PHILIPPINES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PHILIPPINES

Population: 100,981,437 (2015)

Area: 300,000 km2

 

Long live the PKP-1930 in its early time when it was member of the Comintern !

Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas

founded on November 7, 1930

on the 13th anniversary of the October Revolution

(supported by the Comintern (SH) only in its times of Stalin)

Popular Front for municipal elections in 1940 was a revisionist act on order of Dimitrov!

In 1948, the PKP began an armed struggle against the government. In early 1950, the PKP created the People's Liberation Army (Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan) which was made up of about 10,000 soldiers.

The PKP-1930 degenerated into a Soviet revisionist party.

The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) - founded in 1968 - is a Maoist party and member of ICOR - revisionists.

Down with the Maoist Party !

Long live Stalinism-Hoxhaism !

 

 

2017

 

The Comintern (SH) joins the families, the Bangsamoro and the Filipino people in condemning the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) for the brutal killing of seven Tausug farmers last September 14 in Barangay Tambang, Patikul, Sulu. The massacre was perpetrated by operating troops of the Philippine Army Scout Rangers.

Killed were Makrub Diray, Basirun Hayrani, Mijan Hayrani, Binnajar Asak, Salip Maknun Sakirin, Hassan Hamsam and highschool student Alpadal Diray. The victims were harvesting mangosteen and lanzones at the time of their killing.

 

 

2017

 

 

 

 

“Change has Come”

Filipino-first bourgeois policy

 

 

 

"Change has Come for the Socialist Revolution" Filipino-workers policy

Comintern (SH) - Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rise up !

 

Freedom and peace at the coasts of the Philippines can only be achieved by the revolutionary workers of the Philippines who lead the people in the anti-imperialist war against the world imperialists and all their lackeys.

 

Build up the Filipino Section of the Comintern (SH) !

 

 

 

 

 

Transport groups hold nationwide transport strike to protest government's PUV modernization program

2017

 

three-day nationwide transport strike

 

 

 

 

Filipino Workers Are Seizing the Means of Communication in the Fight Against Verizon

These workers understand that without a strong global labor movement, they’re in an unwinnable race to the bottom.

2016

 

 

Image result for Philippines strike

Members of the IUF-affiliated FCCU SENTRO voted overwhelmingly for strike action to stop wage theft on the first week of February

2016

Protesters Face Machine Guns

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The NXP workers and their supporters holding a picket protest in front of the NXP-

 

 

 

Coca Cola workers on strike

2013

 

 

 

PW-transport-strike-cubao-03

Filipinos strike against oil cartel

2011

 

 

 

Philippine Airlines workers protest, 2010.

Philippine Airlines Employees Association (PALEA) union is planning to strike

2011

 

 

 

 

 

SCM Philippines leads strike against education budget cut (2010)

Image result for Philippines strike

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* * *

 

 

 

 

Long live the communist

Philippines in a communist

world !

 

 

 

PHILIPPINES

is ripe for a

Socialist revolution !

 

Create a strong Section

of the Communist International

(Stalinist-Hoxhaists)

in PHILIPPINES !

Long live the Stalinist-Hoxhaist World Movement !

 

 

 

 

 

Long live the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism !

 

 

 

in German language

 

26.1.1978
Die philippinischen Patrioten setzen entschlossen ihren Kampf um die nationale Befreiung fort

 

1. 1. 1978

Die philippinischen Patrioten unternahmen weitere bewaffnete Aktionen gegen die reaktionären Kträfte des Regimes in Manila. Eine wichtige Aktion wurde in den letzten Dezembertagen gegen einen Flughafen bei Ilagan durchgeführt. Bei dieser Aktion wurden sechs reaktionäre Soldaten getötet und einige weitere verwundet. Eine weitere Aktion führten sie gegen einen Militärposten der reaktionären Kräfte auf der Insel Basilan durch. Bei dieser Aktion wurden drei Soldaten getötet, der Posten wurde schwer beschädigt. Auf der Insel Jolo griffen die Patrioten eine Streife der reaktionären Kräfte an, wobei sie einige Soldaten töteten und verschiedene Waffen erbeiteten.

 

6. 1. 1978

Die Patrioten der Philippinen kämpfen mit der Waffe in der Hand gegen das reaktionäre Regime in Manila. Bei einer Aktion in den letzten Tagen gegen einen Militärposten der reaktionären Kräfte in der Stadt Zamboanga kam es zu einem Gefecht, bei dem sieben philippinische Regierungssoldaten getötet und zehn weitere verwundet wurden. Zu Kämpfen kam es auch im nördlichen Teil der Insel Basilan, wo doe philippinischen Patrioten einen Angriff der reaktionären Kräfte Manilas zurückschlugen. Einige reaktionäre Soldaten wurden getötet bzw. verwundet.

 

9. 2. 1978

Die philippinischen Patrioten unternahmen mehrere erfolgreiche bewaffnete Aktionen. In der Nähe der Stadt Cotabato stellten sie einer Autokolonne der reaktionären Truppen von Manila einen Hinterhalt. Drei Militärfahrzeuge wurden zerstört, Dutzende von Soldaten getötet und verwundet. Auf Basilan jagten die Patrioten ein Nachschublager in die Luft. In diesem Gebiet haben sie das Feuer auf eine Patrouille der reaktionären Truppen eröffnet und sie zum Rückzug gezwungen. Die Patrioten unternahmen wichtige Aktionen auch in verschiedenenen Gegenden von Mindanao, wodurch sie den Truppen von Manila beträchtlichen Schaden zufügten.

 

5. 3. 1978

Die Philippinischen Patrioten versetzten den Truppen des Regimes von Manila starke Schläge

Um diesen Kampf zu unterdrücken, führt das Regime von Manila Säuberungsmaßnahmen im südlichen Teil des Landes auf der Insel Jolo durch. So wurde in den ersten Märztagen eine Säuberungsoperation unter Beteiligung von 7 000 Soldaten mit Unterstützung der Luftwaffe und schwerer Artillerie durchgeführt. Die Zonen, in denen die Patrioten aktiv sind, wurden stundenlang bombardiert und beschossen. Doch die Regierungstruppen waren infolge des entschlossenen Widerstands der patriotischen Kräfte gezwungen, sich unter großen Verlusten an Menschen und Kriegsmaterial zurückzuziehen.

 

12. 4. 1978

Es wird berichtet, dass die Wahlen auf den Philippinen in einer Atmosphäre der Gewalt und des Terrors durch die Polizei durchgeführt wurden. Präsident Marcos hatte befohlen, dass die Armee als vorbeugende Maßnahme Verhafzungen vornimmt, um jede Protestbewegung der Massen zu verhindern. Doch weder das von ihm erlassene Notstandsgesetz noch der Befehl für Verhaftungen konnte die philippinischen Einwohner daran hindern, ihren tiefen Hass auf das blutrünstige herrschende Regime und gegen den Wahlschwindel zum Ausdruck zu bringen.

 

18. 4. 1978

Die philippinischen Patrioten verstärken ihre bewaffneten Aktionen gegen die Truppen des reaktionären Marcos-Regime

Die philippinischen Patrioten haben ihre Aktionen gegen die Kräfte des reaktionären Regimes von Marcos verstärkt. Sie unternahmen eine Aktion in einer Provinz 800km südlich von Manila. Bei einem heftigen Gefecht mit einer Militärstreife der reaktionären Kräfte haben die Patrioten 43 Reaktionäre getötet und viele weitere verwundet. Einige Militärfahrzeuge wurden zerstört. Das ist die zweite machtvolle Aktion, die in letzter Zeit gegen die Marcos-Truppen durchgeführt wurde. Wütend über die erlittenen schweren Verluste unternahmen die reaktionären Kräfte Durchsuchungen in den Dörfern dieser Gegend sowie Kontrolloperationen, die jedoch erfolglos blieben.

 

28. 4. 1978

In den Philippinen weitet sich neben dem bewaffneten Kampf der patriotischen Kräfte, auch die Protestwelle der breiten Volksmassen von Tag zu Tag mehr aus. So fand am 26. April in zwei Dörfern eine Protestdemonstration statt. Die Bauern widersetzten sich der schweren Lage und der schonungslosen Ausbeutung durch die Großgrundbesitzer. Die Kräfte des reaktionären Marco-Regimes gingen gegen die Demonstranten vor und versuchten sie auseinandezutreiben. Es kam sofort zu heftigen Auseinandersetzungen zwischen beiden Seiten. Die reaktionären Truppen eröffneten das Feuer gegen die Demonstranten und töteten 12 Menschen und verwundeten 11 weitere.

 

14. 5. 1978

In den letzten Tagen verstärkten sich die Zusammenstöße zwischen den philippinischen Patrioten und den Kräften des reaktionären Regimes von Manila. Heftige Gefechte entbrannten in der Provinz Tarlac, etwa 100 km nördlich von Manila, wo die reaktionären Kräfte eine breit angelegte Säuberungsaktion unternommen hatten. Bei den Kämpfen wurden 35 Soldaten des reaktionären Regimes getötet oder verwundet. Auch verlautet, dass die philippinischen Patrioten in der Provinz Batan eine mutige Aktion gegen eine Militärstreife der reaktionären Kräfte durchführten. Dabei wurde ein Offizier und 5 Soldaten der reaktionären Clique getötet. Bei dieser Aktion zerstörten die Patrioten auch zwei Militärfahrzeuge.

 

28. 8. 1978

Die philippinischen Patrioten setzen ihren bewaffneten Kampf fort

Die philippinischen Patrioten haben in den letzten Tagen aufeinanderfolgende Angriffe besonders im südlichen Teil des Landes gegen die Truppen des reaktionären Regimes von Manila unternommen. Bei einem heftigen Gefecht beim Dorf Pantao töteten die Patrioten 6 Soldaten und verwundeten 2 weitere. Im östlichen Teil der Insel Jolo umzingelten die Patrioten eine Patrouille der reaktionären Kräfte und eröffneten das Feuer auf sie. Dabei wurden 10 Soldaten getötet oder verwundet und zwei Fahrzeuge in die Luft gesprengt. Wie aus der einheimischen Presse hervorgeht, wurden bei den Aktionen, die die Patrioten in den letzten Tagen unternommen haben, 12 weitere Soldaten der Streitkräfte von Manila getötet.

 

 

19. 9. 1978

Die patriotischen Kräfte der Philippinen versetzen den Streitkräften des Regimes von Manila Schläge

Die patriotischen Kräfte setzen in den verschiedenen Gebieten der Philippinen ihre bewaffneten Aktionen fort, wobei sie Militärobjekten und den Streitkräften des Regimes von Manila Schläge versetzen. Bei der letzten Aktion fügten sie dem Feind Verluste an Soldaten und Rüstungsmaterial zu. So griffen die Patrioten im Süden von Zambianga ein Militärobjekt an und beschädigten es schwer. Der bewaffnete Kampf der Patrioten ist die höchste Stufe der Revolte und des Widerstandes des philippinischen Volkes gegen die volksfeindliche Herrschaft des diktatorischen Regimes.

 

 

Das philippinische Volk verstärkt seinen bewaffneten Kampf

 

Radio Tirana - 15. Juni 1978

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maoism on the Asian continent

 


Asia is perhaps the continent which is most affected by Maoist revisionism. This is nothing surprising, since Asia is the continent where Maoism first appeared. In fact, the influence of Maoist social-fascism over Asian proletariat is so intense that we can affirm that Maoism is one of the main – if not the main – obstacle to socialist revolution in Asia. This is a very grave situation because Asia is the most populated region in the world; it is an almost infinite source of proletarian militants for the future world socialist

revolution.

Of course that the Asian workers are among those who are most deceived by this phony “revolution”, even because Maoism opportunistically claims to be “Marxism-Leninism adapted to Asia’s conditions”. Therefore, it is quite understandable that many Asian workers and movements fell under Maoism’s anti-socialist sway. This is what happens for example with the Maoist guerrillas operating in the Philippines.

Asian Maoists are totally dedicated to detach Asian workers from a truly revolutionary path, and they have publicly declared to be against the formation of a new Communist International:

“Remember the Chinese Communist Party never advocated the formation of an International (...). History remembers that despite the achievement of C.P.C under Mao, the party did not go towards establishing the Communist International or establishing an International Organization. Instead it stressed for the Communist Parties of the camp to apply he universal truths of Marxism-Leninism in the concrete situation of their country. It emphasized that other countries should not copy the Chinese Experience but apply the Chinese experience in accordance to their own condition. The main reason for the C.P.C’s caution was devising through local regimes new forms of neo-colonial rule and only a native communist party could analyze and review such situations. An outside force could not grasp the concrete reality. Thus the necessity of political independence of each country’s communist party.” (http://democracyandclasstruggle.blogspot.com/2011_12_01_archive.html A New Communist International? The thoughts of Comrade Harsh Thakor, December, 2011, edition in English)

As can be observed, the Asian Maoists use the pretext of “the independence of each Communist Party” and of the “concrete situation in each country” to deny the necessity of the formation of a new Communist International. Of course that these arguments used by the Maoists are not in the least valid. It is true that each country has its own specific conditions that must be taken into consideration by the Communist Party. However, the general principles and main foundations of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism-Hoxhaism, the lessons and scientific rules taken from the Soviet Union of comrades Lenin and Stalin and from socialist Albania of comrade Enver Hoxha are applicable and must be accomplished everywhere, in all countries and regions without exception. It is crystal clear that, with this attack, the Asian Maoists are trying to discredit the formation of our Communist International (SH). But there are no obstacles which can prevent us, Stalinists-Hoxhaists, from proving to the Asian working masses that

Maoism is nothing more than a pro-capitalist ideology and we will do our utmost to conquer Asian exploited workers to the side of our invincible anti-revisionist proletarian ideology. We will not spare efforts to liberate Asia proletariat from noxious Maoist ideology.

 

* * *

 

Meanwhile, the National Democrats (NatDems), the supposed "guardians of the true Marxist-Leninist-Maoist doctrine", are openly praising Duterte’s admission of his Leftist bias.

 

 

* * *


"Communist" (Maoist) Party of the Philippines

The Maoists of Philippines are member of the ICOR which follows an Anti-Stalinist-Hoxhaist Line.


The “Communist” Party of the Philippines is one of the most deceitful Maoist parties in the world. In truth, Philippine Maoists managed to fabricate a “revolutionary” aura around them due to the fact that the “C”PP is engaged in an armed struggle against the country’s pro-American puppet government. This situation gravely misleads world workers in general, and Philippine workers in particular, who wrongly see the “C”PP as a genuine socialist party. The world bourgeoisie also plays a great role in presenting the “C”PP as an “hard-line communist group”, thus inculcating in the proletariat the false idea that Philippine Maoists are authentic anti-capitalist revolutionaries. This is completely false. Just like the other Maoists parties, the “C”PP is a mere counter-revolutionary and anti-socialist organization which aims to keep Philippine workers subjected to wage slavery and bourgeois despotism.

The archipelago of the Philippines is among the poorest and most exploited countries of the planet. After having been a Spanish colony, the Philippines became a neo-colony of the American imperialists, who dominated and continue to dominate the entire political-economic system of the Philippines in benefit of the American monstrous corporations which take immense superprofits from the exploitation of Phillipines’ resources and workforce. One of the best examples of this domination was the imposition of the fascist dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, who exercised an excruciating repression over Philippine proletariat while accumulating an incalculable personal fortune through serving the interests of the American plutocrats. In the late 80’s, Marcos’ clique was ousted from power but his continuers still rule Philippines in favor of the interests of the pro-American bourgeoisie comprador. Of course, like happens in many other countries, so in the Philippines, the Maoists represent the interests of the Philippine national bourgeoisie which is deprived from the control of the main means of production because of the dominion of the pro-American bourgeoisie comprador. In face of this, the Philippine Maoists do their utmost to hide the fact that far from struggling for the overthrow of the entire oppressive order, they only pretend to replace a certain branch of the exploiters by another. With this purpose, the social-fascists of the “C”PP try to depict their defense of the Philippine national bourgeoisie as “anti-imperialism”:


This political programme must serve to weld together the broadest unity of progressive forces and groups to isolate US imperialism and the die-hard reactionaries, composed of the comprador bourgeoisie (...).”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/documents/rectify-errors-rebuild-the-party, Rectify Errors, Rebuild the Party!, December, 1968, edition in English)

Let us broaden our revolutionary united front and fight US imperialism and the Aquino regime.”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/statements/broaden-our-ranks-and-advance-the-revolutionary-armed-struggle-against-us-imperialism-and-the-aquino-regime, Persevere in advancing the NDFP 12-Point Program, the only viable alternative to the anti-people program of the US-Aquino regime, April,2012, edition in English)

4. (...) the revolutionary armed struggle and mass movement in Mindanao focus against the brutal(...) suppression campaign of the US-Aquino regime and against those multi-national companies that prevent the people from realizing their aspiration for agrarian reform and national industrialization.”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/statements/broaden-our-ranks-and-advance-the-revolutionary-armed-struggle-against-us-imperialism-and-the-aquino-regime, Persevere in advancing the NDFP 12-Point Program, the only viable alternative to the anti-people program of the US-Aquino regime, April, 2012, edition in English)


These statements are clearly aimed at presenting American imperialism and the multinational foreign corporations as being the only enemies of Philippine people. Through this, the social-fascists of the “C”PP try to conquer Philippine toiling masses to the side of the national bourgeoisie, because American imperialism holds an almost exclusive control over the Philippines. Consequently, by promoting and encouraging the struggle against foreign imperialism in general and against American imperialism in particular, the Philippine Maoists are once again doing their utmost to cover the greedy intentions of the Philippine national bourgeoisie with “anti-imperialist” and even “progressive” masks. They do this in order to make Philippine workers forget that all sections of the bourgeoisie are equally exploitative and repressive, and that all of them without exception must be totally eliminated, including the national “patriotic” bourgeoisie, of course.

Moreover, the “C”PP explicitly upholds the most anti-Marxist and counter-revolutionary theories ever put forward by Mao:


The Communist Party of the Philippines must rely on peasant revolutionary bases to defeat the reactionary state power in the countryside before capturing the cities. Comrade Mao Tsetung has extensively shown with genius in theory and in practice how the countryside can encircle the cities (...). The universal truth of the theory of using the countryside to encircle the city has been proven invincible.

The theory of people’s war is universal and applies to Philippine conditions. (...) The cities are actually the bastions of bourgeois state power before the people’s democratic forces develop the capability of capturing them. The counter-revolutionary army must first be defeated in the countryside.”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/documents/rectify-errors-rebuild-the-party, RectifyErrors, Rebuild the Party!, December, 1968, edition in English)


The Maoist concepts of “peasant revolutionary war” and of “encirclement of the cities by the countryside” were already thoroughfully explained and unmasked in the DWM I and DWM II. They are expressions of Mao’s denial of the hegemonic role of the proletariat in the revolution and its alleged replacement by the peasantry. Therefore, we will only recall the words of the authentic Marxist-Leninists about:


- Mao’s peasant “revolution”:

The Mao Zedong though was always opposed in theory and in practice to the correct Leninist idea that during the epoch of imperialism, in each revolution - be it democratic, anti-imperialist, of national liberation or socialist – the leadership must belong to the proletariat.

Mao based the struggle against Japanese occupiers on the peasantry. In the same manner, he did not see the regime of new democracy as the power of the working class, but of the peasantry.

After the liberation in 1949 and during the stage in which socialism was allegedly being built on China, the proletariat was invariably deprived of its hegemonic role

(...).” (Naun Guxho, La Pensée MaoTseToung, theorie et pratique antiproletariennes, 1979, translated from the French language)

In his theoretical writings Mao Tsetung says that China could not have been liberated without the leadership of the peasantry, that the revolution in China was a peasant revolution. According to him, the peasantry was the most revolutionary class, that it had to lead the revolution «and did lead the revolution».

This is a major theoretical error on the part of Mao Tsetung and shows that he was not a Marxist-Leninist but an eclectic and a bourgeois-democrat.

Mao Tsetung, as a progressive democrat, was for a bourgeois-democratic revolution, and when China was liberated, he clung to the same views. According to his views, the peasantry was the leading force and the working class had to be its ally (...). Mao Tsetung wanted to transform this bourgeois democratic theory of his into a universal theory and, in fact, this «theory» was called «Mao Tsetung thought».” (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)


- Mao’s theory of the “encirclement of the city by the countryside”:


Mao formulated and defended non-Marxist theses such as that which is stressed in his obituary:

«The countryside must encircle the city». His obituary stresses that, -«without acting in this way the revolution cannot be carried out»!

This means that the peasantry has to lead the proletarian revolution. This thesis is anti-Leninist. (...)

From a long time back we have not been in agreement with the views of Mao Tsetung, especially with his saying that «the countryside must encircle the city».

We, as Marxist-Leninist, have never accepted this view of Mao Tsetung's because in this way Mao Tsetung considers the peasantry the most revolutionary class. This is an anti-Marxist view. The most revolutionary class of society is the proletariat, therefore it must lead the revolution in alliance with the peasantry, which is the most

faithful ally of the proletariat.” (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)


Mao Zedong’s thesis of surrounding the cities by the countryside is not simply the description of the course of the military operations in China’s liberation war.

To the contrary, it is a cover for definite anti-Marxist-Leninist theories which negate the hegemony of the proletariat and the role of the cities in the revolution. No, “Mao’s road” of encircling the cities from the countryside is a diabolical theory of distrust of the proletariat which replaces proletarian hegemony in the revolution with that of the peasantry.

This theory that in China the revolution could do without the urban proletariat and that the revolution didn’t have to be organized in the cities simultaneously with the work in the countryside, is another ugly manifestation of the pragmatism of Mao Zedong Thought.

This road was not illuminated by Marxism-Leninism. Quite the opposite. (...)

Thus, for Mao, it was only the rural areas and the peasantry which were “indispensable, vital positions of the Chinese revolution” whereas the cities and the proletariat were of less consequence or of no consequence at all and were to take a back seat and wait for liberation to be brought to them from the peasantry! Of course, nowhere do the Chinese give a serious argument for this line which is diametrically opposed to Marxism-Leninism, to the experience of the October Revolution, to the correct advice of Stalin, etc. No, this anti-Marxist line is justified with idiotic dithyrambs such as “revolutionary villages can encircle the cities, but revolutionary cities cannot detach themselves from the villages”!” (Documents of the Marxist-Leninist World Movement of comrade Enver Hoxha, U.S. Neo-Revisionism as the American Expression of the International Opportunist Trend of Chinese Revisionism, Central Organization of U.S. Marxist-Leninists, 1979, edition in English)

The embracement of this kind of social-bourgeois “theories” is totally in agreement with the aims of the “C”PP:

Let us build the broadest possible alliance and mobilize the biggest number of people in democratic and anti-imperialist mass struggles (...). Let us gather the broadest possible support for (...) the people’s mass struggles.”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/statements/set-sights-on-intensifying-the-people-s-anti-imperialist-and-democratic-struggles-as-we-mark-the-39th-anniversary-of-

the-ndfp, Set sights on intensifying the people's anti-imperialist and democratic struggles as we mark the 39th anniversary of the NDFP, April, 2012, edition in English)


These references to the “biggest number of people” and to the “broadest alliance” are clear signs of the opportunistic and pragmatic nature of the Philippine Maoists, for whom the anti-imperialist struggle must be a Russian salad which will include all kinds of reactionaries and which will promote the interests of the Philippine national bourgeoisie while preventing that same anti-imperialist struggle from advancing towards an authentically revolutionary and Marxist-Leninist combat against all kinds of oppression and exploitation, against the bourgeoisie in its entirety and not only against a certain part of it.

Indeed, these declarations represent an attempt by the “C”PP to put the anti-imperialist struggle under the control of the Philippine national bourgeoisie. This is in total accord with Mao’s theory of the “new democratic revolution” in which the national bourgeoisie would be the ruling “anti-imperialist” class.

After all, it is not by chance that the Philippine Maoists openly praise Mao’s “new democracy” and they don’t hesitate in declaring:


The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) was re-established on December 26, 1968 on the theoretical foundations of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is the advanced detachment of the Filipino proletariat leading the new-democratic revolution. The CPP organizes and leads the New People's Army that wages revolutionary armed struggle in the countryside.” (http://www.philippinerevolution.net, The CPP, edition in English)


Yes, there is no doubt that the “C”PP is engaged in an armed struggle. But not every armed struggle is a truly revolutionary and red armed struggle. In truth, the counter-revolutionary and pro-capitalist character of the “C”PP is clearly expressed even within the armed struggle which the Philippine Maoists try to present as proof of their supposed “anti-revisionist ideology”:


Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, including the executive department and its agencies, hereinafter referred to as the GRP AND THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC FRONT OF THE PHILIPPINES, including the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the New People’s Army (NPA), hereinafter referred to as the NDFP Hereinafter referred to as “the Parties”,

Article 1. This Agreement is meant to meet the needs arising from the concrete conditions of the Filipino people concerning violations of human rights and the principles of international humanitarian law, and to find principled ways and means of rendering justice to all the victims of such violations.

Article 2. This Agreement seeks to confront, remedy and prevent the most serious human rights violations in terms of civil and political rights, as well as to uphold, protect and promote the full scope of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including:

4 - (...) the right not to be subjected to campaigns of incitement to violence against one’s person. (...)

11 - The right to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of conscience, (...) and the right not to be punished or held accountable in the exercise of these rights.

12 - The right to free speech, press, association and assembly, and to seek redress of grievances. (...)

18 - The right to own property and the means of production and consumption that are obtained through (...) entrepreneurship, skill, inventiveness and intellectual merit (...).

Article 3. The Parties decry all violations and abuses of human rights.”

(http://www.philippinerevolution.net/documents/comprehensive-agreement-on-respect-for-human-rights-and-international-humanitarian-law, Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, March, 1998, edition in English)


This incredibly reactionary statement is taken from an “agreement” signed between Philippine’s bourgeois pro-imperialist government and the NDPF (of which the “C”PP is the main force). Here, we can see the true face of the alleged “revolutionary armed struggle of the Philippine Maoists”. As can be observed, the “C”PP happily accepts and embraces all disgusting bourgeois-capitalist concepts about “human rights”, “political and social rights”, “freedom of speech”, etc...This kind of bourgeois garbage is completely hypocritical. If we follow and apply Maoism, this means to perpetuate capitalism, and if we perpetuate capitalism, things like “freedom of expression”, “freedom of press”, etc... will solely benefit the ruling classes who control the mass media and are able to inculcate their ideology deeply in the workers’ minds. On the other side, only those people who defend bourgeois exploitative order are allowed to have “free speech” in these media. And the same happens with so-called “human rights”. For an authentic Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Hoxhaist party, there can be no agreements on “human rights” or on “political freedoms” with the oppressive classes which are the only ones being favored by this kind of hypocritical abstract concepts. Under a genuine proletarian dictatorship, there can be no “human rights” to the capitalists and to those who support them. The reactionaries will never have “freedom of speech”, “freedom of expression” or “political rights” under proletarian power, because otherwise this would gravely jeopardize the construction of the socialist society. To give “rights” to the reactionaries would be synonym of opening the path to the restoration of capitalist-bourgeois tyranny.

And the Philippine Maoists go even further with their anti-communist delirium when they gladly agree on “freedom of political convictions” and on “the right to own property and the means of production and consumption that are obtained through (...) entrepreneurship, skill, inventiveness and intellectual merit (...).” If there were still doubts about the social-fascist nature of the Philippine Maoists, we think that these affirmations prove it beyond any doubts. The pro-capitalists of the “C”PP are not only recognizing and supporting capitalist private property, but they also display their infinite hypocrisy by saying that “private property must be won through skill and entrepreneurship”(!!!). This is amazing, because if we are going to ask the billionaires who rule the world, they will all claim that they obtained their wealth through their own “work, skill and entrepreneurship”. The capitalists call “skill”, “entrepreneurship and “inventive merit” to their ability of fiercely oppressing and exploiting the workers in order to accumulate outrageous profits. Therefore, this statement is an open admission by the Philippine Maoists that they defend and support the perpetuation of capitalist order (of which private property is one of the main pillars).

Another very interesting clause assured in the agreement between the bourgeoisie comprador and the Philippine Maoists is “the right not to be subjected to campaigns of incitement to violence against one’s person”. In this clause, we can find total negation of the possibility of achieving socialism and communism, because their accomplishment necessarily involves the implementation of proletarian dictatorship, and the proletarian dictatorship cannot be implemented without the intensive promotion, encouragement and use of harsh violence against the capitalist-imperialist exploiters. Indeed, this violence will surely be widespread and the proletariat led by the Stalinist-Hoxhaist will stop at nothing to eliminate world capitalist system and to advance towards world socialism and world communism. And if to achieve a stateless and classless society it is necessary to physically annihilate all the anti-communists in this earth, we will certainly do it! Everything for the world socialist revolution! We, Stalinist-Hoxhaists, are not bound by the ridiculous concepts of “human rights” or of “political freedoms” and much less by the ultra-reactionary concepts of “freedom of conscience” and of “the right to own private property”. The only purpose of these “freedoms” is to keep bourgeois exploitation alive, is to postpone the red proletarian revolution.

Contrary to what happens with the Philippine Maoists, we, Stalinists-Hoxhaists, are warriors for socialism. We are not like the bourgeois sentimentalists, who hide their support for a dreadful system which ruthlessly kills billions of workers behind hypocritical concerns for “human rights”. And also contrary to what the revisionists think, far from shocking the workers, our positions will attract them because these are consistent and coherent Marxist-Leninist stands which are unchallengeable and invincible. It is the revisionist, opportunistic and pro-capitalist positions of the Maoists in general, and of the Philippine Maoists in particular which cause outrage among the world proletarians and which allow them to see Maoism’s true ideological and class colors.

 

 

The Revolution 1896

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Background

In the years before the 11th century, the Philippines was divided into numerous principalities known as barangays, a name derived from Malayan boats called balangays. These small political units were ruled by datus, rajahs or sultans. In 1565, European colonization began in earnest when Spanish explorer Miguel López de Legazpi arrived from Mexico and formed the first European settlements in Cebu. Beginning with just five ships and five hundred men accompanied by Augustinian monks, and further strengthened in 1567 by two hundred soldiers, he was able to repel competing Portuguese colonizers and to create the foundations for the Spanish colonization of the Archipelago. In 1571, the Spanish occupied the kingdoms of Maynila and Tondo and established Manila as the capital of the Spanish East Indies. This Spanish colonization united the Philippine archipelago into a single political entity.

 

The Manila-Acapulco trade route started in 1568 and Spanish treasure fleets (white) and its eastwards rivals, the Portuguese India Armadas routes of 1498-1640 (blue)

The decline of Galleon Trade between Manila and Acapulco was caused by the arrival of the ship Buen Consejo in 1765. The Buen Consejo took the shorter route[clarification needed] via Cape of Good Hope, a rocky headland on the Atlantic coast controlled by Portugal. The journey through the Cape of Good Hope takes three months from Spain to the Philippines, whereas the journey of the Galleon Trade takes five months. The event proved that Portugal was already past its prime in controlling the route via the Cape of Good Hope, which was already under Dutch control as early as 1652. Shorter journeys to and fro Spain brought faster trade and quicker spread of ideas from Europe.[1] Also, the growing sense of economic insecurity in the later years of the 18th century led the Creoles to turn their attention to agricultural production. The Creoles gradually changed from a very government-dependent class into capital-driven entrepreneurs. Their turning of attention towards guilded soil caused the rise of the large private haciendas. Various government and church positions were transferred to the roles of the Peninsulares who were characterized mostly in the 19th century Philippine history as corrupt bureaucrats.  

During the 1780s, two institutions were established in order to enhance the economic capacity of the Philippines. These were the Economic Societies of Friends of the Country and the Royal Company of the Philippines. The former, introduced by Governor-General Jose Basco in 1780, was composed of leading men in business, industry and profession, the society was tasked to explore and exploit the natural resources of the archipelago. It offered local and foreign scholarships, besides training grants in agriculture and established an academy of design. It was also credited to the carabao ban of 1782, the formation of the silversmiths and gold beaters guild and the construction of the first papermill in the Philippines in 1825. The latter, created by Carlos III on March 10, 1785, was granted exclusive monopoly of bringing to Manila; Chinese and Indian goods and shipping them directly to Spain via the Cape of Good Hope. It was stiffly objected by the Dutch and English who saw it as a direct attack on their trade of Asian goods. It was also vehemently opposed by the traders of the Galleon trade who saw it as competition.

Before the opening of Manila to foreign trade, the Spanish authorities discouraged foreign merchants from residing in the colony and engaging in business. In 1823, Governor-General Mariano Ricafort promulgated an edict prohibiting foreign merchants from engaging in retail trade and visiting the provinces for purposes of trade. However, by the royal decree of September 6, 1834, the privileges of the Company were abolished and the port of Manila was opened to trade.


Shortly after opening Manila to world trade, the Spanish merchants began to lose their commercial supremacy in the Philippines. In 1834, restrictions against foreign traders were relaxed when Manila became an open port. By the end of 1859, there were 15 foreign firms in Manila: seven of which are British, three are American, two French, two Swiss and one German. In response to Sinibaldo de Mas' recommendations, more ports were opened by Spain to world trade. The ports of Sual, Pangasinan, Iloilo and Zamboanga were opened in 1855. Cebu was opened in 1860, Legazpi and Tacloban in 1873.[13] Like Japan that rushed into modernization and national transformation during the Meiji Restoration, the Philippines and its people saw that the Spanish and its government is not as invincible as it was two centuries before. The Indios and the Creoles became more influenced by foreign ideas of liberalism as the Philippines became more open to foreigners. Foreigners who visited the Philippines had noticed the speed of the circulation of the ideas of Voltaire and Thomas Paine. Songs about liberty and equality were also being sung at the time. Some Spanish who foresaw a "fast verging" Indio takeover of the archipelago began to send money out of the Philippines.

First Propaganda Movement (1860-1872)

The Katipunan reached an overwhelming membership and attracted almost the lowly of the Filipino class. In June 1896, Bonifacio sent an emissary to Dapitan to reach Rizal's support, but the latter refused for an armed revolution. On August 19, 1896, Katipunan was discovered by a Spanish friar which started the Philippine Revolution.  

The revolution flared up initially into the eight provinces of Central Luzon. General Emilio Aguinaldo, a member of the Katipunan, spread an armed resistance through Southern Tagalog region where he liberated Cavite towns little by little. In 1896 and 1897, leadership conflicts between Bonifacio and Aguinaldo culminated in the execution or assassination of the former by the latter's soldiers. The Imus Assembly and Tejeros Convention were convened but to no avail. Bonifacio died by May of 1897. Thereafter, Aguinaldo agreed to a truce with the Pact of Biak-na-Bato and Aguinaldo and his fellow revolutionaries were exiled to Hong Kong. However, not all of the revolutionary generals complied with the agreement. One, General Francisco Makabulos, established a Central Executive Committee to serve as the interim government until a more suitable one was created. The revolution formally resumed on May 19, 1898, with the return of Emilio Aguinaldo to the Philippines during the Spanish-American War.

Revolutionaries gather during the Malolos congress of the First Philippine Republic.

           

In 1898, as conflicts continued in the Philippines, the USS Maine, having been sent to Cuba because of U.S. concerns for the safety of its citizens during an ongoing Cuban revolution, exploded and sank in Havana harbor. This event precipitated the Spanish–American War. Being this as obstruction of his blockade, offered war—after which the Germans backed down.

The U.S. invited Aguinaldo to return to the Philippines in the hope he would rally Filipinos against the Spanish colonial government. Aguinaldo arrived on May 19, 1898, via transport provided by Dewey. By the time U.S. land forces had arrived, the Filipinos had taken control of the entire island of Luzon, except for the walled city of Intramuros. On June 12, 1898, Aguinaldo declared the independence of the Philippines in Kawit, Cavite, establishing the First Philippine Republic under Asia's first democratic constitution, the Malolos Constitution.

However, Spain and the United States sent commissioners to Paris to draw up the terms of the Treaty of Paris which ended the Spanish–American War and gave the Americans an official signal to occupy the new Republic. Although there was substantial domestic opposition, the United States decided to annex the Philippines. In addition to Guam and Puerto Rico, Spain was forced in the negotiations to hand over the Philippines to the U.S. in exchange for US$20,000,000.00. U.S. President McKinley justified the annexation of the Philippines by saying that it was "... a gift from the gods" and that since "they were unfit for self-government, ... there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them", in spite of the Philippines having been already Christianized by the Spanish over the course of several centuries.

The Republic resisted the U.S. occupation, resulting in the Philippine–American War (1899–1913). The poorly-equipped Filipino troops were easily overpowered by American troops in open combat, but they were formidable opponents in guerrilla warfare. Malolos, the revolutionary capital, was captured on March 31, 1899. Aguinaldo and his government escaped however, establishing a new capital at San Isidro, Nueva Ecija. On June 5, 1899, Antonio Luna, Aguinaldo's most capable military commander, was killed by Aguinaldo's guards in an apparent assassination while visiting Cabanatuan, Nueva Ecija to meet with Aguinaldo.[26] Aguinaldo dissolved the regular army on November 13 and ordered the establishment of decentralized guerrilla commands in each of several military zones. Another key general, Gregorio del Pilar, was killed on December 2, 1899 in the Battle of Tirad Pass—a rear guard action to delay the Americans while Aguinaldo made good his escape through the mountains.

Aguinaldo was captured at Palanan, Isabela on March 23, 1901 and was brought to Manila. Convinced of the futility of further resistance, he swore allegiance to the United States and issued a proclamation calling on his compatriots to lay down their arms, officially bringing an end to the war. However, sporadic insurgent resistance to American rule continued in various parts of the Philippines, notably insurgencies such as the Irreconcilables and the Moro Rebellion, until 1913.


The Insular Government and the Commonwealth Era (1901-1941)

             

March 23, 1935: Constitutional Convention. Seated, left to right: George H. Dern, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Manuel L. Quezon

The Tydings-McDuffie Act provided for the drafting and guidelines of a Constitution, for a 10-year "transitional period" as the Commonwealth of the Philippines before the granting of Philippine independence. On May 5, 1934, the Philippines legislature passed an act setting the election ofconvention delegates. Governor General Frank Murphy designated July 10 as the election date, and the convention heldits inaugural session on July 30. The completed draft constitution was approved by the convention on February 8, 1935, approved by U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt on March 23, and ratified by popular vote on May 14.

On 17 September 1935, presidential elections were held. Candidates included former president Emilio Aguinaldo, the Iglesia Filipina Independiente leader Gregorio Aglipay, and others. Manuel L. Quezon and Sergio Osmeña of the Nacionalista Party were proclaimed the winners, winning the seats of president and vice-president, respectively. The Commonwealth Government was inaugurated on the morning of November 15, 1935, in ceremonies held on the steps of the Legislative Building in Manila. The event was attended by a crowd of around 300,000 people.

Japanese Occupation (1941-1945)

José Paciano Laurel was the only president of the Second Philippine Republic.

               

Japan launched a surprise attack on the Clark Air Base in Pampanga on December 8, 1941, just ten hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Aerial bombardment, which destroyed most of the American aircraft in the islands, was followed by landings of ground troops on Luzon. The defending Philippine and United States troops were under the command of General Douglas MacArthur. Under the pressure of superior numbers, the defending forces withdrew to the Bataan Peninsula and to the island of Corregidor at the entrance to Manila Bay. On January 2, 1942, General MacArthur declared the capital city, Manila, an open city to prevent its destruction.  The Philippine defense continued until the final surrender of United States-Philippine forces on the Bataan Peninsula in April 1942 and on Corregidor in May of the same year.

The Philippine Executive Commission was established in 1942 with Jorge B. Vargas as its first Chairman. The PEC was created as the temporary care-taker government of the Greater Manila area and eventually of the whole Philippines during the Japanese occupation of the country during World War II. On May 6, 1943, Japanese Premier Hideki Tojo during a visit to the Philippines pledged to establish the Republic of the Philippines. This pledge of Tojo prompted the "KALIBAPI," to call for a convention on June 19, 1943 and twenty of its members were elected to form the Preparatory Commission for Independence. The commission tasked to draft a constitution for the Philippine Republic and elected head was José P. Laurel. The Preparatory Commission presented its draft Constitution on September 4, 1943 and three days later, the "KALIBAPI" general assembly ratified the draft Constitution.

               

The Japanese-sponsored establishment of the Republic of the Philippines was proclaimed on October 14, 1943 with José P. Laurel being sworn-in as President. On the same day, a "Pact of Alliance" was signed between the new Philippine Republic and the Japanese government that was ratified two days later by the National Assembly. The Philippine Republic was immediately recognized by Japan, and in the succeeding days by Germany, Thailand, Manchukuo, Burma, Croatia and Italy while neutral Spain sent its "greetings."

In October of 1944, General Douglas MacArthur, the overall commander of American forces in the Pacific, had gathered enough additional troops and supplies to begin the retaking of the Philippines, landing with Sergio Osmena who had assumed the Presidency after Quezon's death. The battles entailed long fierce fighting; some of the Japanese continued to fight until the official surrender of the Empire of Japan on September 2, 1945. The Second Republic was dissolved earlier, on August 14. After their landing, Filipino and American forces also undertook measures to suppress the Huk movement, which was originally founded to fight the Japanese Occupation.

Fascist Marcos

 Martial Law (1972-1986)

           

On September 22, 1972, former Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile was reportedly ambushed by communists while his staff car was driving in San Juan, killing his driver but leaving him unscathed. The assassination attempt, along with the growing threat of the New People's Army and citizen unrest, gave Marcos enough reason to declare Proclamation No. 1081, which he signed on September 17 (postdated to September 21), the same day.  Marcos, who henceforth ruled by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, abolished Congress, shut down media establishments, and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists.

           

The first years of Martial Law saw an increase in military hardware and personnel in the Philippines, giving a precursor to reduce military dependence on American personnel to police the country. In 1984, American lease on Philippines military bases were extended only by 5 years, as compared to 25 years' extension in 1959. Agricultural production, especially in rice production (which increased 42% in 8 years), was increased to decrease dependence on food importation. Philippine culture and arts were promoted with the establishment of institutions such as the National Arts Center. However, to help finance a number of economic development projects, the Marcos government borrowed large amounts of money from international lenders. Thus, proving that the country was not yet fully independent economically. The Philippines' external debt rose from $360 million (US) in 1962 to $28.3 billion in 1986, making the Philippines one of the most indebted countries in Asia.

 

DOCUMENTS

 

1899

Adress of the antiimperialist league in the USA

 

 

February 10, 1899

Report of the Executive Committee of the anti-imperialist League

 

 

Yankee Colonies

 

Harry Gannes

1930