💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › malaginoo-blossoms-of-an-aborted-revolution.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:29:38. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Blossoms of an Aborted Revolution
Author: Malaginoo
Date: February 2020
Language: en
Topics: history, Philippines, the State, revolution, Bandilang Itim
Source: http://libcom.org/blog/blossoms-aborted-revolution-25022020
Notes: An anarchist reflection of the 1987 People Power Revolution which deposed the dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

Malaginoo

Blossoms of an Aborted Revolution

Let us not mince our words. The EDSA Revolution has failed.

If you look around at the state of society in our archipelago, you can

see clear parallels to the horrors of 1972. A dictator, with the

military and police in the palm of his hand, supported by sycophants

blindly loyal to his person and by local and foreign capitalist

interests, brutally murdering and terrorizing the poor, and the

dissidents who fight for them.

It’s as if we never woke up from the nightmare.

Supporters of the revolution have praised it for being bloodless, and

for setting an example of a peaceful transition to democracy. It is said

to have inspired the revolts in Eastern Europe, the democratization of

South Korea, and even the recent Arab Spring of 2011. What would have

been the beginning of a bloody civil war, instead brought the all

sectors of society to rally in the capital and force a dictator to

resign. If there is any validation of the strength of civil

disobedience, it is on Epifanio de los Santos Avenue from February 24 to

25, 1986.

However, detractors vilify its failure of replacing the prevailing

order, instead replacing old oligarchs with new ones. For all the irony

in their words, the right do have a point: EDSA 1 ended up futile in the

end. That mass movement could have sown the seeds of a social

revolution, towards the weakening and dismantling of Capital and State

that has brutalized them for so long. It instead brought about the

return of a cacique democracy: the perfect breeding ground for

cultivating the return of a tyrant.

We cannot pinpoint where the Revolution was defeated by the interests of

the ruling class. However, the events unfolding after February were

already premonitions of its failure.

Unsuccessful attempts of the Cory Aquino administration at agrarian

reform, already insufficient to address the feudalistic control of

landowning families, caused peasants’ organizations to strike in the

nation’s capital. Their concerns for recognition in land ownership were

ignored by the government they supported to supplant the indulgently

capitalist Marcos regime. They also criticized the background of the

President, who came from the Cojuangco family, wealthy hacienderos who

came to control the San Miguel Corporation. This all came to a head in

Mendiola Bridge, on January 1987, when 13 were shot and killed and 51

demonstrators were injured by security forces.

The Reform the Armed Forces Movement, led by Col. Gregorio Honasan, who

joined forces with pro-Marcos soldiers, couped the government multiple

times from 1987–1990. The gravest one was on August 28, 1987, when

forces launched a coordinated attack on multiple military bases and even

Malacañang itself, which claimed 53 lives. There were also around 200

military and civilian injuries, including the future President, Benigno

Aquino III. Ka Louie Beltran reported that the President “hid under her

bed” during the revolt, prompting a libel charge and arguably, the first

instance of the repression of press freedom since the Marcos era.

These incidents concerned the military officials from within the

government. As a result, reformist and radical voices, once resounding

in government, were silenced and pushed away. There was also tightened

control over agitation by workers’ organizations and human rights

groups. These events all led to the rise of Fidel Ramos, from a coup’s

co-conspirator, to the right-hand man of the President. The rightist

forces prevailed in the administration.

The government also authorized the establishment of paramilitary groups,

ostensibly to counter the insurgency of the CPP-NPA-NDF. This, however,

became pretense for politicians and military officers to create private

armies at their own disposal, terrorizing political opponents and

dissidents. To this day, we still deal with the legacy of these

quasi-military forces, who offer no loyalty but to their financiers and

patrons.

These incidents, along with neoliberal reforms and corruption by the

President’s own family, started to convince dissidents that we are still

at status quo. First, of course, were the Marcos loyalists and Aquino

critics that were itching for an electoral win. However, as the leftists

woke up from their political accommodation—perhaps after shots were

fired in Mendiola—it soon became apparent that EDSA didn’t topple a

system, it merely changed the king (or rather queen), on the throne.

This should be considered a missed opportunity, and possibly even a

shame. Here was a chance to destroy a broken society fueled by

capitalism and oppression of minorities, women, and the poor. Here was a

peaceful movement that brought people of all social strata to commit

mass civil disobedience. Here was a moment to propagate the ideas of

egalitarianism and bayanihan, that could have led towards the

dismantling of hierarchical and violent social structures that plague us

today. Yet, in the end, the bourgeoisie, the compradors, and the

imperialists prevailed.

However, there are also lessons that we can learn from this stillborn

revolution as citizens of this archipelago. We cannot rely on

electoralism to achieve the necessary fundamental changes in society.

The State that is so intimately tied to Capital is not the vehicle for

achieving lasting freedom and equality. The ruling classes that tailored

the government for their own benefit cannot be the true representatives

of the people, and their struggle. We have seen it before and after the

EDSA Revolution. Marcos used the instruments of State to funnel wealth

into his own pocket and the corporations of his cronies and financial

backers. The same can be said for all presidents after, from Cory to

Erap to Gloria and Duterte. Cory, for her part, blocked the passage of

laws that would have brought needed reforms to the millions of Filipinos

laboring away in the agricultural sector. It is the epitome of the

ruling class protecting their own interests at the cost of the masses.

Simply, what we should take from EDSA is that regime change and

replacing our presidents cannot bring about liberation. Liberation is

the task of the oppressed and dispossessed alone.

Now, we are seeing history repeat itself in the form of Rodrigo Duterte.

The ideals that made EDSA the foundation of the Fifth Republic have

crumbled under the weight of an authoritarian government filled with

lapdogs, lackeys, and opportunists. As we commemorate the end of an era,

let us remind ourselves that we are entering another, perhaps as vile

and oppressive. If we are called by our own consciences to rise up

again; for the poor shot dead in the streets, for those arrest and

tortured for speaking the truth; for the laborers organizing to receive

the true value of their labor against the complex of Capital and State;

let us lay the groundwork for an outright revolution, towards the total

liberation of all people, and the end of all masters on this

archipelago. Even an aborted revolution can bring the blossoms of

freedom. A reminder of the failures past can be a guide for the success

and victory of tomorrow.