MANY STORIES RESURFACE as the 29th anniversary of the EDSA People Power draws near. Some say that it was Benigno Aquino Jr’s assassination that sparked the beginning of the end Marcos’ rule. History, however, tells quite a different story.

EDSA People Power was a product not of a single stateman’s martyrdom, but of the collective struggle of Filipinos from different walks of life who risked their lives to end the dark years brought about by the dictatorial rule. From the dawn of the martial law years to the victory of the momentuous uprising, it is undeniable that workers, peasants, professionals, church people and even some among the elite – many of whom came from the ranks of youth and students – were at the forefront of protests and demonstrations that confronted the Marcos dictatorship.

1960’s

After a long hiatus in revolutionary activity and the grave crisis that afflicted the country during the late 50’s, the youth broke the “post-liberation” peace and held a 5,000-strong demonstration to protest the Anti-Subversion Law. Many progressive organizations emerged like the Student Cultural Association of UP, Kabataang Makabayan and Samahang Demokratiko ng Kabataan, among others. Like mushroom, many were organized across the country. In many schools, instances of tuition and other fee increases served to ignite the fury of the youth. Since they were conscious that their sectoral concerns are but a “microcosm” of national and even international problems, they actively engaged in multi-sectoral campaigns and struggles – the most phenomenal of which were the anti-Vietnam War protests in the late 1960’s. Students went out of their way to immerse in communities and factories to form people’s organizations and trade unions, and to solidify the unity of the people. Some students even forsake their schooling to work fulltime in mass work and to struggle for social transformation.

1970’s

The spark that spread like wild prairie fire in the 1960’s was what prepared for one of the most fateful events in the country’s history. Launching their own “state of the nation address” to protest Marcos’ own speech the following year, people composed mainly of students protested along Mendiola in January 26, 1970. They were violently dispersed and several demonstrators were killed by constabulary forces. Instead of pouring cold water to the burning agitation of the people, the brutality only ignited a wave of protests, and demonstrations were launched across the country, with those held in Manila reaching 10,000-strong each. This lasted for three months, and became known in history as the First Quarter Storm of 1970.

By 1971, Pres. Marcos suspended the writ of habeas corpus,

immediately after the Plaza Miranda bombing, an incident which was proven to be an orchestration by the Marcos clique itself. But this did not deter activists from further exposing and isolating the regime.

By 1972, martial law was declared.

Working in different conditions where even the assembly of at least three people can cause them to be arrested, activism transformed from an aboveground to an underground movement. This movement clandestinely organized groups and organizations that used traditional activities to continue doing propaganda work among the people. Hence, after several years of sowing the seeds of much larger protests, another series of

protests broke out by the late 1970’s with the La Tondeña strike and the anti-Interim Batasan Pambansa “noise barrage” serving as most noteworthy examples.

1980’s

In the early 1980’s during a time of severe economic and political crises, protests and demonstrations became bigger, more frequent and diverse. The Marcos regime became increasingly exposed and isolated from the whole people, and this encouraged even the anti-Marcos elites who openly criticized the government and joined

the bandwagon. Among them was Benigno Aquino Jr., who was eventually martyred in 1983. Marcos’ desperation was the one responsible for Aquino’s assassination.

What it planned as an attempt to quell dissent only became as a further stimulus for more militant actions on the part of the people. Finally, when Marcos manipulated the 1986 “snap elections,” the people decided that enough is enough.

From February 22 to 25, 1986, the Filipinos massed up in what came to be called as the EDSA People Power uprising. They reached close to two million in strength, not counting those in many other cities and town centers. They stayed in the streets until the abhorred president was ousted.

The victory of the unprecedented EDSA People Power uprising was not only a result of a single assassination. It was a result of the sacrifices of thousands of workers, peasants, professionals, church people and even some among the elite – many of whom came from the ranks of youth and students.

During the Marcosian regime, our ancestors gradually realized that sovereign power lies on their hands. They also learned that they can only wield this power by means of collective action. As we commemorate the EDSA People Power, let us not forget the lives and the stories that paved the way for an uprising that now inspires us. And with this inspiration, let us, like the generations before us, wield the power of the people to cause much-awaited changes in society. [P]TH

E PE

OPLE

’S P

OWER

:ED

SA a

nd th

e en

durin

g le

sson

from

the

past

Framing of the DebateDebates in contemporary political science usually pit the idea of popular sovereignty against state power. For some, the state is established as an expression of popluar sovereignty. Hence, individual citizens and groups need to surrender some of their rights to respect and obey the power of the state as it fulfills its purpose of safeguarding national security and social order. For them, it is better to live in a state with our rights curtailed than to weaken that state and live in perpetual chaos. They see those who agitate to question and oust governments as destabilizers, as anarchists. Meanwhile, others point out that state power is limited by the very sovereignty and rights of the people that it is supposed to promote and protect. Hence, for them, it is only right for the people to rebel against a state that they perceive as abuser of human rights and violator of the people’s sovereignty. They see those who defend what they would consider as a repressive state as tyrants, as authoritarians. This is how contemporary political debate is framed, and it seems that the debate won’t end under the current state of affairs. However – “Im Anfang war die Tat! [In the beginning was the deed!] And human action had solved the difficulty long before human ingenuity invented it.”1 Twenty-nine years ago, when the dictator Ferdinand Marcos was ousted in the historic mass demonstration of EDSA, people power prevailed– or did it?Winning the DebateEDSA succeeded in ousting Marcos, yes. But it did not overthrow a state. Ousting a ruler in an oppressive state is like when you fix a flat tire by changing the exterior even when the problem is with the interior. Some say that there would be no EDSA if it weren’t for Juan Ponce Enrile’s and Fidel Ramos’ attempted coup d’etat that weakened the Marcos’ police-military bureaucracy. Others say that it was the influential role of the church who called on the clergy, religious and the laity to swell the streets that led to Marcos’ demise. Still others say that it was the US’ decision to withdraw its support from the dictator that finally ended up his office.Cory Aquino, the “martyr’s wife,” the “icon of democracy,” was installed as the country’s president upon Marcos’ exit. There was no constitutional succession, there was no election that appointed her – it was mere public opinion, and, well, the conjunction of interests among the anti-Marcos elites.Hence, some frown at EDSA and say that it was itself a ploy of the elite and their foreign masters, a mechanism for one clique to replace another. Seen from this perspective, it would seem that EDSA is not the triumph but the cooptation of people power.Ironically, this is the same argument that the current BS Aquino administration uses today. The family that benefitted from the demonstration of popular sovereignty during the First EDSA claims that only by maintaining the status quo would EDSA be best commemorated. Understanding the Debate ParametersThe campaign for the removal of BS Aquino from office calibrated during the outpouring of widescale contempt to his lack of accountability for the botched Mamasapano operation, which resulted in the death of more than 60 Filipinos. His allies, however, claim that his resignation is tantamount to wavering from his daang matuwid. They say that the progress that BS Aquino has staunchly promoted would be obliterated when incompetent and corrupt leaders replace him. They warn us that attempts to force the resignation of BS Aquino are mere opportunistic plots by usurpers of power who use EDSA to further their selfish interests.The warning is not without basis. If constitutional succession is to be followed, Vice President Jejomar Binay, who now experiences allegations of many cases of graft and corruption, would replace BS Aquino. It would seem not worthwhile to oust a president to be replaced by another who is no different from him. Meanwhile, there are rumors of a coup d’etat plot that if realized and successful might establish a military junta, something that stands in opposition to popular sovereignty. Some politicians who back calls for a “national transition council,” on the other hand, insinuates going to EDSA to remove BS Aquino and grab power for themselvesHow are we to resolve this contradiction? EDSA has always been a symbol of the triumph for popular sovereignty, but it now appears to be a device for state power to maintain the status quo. Those who wish to maintain state power, to maintain the status quo, fan the popular desire to go

to EDSA and oust the regime in power so that they can rule in its stead. Meanwhile, the defenders of the same status quo warn just against that! As if caring for popular sovereignty, BS Aquino’s allies advise that the best way to uphold the legacy of EDSA is to look beyond EDSA and not to go to EDSA at all.Aha! Eureka!The False Dillema RevealedThe problem has just presented its own solution. Twenty-nine years ago, popular sovereignty has overthrown a dictator, and Cory Aquino was installed as the new president. Thirteen years ago, we have ousted a plunderer, and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo sworn in as president following the principle of constitutional succession. Two EDSAs have taught us that popular sovereignty finds ways to assert itself if state power represses it – and it can surely assert itself again. But now that another EDSA is brewing, concerns about replacement have been greater than ever. Current debate is framed by opposing state power with popular sovereignty, by letting us choose between the doom of social chaos and the perpetuation of social injustice, between ousting a hated ruler and replacing him with something that is no less evil. It presents us with a false dillema. The solution, therefore, is to throw this false problem altogether.We cannot look beyond EDSA if we do not go to EDSA in the first place, for looking beyond EDSA is not to tremble at the possibilities that lie ahead but to learn to do more than just going to EDSA. And if it means not merely replacing a tyrant with another one; if it means not opposing popular sovereignty with state power but establishing a new state power that serve the interest of popular sovereignty; then that let it be done. Two EDSA’s have shown us that popular sovereignty can be coopted by those who wish to maintain the status quo, the current state power. Another EDSA will show us that the merging interest of state power and popular sovereignty may not mean cooptation at all. That would happen if we do not just concern ourselves with replacement, but with total social renewal. Let that be the lesson of the third EDSA.In the end shall be the deed; and human action shall solve the difficulty that human ingenuity has long invented. [P]- - - -1 - Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific quoting Goethe’s Faust

photo by Joey D. Vera

People Power was a product not of a single stateman’s

martyrdom, but of the collective struggle of Filipinos

from different walks of life who risked their lives to end the dark years brought about

by the dictatorial rule.

LOOKING BEYOND EDSA

SPECIAL ISSUE | February 25, 2015

WO

RD

S |

KEZ

IA G

RA

CE

JUN

GC

O L

AYO

UT

| PA

UL

CA

RSO

N

WORDS | JOHN MOSES CHUA LAYOUT | PAUL CARSON