["People's power" in the Philippines mobilized millions of…]

Scan page 7

"People's power" in the Philippines mobilized millions of workers, displaced farmers, and elements of the middle-class against the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos. But the fruit of the "February revolution" is a capitalist government. The anti-Marcos "elite oppo -sition" and the army headed by Juan Ponce Enrile, Marcos' former defense minister, are the key elements in the new regime.

The Philippine events demonstrate the ability of the local ruling classes to rebound from a seemingly hopeless political situation. But more important, they show that the ruling classes can do so only on the coattails of the mass movement.

Several left-wing organizations, including "democratic socialist" and "independent Marxist" groups, gave their support to Cory Aquino's pro-capitalist slate in the February presidential elections. These groups limited their electoral program to removing Marcos and saw their action as helping to "push Aquino to the left."

The bulk of the left, including the nationalist coalition BAYAN and the mass organizations under the influence of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), opted for a boycott of the elections. The CPP pointed out that the electoral process was fraudulent and that Aquino was a capitalist candidate.

Unfortunately, the forces advocating boycott failed to correctly gauge the rising mobilization of the masses, who saw the electoral process as an opportunity to voice their long-simmering hatred of the Marcos regime. Fighting for the right to freely participate in political action became the momentary focal point of the mass struggle.

Failing to pose a viable working-class alternative to both Marcos and Aquino, the boycott yielded leadership of the democratic struggle to Aquino and the elite opposition without a fight.

Reassessing the boycott

In the wake of the elections, left-wing political organizations have taken a critical look at the boycott. The CPP now calls the boycott a "major political blunder." The national council of Kadena, a large youth group within the BAYAN coalition, terms the boycott "a tragic error."

Unfortunately, of drawing the wrong conclusions, reasoning that "critical participation," i.e., voting for Aquino, was the only viable alternative. Today, this view extends to politically supporting Aquino against more right-wing figures in the government.

Thus, Leandro Alejandro, secretary-general of BAYAN, stated, "There's a great potential for the Aquino government to evolve into a more representative government. She's no nationalist, but she's a sincere liberal and will stand up for what she's said already." (San Francisco Examiner, March 3, 1986)

The CPP, for its part, calls for "constructive criticism" of the Aquino regime. "In our propaganda we agreed on no attacks on her [Aquino]," a CPP official told the Examiner on July 18. "We like her...And it becomes a public relations problem for her if the left supports her and she doesn't negotiate with us."

The CPP puts forward the view that there are "liberals and progressives" within the Aquino government that "recognize the legitimacy of fighting an unjust social system." In the May 1986 issue of the CPP organ, Ang Bayan, the party leadership advocates a friendly stance toward the liberal wing of the government, stressing that it "car be drawn to support the people's demands or can be neutralized."

The CPP states that one of its major goals is to be accepted as part of a "transitional coalition government" on an equal footing with the pro-capitalist parties and groupings. So far, however, Aquino has emphasized that she will never appoint Communists to her government.

Roots in Maoism

The CPP's current conciliatory attitude toward Aquino highlights the holdovers of the Maoist variety of Stalinism on the CPP. The CPP originated in a 1968 Maoist break with the pro-Moscow Philippine CP, the PKP. Initially oriented to rural guerrilla warfare, it distanced itself from China in the mid-1970s and has expanded its work to a variety of arenas including semilegal activity in the urban centers.

The Maoist "people's war" strategy distorted Pres Marxist view of the role of armed struggle in the revolutionary process. Rather than seeing it as an organic development arising out of the need to defend the mobilizations of the workers and peasants around concrete demands, Maoist military practice was employed as a long-term strategy based on peasant armies divorced from the urban centers.

This strategy was combined with political alliances with the "national bourgeois" component of the capitalist class, which was considered a potential partner in what the Maoists called the "bloc of four classes."

Reflecting the influence of these views, the CPP could call for nationalizing foreign and monopoly-owned UST Filipino soldier defects from Marcos under the mass pressure of "people's power."

concerns while simultaneously stating: "Part of the workers' anti-imperialist struggle is an alliance with national capitalists. In concrete terms, the workers seek protection for local capital over thos: = of foreign monopoly. The workers support a bigger voice for the national bourgeoisie in the economy and in the formulation of economic policies." (Ang Bayan, May 1986)

Importance of class independence The ruling classes of the world are not at all unfamiliar with the phenomenon of mass mobilizations which threaten their rule. Wherever possible they seek to channel the anger and frustration of the masses into reformist electoral schemes designed to give the appearance of offering solutions to the problems of capitalist rule. History has recorded the tragic consequences resulting from the failure of the workers' organizations to maintain their political independence from these pro-capitalist formations and leaders.

The best example from recent history is the political support given by most of the Iranian workers' organizations to the "anti-imperialist" government of Khomeini. In the name of fighting against the "fascist" forces of the Shah of Iran and U.S. imperialism, the Iranian left aided Khomeini in reconsolidating the rule of Iranian capital. In time, the workers' movement was beheaded, disoriented, and finally demobilized.

In the Philippines, the uneasy truce between the different components of the capitalist class within the new government results from the common need to reestablish their control over a mobilized people.

This job is made easier so long as the workers and peasants retain illusions in Aquino's ability to fundamentally change the country's social and economic structures. To the extent that the CPP and the mass organizations it influences support Aquino, these illusions are deepened and the potential for the independent mobilization of the masses is weakened and ultimately crushed.

It is the power of the mass movement itself which compels Aquino to announce the reforms affecting the (continued on page 10)

SOCIALIST ACTION AUGUST 1986 7 Photo/ Jeanne-Marie Hallac

Scan page 8

A numt William I more up-t‹ models to Father ( fascist car metropolit

----- pull-quotes -----

IS MY Photo/Peter Charlesworth

A Marxist Theoretical Revieu