] Trocki, Carl. Gangsters, democracy and the state in Southeast Asia. USA: Cornell University Press, 1998: 57
[12] Joel Rocamora, “Formal Democracy and its Alternatives in the Philippines: Parties, Elections and Social Movements”.Paper presented at the conference Democracy and Civil Society In Asia: The Emerging Opportunities and Challenges. Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 19-21 August 2000
[13] Freedom House, “ 2009 Freedom in the World Report” released July 2009.
[14] Segundo Eclar Romero and Linda Luz Guerrero, “Philippine Democracy and Governance 2005:Insights from the Asian Barometer Survey” included in An Asian Barometer Conference on the State of Democratic Governance in Asia report. June 2008: 24.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
EDSA 1 Recollections by a Poppy Flower stuffed inside the barrel of an M-16
What really prompted us to troop to Highway 54 and demand for the resignation of former president Ferdinand Marcos? Was it a call for change? What kind of change?
I was still a teenager when EDSA uno broke out. I was born like a poppy flower stuffed inside the barrel of an M-16 rifle. Like most of us, my family belongs to the lower middle class. I had aunts who graduated with a PHd in UP and an MA abroad. I had uncles who also finished their college degrees despite the relative poverty of our family.
For us, there was nothing irregular with what Marcos did for the country. Fact is, our family benefitted from the previous regime. We were the first ones given a home. My aunt, who was once a principal in a public school, won a government raffle which gave her two houses--one in a tenement and the other, a row house in Antipolo.
Later I realised that my family in my father's side belongs to the Rivera which is a family directly linked with the Marcos family. However, unlike other so-called relatives, we never used this connexion to gain concessions from the regime.
Anyway, living under a dictatorship was, for me, nothing irregular or fearsome. No one among my relatives was arrested. My uncle, who died in a car accident, was a founder of SDK. He, however, probably made peace with the authorities since I never got any info that he was arrested or jailed. Yet, a few years before his death, I saw him during one or two rallies which I attended.
Like most of us, there was peace during Macoy's time. Yes, we saw some excesses in several television clips but these were justified as something which the official family did to at least make Filipinos proud of themselves. Imelda's shoes for example, they were plenty, but hey, the former MMDA and first lady had to travel, yes? And travelling requires a lot of shoes.
What I saw when I was growing up were Marcos' orations. The former president spoke with authority and with wit. It was a joy seeing him speak. Fact is, his face is still etched inside my brain. I was wired to listen to him and even emulate him, whenever possible. He made us proud of his speeches.
Yet, those speeches hide the real truth---the deaths of thousands, the poverty of many, the erosion of social values, war, inhumanity and the deprivation of several civil rights. While we eat barely two times a day, several of the dictator's cronies lavish themselves with riches beyond measure and feast themselves to death with imported goods, most of which, caviar.
We, however, were made to believe that every single thing was fine. Rumors circulated that Imelda allowed hundreds to die while the Cultural Center was being built. There was news of a senator killed due to his principles, and several others, dead, when they revolted against the regime.
I was a living witness of several thousands of us, shouting ourselves hoarse when a group of nationalists visited us. I later learned that that one was an election rally. Shouts of "laban" reverberated throughout the dark alleys of our condominium building.
I was then a high school student when reports of a "revolt" broke out. Several soldiers were reported to have holed themselves inside Camp Crame. The action was reportedly led by Defense secretary Juan Ponce-Enrile, a close Marcos crony and General Fidel V. Ramos, a Ramos relative. They defected to the Cory Aquino side shortly after the 1986 elections, which, according to Enrile, Cory won by a landslide.
It was my first time to hear of the name "Cory Aquino". Cory was the widow of the late Senator Benigno Noynoy Aquino. I shed a tear when the body of the slain senator was shown on television, slumped at the tarmac, murdered by an assassin. The alleged assassin, Galman, was also shown side by side with the slain nationalist, once accused of being a Communist, but, in truth and in fact, a genuine lover of God and Country.
Cory was convinced by several anti-Marcos forces to fight the ageing dictator in an elections. The ageing dictator agreed. Marcos was seen campaigning and throwing strong speeches against his detractors. Afterwards, he was seen being carried by several bodyguards.
Rumours of Marcos' illness swept the country. There were rumors that the country was being run not by Ferdie, but by Meldy and a Hollywood actor. Most of the people think that it was time for Macoy to retire or die, but the dictator probably thought he was still "strong" and "needed by the people".
The elections were a sham. And most of the people knew it.
That's why several soldiers, wearing the People's flag in their uniforms, chose to side with the Truth. Three years ago, these soldiers made their views known when they unfurled a streamer during a PMA rites event. That "We Belong" streamer never meant anything to several people, but it was as serious as life to those who founded the RAM, especially young First Lieutenant Diosdado Valeroso. Several thought that the group was just fans of Benatar's famous pop song, but unknown to all, these soldiers were dead serious in their struggle to regain the democracy and freedom for the people.
That "We Belong" transformed itself into "Our Dream shall never die." It was a classic call for change, change that we can dream of. But, what is that change? What is really, the dream of the people?
I was still a teenager when EDSA uno broke out. I was born like a poppy flower stuffed inside the barrel of an M-16 rifle. Like most of us, my family belongs to the lower middle class. I had aunts who graduated with a PHd in UP and an MA abroad. I had uncles who also finished their college degrees despite the relative poverty of our family.
For us, there was nothing irregular with what Marcos did for the country. Fact is, our family benefitted from the previous regime. We were the first ones given a home. My aunt, who was once a principal in a public school, won a government raffle which gave her two houses--one in a tenement and the other, a row house in Antipolo.
Later I realised that my family in my father's side belongs to the Rivera which is a family directly linked with the Marcos family. However, unlike other so-called relatives, we never used this connexion to gain concessions from the regime.
Anyway, living under a dictatorship was, for me, nothing irregular or fearsome. No one among my relatives was arrested. My uncle, who died in a car accident, was a founder of SDK. He, however, probably made peace with the authorities since I never got any info that he was arrested or jailed. Yet, a few years before his death, I saw him during one or two rallies which I attended.
Like most of us, there was peace during Macoy's time. Yes, we saw some excesses in several television clips but these were justified as something which the official family did to at least make Filipinos proud of themselves. Imelda's shoes for example, they were plenty, but hey, the former MMDA and first lady had to travel, yes? And travelling requires a lot of shoes.
What I saw when I was growing up were Marcos' orations. The former president spoke with authority and with wit. It was a joy seeing him speak. Fact is, his face is still etched inside my brain. I was wired to listen to him and even emulate him, whenever possible. He made us proud of his speeches.
Yet, those speeches hide the real truth---the deaths of thousands, the poverty of many, the erosion of social values, war, inhumanity and the deprivation of several civil rights. While we eat barely two times a day, several of the dictator's cronies lavish themselves with riches beyond measure and feast themselves to death with imported goods, most of which, caviar.
We, however, were made to believe that every single thing was fine. Rumors circulated that Imelda allowed hundreds to die while the Cultural Center was being built. There was news of a senator killed due to his principles, and several others, dead, when they revolted against the regime.
I was a living witness of several thousands of us, shouting ourselves hoarse when a group of nationalists visited us. I later learned that that one was an election rally. Shouts of "laban" reverberated throughout the dark alleys of our condominium building.
I was then a high school student when reports of a "revolt" broke out. Several soldiers were reported to have holed themselves inside Camp Crame. The action was reportedly led by Defense secretary Juan Ponce-Enrile, a close Marcos crony and General Fidel V. Ramos, a Ramos relative. They defected to the Cory Aquino side shortly after the 1986 elections, which, according to Enrile, Cory won by a landslide.
It was my first time to hear of the name "Cory Aquino". Cory was the widow of the late Senator Benigno Noynoy Aquino. I shed a tear when the body of the slain senator was shown on television, slumped at the tarmac, murdered by an assassin. The alleged assassin, Galman, was also shown side by side with the slain nationalist, once accused of being a Communist, but, in truth and in fact, a genuine lover of God and Country.
Cory was convinced by several anti-Marcos forces to fight the ageing dictator in an elections. The ageing dictator agreed. Marcos was seen campaigning and throwing strong speeches against his detractors. Afterwards, he was seen being carried by several bodyguards.
Rumours of Marcos' illness swept the country. There were rumors that the country was being run not by Ferdie, but by Meldy and a Hollywood actor. Most of the people think that it was time for Macoy to retire or die, but the dictator probably thought he was still "strong" and "needed by the people".
The elections were a sham. And most of the people knew it.
That's why several soldiers, wearing the People's flag in their uniforms, chose to side with the Truth. Three years ago, these soldiers made their views known when they unfurled a streamer during a PMA rites event. That "We Belong" streamer never meant anything to several people, but it was as serious as life to those who founded the RAM, especially young First Lieutenant Diosdado Valeroso. Several thought that the group was just fans of Benatar's famous pop song, but unknown to all, these soldiers were dead serious in their struggle to regain the democracy and freedom for the people.
That "We Belong" transformed itself into "Our Dream shall never die." It was a classic call for change, change that we can dream of. But, what is that change? What is really, the dream of the people?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)