Colleague John Nery asks, Is Ninoy, today, even relevant? Time, has, indeed dulled what for some was a defining point in our nation's life. Juan Mercado delves into this, and ponders the remaining mysteries, chief of which remains: who ordered Ninoy killed?
Ninoy Aquino's coming home to die was a fork in the road, for those who'd opposed Ferdinand Marcos thus far. Whether of a moderate or radical persuasion, up to that point they were a minority. Ninoy's death began the transformation, in earnest, of the country. After August 21, 1983, what would become the minority in terms of public opinion, were supporters of the Marcoses.
Marcos was rumored to be dying, he hadn't established a mechanism for a transition (one people took seriously, anyway), furthermore, parliamentary elections were expected in 1984. The moderate opposition -which, we forget, had flirted with the idea of armed struggle, too, a few years earlier- was divided between those who opposed participating in elections, and people like Ninoy who'd advocated political participation as far back as the elections of 1978, when Ninoy campaigned from his jail cell. The CPP-NPA, trying to build bridges by means of the NDF, and which had resisted the dictatorship from day one, continued its hard-line stance. Thus began its transformation from a movement that had been on the right side of history through its resistance to martial law, into a movement that missed the bus, historically, morally, and politically, by boycotting the snap elections in 1986.
Postcard Headlines reprints a commentary by the late Antonio Zumel, which shows to great effect, I think, how calcified the thinking of the Left had become in 1984, how it is misread, because of ideology, the significance of Ninoy's death, overstated the importance of its own role and its place in the public imagination, and so set itself up to alienate its more moderate allies and sidelined itself when the dictatorship finally fell. I delved into all of this in my article, The Road to Edsa, published during the 10th anniversary of Edsa.
I've posted my own thoughts on Ninoy's assassination (August 21, 2006) but in view of the above, it's good to revisit some articles that help explain what went on. In his column today, Conrado de Quiros says he believes Marcos decided on martial law when his NP senatorial slate was massively defeated in the 1971 elections. A contemporary account was written by Teodoro L. Locsin, Jr. when the Free Press made Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. Man of the Year, 1971. Locsin, Jr. revisited his 1971 conversation with Ninoy in Ninoy speaking, August 23, 1986.
Surely written by Locsin, Sr. was an editorial titled If, which pointed out what could have been, had the Marcoses merely whisked Ninoy away back to jail, or publicly embraced him: called his bluff, so to speak. And this insight into the ultimate handicap of the late dictator:
So, Marcos was brilliant – at the start. He did not have a gun, then: martial law enforced by the Armed Forces of the Philippines with his Number 1 hood, Ver, as chief-of-staff. Then, martial law! Brilliant he was, okay, or just cunning, unprincipled, a thinking son of bitch? All right, brilliant Marcos was. But the intellect deteriorates not meeting real challenge. The gun makes all challenge ineffectual. The mind becomes dull. Absolute power does not only corrupt absolutely, it stupefies. There is no need for intelligence when the guns serves. The blade of the mind rusts. Absolute power brings absolute stupidity. Such is the lesson of all dictatorships. Except the Communist challenge to contend with, and so remains as sharp as ever. Marcos, if in control when Ninoy was killed, had become just plain stupid.There are two brilliant -and fierce- meditations by Teodoro M. Locsin, Sr., the first titled The Conscience of the Filipino: The Sacrifice and the second, which took it's cue from Aquino's famous statement, "The Filipino is worth dying for." Locsin, Sr. tartly asked, Is he?
The moderate opposition -which, we forget, had flirted with the idea of armed struggle, too, a few years earlier- was divided between those who opposed participating in elections, and people like Ninoy who'd advocated political participation as far back as the elections of 1978, when Ninoy campaigned from his jail cell.... Postcard Headlines reprints a commentary by the late Antonio Zumel, which shows to great effect, I think, how calcified the thinking of the Left had become in 1984, how it is misread, because of ideology, the significance of Ninoy's death, overstated the importance of its own role and its place in the public imagination, and so set itself up to alienate its more moderate allies and sidelined itself when the dictatorship finally fell. I delved into all of this in my article, The Road to Edsa, published during the 10th anniversary of Edsa.I've posted my own thoughts on Ninoy's assassination (August 21, 2006) but in view of the above, it's good to revisit some articles that help explain what went on. In his column today, Conrado de Quiros says he believes Marcos decided on martial law when his NP senatorial slate was massively defeated in the 1971 elections.
