Why the EDSA conundrum? Cory and revolution ‘photo-shopped’ into EDSA coup
Credit to Author: YEN MAKABENTA| Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:26:22 +0000
First word
THE Liberals and yellow cultists often accuse the Marcos camp and Duterte supporters of rewriting or revising history.
In the case of EDSA, the Aquino forces started revising the EDSA story while the event was still unfolding in the historic avenue. At the climax, they “photo-shopped” Cory Aquino into the event in order to promote a different scenario and resolution of the political situation.
Consequently, in the official EDSA commemoration every year, we always have a wrestling match between EDSA believers and EDSA skeptics about the events of Feb. 22-25, 1986, and their lasting meaning for the nation.
Some people, like the Aquino forces and the Liberals, who claim EDSA as part of their birthright, will always think of the event as a miracle and a revolution, a gift of providence to the Philippines.
Those like the original coup plotters who wanted only to topple Marcos from power, will reject the extravagant claims of a People Power revolution. They will highlight the facts and details of the five-day uprising, and will leave to the public and the media the task of comprehending their import.
Bizarre outcome
The argument becomes goofy the moment it tackles the bizarre outcome of the seemingly successful revolt:
First, the inexplicable anointment of Cory Aquino as Marcos’ successor—she who never set foot in EDSA during the tumultuous five days of the uprising;
Second, the proclamation by Cory of a revolutionary government, so she could govern by decree as both the executive and legislative power of the new government; and
Third, the reorganization of the Supreme Court and the appointment of a new chief justice by Aquino.
Aquino communicators undertook a herculean effort of painting Cory as a force for the institution of a genuine democracy. But this was contradicted by her very actions in office, as she rejected all unsolicited advice. They wound up writing hagiographies.
Immediately after her accession, Aquino issued Proclamation 3, a provisional constitution which established a revolutionary government. The edict promulgated the 1986 Freedom Constitution, which retained or superseded various provisions of the 1973 Constitution that was in force up to that point. This allowed her to wield both executive and legislative powers. Among her first acts was to unilaterally abolish the Batasang Pambansa (the unicameral legislature duly elected in 1984).
Photo-shopped revolutionary
Most Filipinos living at the time of EDSA are still young enough to remember vividly the events of 1986.
What we remember differs starkly from the official claims.
To many Filipinos, it was as if Cory Aquino had been photo-shopped into the picture of the EDSA revolt, in order to convey a different scene of struggle.
There is no photograph or video anywhere that shows President Cory setting foot on EDSA at the time of the uprising. In fact, she was holed up in a Catholic convent in Cebu at the time. Her security feared for her safety.
The disconnect between the coup leadership and Cory’s group always presented a source of tension and conflict in post-EDSA developments.
In retrospect, the countless coup attempts against the Cory government were entirely predictable.
Their lack of success is more surprising because Cory‘s shortcomings as a leader were epic.
She knew next to nothing about governing. When she brought about darkness 24/7 to the country, she was fittingly tagged the “Queen of Darkness.”
Bogus revolution
Who had the idea of calling the EDSA event a revolution?
This is comical because the revolutions in history have trouble holding on to the word.
In an insightful essay, Charles Krauthammer says the French revolution was the father of all revolutions; it redefined the word.
The American revolution is, in the estimate of American scholars, a pseudo-revolution, because it was utterly lacking in the messianic, bloody-minded impulses of the French revolutionary regime.
Irving Kristol wryly notes that the American revolution was notable chiefly for this: “It rearranged the constitutional furniture, its revolutionary leaders died in their own beds.”
The other revolutions of our time — Russian, Chinese, Cuban, Vietnamese — have been savage failures.
How does the People Power revolution fare when we stand it up side by side with all these revolutions of modern times?
This is too much for EDSA to bear.
People power
Associating EDSA with people power is more workable.
The term “people power” was first used by members of the 1960s “flower power” movement, as they protested against the Vietnam War.
Since EDSA, there have been many like-minded revolts in other parts of the world, that involved the massing of great numbers of people to protest against a reigning government.
In an analysis of the weakness of democracy, Walter Lippmann offered an insightful summary of people power:
“What then are the true boundaries of the people’s power? The answer cannot be simple. But for a rough beginning let us say that the people are able to give and withhold their consent to be governed — their consent to what the government asks of them, proposes to them, and has done in the conduct of their affairs. They can elect the government. They can remove it. They can approve or disapprove its performance. But they cannot administer the government. They cannot themselves perform. They cannot normally initiate and propose necessary legislation. A mass cannot govern.”
I think, this should end all talk of people power revolution.
It is unwieldy and indefensible.
yenmakabenta@yahoo.com
The post Why the EDSA conundrum? Cory and revolution ‘photo-shopped’ into EDSA coup appeared first on The Manila Times Online.