Category: ninoy

a ninoy aquino book

i’ve been writing a ninoy book for a year now.  working title: The life and the death of Ninoy Aquino / A timeline 1932 -1983.

i only meant to come up with a simpler shorter version of EDSA Uno (2013) upon the request of  high school teachers.  maybe four slim volumes, one per day, that students could pass around.  and a first volume, of course, to quickly introduce the main players—marcos  and imelda, ninoy and cory, enrile and ramos—setting the stage for february 1986 and People Power.

it was easy enough coming up with quick factual timelines of ferdinand’s and imelda’s lives, the milestones pre-EDSA being well-documented and pretty much public knowledge, never mind the marcos revisionism.  the opposite is true, however, of ninoy’s life.

except for the broad strokes—major milestones marking the road to martyrdom at age 50—much of ninoy’s narrative has yet to be told from beginning to end in one go, particularly where it clarifies his radical relations with the left that had marcos tagging him a communist sympathizer; where it delves into the pain of imprisonment and the military trial that convicted him to death; and where it tells of ninoy’s last three years, what he was up to in America, and why he decided to come home when he did.

Like Marcos, the 50-year-old Aquino was a complex, contradictory figure who was in flesh-and-blood quite different from the devotee of Gandhian non-violence into which some sectors of the Philippine opposition are now converting him for their own political ends. But of one thing there is no dispute: Aquino was a profoundly courageous man. It was this streak of stubborn courage that earned him a death sentence in 1977, after five years of imprisonment had failed to extract from him a pledge of allegiance to Marcos. And it was this courage, wedded to a driving ambition and a deep concern for the strategic interests of his class, that propelled Aquino toward his appointment with history that dog-day afternoon of 21 August. ~ Walden Bello (1984)

going on four decades later, ninoy is being dismissed as just another ambitious politician who came home from exile and died on the tarmac, and so he became a hero, because he died on the tarmac.  and what about daw his non-record as a senator—twice elected and not a single law attributed to him.  and who daw cares about EDSA now, now that the marcoses are back anyway, and the color yellow has lost its glow, no thanks to the color-blind who choose to see red instead.

meanwhile a young academic has played up ninoy’s role in the birthing of the CPP/NPA brand (as though ka dante and joma would not have met but for ninoy); he has also expressed serious doubt in ninoy’s denial that he was ever a communist because daw ninoy did not live to define his terms.

thing is, ninoy did, define his terms, in Testament from a Prison Cell (1984) and it’s surprising that the young scholar seemed to not know of this primary source.  well, maybe it’s cory’s fault.  post-EDSA, ninoy’s political views were never spoken about, much less discussed, or ever referred to for guidance.  i suppose because cory had her hands full fending off rightist pretenders to the throne; better to play it by ear than to invoke ninoy, because then they’d have pounced and screamed “communist!” too.

in fact ninoy was no communist, no anti-imperialist, for sure.  but he admitted to being a keen student of theoretical marxism, following every twist and turn of local communists, reading practically all the published works of local reds, and interviewing communist intellectuals for first-hand information every chance he got.  in fact, he was a christian social democrat who sought to “harmonize political freedom with social and economic equality, taking the best of the primary conflicting systems—communism and capitalism.” [Testament from a Prison Cell 30-31]

and so a book on ninoy muna, for the record.  nothing quick or sketchy, rather more detailed than usual, in a timeline format that is reader-friendly and easy to add to, delete from, or re-arrange for fine-tuning.

it starts with a quick run through grandfather servillano’s and father benigno’s stories, because patterns repeat.  whenever possible, i let ninoy tell his own story while accommodating too the voices of family and friends, critics and enemies, and local and global media through the years.

sources are cited religiously in tracking his climb and claim to national consciousness as well as his politics and worldview as it evolved from magsaysay to marcos times and from imprisonment in fort bonifacio to exile in america, until he decided it was time to go back home, face death in manila, than be run over, accidentally or not, by a boston taxicab.

happy ninoy aquino day!

upsilon upset

read Destroying a myth by domini torrevillas.  i’m not sure what myth is being destroyed.  perhaps the myth that upsilon is still the best?

I’m still savoring the taste and mirth of the recently concluded successful 100th year celebration of Upsilon Sigma Phi which was attended by more than half of the entire membership of the fraternity from all over the world.  But alas, even before the last lights were turned off or before the last hurrah was said,  a dark sinister  move was ensuing.  A private online chat of  two or three of the newly minted student Upsilonians, still not fully socialized to the fraternity ways and traditions, was maliciously hacked and thrown open for everybody to read in cyber space. Admittedly the contents of the chat are horrible, reprehensible and condemnable: misogynistic views, racial slurs, anti Muslim, anti gays and lesbians. Even the resident Upsilonians were shocked and angry that such kind of behavior or thinking exists in the fraternity.  They immediately condemned the abhorrent conversation and asked for disciplinary actions.

The Diliman head of Upsilon known as Illustrious Fellow, Girard Sirios, was understandably upset.  Considering that this chat was hacked and considering further that this is an era of fake news, he wanted to ferret out the truth himself. Has the conversation been enhanced or made to appear worse than what it was? For him every member is precious and he is not about to throw the student brods to the angry crowd crying for blood. If all were said and correctly quoted, they should be answerable  for their acts. But this would be glorifying the hacker who committed the criminal act and whose aim is to destroy or malign Upsilon, which the Illustrious Fellow vowed to protect.  On another thought,  can anyone be so angry at the whole world or is this a case of mental disorder?

medyo convoluted.  but let me pick it apart.  so.  is illustrious fellow girard sirios investigating it at all?  tatlo nga lang bang mga bagets ang involved?  incorrectly quoted ba sila o correctly, as in, walang labis walang kulang?  i hear the thread started in march and that periodically it would turn evil.  i hear also that some senior brods were part of the thread.  why did they allow it to go on?

Maria Jovita Zárate may part nga sa chat na may sumaling senior brod. “mga brod, kung may kailangan kayo nasa Quezon Hall lang ako…” most incriminating. identified na yata kung sino yun. official family of Pres Concepcion who is an upsilonian.

Stuart Santiago  they are complicit then.

they should all be expelled from the frat, at the very least.  they should all be expelled from UP, at the very best.

Carol P Araullo Simple lang naman. Identify the ones who posted, expel them from UP and if the Upsilon really wants to recover its credibility, expel them from the frat. Upsilon should make a public statement acknowledging the grievous infraction of every principle UP holds dear, (in fact, of everything a decent, sensible, respectful human being should uphold), apologize to the individuals, groups and sectors maligned and threatened, and GROVEL for understanding and forgiveness by their victims and the UP community at large.

yes, *GROVEL*

but but but.  the upsilon thinking, if we are to take it from torrevillas, is that if guilty, the culprits should indeed be “answerable,” EXCEPT THAT, that daw would be “glorifying the hacker who committed the criminal act and whose aim is to destroy or malign Upsilon, which the Illustrious Fellow vowed to protect.”

so: hacking is a crime, and that’s the only wrong that needs righting, the only sin that needs punishing?  but the original sin was that horrible online chat.  for all we know it was exposed, not by a rival frat hacker with intent to take down upsilon, but by a lonsi lurker with intent to rock the boat and rid the frat of these dregs.

besides, mr illustrious fellow, can protecting upsilon, and being complicit in that offensive drivel, be more correct and appropriate and honorable than standing up for the women, muslims, lgbtqs, lumad, and the memory of cory and ninoy that your boys felt free to demean insult malign just because they thought no one was listening except like-minded brods?  that’s the message upsilon is sending, guys, in case hindi niyo alam.

“On another thought,  can anyone be so angry at the whole world or is this a case of mental disorder?”

again i’m not sure.  who’s torrevillas referring to: the bad boys of upsilon or the hacker?  pero gusto ko yung “is this a case of mental disorder?”  umabot talaga tayo sa mental disorder as a defense?  parang puwede mag-plead ng insanity?  mygad.  why not.  yung tipong psychotic na split personality.  which might also explain why their values are a mess.

read men sta. ana’s Upsilon’s progressive legacy (or why Upsilon should not be associated with Marcos)

During the course of its centennial celebration, the fraternity, which takes pride in striving for leadership, has not given any public recognition to Marcos, the only Philippine president it can claim. Wenceslao Q. Vinzons, a fighter for independence, and a true war hero (unlike Marcos who had to burnish his reputation with fake medals), has become Upsilon’s model. The fraternity has likewise honored fellows — the living and the dead — for their significant contributions in different fields and disciplines. But Marcos is excluded. (Other Upsilonian politicians, even the good ones like Ninoy Aquino, have likewise been excluded from receiving recognition during the centennial celebration. Perhaps, this is the tradeoff to prevent Marcos from being recognized.)

imagine.  wenceslao vinzons as model.  ninoy aquino not good enough, guys?  or maybe too recent?  lol.  but seriously, what is so great about a fraternity that won’t can’t stand up for what is right because for the longest time, marcos and government connections came first.  where was brotherhood nang ikulong ni big brod marcos si kid brod ninoy nang mahigit pitong taon.  what does it say about the frat that to this day refuses to acknowledge ninoy aquino as hero.  marcos loyalists still rule?

Maria Jovita Zárate for teachers of the social sciences and cultural studies, that long thread spanning the months of March to November is a fecund material for some intense close reading, a discourse analysis that might just unpack the web of power relations—frat and university community, frat and special sectors of that community, senior brod and junior brod, brods within Quezon hall and outside of Quez Hall. As a teacher I would grab that opportunity as a teachable moment, and probably end with a walk-through in the academic oval where the “illustrious” history of the organization is represented in those kitschy tarps.

“illustrious” my foot.  upsilon has long lost its glow.  about time for a case study: of upsilon’s rise and fall.

ninoy aquino on my blog

on ninoy’s 86th birthday, sharing some posts over 10 years of blogging about a beloved hero.  those who continue to say that if he had not been assassinated he would have turned out to be just another traditional politician… they are wrong.  read nick joaquin’s The Aquinos of Tarlac: An Essay of History As Three Generations (1983).  ninoy was coming from somewhere else, and he had a vision for nation.  unfortunately, as it turned out, cory the cojuangco could only do so much (to put it kindly).

in defense of ninoy 
joma sison, plaza miranda, ninoy aquino
noise barrage 1978: first People Power show 
Carmen Guerrero Nakpil on the death of Ninoy Aquino
ninoy and the hacienda
Ninoy Aquino and the Rise of People Power
ninoy’s LP would have welcomed satur and liza 
beyond conspiracy: ninoy’s politics 
ninoy’s politics: “Three Generations” 
ninoy’s politics: “The Filipino As Dissident” 
ninoy’s politics: “A Christian Democratic Vision” 
ninoy’s politics: “Manifesto for a Free Society”
ninoy, 21 August 83  
ninoy’s killers (updated) 
wearenotninoy

in defense of ninoy

i wonder how leloy claudio feels to find that his essays painting ninoy aquino red were widely posted and shared on facebook by pro-marcos peeps on ninoy’s 35th death anniversary.  in his place i would be soooo mortified.  imagine.  wittingly or unwittingly, giving credence to ferdinand’s charge that ninoy was a communist-coddler.

read gmanetwork‘s Ninoy networked with everyone, Reds included and rappler‘s Ninoy linked up with the Left to aid presidential ambition, and weep.  claudio draws from nick joaquin’s The Aquinos of Tarlac (1983), his own interviews of communist personalities led by jose maria sison who confirm, of course, the links with ninoy (it is in their interest, after all, to do so), and on US embassy documents, most of the material finding their way to his book Taming People’s Power: The EDSA Revolutions and their Contradictions  (Ateneo de Manila Press 2013).

what claudio’s work lacks, and glaringly, scandalously, disgracefully so, is ninoy’s side, that is, ninoy’s own account of his relations with the left that, along with his critique of the communist ideology, is painstakingly spelled out in Testament from a Prison Cell (1984).  written 1975 to 1977 it was meant to be his closing statement before military commission no. 2 that sentenced him to death by musketry for subversion, collusion with communist dante buscayno in a 1957 murder, and illegal possession of firearms.  the closing statement that he was not allowed to read/from in open court.  the closing statement that cory published the year after ninoy’s assassination.

In this statement, Aquino explains the meaning of his obstinate struggle, his ideology and his proposed strategy for national survival.  He seeks to focus the attention of the Filipino people and the world on the wanton violations of human rights by the martial law administrators.  He identifies the victims of torture and their torturers, and reveals the torture methods used by Marcos’ military investigators. By citing case after appalling case, he describes how detainees have been framed with confessions brutally tortured out of them — and how others, especially Marcos’ uncompromising political enemies, are framed with similarly secured confessions.  It is Aquino’s most powerful indictment of the Marcos dictatorship which held him prisoner for more than seven years.  [Introductory Note]

This brief but moving testament of one man’s convictions–a man self-described as “a humanist, a democrat and a romantic”–was written in a prison cell <…>  What is presented here is Aquino’s elegant, reasoned defense of his political views (Christian Socialist), his outline for an ideal society (freedom of the individual is all-important), and a family history of patriotism (both his father and grandfather were “imprisoned for serving the Filipino people”). Bleeding through the text’s rationale and legalese is a current of unabashed passion from a man who believed in his cause.  [https://www. publishersweekly.com/978-0- 9621695-1-9]

can it be that claudio does not know about, and therefore has not read, the book?  or did he choose to ignore it because he would have had to rethink his sophomoric conclusions re ninoy’s alliance with the left?

NINOY AQUINO: I am not a communist.  I have never been one.  I have never joined any communist party.  I am not — and never have been — a member of any illegal and/or subversive organization, or even a front organization.

Yes, I have met with communist leaders and members of subversive organizations both as a newspaperman and as a public servant as far back as 1954.  In fact, the government awarded me the highest civilian award precisely for what my pacification parleys with rebels and subversives had achieved.

President Magsaysay made use of my services as a negotiator not only with the communist-led dissidents in Central Luzon but also with Muslim outlaw leaders.  Indeed, I consider my ability to communicate with the leaders of the various dissident movements as well as my understanding of their causes as one of my special qualifications for high office.

I have been a student of communism, especially the Philippine communist movement, for the last two decades.  I have written many papers, delivered many lectures on the Huks, who later became the HMBs and who, still later, became the CPP/NPAs, their aims, their inner dynamics, and motivations, both in the Philippines and abroad.

If I had planned to seek the Presidency in 1973,  it was because I sincerely believed I had the key to the possible final solution to the vexing dissident (communist) problem.

I was first exposed to communism as a young teenager shortly after the war, in 1945, when my hometown of Concepcion was literally occupied by the Hukbalahaps.  Our town mayor, an avowed Huk, was appointed by the dissident group.

In 1950, I was assigned by the Manila Times to cover the UN police action in Korea with special emphasis on the participation of the Philippine Expeditionary Force to Korea (PEFTOK).  I witnessed the brutal massacre of innocent civilians by fleeing communist forces.  Barely 18, I learned firsthand from North Korean survivors how the communists governed and regimented their people, how all freedoms were suppressed, especially the rights to peaceful assembly, religion and free speech.  Some of my most poignant early newspaper stories dwelt on the grimness of existence under communist totalitarian rule.  [pp 14-15]

… I have been a student of theoretical Marxism.  I have followed every twist and turn of our local communists.  I have read practically all the published works of our local Reds. Whenever possible, I interviewed communist intellectuals to get first-hand information.

This, however, does not mean that I have embraced communism, much less joined any communist or subversive organization. On the contrary, I would like to believe that I convinced some of the dissidents to return to the fold of government, as in the case of Mr. Taruc.

I have never advocated the overthrow of the government by force and violence, much less the establishment of a totalitarian regime. Or worse, placing this country under the domination and control of an alien power. [15-16]

… In my speeches, both in and out of Congress, I advocated a more humane approach to the dissident problem.  I denounced the use of para-military units, like the Monkees, who summarily executed barrio residents suspected of NPA links.  My exposes brought me  into a collision course with Mr. Marcos and his military subordinates.

In May 1966, barely five months into office, Mr. Marcos branded me a “Huk coddler and sympathizer” when I, as governor of Tarlac, denounced the massacre of farmers in Barrio Culatingan, Concepcion, Tarlac, by a group of Monkees led by a PC Ranger.  It is indeed an ironic twist that while I stand today charged with communist subversion, Mr. Marcos is adopting some of my recommendations in 1966: a liberal program of amnesty for returning dissidents, resettlement and a vigorous land reform program.

…Many of our countrymen have been conditioned to automatically believe that the dissidents, be they Huks, HMBs or CPP/NPAs, are not only communists or communist-led, but are evil personified.  I do not believe they are per se evil.  Assuming they are evil, they are a necessary evil.

Were it not for the Huks, President Magsaysay would never have pushed through Congress the landmark Rice Tenancy Act, which provided for tenants’ security of tenure and the itemization of the division of produce.  Known as the 70-30 Rice Law, that law for the first time gave the tenant the sole option to remain a tenant or become a lessee.  [26]

… And when Macapagal, a son of Central Luzon, was elected President, the country witnessed the enactment of the first comprehensive Land Reform Code in the Philippines, seminal though it was.  Congress passed it in 1963; but only after President Macapagal had called the reluctant Congress to several special sessions, wearying the landed interests in the Senate and the House until they gave in.  This is the Land Reform Code now being implemented by Mr. Marcos.

Indeed our wealthy Filipinos have yielded only under mounting social pressure — never of their own volition.  Without the Sakdals, without the Huks, without the NPAs, our toiling people would still be serfs in a kasama or land tenancy system as feudal as in any feudal state.

The dissidents, I concede, have committed many acts of murder and depredation.  Many have already paid for their crimes with their lives or with long prison terms.  But it must be equally admitted that because of their unremitting struggle, our society and our people’s social conditions have improved. [27]

… let us not forget: This Republic was founded by rebels and insurgents who were hunted down like mad dogs in their own time.  My own grandfather was one of those hunted men.  Some of our greatest heroes — Frs. Gomez, Burgos and Zamora; Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio — were all executed for treason.  Yesterday’s traitors are today’s heroes!

… If I have gone out of my way to meet with insurgents, if I have given them shelter and medical aid when they came to me, bleeding and near death, it was because I was convinced these dissidents were freedom-fighters first — in their own light — and if they were communists at all, they were communist last.

… They might have been dissidents.  But to me they were brother Filipinos who deserved the right to be heard.  My intention was to prevent them from becoming hopelessly desperate — and to give them a feeling of belonging.  By lending them a hand and a sympathetic ear, I wanted to hold out to them the hope for a better future. [28]

… I believe that freedom of the individual is all-important and ranks above everything else.  Every citizen must be given the equal opportunity to self-fulfillment, to better himself.  While it is true indeed that not all men are equally endowed, I believe that every man should be given the equal opportunity for advancement through free, universal and quality education.

Confidence between the majority and the minority, between the government and the governed, is indispensable to the vitality of a democracy.  There can be no confidence where established rights are destroyed by fiat.

… The supreme value of democracy is freedom, not property.  The democratic world will meet the communist challenge if it upholds and unites on the issue of freedom as the fundamental element of human survival.

… A free media is indispensable if a democracy is to function efficiently, if it is to be real.  The people, who are sovereign, must be adequately informed all the time.  A reasonable case, reasonably presented, will eventually win the hearts of the people.  But the people must know the facts if one expects them to decide correctly.

I  believe democracy is not just majority rule, but informed majority rule, and with due respect for the rights of minorities.  It means that while the preference of the majority must prevail, there should be full opportunity for all points of view to find expression.  It means toleration for opposition opinions.  Where you find suppression of minority opinion, there is no real democracy [30-31]

The basic flaw of capitalism is its primary concern for political liberty; it cares comparatively less about social and economic equality.  Communism, on the other hand, aims at social and economic equality but ruthlessly opposes and destroys political liberty.

I believe in a Christian Democratic Socialist ideology that will harmonize political freedom with social and economic equality, taking and merging the best of the primary conflicting systems — communism and capitalism.

… I believe in evolutionary reform and I regard all human life as equally priceless, regardless of circumstances.  I hold individual freedom most sacred, because it is God’s gift.  I cannot accept any form of dictatorship, whether of the left, the right or the center. [31]

… I adhere to an evolutionary program.  This must always stand the test of national approval as expressed through periodic elections, plebiscites, referenda, which will ensure that the program is implemented — and will continue to be implemented — only with the consent of the majority freely expressed. [32]

a primary source such as Testament from a Prison Cell is a must-read, especially for an academic, a historian yet! like claudio, who dares write on, and devalue, the legacy of ninoy aquino.

bad enough that the marcoses continue to revise EDSA history.  worse, that claudio, wittingly or unwittingly, has given the marcos camp ammunition to shoot down ninoy yet again.  claudio should be apologizing to nation for irresponsible “scholarship.”  the same goes for his editorial team and academic consultants.

*

read gary devilles’ review of claudio’s book here  https://muse.jhu.edu/article/ 620451/summary

more from ninoy’s Testament:
The Filipino as Dissident  
A Christian Democratic Vision  
Manifesto for a Free Society