MERGED: CPP-NPA-NDF Discussions (Issues, Updates, etc.)

[gareb]

---

between a non-violent and a violent revolution, as the only two strategies of philippine revolution, you basically have decided that violence is the only way, gareb.

forgive me if i made the impression on you that i am in favor of armed struggle. i am not.

let me impress unto you that there is a difference from doubting the effectivity of something and accepting its opposite. that is where i am situated at the moment.

i am doubting the effectiveness of a peaceful revolution as it has time and time again failed to deliver its promises. what it has done is to even complicate things as we we are now in a murky situation wherein a facade is made glorifying the said peaceful revolution and using it to cover the rotten system underneath... majority of us unfortunately cannot see it or are too indifferent to even care.

yet still, i am not infavor of a bloody revolution. maybe i gave you the wrong impression that i was, but i am not. what i am trying to do is to demystify us all from the common misconceptions of an armed revolution. you go to the hinterlands and you will understand why people there, the peasants and the farmers are sympathetic towards the revolutionists. what they want ( and us too ) is change. they cannot see any other solution as certain solutions have been tried and tested, but unfortunately are not effective.

we keep talking about the things that we have heard about the revolution without really looking it in the perspective of those people who are concerned. we have the tendency to disregard what they have to say as it already is, for us, wrong. i am merely providing their perspective, brushing of the dust, clearing the air, of mistaken ideas of what it really is.

armed struggle, unfortunately, is NOT the only solution. it may work, it may not... but as a good friend said,

Violence is only necessary in the most extreme cases... but it is never a first choice for change....

jose rizal ( the hero ) was against an armed revolution. he knew that the blood spilled will someday reemerge and haunt the free country. he gave the french revolution as an example.

now, my question is...

if armed struggle is the only solution as you and the communists have outlined, since non-violence is "just ineffective", why are you not among the proud future "martyrs" and "heroes" in the mountains, carrying M16s and AK47s, waging war against the young soldiers of the Philippine military?

what's keeping you from joining the ranks of the NPA?

first, i am not a communist. i am merely providing for the 'missing' side that is suppose to be in a balanced argument. i am just a stand in for the people who are suppose to be here. i am not one of them. i am just here to provide the perspective of these people ( however limited and unjustified my presentation is ). audiatur et altera pars the other side too must be heard

second, i am again to argue that the military or as you put it, the 'young soldiers of the Philippine military' is just a representation of the state. they stand for the state defending itself when these people are engaged in an armed conflict between the rebels in the countryside.

the sarcasm is not lost to me with the quotation marks though. unfortunately you have failed to give credit to the soldiers in the Philippine army who are sacrificing themselves in line for an ideology (if there is an ideology behind them) that i doubt they understand if they know anything about it at all --- an ideology that is being rejected by the masses because of sheer hunger.

[free_thinker]

you go to the hinterlands and you will understand why people there, the peasants and the farmers are sympathetic towards the revolutionists.

we must also discuss the question of representation. does the NPA really represent the struggle of these peasants and farmers? or, is there a separate phenomenon present here, namely the innate respect for any group with guns and the ability to use violence.

there's a prof. at UP dil, who used to be an active officer in the NPA during the 80s in the cagayan valley of northern luzon. the relationship between the NPA and the indigenous tribes, he once described, was tribal respect. the NPA was seen as a powerful tribe, hence the locals' respect of them. other than that, the indigenous cared not about the grander "people's struggle"--they had no conception of it. this was one of the many dissonance which eventually prompted the professor's departure from the movement he'd grown up in.

that's just one trivial story i know of that related to the NPA. but, it goes directly to the question of representation. are the farmers and peasants sympathetic only to the communist revolutionists? or, if given the chance, would they be as sympathetic towards other revolutionaries and other strategies for change that doesn't involve killing and dying? are they given this choice? when the NPA moves into a small town, it automatically renders that town a target for the AFP, what choice do the peasants and farmers have when this happens? representation and choice.

[free_thinker]

p.s.--

gareb, your last post was the best one yet on this discussion. you've discussed various points i have never even thought of, and for this i thank you for enlightening me.


keep in mind the sarcasm was directed to communists reading through who have swallowed their own ideology whole, without examination. it wasn't directed at you.

keep it coming...

[dirk]

no it is not weak. it is just ineffective. there is no comparison between martin luther king's america, together with ghandi's india versus the philippines. there were no political subtleties involved, no political manipulation, no 'subdermal' agenda. what was involved there was racism and independence, one is a concrete ideology that must be destroyed, another is an ideology that must be uphold. there were the whites, there were the british. the philippine setting offers a different set of characters. politicians that we hate yet still support, love hate relationship with the americans, the elite who happens to weld power... it's more complex than the issue faced by ghandi and king. i see no point of comparison.

the struggles forged by ghandi and king, were simpler compared to the present circumstances in the philippines? this is the first i've heard of this. no political manipulation involved? no political subleties? agenda?

the central themes both in india and the american south was that of racism and colonial mentality. racism is that power that the hegemony wields, while colonial mentality is that which the oppressed suffers from. the white americans and the british possessed the power of racism. while the blacks and the indians suffered from the results of years of having their minds colonized.

the philippine condition is no different. every time we see a white man, a foreigner, walk down the street we stand in awe, with complete humility. all filipinos suffer from colonial mentality. this behavior is copied through various facets in our society, in which one acts as the colonizer and while another group acts as the colonized. this is why we readily address persons in 'high' positions as sir or ma'am, without even first wondering if they indeed deserve our respect.

yes, you're right, it's not the same as in india and the american south, or the farm fields of california, but you are still dealing with the same behaviors found in racism and the colonized mind. and as you saw in india and the american south, it was widely effective, although the process is still on going.

as for political subleties, agenda, and manipulation, i don't have to be a rocket scientist to know those realities were involved in the non-violent movements in india and the u.s.

[gareb]

the struggles forged by ghandi and king, were simpler compared to the present circumstances in the philippines? this is the first i've heard of this. no political manipulation involved? no political subleties? agenda?

in certain perspectives, yes, they were simpler. we have to bear in mind that in martin luther king's situation, there were readily seen manifestation of racism. the contradictory is blatantly obvious; blacks versus whites-- there were not people at the middle. in india there was the british and the indians. we have to see that the situations in these countries at that times were almost to the point of being polarized. 'if you were not among us, u are with them'. no third party.

the philippine setting is different. there are the rich ruling class, the middle class, and the majority lower class 'masa'. and not only that, there are different stratifications in the middle class sector that makes it an unsound decision for any to pigeon hole them to belong to either class.

your example on racism and colonial mentality is commendable. it actually has stimulus-response effect. when a hegemony oppresses a people (racism, for example), the response could only be either a revolution or submission. revolution calls for radical changes, submission on the other hand calls for a colonial mentality to take hold.

i wont even deny that we have this colonial mentality in us -- a certain sense of submission. yet i believe that this must be removed if ever we want genuine liberty. i still have to find a peaceful way to do this. a revolution will never be complete if it only changes the superficial structures in politics and governance without changing customs and traditions that have the rotten worm of colonial mentality and submission in it.

as for political subleties, agenda, and manipulation, i don't have to be a rocket scientist to know those realities were involved in the non-violent movements in india and the u.s.

when mentioned political subtleties, i was not thinking of the clandestine ( yet still morally sound ) negotiations. i was thinking of hidden selfish motives, 'pakitang-tao', taditional politics, insincere propaganda. what came to my mind that king's and ghandi's campaign was based on a concept of what was ought to be; a concept that was noble in itself as it was accepted by the whole world.

philippine setting is different. look into the faces of our crocodilian politicans and i am sure you will agree with me.

[gareb]

free_thinker:

yes of course, respesentation.

as i have mentioned earlier, i am not one of them. i cannot speak on behalf of the NPA. i know of the things they are saying to those who are willing to hear them, but to the extent of knowing if the peasants and the workers they are suppose to be fighting for is truly supportive to their case, i still have to figure that out. words of course, are different from actions.

yet still, we have to bear in mind that sometimes, people's indifference towards 'higher' struggles such as those espoused by the NPA and the MILF, is basically due to need. they ( the people ) will not care about anything the revolutionaries say, simply because they are hungry now... and that they cannot take to be satisfied any later. this reaction formation is best illustrated in jose sonil's "ang masa". they may agree with what is being said by the revs, but they will participate only as little as possible. due perhaps to that corrupted sense of 'pacificsm'.

another factor perhaps, and this intentionally pointed out to the example presented about a UP dil professor; there were certain grave mistakes done in the 80's by the members of the NPA. the people they supposedly fought for became fodder for their extravagances. it is a well documented case, and humbly admitted by the high ops of the NPA.

[gareb]

free_thinker:

i am flattered by your remarks. i fear that i am unworthy of such. i am just another person, sharing what he knows and how he thinks the world works, and opening his mind to new things he might have missed along the way. i believe it is every person's duty to do so.

i do not blame them for swallowing it whole. when one is at desperate times, the tendency is to adapt the most radical stance to rid one's self of the malaise.

yet we know that the disease is there. it is in us to change it. how? that is what we are discussing right here. :mrgreen:

[gregggy_ph]

communism will lead us to equality and justice....cge balik nako sa taas...

[gareb]

i believe that u have to substantiate your claims, greggy_ph.

[sinus_]

i think they are just looking for reasons to get their hands on more money