A traitor whose machinations led to the loss of Philippine territory – Sabah – with his orchestrated expose on the Senate floor of the fake Jabidah Massacre.
He was never president of this country.
He was not officially declared a national hero.
So, he was killed at the tarmac. Is that enough reason to name the airport after him?
“Dragon slayer” Atty. Larry Gadon was at his loquacious best at the Kapihan sa Don Facundo media forum in the City of San Fernando Wednesday in reiteration of his arguments for the reversion of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport to its old name of Manila International Airport.
“Asshole of the century,” the irrepressible Teddyboy Locsin, Phl’s permanent representative to the United Nations, purportedly twitted in tweets the man who opened the Pandora’s box that ultimately led to the ouster of CJ Ma. Lourdes Sereno.
“(T)he Sphincter of the Ages. Without Ninoy, good-looking Filipino women would be sex slaves of Marcos uniformed goons. And the men would be walking targets. Is there an Anus Mirabilis Award out there to confer on this butthole?” So went the diatribes, characteristically Teddyboy’s. His is the hero to Gadon’s heel.
Gadon though had volumes of signatures to prop up his cause which, he said, he had already fi led with Malacañang and the House of Representatives.
The certified Ninoy lover Locsin taking on the unapologetic Marcos loyalist Gadon makes yet another spontaneous combustion of the Marcos-Aquino dichotomy. Which, renews to relevance Macoy or Ninoy that formed Part V of an essay on the “The Hero in History” serialized in my column Ingkung Milio in The Voice from late 1983 to early 1984 – well over 30 years ago, wow! Read on:
THE IDEAL conclusion of revolutions is the liberation of the people. This liberation can come in various forms: from foreign or homegrown oppressors, from want and fear, from repressions of the basic rights of free speech, press, assembly, etcetera.
Now, if we believe that the ideals started by the Revolution of 1898 were continued and bore fruition in 1972;
If we believe that our people’s liberation was effected by Martial Law;
If we believe that President Marcos assumed all the ideals and aspirations of our people in his declaration of Martial Law;
Then, it is logical to conclude that Marcos is the Filipino Hero in History.
But do we believe in any of those basic premises?
For more than a decade we have been led to believe that everything around us is “the true, the good and the beautiful.” Thanks to the controlled media, we were spared the sordid realities of life in these islands where Asia wears a smile. Thanks to the manipulated press, our vision of this country for that period was constricted by high-rise hotels, networks of superhighways, beautiful edifices. The “development” of the City of Man was simply awe-inspiring, so mind-boggling that we were mesmerized to believe all that emanated from the Palace by the Pasig.
On account of these, and more mind-bending bordering already on mass brainwashing, the general mass developed short-sightedness, rather, a myopic mindset – the people refusing to think beyond Marcos, failing to envision any alternative to the Marcosian thought, seeing impossibility to find any leader other than Marcos.
In a way, the ruling elite’s boast of noalternative- to-Marcos was more hallowed than hollow. For the Opposition behaves like a bunch of Boy Scouts lost in the woods, each one wanting to take the whole troop to his chosen direction.
There was indeed a great need to unite the Opposition and subsequently form a common front against the regime. This by coming out with an alternative to Marcos. The more important thing though was to convince the people of the soundness of their alternative for their acceptance, and ultimately, support.
The call for national reconciliation by itself would have served as a call to arms. Its enhancement by the martyrdom of its firmest believer and foremost proponent adds the dimension of spirituality to it. By the assassination of Ninoy Aquino, national reconciliation transcended political lines.
To say that Ninoy’s martyrdom awakened the people is an understatement. It would be most fitting to state that Ninoy assumed the role of a political Christ whose Calvary did not only open the eyes of the Filipino people to realities but heightened their senses, strengthened their hearts and firmed up their resolve to attain liberation.
Events consequential to August 21 likewise provided an antithesis to the long-held Marxist thesis of class struggles. The current movement towards freedom, democracy and justice transcends status: plebeians and patricians, workers and capitalists – the traditionally warring factions have united in Ninoy.
All the rallies, political discussions and heightened conscientization of the people point to the direction of Ninoy in the process of being the Filipino Hero in History. Inasmuch as the process has no guarantee of successfully meeting its desired end, i.e. total liberation of the Filipino from oppression as catalyzed by Ninoy’s martyrdom, we cannot at this time say that Ninoy is our Hero in History. A hero in the company of Rizal, Bonifacio, Sakay, Abad Santos, he definitely is already.
Some years from now perhaps, history will pass a definitive judgment on Ninoy. As it shall pass the same on Marcos.
But even at that future time, the basic questions shall remain:
Who woke up the people from their deep slumber?
Who freed the people’s minds from imposed fixations?
Who liberated the Filipino from fear, from silence, from despair?
Who led the Filipinos to think, act Filipino?
Who brought back the dignity of the Filipino before the world?
A lot more are to be asked, Countless questions shall crop up begging for answers. But there shall only be one answer, of two choices: Marcos or Aquino.
Take your pick: Ninoy or Macoy? I already did.
(A SHORT two years after this piece saw print, EDSA came. And the rest is history. Ninoy’s. And Cory’s. And in the light and aftermath of their son, the BS Aquino III’s presidency, the fulfilment of yet another Marxist prophecy: History repeats itself: first as tragedy, second as farce.)
