for everyone |
People Power is dead…Lord, help us! – I can only imagine that a lot of people must have been rather disappointed at the dismal if disappointing turnout at the “Anti-Con-Ass” rally held in Makati recently. Crowd estimates were vague and varied (6,000-15,000) depending on who was counting. The best that can be said of the affair was that for all its hype and hoopla it turned out to be rather unimpressive if not downright pathetic. People started to leave even before it was over. They knew it was a lost cause. Considering that various influential sectors, church-based, political and militant groups, even agreed to band together to voice their collective indignation over the House resolution to convene a constituent assembly, (or “Con-Ass”) at this time, the rally fell far short of the desired or expected public support and attendance. It was a far cry from the legendary People Power or EDSA Revolution of 1986 – no doubt the Holy Grail of every professional militant group or political activist.
In the first place, the organizers should have known better than to hold the rally in Makati. It’s a bit too “elitista” as any seasoned activist will tell you. It’s like Trillanes insisting on holding court at the Manila Pen. If you want to take to the streets, do it by closing down several blocks along EDSA on both directions. And do so with conviction, no matter who gets hurt. Then, you might convince more people to join. You might also get hosed down in the process but at least you will have made your point. Or, someone could offer himself for self-immolation, then get hosed down. The Filipino is worth getting wet for.
Let’s face it, in case we haven’t gotten it yet – PEOPLE POWER IS DEAD. And I’m glad. We had our chance with the EDSA Revolution of 1986. And we blew it. At least our people seem to think so. How often since 1986 have we tried in vain to launch so many protest rallies and street marches, demonstrations, general strikes and boycotts and fell flat on our faces, or more graphically, got hosed down in the process (“parang basang sisiw”). Maybe Malacanang has wised up to the idea – ang ibong basa ang pakpak, hindi na maari pang lumipad. Maybe, it’s time to look for something more imaginative.
We had our chances with the “Hello, Garci” scandal, the “Sec, mey 200 ka dito,” “Jun… moderate their greed,” the scandalous plunder committed by military generals and government officials, the effete Office of the Ombudsman, the oppressive gas prices and the useless ERB, the ZTE-NBN scam, the fertilizer scam, the Dep-Ed scam, and poor whistleblower Jun Lozada who has since been all but forgotten in favor of Dr. Haydden Camera. The traditional oppositionists, militants and activists tried everything to mobilize a collective outrage and rally people to the streets but every time to no avail. The people would not budge.
Our people are tired of rallies, politicians, activists, radicals, fundamentalists, policemen, people in government. “Pare-pareho lang lahat yan. Gusto lang nilang makisawsaw sa caban ng bayan.” That’s why as a form of protest they even tried voting for movie actors, “action stars,” comedians, basketball players. But to the people’s chagrin, they were not any better. They were even worse. But at least these novice senators could be forgiven – for evidently not knowing what they were doing there in the first place, in the Senate no less.
No, people are not outraged. They are tired.
Rallies are for people with some hidden agenda, some selfish interests, political plans and ambitions. You will not get them to admit that of course. They will insist that they are doing it for the good of the country, for the sake of our children and our children’s children, for the common good. The tune somehow has a hollow ring to it. It’s like asking Kuya Freddie Aguilar to do a rap number.
Why do I get the impression that whenever anybody somehow succeeds in getting some “media mileage,” becomes a celebrity of sorts, albeit for some 15 minutes, or gets some exposure for exposing some all too common scandalous corruption in government, that somehow qualifies him to become a senator or a party-list representative? Does one have to be a professional rabble-rouser to qualify for a lucrative position in government? Isn’t there some other mode of generating public attention and interest other than inconveniencing and molesting people who need to work in order to buy their next meal?
Indeed, there oughta be a law outlawing political or partisan rallies and demonstrations being held in streets, parks and other public places. They are a public nuisance well within the legal definition of the term. If political groups and activists want to generate public indignation, the best way to do so is to make people pay for it by buying tickets to attend the rally – making it their patriotic act and duty - to be held in some coliseum, stadium, or hotel convention hall, just as they would some basketball, boxing or soccer game or rock and roll concert. That way too the organizers can accurately gauge how strongly people feel about certain life-and-death issues.
How is it possible that tens of thousands of rabid fans will pay any price to attend some inane football, soccer, or baseball games, or hip hop concerts, generate such rabid enthusiasm and emotions and pay good money for doing so, whereas political groups and party-list militants have to truck (“hakot”), feed and pay people just to carry their stupid banners and placards and shout childish slogans? There’s something pathetically wrong with this political picture.
We resented it when we got criticized the first time around by Lee Kuan Yu of Singapore. He sort of hinted that people power is not the remedy to institute change or reforms in the political system. It is a throwback into the primitive days of the mob rule. In retrospect, this autocratic ruler may have had a point. It took centuries upon centuries of western civilization to devise the democratic and system of laws that we have long seen fit to adopt and embrace. You don’t agree with the current dispensation, then, elect a new set of leaders, but select wisely, for goodness’ sake. And please, no more movie stars, comedians, basketball stars, their wives and children, or even world champions. For that matter, no more deposed Presidents or convicted plunderers.
You don’t like a certain law, then, amend it or, have your congressman do so. You discover government scams and plunderous graft and corruption, fire the sonamaguns. Prosecute them, jail them – and throw away the keys. You have a good-for-nothing Ombudsman, impeach him/her. Let’s not just hold congressional investigations in front of TV cameras or take to the streets. You disagree with some government policy or regulation, run to the Supreme Court. In short, we still do have some form of workable government system in place. People power is not always or necessarily the only available or effective remedy.
Some people may not appreciate my saying so but I find that there is something disagreeably dishonest about many so-called civic-minded citizens, activists, even religious leaders who acquire some prominence by constantly finding fault with government or generally sowing seeds of discontent, only to wind up running for some public office or otherwise “cashing in” on such dubious celebrity status by accepting some lucrative government position or sinecure, consultancy or juicy contract. It looks too much like the same influence-peddling outlawed by the anti-graft law which was purposely enacted to discourage or deter such deceitful if disgusting forms of corruption.
Just because people power is dead does not mean we are validating or tolerating all the shenanigans in government either. I realize that peaceful political dissent is a hallmark of free and open societies. That taking the high moral ground is the price we sometimes have to pay for citizenship in a democracy. But taking to the streets at every opportunity cannot possibly be the answer either. It smacks too much of radicalism, fundamentalism or fanaticism. And much of the problems of the world these days are due to mind-sets in the mold of Bin Laden or other hairy monsters.
I suggest we stop getting the citizenry all riled up just because some people have ambitions to take over the reins of government. If people seem satisfied to accept things they cannot seem to change, if they seem apolitical and apathetic, why not let them be? Let’s leave politics to the professional politicians, the people who have made it their business to be political animals. Ordinary citizens have enough to do earning their daily bread, paying taxes, obeying stupid laws and regulations, or subsidizing government’s profligate ways. Let them exercise their right and duty to vote and do so wisely - when the proper time comes. That’s the best we can expect – unless we desperately want our country to turn into another Cambodia, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan or Rwanda, Uganda or some other war torn banana republic.
I believe this is the most and the best we can expect. After all, we are a relatively young republic. We have a long way to go and our people still have a lot to learn. Until our surveys continue to show that at least 15% of the voters are still willing to vote for a deposed president and convicted plunderer, I suggest that our well-intentioned activist nuns should stop providing security services for Jun Lozada (let him run for Senator on his own), and instead go back to their convents to pray for our greatly misguided people. The help we obviously need at this time – and for always – is some supernatural intervention and guidance. Lord, help us. - Bro. James D. Lansang
Lord, help us...
...find a 21st century Rizal (the Intellectual, with a vision), ...a Bonifacio, who's got guts and not afraid to raise his hand, who does not winch from the sight of blood and sweat; ...and GomBurZa to guide us and inculcate the basic principles of an ...ethical governance. And who's this 21st Messiah that we long for? When will his time come? Lord, help us... |
Tama ka na naman, Kuya James.
Sabi nga sa Ecclesiastes: May panahon para sa lahat ng bagay. At laging napapanahon, na tayo ay manalangin. Pero ang panalangin ay dapat taimtim, sinsero, galing sa kaibuturan ng ating puso at buong katauhan. Hayaan ninyong ibahagi ko ang maikling panalangin, bilang bahagi ng aking tugon sa inyong pinakahuling obra maestra: Panginoon, kailangan namin ng bagong Rizal, bagong Bonifacio, bagong Gomez, Burgos at Zamora, bagong mga lider na tunay na lingkod-bayan. Pero Panginoon, higit sa lahat, bagaman matagal na kaming naghihintay at nangangailangan ng tunay na mga lider, ng matitinong mga lider, mga maka-taong lider, nananalangin po kami na ang bawat isa sa amin ay matutong isabuhay ang tama, ang mabuti at ang maganda at ang nararapat sa aming personal na buhay araw-araw, gabi-gabi, linggo-linggo, buwan-buwan, taon-taon. Pinasugo si Kristo ng Ama mahigit ng dalawang libong taon. Pero, tulad nga ng paulit-ulit kong nababanggit sa ilang mga kasama, ilan ang tunay na nakinig at nakikinig kay Kristo? Ilan ang nagsasabuhay ng Kanyang aral na isinabuhay: Pagmamahalan. Sino ang tunay na nagmamahal? Sino ang tunay na nagmamahal sa kapwa? Sino ang tunay na nagmamahal sa mga nangangailangan? Sino ang tunay na nagmamahal sa pinakamaliliit sa ating paligid? Kung ano man ang ginawa at ginagawa ninyo sa pinakamaliliit ninyong kapwa-tao, yan ang ginawa at ginagawa ninyo sa Akin. Kuya Jess. Ano na nga ba ang nagawa at ginagawa natin para sa ating mga maliliit na kapwa-tao? Kuya James, salamat sa mga ginintuang "tilamsik" na nagmula sa kaibuturan ng iyong puso, sa kaibuturan ng iyong pagka-tao. Sine cera, Kaka RVQ. |
elmersarmiento wrote on Jun 15, '09
You've turned political, James. But let me digress. People power is ALIVE. Go out in the street and you can see so many people doing their own things. Malls, cinemas, concert of the pussy whatever, airports, cockpits, SLEX and NLEX, parking lots, churches and mosques, etc. are packed with people. All breathing, talking, making love (will be 100 million in 5 years), gossiping, fighting, texting, blogging, praying, laughing, dancing, etc. I don't see this in wealthier countries. The disposable income we received from millions of our OFWs provides our first defense against the so-called economic crisis and results in an unusual economic buzz to our country. The Filipino pipol is turning/moving the economic wheels and I am amazed on the bustling economy. Go to Taguig, Mandaluyong, Pasig and you can see new building constructions. Every quarter, a SM mall is being opened; everyday, a restaurant, a sari-sari store, a mom-n-pop shop crop up. I love the market place and it's getting noisier everyday. Go out and listen to the new voice of our people.
|
KOREK KA JAN, Kuya ELMER! You are wise to take the globally-recognized "PEOPLE POWER" invented by Filipinos and turn it around to describe the current power of the Filipino. Perhaps we can call this new power "PINOY POWER" to distinguish it from that political upheaval otherwise known as the EDSA Revolution of 1986.
Being the well-traveled man that you are, you have witnessed for yourself that Pinoys are now beginning to emerge as another race to be reckoned with in the global scene. There are now visible, viable and vibrant Filipino communities in all major cities of the world. They are the new kids on the block. They have taken over the humble roles and chores traditionally held by former African slaves, Chinese and Japanese peons and yayas (a Chinese term), the Latina chambermaids from Mexico and Puerto Rico, and other lowly jobs now disdained even by Korean, Indian, and Latin American immigrants. In the past I have tried to suggest that the day will come when many powerful world leaders and businessmen (mestizos) will emerge born of Filipina mothers raped and impregnated by their foreign employers. Perhaps we should call this global phenomenon "PINOY POWER." It's the best argument against abortion and birth control. Why else are churches empty and seminaries and convents in Europe closing down. There are not enough people there anymore except Pinoys. We don't really need expensive Japanese robots. We got millions of Pinoys to do the job. |
ang sarap magbasa ng mga mala-diamanteng karunungan ninyo, jaime, kaka, elmer. ang sarap ninyong pumulso ng tibok ng mga pangyayari na lingid sa kamalayan ng tulad naming nakararami. mabuhay ang pag-ahit ninyo sa kahulugan ng mga sumisibol na nangyayari sa kapaligiran! dumami sana ang lipi n'yo.
|
butchcelestial wrote on Jun 17, '09
Lets observe Iran at the moment. Its people power but with technological aspects. |
Kuya Elmer, parang sinasabi mo that it's about time we give the term "people power" a fresh perspective, a new dimension. I'm reminded of the kid who’s now bringing alcohol to school every day dahil sa AH1N1. Sabi ng bata sa kanyang classmate, "Alam mo, alcoholic na tayo".
Of course, AH1NI does not make us a nation of alcoholics. Neither are we about to adopt the “Happy Birthday” song as our national anthem. The Elmer Proposal, to my mind, is for us to wear our green hats (or to find new ways of looking at things). People Power is not dead; neither is it dying. It’s just there somewhere. . . most likely in the dark. . . waiting to be fertilized. . . you know, darkness and fertilization normally go together. . . Meanwhile, the people can explore other fora (blogs, SMS, and especially the new computerized system of voting) to ventilate disgust and frustration. Yes, there’s security in repetition but People Power is an ultimate option, not an ordinary operation. By all means, patalsikin natin ang mga nambababoy sa atin but we have to work hard to make democracy work. . . again. This leads me now to two questions which I suspect are digressions: pure coincidence lang ba na ang salitang “pambababoy” ay nauuso sa panahong ito ng swine flu? Kung hindi ba natin masugpo ang pambababoy sa atin, tama bang palitan na lang natin ang pangalan ng ating bayan from “Pilipinas” to “Babuyan Islands”? . . . On second thought, seriously this time, I heard that Babuyan Islands is a paradise and the people there are gentle and free. . . wala raw pambababoy na nagaganap doon. |
Go out and listen to the new voice of our people. 
avilacharles wrote on Jun 21, '09
Warning: the following is a lengthy treatment of "people power" only a couple of months after the original event.Some may find it useful as a historical context for the term. If you have the inclination and the time, for whatever it's worth here it is:
An Analysis of the People's Urban Insurrection Paper delivered by CHARLES AVILA at the first public reunion of the April 6th Liberation Movement - 1986 Prior to the success of people's power in February 1986, at least three major strategies were offered to the Filipino people to rid the nation of the US-backed Marcos dictatorship. The three were: (A) the strategy of protracted people's war or PPW; (B) the purely electoral strategy or ES; and (C) the strategy of people's urban insurrection or PUI. Although strategies (A) and (B) had, by far, the bigger number of adherents throughout the many years of the Marcos dictatorship, in the end, it was strategy (C) that enabled democracy to triumph over tyranny. On February 25th, 1986, people power toppled down the Marcos regime. THE ELEMENTS OF THE PUI STRATEGY The Subjective Factor - The attitude urged on activists by the proponents of the PUI Strategy related to the simple but extremely difficult task of being open to changing reality and being contemporaneous with the present. Openness to reality meant, first of all, the rejection of sectarianism and the acceptance that no one individual, group, or organization really makes history alone. This meant that the claim, implicit or explicit, that outside one’s group, there could be no revolution had to be considered as ridiculous as the medieval claim that outside the church, there would be no salvation. For it is the people who make history. The people - the majority populace - at certain crucial moments cease to be mere objects and awaken to become true subjects of history, directing the latter's course until a next stage of "normalcy" is reached and they tend again to be less participative in the historical process. In their reading of current history, the PUI proponents observed that the crucial moment had come on at least two occasions: April 6, 1978 and August 21-31, 1983. April 6th, 1978, after which date the urban guerilla A6LM or April 6th Liberation Movement was named, marked the first clear occasion of massive people's urban insurrection had it been organizationally led along a clear direction. The April 6th event was a massive noise barrage on the eve of a farcical election where the top charismatic leader of the opposition was running for a legislative seat from jail. For the first time, during those years of dictatorship, millions of people in the metropolis made loud and clear their hatred and rejection of the Marcos regime. They did so on an occasion where they had a concrete choice over the dictatorship - the leadership of the popular Ninoy Aquino. April 6th was thus perceived to be Strike One for people power, in Pilipino Lakas ng Bayan or LABAN. If you ever wondered when that word "Laban" first became truly popular, it was on April 6th, 1978. Strike Two came on August 21-31, 1983, after which date the activist group ATOM or August Twenty-One Movement was named. Ninoy Aquino was murdered August 21st and the biggest funeral in recorded history took place ten days later, signaling the massive rejection of Marcos by the Filipino people a second time. On this second "strike", massive people's self-mobilization again did not lead to insurrection. Marcos managed precariously to stay on in power by allowing the people to let off steam in various imaginative actions which came to be widely known as the "Parliament of the Streets" or POS. The propaganda movement led by the POS considerably weakened the Marcos regime at all levels - economic, political and ideologico-cultural. One economic crisis after another was accompanied by as many political crises. However, the regime managed to hold on. Marcos defended himself with a clear understanding that there was a qualitative difference between an insurrectionary strike which he had prevented at all costs, and all other "letting-off-steam" type of people's actions, no matter how massive in character, which he could tolerate. With the weakening of the regime after Strike Two, most analysts came to believe that the triumph of Strategy (A) or Protracted People's War had become inevitable - within a hazy three to five years, perhaps. In any case, the analysts went, most people would end up following Strategy (A) or PPW because Strategy (B) or the Electoral Struggle had absolutely no chance of success. It was most patent that a dictator could never be toppled down by an election, at least not by a purely Electoral Strategy. In the meantime, the PUI proponents persistently proclaimed that Strike Three was near at hand. The third crucial moment would come, according to their reading of history-in-the-making, with the taking place of another Event comparable to April 6th or August 21st. In their analysis, that Event would most probably be the National Elections scheduled for 1987. They were sure that a national election would mean Marcos' having to use massive fraud and terrorism against a determined people's rejection of his regime. The "Post", as they called the Post-Election scenario, would mean massive protests, a double count of election results - the official government differing from the unofficial but more credible citizen's count - followed by more protests which would lead to dual power (the old government and the new claimant) and finally, to a successful People's Urban Insurrection. The Four Objective Factors - By September-October 1985, the "Post" had become a hot topic among PUI proponents. With the growing success of the struggle in the international arena - among the foreign media, international agencies (banks and businesses) and foreign governments - the possibility of Marcos' calling for "Snap Elections" had become more real. To strengthen his hand in dealing with the politico-economic crises that wouldn't go away, Marcos was believed ready to seek a "fresh mandate". Thus, preparations for elections among the adherents of Strategy (B) which had started much earlier, became more intense with all the resultant factionalism and divisiveness. In early November 1985, Marcos finally called for a "Snap". He exuded the confidence and arrogance of one who had all the powers and intent of not losing in an election. He was confident that it was well nigh impossible for the adherents of Strategy (B) to ever get united in one electoral ticket. And in his view, the numerous militant but predictable adherents of Strategy (A) would logically go for a response of boycott against positively advocating participation in the electoral struggle. As for the adherents of Strategy (C), in Marcos' view, they were too few and too weak that he could destroy them anytime. The PUI proponents, however, never wavered from their certitude that a national election would mean Strike Three - either a "home run" or a "strike out". And they identified four objective factors essential to the realization of a successful people's uprising: (1) the strength of the open-legal forces; (2) the strength of the urban guerilla organizations; (3) the capacity to neutralize and then win over significant portions of the Armed Forces of the Philippines; and (4) the existence of international support ensuring that the fait accompli of a successful uprising would not long remain isolated but gain the necessary diplomatic recognition. The active interplay, intertwining and convergence of these four factors were crucial in the realization of the People's Urban Insurrection against the Marcos dictatorship. 1.The Open-Legal Forces - After the 1978-1981 urban guerilla actions which culminated in the Aquino (Ninoy) - Marcos transnational negotiations, a qualitative change took place in the Philippine dictatorial polity. A quasi-democratic thaw came about that permitted to a limited degree the development of the opposition mass media, mass movements, and political parties. After the Aquino martyrdom in 1983, the atmosphere of daring became even more pronounced. The ripples of people power that started in the late 1960's whose further development was arrested with the imposition of martial law in the early 1970's, became like big waves in the post-1983 POS (parliament of the streets) gently threatening, after the forging of the Cory-Doy unity, to become a huge tidal wave that could sweep away the Marcos-Crony dictatorship from power. As the Cory-Doy campaign moved from province to province, city to bigger city, and town to smaller town, only those with the most dogmatic ideological hang-ups or the thickest of analytic blinders could fail to note that the largest mass movement in the nation's history was now a-borning. Not to be part of that movement would be equivalent to deliberately resigning from a historic people's process: in other words, boycotting such a movement would surely mean being thrown to the political sidelines by an intensely awakened populace. Thus, it came about that may adherents of the PPW strategy, by mis-reading the historical process which was under way before their very eyes, and by their virtual absence from the final battles against the dictatorship, isolated themselves from the majority populace, becoming in the end de facto allies of a regime that was trying to keep anti-Marcos voters home. The Cory-Doy campaign which was national in geographic, sectoral, and ideological scope provided the needed matrix for the generation of "people power" - defined as "the self-awareness, self-organization, and self-mobilization of the majority populace against a well-focused target", the Marcos regime. A bit disorganized and inefficient as political campaigns go, that campaign was, nonetheless, extremely effective as a thousand initiatives self-coordinated against a common well-focused target. As the campaign came to the final days before the February 7th electoral exercise, many adherents of Strategy (B) became increasingly aware of the necessity for Strategy (C). The proponents and adherents of the latter strategy (People's Urban Insurrection) were, from the very start, an essential part of the Cory-Doy campaign. They knew that the campaign was the necessary first chapter of the total people's process. They also believed that a second chapter was inevitable - aimed at defending the people's mandate and proclaiming the new legitimacy. Thus, they systematically went about briefing the foreign media on Chapter Two, or the "Post" scenario. And when, days after February 7th (Election Day), the foreign correspondents were still very much in town, the Marcos propagandists fell into panic. They asked, "Why are they still here? Is there something else planned by the opposition?" Indeed, there was, because by then, Strategies B and C - electoral and insurrectionary - had already merged. 2.The Urban Guerillas - It has almost become a truism to assert that for massive non-violence to succeed, there must exist somewhere in the political spectrum groups capable of inflicting some violence on the enemy. More accurately, while in the end, only massive people power (necessarily nonviolent) can effectively bring down the key targets of the national struggle, the growing potential for selective and incisive use of force must be present. "The aim here," according to an urban guerilla communiqué entitled The Tasks at Hand dated February 10th, 1986 and subsequently publicized abroad by CBS News, and the San Francisco Examiner, "is to carry out public justice now and convincingly show the people that they are not helpless nor is the Marcos government still in full control. Urban guerilla activities will ideally create an atmosphere of daring as well as act as vanguard for the more crucial massive actions of the people so that the latter are not dispersed or cut down like sitting ducks by an unscrupulous regime that stops at nothing to keep itself in power. The Cory-Doy leadership, while disassociating itself from urban guerilla activities, must not fall into the temptation of condemning them, for their aim is merely the shaking up of the regime and the softening up of the key targets which, in the end, only massive people power can effectively bring down". Early on, the communiqué stated: "The combination of the following elements is required for the attainment of the over-all aim [i.e. the installation of a Cory-Doy government in the soonest possible time]: an enhanced capacity for greater and still greater mass actions; a program of civil disobedience or non cooperation; a series of destabilizing urban guerilla actions; the formation of a government that can issue meaningful orders to the civilian-military bureaucracy of the old government; and, finally, a serious effort at gaining diplomatic recognition from the present allies of the Philippines." The premises for the tasks outlined in the communiqué were simply put: "The people's mandate must be defended and the popular victory proclaimed as the new legitimacy, for the Marcos government has, at long last, been finally and definitely rejected by the Filipino people as an illegitimate government which they rejected in the last national election." The days immediately following the election, however, saw the predominance of cautious instincts that advocated a gradual build-up of a civil disobedience and boycott campaign possibly leading to a general strike. This was in contrast to immediately calling for greater and still greater mass actions and a series of militant destabilizing tactics toward a massing of people at Malacanang supported by urban guerilla forces that would lead the initial assault on the formidable palace guard. The predominant gradualist approach turned out to be the wiser course. Marcos' "operation slow count" at the COMELEC, all-out attack on the NAMFREL, and "operation quick count at the KBL-controlled Batasan were correctly answered by the gradualist tactic of ensuring the opposition's enhanced capacity to concentrate people power at will - anytime, anywhere. Thus, urban guerilla actions, so much needed as a potential destabilizing force against the regime, ironically turned out to be, in fact, unnecessary as an actualized force. For it became clear that such actions would only offer Marcos the excuse he needed for quick decisive repression risking a return to passivity, fear and vacillation among the rank and file of the broader opposition and thus, ultimately, diffusing the hitherto easily concentrated power of the people. Every move had now to be evaluated against the strategic thrust: will it help or will it hamper the gathering together of the people power? 3.Winning over the Military. That significant elements of the military had long been won over to the people's cause by their own conscience and the pressure of growing people's power was quite widely known. PUI proponents had considered this factor in the formulation of the total strategy. They had to - in as much as they were merely "reading" history. More accurately, they were merely taking note of the many diverse but inevitably converging lines and facts of history-in-the-making. Thus, they were confident that under conditions of Marcosist die-hards mounting an attack on the unarmed masses, the latter would be able to count on various centers of the reform movement in the armed forces to hamper the regime's "mad dog" propensities. The PUI strategists' projections anticipated such decisive actions to come from the reformists only during or after the insurrectionary strikes of the majority populace - not before or as a catalyst to the latter. The slow development of the "Post," however, made it necessary for the military reformist to move first, or else Marcos would have obtained the precious time he needed to ease the tensions and return the nation to "normalcy" - a situation considered undesirable by the opposition. For once, a business-as-usual attitude prevailed, no matter how long it took Marcos' chances of victory increased. With time gained, he would successfully condition the majority populace to reluctant, powerless but, nonetheless, real acceptance of his government as the only de facto and therefore, de jure government around. The people would still perceive him as odious, repressive and oppressive; they would still look upon his regime as one that would eventually end; but, for now, they would learn to accept him as the omnipotent factor in the local political scene. Luckily for the nation, the Enrile-Ramos revolt happened when it did. It became the much-needed element of surprise that put Marcos off-balance. But luckily, too, for the military rebels, their faith in people power saved them from almost sure annihilation and hastened the total victory of the people over the Marcos dictatorship. The people's readiness to die saved so many armed rebels from death. And the armed rebels' readiness to fight to the death, enabled the strategic force of massive nonviolence to dismantle the institutionalized terrorism of the Marcos regime. The people's urban insurrection against tyranny - truly the people's and not merely that of an elite party or force - achieved the victory of democracy over dictatorship. 4 International Solidarity - Throughout the long years of the Marcos rule, there was no lack of militant exiles abroad - in the U.S. and Canada, Western Europe and elsewhere who, at first, functioned as a propaganda movement for the silenced majority at home. Later, quite a few of them became "guilty" of more than just talking but also active logistical and other kinds of support for the militant struggle in the home front. True enough, the latter kind of exiles were quite few but, still, significant enough to move Marcos to get Reaganism to persecute and prosecute them with extended FBI, CIA, and Grand Jury investigations. While it can be argued that the struggle to cut off all aid to Marcosism was more successful in the effort than the final results, it cannot be argued that the struggle to expose before the world the evils of the Marcos regime was not a hundred percent success - because it was, with all the destabilizing consequences for the transnationally propped-up dictatorship at home. In the last stages of the struggle, however, the PUI proponents looked to international solidarity work for something even more significant: prepare friendly and guilt-ridden governments to recognize a fait accompli in the Philippines, the fait accompli of a popular government that would be installed by a people's uprising following a clearly won election. One of the chief lessons drawn out by Apolinario Mabini in La Revolucion Filipina was the importance of Manila to the national struggle. Whoever won Manila as the source of legitimation and solid base of operations had already won the whole country. A government in Manila could easily be perceived as the national government. But in the case of prolonged struggle between two governments, which would the foreign governments recognize? Emilio Aguinaldo failed, by his vacillation, both to win Manila and to get international recognition for the First Philippine Republic. The consequence was national disaster. Camp Aguinaldo, however, in 1986, displayed the combination of people power and rebellious military might, with more than a little help from the foreign media that continuously brought this unique revolutionary drama to the living rooms of hundreds of millions around the world, and ensured that the new Philippines would not be isolated, but warmly accepted as a new model of political change in the community of nations. WHAT THE UPRISING ACHIEVED People power, defined as the self-awakening and self-mobilizing of the majority populace against a well-focused target, hit the "home run" on Strike Three, February 1986. Ninoy's faith in the Filipino was vindicated: The Filipino was really "worth dying for". While Ninoy was clearly the inspired and inspiring figure of the people’s process from inception to finish, it was the grace - filled ability of Cory Aquino to continue the fight of Ninoy" - her ability to call on the people to stand up with the dignity that she incarnated against the worst machinations of tyranny - her ability to gently handle and firmly resolve the myriad contradictions among her numerous followers - in short, her wisdom and sincerity that, in the end, crushed the wiliness and utter fraudulence of Mr. Marcos. The principal contradiction in Philippine society which the February insurrection resolved was simply that between the Marcosian dictatorial rule and the people's democratic aspirations: dictatorship vs. democracy, tyranny vs. freedom. Therefore, they will be disappointed who expected an automatic resolution of the numerous other contradictions existing in Philippine society today. The people's uprising merely achieved for the nation the democratic space so badly needed by every individual and social sector to struggle for their various politico-economic views and interests in relative peace - minus arbitrary detentions, the "salvagings", the tortures, the danger of exile, and - generally - minus the atmosphere of fear. The February Uprising achieved neither an independently developed capitalism nor an incipient socialism, neither the complete abolition of feudalism nor the complete banishment of imperialism. But something great and something truly historic was attained: the Filipino people through massive nonviolent actions crushed a modern home-grown and foreign-supported dictatorship. And that, indeed, from any angle or consideration, is no mean achievement. After the Uprising, therefore, we're back (or forward) to liberal democracy. Within this context, it is hoped, the struggle for independence and social justice can be hastened. After the political triumph of people power comes either the social revolution or regression into another form of plutocracy. Therefore, the No. 1 item in the democratic agenda is the institutionalization of people power through the massive build-up of autonomous people's organization - both at the movement level and in the area of grassroots political party-building. A people-oriented mass media can continue to be strengthened only alongside the existence of stronger people's organizations. It will certainly help the democratic cause a lot if, from the start, the new government is willing and able to co-opt into its ranks wise and dedicated leaders who have already been tested through the years in their sacrifices for the people's causes - leaders whose hearts and minds carry a corrective bias in favor of the majority who are poor. It will also help tremendously if the new constitution were to give us not only a bill of human rights but, above all, a new concept of property that is explicitly democratic in substance and intent and not only implicitly oligarchic by again silently following the old absolutist and exclusivistic Roman Law concept which has ruled our property structures for more than 400 years now. Without a new concept of property and human rights guarantees (the latter being a sure bill anyway), a new generation of Filipinos may yet be the first to reject the new Philippine model of people power that was predominantly nonviolent in style. When not attended to for long, the property question always finds a way of resolving itself through violence. Someone has time and again remarked that Marcos was not the devil incarnate, as many people were, justifiedly, often tempted to believe. Rather, Marcos was the Scourge of God on a people that misused their freedom, and allowed an ideology of greed to prevail across the land. But if Marcos was God's Scourge, then perhaps, Cory Aquino is God's gift to a repentant nation that finally stood up as a freedom-loving people against tyranny. In any case, it would be unjust to Cory if, after a recently concluded people's insurrection, we now lazily transmute people power into some kind of people's mendicancy by casting her into a deus ex machina - a messianic president whom we expect, vendo-machine-like, to accurately know and solve all the problems of society without efforts on our part to build strong social organizations, strong people's movements, and vibrant "people power" communities. The true Lakas ng Bayan must go on. The spirit of February '86 must continue. After our common triumph over tyranny, we may, as a people, now peacefully find solutions to the more urgent but age-old problems of our land: the problems of dependence, underdevelopment, poverty, and injustice. Ateneo de Manila University Gym April 6th 1986 |
The presentation by Mano Charlie of the stages of people power (Pinoy style, version 86) is lengthy but I can't say I wasn't forewarned. Indeed, the stages took a long while, but the entire process will take a whole lot longer. The last and most crucial phase - the institutionalization of people power - is one big bottleneck that requires cracking.
In sum (and still using my previous analogy), ito ang nagiging siste: darkness, injection, fertilization, jubilation, and abortion. Paktay agad. Na dapat ay: darkness, injection, fertilization, jubilation, elongation, duration, more jubilation, and finally emancipation. . . . Institutionalization would be more meaningful if the process is allowed to extend beyond political play (elongation) to address other pressing concerns like job creation, for one. Just a wild thought: kung magko-ConAss na rin lang, eh, why won't we just choose or reject our president as we buy or sell securities in the stock exchange? We can, say, transform Comelec into a Makati Exchange- like institution. Tutal, magko-computerize na rin lang tayo. Kung ayaw na natin sa ating pangulo, eh di sell tayo at buy naman tayo ng ibang pangulo. To ensure the continuity of programs, we can also vote for or against programs. . . . . again, sa stock exchange-like system. . . . . na hindi puwedeng baguhin ng nakaupong pangulo. Di ba, tunay na people power ito? Mabilis, payapa, at hindi magastos. At wala na tayong maririnig sa TV na ". . . di bale nang magdildil ng asin basta't may sarili tayong bahay. . ." |
butchcelestial wrote on Jun 23, '09
What say, if you want not to solve a problem . . . . form a committee . . . . |
I now wonder, what is worse -- thinking without doing or doing without thinking?
However, I don't wonder what the direction should be -- movement. It should be movement from one level to a higher desirable level. Not more of the same. It's worth repeating here one more time: NOT MORE OF THE SAME. There's a great chasm separating "motion" from "movement". Answering the phone is simply motion. I am not against the concept and use of People Power as it is normally understood as I'm not against the presence of a hammer in my house. I just don't want anybody to use the hammer as a tool to crack my head. Thinking is not, need not, should not, be uni-dimensional. This is the proposition of Edward de Bono when he wrote books on lateral thinking and the six thinking hats. White hat thinking presents cold facts and figures. Red hat deliberately reveals emotions as they impact decision-making. Yellow hat thinking proposes all positive sunshiny scenarios. Black hat brings forth every negative modes of failure possible. Green hat thinking is the Einstein, the Steven Spielberg, the Kurt Vonnegut, the Erma Bombeck who love to deviate from traditional thoughts by searching for eurekas in wild dreams and humorous episodes. Blue hat thinking coordinates the entire process of decision-making process, synthesizes and organizes all the inputs for final resolution. Everything is deliberate and, in a sense, involves some form of action, too. Experts now call the entire exercise as the "wholistic approach". I prefer the old Desiderata-sounding saying, "Respect the centavo". When Kuya Charlie presented the stages of People Power, I understand that it should be appreciated as a recognition that People Power does indeed undergo certain phases or steps. Since he further avers that People Power has yet to see full consummation, questions remain hanging in the air. That would mean an engagement in more deliberate thinking by using wholistic approaches so as to allow the evolution of methods and to avoid MORE OF THE SAME. A rule of thumb in the investment world is not to get bullied into purchasing something that "can't wait". There are phases and it's a mad, mad, Madoff world. |
Seriously, you are right again, Kuya James.
Ex-sems are indeed a dangerous breed and an endangered species. But our society needs this dangerous, endangered breed/species. Tulad ng alam nating lahat, at pinagmamalaki, maraming magagaling, tunay na magaling, mahuhusay, matatalinong mga lumabas sa seminario. Talagang "dangerous" kung baga, ang mga dating seminarista. Puede sila kumaliwa, kumanan, sumentro, at kaya nilang patunayan na kung ano man ang kanilang panig ito ay "tama". Nakakatakot nga... Talagang nakakatakot kung ang kaalaman, ang kagalingan ay hindi wasto ang pag-gamit nito. Nakakatakot nga kung ang kagalingan, ang karunungan ay ginagamit at gagamitin para sa pansariling kapakanan lamang; kung ito ay gagamitin para kasamaan; kung ito ay gagamitin at ginagamit hindi para sa kapakanan ng nakararami; kung ito ay hindi gagamitin at hindi ginagamit para sa pagpapalaya sa ating mga kapwa... Nakakatakot nga, Kuya James, dahil, sa dami ng magagaling sa ating hanay, hindi pa rin nasasakatuparan ang sa Hardin ng Eden ay inutos Niya: Magpakarami at humayo kayo, maghasik, magkalat, magsabog at mamahagi ng kabutihang nasa sa inyong kalooban at katauhan saan man kayo naroroon at mapaparoon... Di kaya napapanahon na, na dapat simulan na natin ang isang kongkretong pagkilos (para patunayan natin na minsan di tayo sang-ayon, at para mapatunayan nating mali, for once, ang palagay ni Kuya James na: "With thinkers like these, no further action or movement is possible." Anong "movement" ang dapat at puede nating ilunsad habang maaga pa? "CHARLES AVILA...ED DE LA TORRE...ET ALII for..............................................MOVEMENT" Ano sa palagay nyo, mga kakosa? Respectfully submitted. |
We were once the hope of the Fatherland. But then hope springs eternal for the young at heart and in mind. God helps those who help themselves (Aesop/Ben Franklin). In the Bible, God is the Helper of the helpless (Isaiah 25:4). I suppose Salvation and building the Kingdom of God is a partnership between God and Man.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment