A Rejoinder for Benjamin Pimentel on the Issue of Peace

By Jacinto Luna


Again, a Filipino-American writer who writes article for the Inquirer from the States, Benjamin Pimentel, went on his usual counter-revolutionary, anti communist vitriol.

He does it again at the eve of the projected peace negotiations between the National Democratic Front (NDF) and the government.

As usual, the Pimentel jeremiads focus on the so-called Aquino legacy. The perinial subject of all the bourgeois media in the Philippines.

This time, he pointed out one of the rare truth in the struggle that the “yellow brigade” appropriated for them --the battle cry of the La Tondena Strike of 1975, "TAMA NA, SOBRA NA, PALITAN NA!”  that was hijacked by the Cory Aquino propagandist as their own.

One thing  that Pimentel wrote is to paint the revolutionaries as “working behind the scenes were UG leaders, including Edgar Jopson and Father Luis Jalandoni, now the chief representative of the National Democratic Front.” That makes them look as conspiratorial lot.

To correct the misimpresions of an armchair writers like Pimentel, the strike was led by the then Manila Rizal Party Committee (MRPC) led by then by Ka. Digo, Caridad Magpantay,the Jalandonis and others who are still leading the underground in their bitter struggle against the new Aquino III regime.

To say that they are behind the scenes is to marginalize their active participation in the great undertaking. They were on the ground and were with the workers in every step of the way.
For the information of the writer, the general area of La Tondena was a bastion of the labor movement since the turn of the century. And during the time,during the early years of martial law, Tondo was a bastion of the movement. Besides, the leaders of the movement were from that area especially Ka. Digo.

And for the information of the uninformed writer, and it was not a ” a little known but a decisive victory" It was a great tactical victory because the regime was forced to tack back and end  its “strike ban”

Actually, the La Tondena Strike opened the flood gates of a budding underground labor movement into the open mass movement  and five years later, set the stage for the formation of the militant, patriotic and progressive labor center- the Kilusang   Mayo Uno (KMU) led by the great labor leader Bert Olalia  in 1980.  Actually, it was the first lethal blow to the US-Marcos dictatorship .

In another jab at the movement, the writer called the underground and the revolutionary movement and the AFP as “addicted to war.” and “ allergic to peace.”

He never bothered to study the latest event in history that the movement entered into a ceasefire during the first Aquino regime from November 27, 1986 to January 22, 1987.

The good writer never bothered to note that the ceasefire ended when the AFP and the police massacred 13 peasants and wounded more than 150 others  at the foot of Mendiola bridge, the second Mendiola Massacre on January 22, 1987 that is until today justice has not been served.

Again, the writer calls the revolutionary movement and the UG( the term he alternately use) as “those in the UG who arrogantly see themselves as the only true champions of the people, who fantasize about a time when one party claiming to know the correct path will finally be in charge.

And on both sides are people who do not want the war to end for other reasons. For they see war as their career, as a way to hang on to, even expand, their power.”

I might surmise that’s how he sees the ordinary people, the Filipino people as a mass of ignorant and uneducated mass that can be led by a small group of conspirators as he portrayed  the Jalandonis and others.

Using his venom, the writer again called the comrades in the countrysides as “some probably even profit from the conflict. There’s money to be had in protection rackets and other illegal activities for any creative-minded military officer. For an enterprising rebel commander in some remote part of the archipelago, extortion funds, a.k.a. revolutionary taxes, are an easy way to make a living”  

Maybe he is referring to his fallen idol, former NPA leader Romulo Kintanar who he worships without thinking to high heavens!

This makes him a bonafide propagandist for the AFP or the minimum as a fellow traveler for the armed forces and the police intelligence agencies and propaganda machine.

Maybe to soften the blow, the writer postulates: “There are countless stories, moving and inspiring, of young men and women, many from rich and powerful families, who gave up their lives of privilege out of a burning desire to change a society burdened by dehumanizing inequality. Edgar Jopson, Lorena Barros, Nilo Valerio, Emmanuel Lacaba. . And some of them are not wedded to a narrow ideology.”

Empty lip service for some of his friends still active in the movement?

As a revolutionary I dare say to the writer that his hope that: “ The challenge is to find people on both sides with the burning passion for social change, but who are humble enough, strong enough, courageous enough to acknowledge an indisputable fact: This war must end. That this war has turned into a pointless, vicious cycle of vindictive violence.”

 I assure him that the revolutionaries are the most ardent people for peace but they understand that that in order to achieve peace, the best way to achieve peace is by waging wage war against unjust war, against oppression and against all forms of tyranny.

For us to let this article of a disgusted former national democrat who never understood the revolutionary principles to be left unanswered is the height of liberalism. This insult to the collective memory of First Quarter Storm (FQS) activists and real fighters and our countless martyrs against martial law cannot just be ignored.

Pimentel can liken himself to the American writer Ernest Hemmingway, a witness to the Spanish civil war. A writer who  empathized with the revolution but never endeared himself with the people and their struggle.

And in  their bitterness and being influenced by false idols, write to smear people and degrade the people’s movement and in the process present himself as an authority on the subject which he really does not comprehend.

As an Asian revolutionary says; “ a hundred streams from the pen, a thousand miles away from the theme.”


*********

 ( This is the article that Jacinto Luna wrote about and posted on this FB account—editors)

 ‘Tama Na! Sobra Na!’ as a cry for peace

By Benjamin Pimentel

CALIFORNIA, United States—Twenty five years ago, Corazon Aquino rallied Filipinos against a despised dictatorship with the slogan, “Tama na! Sobra na! Palitan na!”—“We’ve had enough! Things have gone too far! It’s time for a change!”

In a few weeks, a government now led by Cory’s son will begin peace talks with rebels represented by a former priest who was with the group that coined the original version of that battle cry: “Tama Na! Sobra Na! Welga Na!”—“It’s time to strike!”

It’s an odd twist in our history.

Cory’s call to action against a ruthless tyrant began as a protest slogan of a relatively small group of factory workers, backed by leftist and church activists, including members of the underground, the UG.

Together, they took part in a little-known, but decisive, confrontation with the Marcos regime. In October 1975, about 500 workers of La Tondena in Manila staged the first major labor strike under martial law. Working behind the scenes were UG leaders, including Edgar Jopson and Father Luis Jalandoni, now the chief representative of the National Democratic Front. Priests, nuns, and students later joined the fight.

As new peace talks begin, Noynoy’s government and the UG could perhaps reflect on this connection in our history, as they struggle to find a way to end the war.

It won’t be easy.

On each side are people who have become so addicted to war, they’ve grown allergic to peace. On each side, there are those who cling to a demonized portrait of the other.

To the UG, the military is an unreformed and unreformable instrument of repression, incapable of protecting the nation’s interests. To the military, the UG is a vicious force, working toward a dark, totalitarian future under a repressive party of dogmatic ideologues.

There are elements of truth in both images, of course.

There are those in the military who see nothing wrong with using military repression, including torture, to deal with dissent. Some even fantasize about the military in total control, fuelled by the belief that the armed forces as the organization that can fix the country’s ills.

And there are those in the UG who arrogantly see themselves as the only true champions of the people, who fantasize about a time when one party claiming to know the correct path will finally be in charge.

And on both sides are people who do not want the war to end for other reasons. For they see war as their career, as a way to hang on to, even expand, their power.

(Some probably even profit from the conflict. There’s money to be had in protection rackets and other illegal activities for any creative-minded military officer. For an enterprising rebel commander in some remote part of the archipelago, extortion funds, a.k.a. revolutionary taxes, are an easy way to make a living.)

The challenge for both sides is to break free from the painfully narrow storylines, to see more nuanced portraits of each other.

Take the military, a huge, complex, and essentially divided organization.

Just recently, an officer accused of rebellion applied for amnesty. It’s hard to say what moves former Lieutenant Senior Grade Antonio Trillanes nowadays—he’s a politician now, after all.

But it was clear what partly moved him eight years ago when he rebelled against government: Disgust with the corruption in the armed forces. He felt so strongly about it, he even explored the problem in an academic paper.

And there are probably others like him in the armed forces, idealistic and committed officers, but who may be wiser, more forward-thinking than Trillanes. For while they believe strongly in the need for change, they also know that adventurism—say, launching a military assault on a fancy hotel—is foolish and pointless.

They probably understand that the principle of civilian rule over the military is sacrosanct in a democracy, and they may even acknowledge that there are probably those in the UG with whom they share a belief in the need for change.

And the UG?

There are countless stories, moving and inspiring, of young men and women, many from rich and powerful families, who gave up their lives of privilege out of a burning desire to change a society burdened by dehumanizing inequality. Edgar Jopson, Lorena Barros, Nilo Valerio, Emmanuel Lacaba.

And some of them are not wedded to a narrow ideology.

Before his death in 1982, as his widow Joy Asuncion told me, Edjop was troubled by the stunning revelation that the UG may have been responsible for the bombing of Plaza Miranda in 1971. Many others have left the movement to explore other paths to change, disgusted with the bloody purges in the UG, its display of Khmer Rouge-like capacity for violence and cruelty.

The challenge is to find people on both sides with the burning passion for social change, but who are humble enough, strong enough, courageous enough to acknowledge an indisputable fact: This war must end. That this war has turned into a pointless, vicious cycle of vindictive violence.

Winning the peace will be tough. But the history of “Tama Na! Sobra Na!” offers an important lesson.

For in the two historic confrontations in which it was used to rally Filipinos, the slogan worked. It was effective. It led to victory.

The 1975 labor strike was eventually broken up by Marcos’s security forces. The workers and their church sympathizers were hauled off to jail. Edjop and Jalandoni were forced to go into hiding.

But the strike turned out to be a political turning point. It broke the wall of silence under martial law. It sent a powerful message to Filipinos: “We don’t have to be silent. We don’t have to give in to fear.”

The strike inspired a generation of activists, and triggered protests that set the stage for the final confrontation with the tyrant. In 1986, Filipinos rallied around Cory to finish the job. A dictator, one of the most ruthless and greediest in the history of Southeast Asia, was finally overthrown.

As new peace talks kick off, it is perhaps time to turn once again to that slogan of defiance, that battle cry of victory. It’s perhaps time to reclaim it, to revive it, to give it new life as a cry for peace.

“Tama Na! Sobra Na! Kapayapaan Na!”—“It’s time for peace!”