TODAY, IT is more or less affirmed that there is a national consensus on the need for change – or, to put it more bluntly, on the need for revolution. But there is a consensus as well on the desirability of a peaceful revolution as the only means of preserving of preserving our freedom and our democratic tradition.
I have called it a democratic revolution, to signify a peaceful transformation of our country, and also to indicate that it should be an undertaking of the people, of all the people, in accordance with the democratic concept. – February 1971, at the Catholic Broadcasting Conference.
The Democratic Revolution is a rededication to the historical aspirations of the Filipino people, but it makes demands not only on the political authority itself but on the very foundation of that authority: the people.
The dominant characteristic of our society which demands radical change is the economic gap between the rich and the poor. We find here a wide consensus that includes the rich themselves.
This gap is the constant theme of political oratory and social criticism. There is a general agreement that this gap must be narrowed down if only for the sake of social stability…
Democratic theoreticians consider the constitutionality of democratic governments as the guarantee of the people’s right to revolution, for it provides for radical changes by peaceful means.
The decisive concept of revolution is radical change rather than violence. Only when the constitutional means for change become impotent or unavoidable does armed revolution become justifiable.
A Jacobin revolution which has for its aim the overthrow of a democratic government is clearly a contradiction of terms.
In an oppressive, undemocratic society, a Jacobin revolution is justified, even inevitable. In an imperfect democracy (and which democracy is not?), a democratic revolution – constitutional and liberal – is necessary.
As a matter of fact, the stability and strength of a democracy depends on the concept of a continuing revolution by constitutional means. This, then, is the theory of Democratic Revolution – constitutional, liberal and nationalist. – 1971, Today’s Revolution: Democracy
AND THEN there was the EDSA Revolution.
The thoughts of the Great Ferdinand on the grand Democratic Revolution he believed he was to lead swept by the power of the oppressed, raised by the man of the cloth, vanguarded by the widow in yellow.
Indeed, Marcos becoming in 1986 the victim of the revolution of his own thoughts. Aye, who was it who said, “Revolutions devour their own children”? Or is that, in the Marcos case, a perversion?
A quarter of a century and a couple of years since EDSA, don’t Marcos words still ring true as the day they were written 42 years ago?
Marcos, Marcos, Marcos pa rin!
Indeed! And then there is Senator Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., Congresswoman Imelda Marcos, Governor Imee Marcos. Lasting legacy ever, EDSA no matter.