Erasing Ninoy

OF THE many things that can change in 35 years, memory is not exempt. “It is not that individual memories are less acute but that the collective image of what really happened, once so clear, has become increasingly uncertain.”

That’s the writer James Hamilton-Paterson, remarking on the 10th anniversary of the EDSA uprising that ended the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos. In his book “America’s Boy,” he observed an “uneasy hollowness” in the event and how it had become increasingly difficult for its participants to invoke “the magic and significance of those few February days and nights in 1986.”

On Tuesday, Ninoy Aquino Day, marked 35 years since the assassination that spelled the beginning of the end for Marcos. Malacañang made it a nonevent by declaring a holiday, instead, for the Festival of Sacrifice, never mind if it was a day earlier than most celebrations of the Islamic holiday. It issued a brief statement, signed by President Rodrigo Duterte, that honors “the courage and patriotism that Ninoy demonstrated during his struggle,” but avoids mentioning the dictatorship that he struggled against.

No one can say for certain why Ninoy Aquino decided to come home 35 years ago. Perhaps the former senator did see a political opportunity waiting, as Marcos was by then gravely ill and had no credible successor waiting in the wings. The man was a politician, not a saint. Only the willfully ignorant will claim that his popularity was universal or that he was without flaw.

But all that, plus the efforts of revisionists to demonize him now, does not change the facts. By coming home in the face of great risks, Ninoy Aquino made it possible for people to see that a corrupt and brutal dictatorship could be brought to an end. What is that, if not heroic? And why are some so desperate to erase him from our collective memories? SS-CEBU