Skip to main content

[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. 

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

What's the Use of Complaining About Celebrities and Political Dynasties Running for Politics While DEFENDING Presidential and Rejecting Parliamentary?

2025 is just around the corner for the midterm elections . People keep emphasizing the need to "defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines" for any amendments whatsoever. If that were true then we really need to remove Article XVII entirely if the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines was meant to be set in stone (read here ). Several camps whether it's PDP-Laban supporters, Liberal Party of the Philippines supporters, Uniteam supporters, etc.--I can expect social media mudslinging at its finest . I keep talking about the need to amend or even replace the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, they keep acting like it's the best constitution in the world, they cite Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (and others like the Monsods) to idolatrous levels , and when I talk about the parliamentary system--I can expect the whole, "Boohoo! It will never work because we already tried it under Marcos! The proof was Cesar Virata!" However, I wrote a refute on that ...
Read more

No to Cha Cha Because of EDSA?

Back when I was in elementary, we were told that EDSA 1986 was a good thing. I don't want to deny the well-documented human rights abuses of the first Marcos Administration . The repeated call to amend or reform the constitution has unfortunately been demonized as if it's always a bad thing. I guess that's a result of people with poor reading (and listening) comprehension for so long . If only people started to read in-between the details of Philippine history, if only people read through the book From Third World to First and not just quote the late Lee Kuan Yew about the Marcoses, they'll see that using EDSA to demonize charter change is really a bad move. Startling facts during the Marcos Years that may have been ignored by anti-charter change proponents What happened during EDSA was practically a revolutionary government . Above is a video of the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy. I confess that I do tend to admire Ninoy, especially with his Los Angeles sp...
Read more

The EDSA Revolution of 1986 Would've Never Happened if People were Stuck in Nostalgia

  It's something that I read crybaby comments online where people are saying, "Making EDSA a special working day is making us forget the glory of EDSA." Please, let me remind people that even 10 years later , neither the late Lee Kuan Yew's birthday nor his death anniversary has become a national holiday in Singapore! Singapore simply honored LKY's birthday by working on that day. I was laughing at the toxic Facebook page called We Are Millennials. What truly made me think that these people are stuck in nostalgia is that EDSA 1986 would never have been possible if the Filipinos were stuck in nostalgia . I remember talks about how the first Marcos administration was built on these two pillars. The first pillar was information control . The other pillar was toxic positivity. I remember back in 1995 when the social studies teacher talked about how he thought that Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was a "good president" due to the long holidays. However, the holidays ...
Read more

[OPINION] Why Do Some Filipino Boomers Insist that the Marcos Years Were Under a "Parliamentary System"

  This is a screenshot I got on Facebook. The Tweet is courtesy of Raissa Espinosa-Robles, who I hear is a marites or a gossiper. I'm not denying that there are some truths in what she said. It's true that the Marcos Years have their well-documented human rights abuses. However, Mrs. Robles still continues to insist in the myth of a parliamentary system under Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s regime. It's not just Mrs. Robles but also some Filipino boomers who keep saying, "Are you crazy? We had a parliamentary system under Marcos."  I could show them some evidence like Marcos' severe lack of legitimacy to disprove the parliamentary systme. I even wrote about the snap elections because Marcos was a president with powers (read here ). Under a parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. The president is just a door opener and credentials receiver! Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. and Salvador "Doy" Laurel both challenged the legitimacy of Marcos...
Read more

Why EDSA Should Be a Reason to Support, NOT Oppose Cha Cha

  I don't doubt that the EDSA Revolution left a legacy to the world. Yesterday, I wrote a piece where I asked if EDSA should be a reason to say no to cha-cha . It was a peaceful revolution though it's often argued that the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. didn't want to further ruin his already  tarnished image  in front of the world. How true was it that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., in his younger days, wanted to run over the protestors? However, consider EDSA wasn't really one of a kind. The Indian pacifist Mohandas Karamchand "Mahatma" Gandhi, and his  writings inspired the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy . also led a similar revolution against the  unjust  British occupation of India during that time. Gandhi may have been dead by the time Ninoy read about Gandhi. However, Gandhi's peaceful protests left a legacy that was probably not so well-known before. Today, the Indian economy has been doing better than the Philippines. I even consult...
Read more