[OPINION] Why I Believe EDSA Revolution Succeeded and Why Tiananmen Square Protests Failed

Kuwento ni Kapitan Kokak

Being a Chinese Filipino can be a complicated thing. It took me years to figure out my place in the Philippines. It wasn't until I was in my fourth year high school (in 2001-2002) that the Filipino teacher spoke about Jose Rizal being Chinese by blood. The Filipino teacher asked if one had to be born ethnically Filipino (though it's best to view Filipino as a race, and most Filipinos are of Malay-Indo descent) to be a true Filipino patriot. The answer was no, where she cited several Filipinos of Chinese descent. However, seeing Communist China progress over the Philippines, tends to be my favorite justification whenever I become unreasonable. I even blamed democracy (rather than its misuse, or a wrong notion of it) for the ills the Philippines suffered. An irony is that Communist China should become more powerful than the Philippines.

It's easy to brag about the EDSA 1986 Revolution and how it influenced the world. However, take note that the EDSA Revolution 1986 isn't anything unique, as Mohandas Karamchand "Mahatma" Gandhi led a peaceful protest during the British Occupation of India. I'm not going to diminish its significance. It was good to transition back from fascism to democracy. Thankfully, the late Jose Maria Sison's passport was canceled while he was in the Netherlands. Sison could've probably set up his own version of the Khmer Rouge, if he ever took over the Philippines. Why I use the Khmer Rouge as an example is because the late Saloth Sar (Pol Pot) barely ruled for a decade (just four years) but caused more deaths than the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. ever did. I doubt Sison had the brain power of either Ho Chi Minh (real name is Nguyen Sinh Cung) or Mao Zedong to die with their parties still ruling the country.

However, there are stark differences between the Marcos Regime and Communist China. The Marcos Regime was characterized as an era of massive debt and inflation. The Marcos Years as the Fool's Golden Years of the Philippines, were ruled by rampant protectionism. In turn, the Philippines was already bankrupt. Per Se from the University of the Philippines (UP) revealed that the Marcos Years followed the Latin American debt-driven policies. The regime can be likened to a person who lives a luxurious life under debt. Meanwhile, Communist China under Deng Xiaoping's rule (though the guy was also a dictator, by default) had created Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Deng opened Communist China for business. 

As I read the book From Third World to First, I remember what the late Lee Kuan Yew said about Marcos. Marcos' economy was literally bankrupt. LKY even called Cesar Virata (who was a prime minister in a presidential government) a nonstarter. As I read through the book, it was interesting to see the stark contrast between the Philippines under Marcos and China under Deng. The Chinese military was already fully equipped. It's possible that the military wasn't even paid properly under Marcos' fascist regime. If Marcos wasn't paying them properly, then I don't think the military would even be willing to suppress the protesters. However, China's military under Deng had a significant improvement compared to Mao's time. I bet that Col. Conrado Dumlao Yap (by the way, he's a Chinese Filipino, not a Mainland China citizen) and his troops were only able to succeed because China's military was already weakened by Mao's mismanagement.

I could also credit the Chinese students who protested, rushed in unprepared. The EDSA Revolution of 1986 succeeded because the military defected from Marcos. I doubt Marcos was paying them much or even giving them enough benefits. It's not easy to be in the military. You might compare that to an underpaid security guard, leaving their agency for not paying them properly or providing him/her proper benefits. The Chinese students demanded to be heard. However, I can assume that the Chinese students ignored that the military was on the side of the CCP. Marcos lost the support of his military. The CCP had the full support of its military. With the late Fidel V. Ramos and still-alive Juan Ponce Enrile having had some significant control--it's safe to ask what could the late Fabian Ver do at that time? Ver may have lost control of significant parts of the military, along with his trusted loyalists. 

It might be important to note that Marcos, despite being a tyrant, may have ordered, "Not to shoot". The Kahimyang Project suggests that Marcos ordered "not to shoot", which might be impossible. Pretty much, Marcos lacked the ruthlessness of the CCP or even Pol Pot. Would've Marcos followed Pol Pot's ruthlessness--he may not even be able to sit for 20 years in total! Marcos may have also lacked Mao's charisma or deceptiveness. Mao was able to rule for 27 years as a tyrant, until his death. Mao still had a good amount of support, probably being careful. Plus, China was already too hungry to even dare to overthrow Mao. Leaving China for other parts of the world was the only option. Later on, several Chinese became different nationalities such as the Chinese Filipino. It seems none of the descendants of overseas Chinese would ever desire to live in China either!

These are two different situations. The Tiananmen Square Massacre victims shouldn't be forgotten. The incident should also be a warning that it's not the Chinese people that's the enemy, but the CCP! It's possible to love China but not the CCP. I love China, but I don't support the CCP. However, with the CCP possibly weakening, it might be overthrown by the Chinese people, if ever.