HOTSPOT
Tonyo Cruz
The title of this piece is the text of a t-shirt we wore in the months leading to the second People Power uprising of 2001.
Released by the September 21 Movement led by Fr. Joe Dizon, the t-shirt reminded the public then about the power of people’s collective action in doing what the state cannot or refuses to do: hold accountable and remove a president found guilty of malfeasance, plunder, and brutality.
A president obviously did not heed the message. Filipinos though took it to heart and for the second time exercised their direct sovereign power to remove a president on Jan. 20, 2001. Days later, movement leaders charged the ousted president with plunder.
As we mark this week the people’s 1986 victory over the Marcos dictatorship, the phrase “we toppled a tyrant and we can do it again” acquires extra significance as the tyrant’s son appears to lead the race for president.
Leni Robredo cannot do it alone. In order to beat Marcos Jr., she needs to summon the unity of millions of Filipinos. As an independent, she needs to challenge —barangay by barangay, town by town, city by city, province by province — the traditional political machinery directed against her. As a candidate vowing change, she needs to offer a program of government response to the people’s demands for democratic change.
History offers Robredo and her supporters valuable lessons on how to accomplish this. From forging alliances and coalitions, to building solid organizations at the grassroots. From directly engaging and exposing the opponent, to harnessing and mobilizing the public to do heroic things. The national experiences that led to 1986 and 2001, if devoid of traditional political myth-making, could provide her an arsenal of tools useful in her quest for the presidency.
But while there are similarities, there are differences in today’s situation. For instance, the outgoing president pretends not to support any presidential candidate. Yet the power of the incumbent is strongly felt as favoring Marcos and the president’s own daughter. What kind of surprises they have in store for Robredo and her supporters, we do not know. What is certain is that the power of the incumbent is awesome and far-reaching, and could put up unnecessary stumbling blocks on the opposition’s path.
Marcos Jr. stands for “more of the same” and for misinformed nostalgia about his father’s reign. That provides Robredo the opportunity to fully claim to be the candidate of democratic change. But in order to wrest the attention of the public away from Marcos Jr., she has to fight for them and guarantee reforms beneficial to the workers, farmers and the poor in both rural and urban areas. Yes, Robredo’s campaign must be unforgiving about the Marcos record and historical revisionism, but it must also be inclusive and welcoming to the public, especially those who may consider voting for Marcos.
Robredo must also confront the valid grievances hurled at the post-Marcos administrations led by liberal-democratic administrations. Yes, we must say “never again” to dictatorship that lasted 14 years until 1986. But the post-Marcos period is now 36 years long. These administrations, from Corazon Aquino to Rodrigo Duterte have on their own caused deep wounds.
If there is anyone who should be able to make sense of the last 50 years from 1972 to 2022, it should be Robredo. Why? Robredo has shown the capacity for empathy and self-awareness.
With the help of her allies and coalition partners, Robredo should be able to look back at the past 50 years from the point of view of ordinary Filipinos and see what needs to be said and done. If she manages to do this soon, she can find the most powerful narrative, program, organizational machinery, and manpower capable of snatching the lead, and emerge as a great president.
As the nation marks People Power of 1986 amid a hyperpartisan election campaign, perhaps we could unite around our heroes from 1896 to 1986. They did not join foreign and domestic foes in blaming Filipinos for their lot. They rejected the charges of Filipino indolence, ignorance and apathy. They inspired Filipinos to stand up for country and for themselves, extolled their virtues, and gave them high aspirations. They — we — are worth fighting and dying for, and could make history.
Tonyo Cruz
The title of this piece is the text of a t-shirt we wore in the months leading to the second People Power uprising of 2001.
Released by the September 21 Movement led by Fr. Joe Dizon, the t-shirt reminded the public then about the power of people’s collective action in doing what the state cannot or refuses to do: hold accountable and remove a president found guilty of malfeasance, plunder, and brutality.
A president obviously did not heed the message. Filipinos though took it to heart and for the second time exercised their direct sovereign power to remove a president on Jan. 20, 2001. Days later, movement leaders charged the ousted president with plunder.
As we mark this week the people’s 1986 victory over the Marcos dictatorship, the phrase “we toppled a tyrant and we can do it again” acquires extra significance as the tyrant’s son appears to lead the race for president.
Leni Robredo cannot do it alone. In order to beat Marcos Jr., she needs to summon the unity of millions of Filipinos. As an independent, she needs to challenge —barangay by barangay, town by town, city by city, province by province — the traditional political machinery directed against her. As a candidate vowing change, she needs to offer a program of government response to the people’s demands for democratic change.
History offers Robredo and her supporters valuable lessons on how to accomplish this. From forging alliances and coalitions, to building solid organizations at the grassroots. From directly engaging and exposing the opponent, to harnessing and mobilizing the public to do heroic things. The national experiences that led to 1986 and 2001, if devoid of traditional political myth-making, could provide her an arsenal of tools useful in her quest for the presidency.
But while there are similarities, there are differences in today’s situation. For instance, the outgoing president pretends not to support any presidential candidate. Yet the power of the incumbent is strongly felt as favoring Marcos and the president’s own daughter. What kind of surprises they have in store for Robredo and her supporters, we do not know. What is certain is that the power of the incumbent is awesome and far-reaching, and could put up unnecessary stumbling blocks on the opposition’s path.
Marcos Jr. stands for “more of the same” and for misinformed nostalgia about his father’s reign. That provides Robredo the opportunity to fully claim to be the candidate of democratic change. But in order to wrest the attention of the public away from Marcos Jr., she has to fight for them and guarantee reforms beneficial to the workers, farmers and the poor in both rural and urban areas. Yes, Robredo’s campaign must be unforgiving about the Marcos record and historical revisionism, but it must also be inclusive and welcoming to the public, especially those who may consider voting for Marcos.
Robredo must also confront the valid grievances hurled at the post-Marcos administrations led by liberal-democratic administrations. Yes, we must say “never again” to dictatorship that lasted 14 years until 1986. But the post-Marcos period is now 36 years long. These administrations, from Corazon Aquino to Rodrigo Duterte have on their own caused deep wounds.
If there is anyone who should be able to make sense of the last 50 years from 1972 to 2022, it should be Robredo. Why? Robredo has shown the capacity for empathy and self-awareness.
With the help of her allies and coalition partners, Robredo should be able to look back at the past 50 years from the point of view of ordinary Filipinos and see what needs to be said and done. If she manages to do this soon, she can find the most powerful narrative, program, organizational machinery, and manpower capable of snatching the lead, and emerge as a great president.
As the nation marks People Power of 1986 amid a hyperpartisan election campaign, perhaps we could unite around our heroes from 1896 to 1986. They did not join foreign and domestic foes in blaming Filipinos for their lot. They rejected the charges of Filipino indolence, ignorance and apathy. They inspired Filipinos to stand up for country and for themselves, extolled their virtues, and gave them high aspirations. They — we — are worth fighting and dying for, and could make history.