Martial law 50 years after

Where does the Left stand today

Last of 4 parts

UNDENIABLY, after five decades, the CPP-NPA-NDF (Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front) have suffered major setbacks, starting with Sison’s capture in 1976, the surrender of Victor Corpus, the capture of NPA founding commander-inchief Dante or Bernabe Buscayno, the 1976 mass arrest of CPP politburo members, the arrest of erstwhile CPP chairman Rodolfo Salas and of Rolly Kintanar.

They also have had to contend with the emergence of the anti-Joma Sison “Rejectionist” or RJ group, the neutralization of CPP-NPA leaders, the capture of “acting” CPP chairman Alan Jazmines, and the continuing arrest and capitulation of many party leaders.

EDSA ‘86 resulted in a high degree of isolation from the masses and from the middle and the upper sectors of society brought about by unpopular political and military decisions, not to mention the repeal of RA 1700, better known as the “Anti-Subversion Law.”

Collapse of communism

The collapse of the Eastern Europe socialist bloc and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and the dwindling capacity and predilection of China and other (remaining) communist states and parties to support the CPP-NPA-NDF were the other problems.

And then also military defeats, surrenders and perhaps more significantly in the long run, widespread disaffection and demoralization among cadres and the rank and file.

In fact, in his recent article, columnist Bobi Tiglao said the CPP now appears to be headless since March 2020 when Julius Giron, tagged as the party chairman then, was slain in an encounter with the military. About a month ago, Benito Tiamzon, along with his wife Wilma, whom Giron was said to have replaced as chairman after their capture in 2014, was believed to have died after the boat they had boarded exploded.

All of the above was exacerbated and exploited by a relatively unified, determined and popular government effort to wipe out and/or win over the CPP-NPA-NDF as a whole or parts of it.

As a note, therefore, on the balance of forces, the CPP-NPA-NDF, which in the latter years of the Marcos regime dared to talk about approaching or being at the point of a “strategic stalemate” with the government, retreated from this overoptimistic phraseology and began again to harp on the “protractedness of the struggle.”

In short, in the political and military arenas, the CPP-NPA-NDF have been driven to the “strategic defensive” to borrow a favorite Maoist terminology, and the government and its Armed Forces have taken the position of “strategic offensive.”

On historical revisionism

About the same time last year, I wrote an article entitled “A flawed notion of historical revisionism,” which was published in the paper I used to write for.

I wrote the article in reaction to the accusations hurled against singer-actress Toni Gonzaga of resorting to historical revisionism when she guested the presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. in her online program.

Today, I am revisiting the topic as critics of the BBM administration have started sprouting up like mushrooms after a downpour, recalling “traumatic personal and collective memories of plunder and human rights violations” during the rule of the elder Marcos even if they were mere toddlers during that time.

These critics have vowed to defend their version of history which they claim to be the historical truth with regard to the narratives of martial law.

I just can’t understand what historical truth they are referring to in defense of their position. Again, to begin my article with a quote from Napoleon Bonaparte as I did in my previous article.

According to Napoleon, “What is history, but a fable agreed upon? By its very nature, history is always a one-sided account.”

Allow me to follow it up with another, this time from Leigh Teabing, a character in Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code. In the book, the Teabing character said: “History is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated, and the winner writes the history books — books which glorify their own cause and disparage the conquered foe.”

What version of history?

Now, let me ask these self-proclaimed defenders of the so-called historical truth: Who wrote the version of history that they are trying to defend?

They decry the declaration of martial law as being the primary culprit in human rights violations that escalated sky-high during the time of the first President Marcos. Yes, the declaration of martial law is part of the historical truth. But what about the numerous sides of the story, which play a vital role in the historical truth, which these people have deliberately omitted?

A crucial part of the historical truth, according to former cadres of the CPP who are now coming out, claim that party chairman Joma Sison had sold the soul of the revolution to the group of the late Ninoy Aquino in exchange for funding and arms. The collaboration between Left and that section of the oligarchy — precursor to the Yellows — was even openly manifested in 1978 when the Left fielded Alex Boncayao along with other traditional politicians, including Ninoy, in the elections for the Interim Batasang Pambansa under the banner of the Laban ng Bayan, or Laban.

According to these former cadres, Ninoy Aquino collaborated with the Left in the bombing of the Liberal Party miting de avance at Plaza Miranda, which forced Marcos to declare martial law.

There was a war going on between the State forces and the underground Left which was openly being supported by the Legal Left. Expectedly, there would be casualties on both sides. But as it is, all those killed and incarcerated were labeled as human rights victims by the Legal Left. But this has to be qualified. Those waging an armed struggle against the government were not listed in any roster, wore no uniform and didn’t flash any ID identifying them as armed combatants. Thus, members of the Legal Left can easily vouch for a slain combatant as their member — a civilian mass activist — in order for them to claim he or she is a human rights victim.

But non-combatants can’t seek refuge behind the excuse that they are not directly involved in the armed struggle, for it is the policy of the CPP for its members to be prepared to be deployed with the NPA anytime. They are reservists. In fact, when you take an oath in any underground organization, the last line of the oath reads: “Buhay man ay ialay.”

Democracy restored?

Marcos was eventually ousted. Cory Aquino assumed the presidency. And these defenders of the so-called historical truth claim Cory restored democracy. But did she?

Cory benefited from the coup d’état staged by the then-Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile even as she was then hiding in a convent in Cebu.

These so-called defenders accuse the late Marcos of being a dictator for having delegated to himself the role of the executive and legislator. But those powers came with the declaration of martial law, which was provided for in the 1935 Constitution, which was prevailing at the time.

But Cory abolished the Constitution, established her revolutionary government, implemented her own laws, removed all local officials and replaced them with people of her own choice.

Restored democracy? Tell me about the Mendiola and Hacienda Luisita massacres which claimed the lives of the poor peasants who were merely seeking a piece of land they could till.

So, why are these missing in the historical truth these people are trying to defend?

It is because history, as it is being taught today, has been written by a section of the society that had deposed the former president — the victors in the 1986 uprising.

To glorify their own cause and continue to disparage the conquered foe. Thus, they will continue to sell their version and interpretation of history as the truth.

And now, as BBM, the scion of the late strongman, has assumed the presidency, we would expect an intensified vilification drive against him and his family.

On the other side of the fence, that same faction of the oligarchy, now represented by the Pinklawans, have again joined forces with the Left to challenge and oppose this fledgling administration. Back to where everything started.

But then, I believe the Filipinos will not let what they are sinisterly planning to succeed this time. We have learned our lessons — that the vilification of Marcos leading to his ouster was nothing but a grand design concocted by Ninoy Aquino owing to his political ambition, and ably aided by the gullible Jose Maria Sison, who himself, had been planning on betraying his oligarch partners once they seized power.

Sison failed then as the oligarch-led Yellows junked the Left after having ascended to power. But as a consolation to him, both of them will fail now.