Who are the Volunteers for Popular Democracy? EDICIO "Ed" de la Torre, priest of the Divine Word Society, is today on leave from the order. Starting out as a chaplain in the Federation of Free Peasants (FFF) and an activist in the Christian social demoeratic group Xi Rho, he radicalized and in 1972 became chair of Christians for National Liberation (CNL).
A leader of the National Democratic Front (NDF) from its estab lishment in 1973, he was arrested and spent over five years in prison. He was conditionally freed in April 1980 and sent to Rome and Louvain for "study".
Arrested again on his return to the Philippines in April 1982, Ed de la Torre regained his liberty after Corazon Aquino's victory. Today, he leads the Volunteers for Popular Democracy (VPD), along with Horacio "Boy" Morales, ex-chair of the NDF.
PHILIPPINES crats to work together. Lakas, moreover, like us, is developing the theme of "popular power."
It should also be noted that the social democrats of Bandila are playing a much more limited role in Lakas than was the case before. On the one hand, they have very likely gotten too caught up in governmental and administrative activity. On the other, they are too busy relaunching their own political party to play their role giving impetus to Lakas. They lack cadres. Lakas must be helped to put into practice its conceptions of popular power.
Q. You explained that one of the VPD's tasks was to support the progressive wing of the government by offering concrete proposals. In doing that, don't you risk being associated with a bourgeois government and compromised?
A. I don't think that is the danger. We have no illusions about what this government can offer. It is a coalition of forces. You could even say that Cory herself is a coalition! It can be thought that progressive elements are in a minority in this government. And it is not enough to keep an eye on Enrile, the minister for defence. General Ramos, the chief of the general staff, has the reputation of being a "professional" officer. But he could step into politics, like the Thai generals. He has a good image and important connections in the United States. He comes from a family that is very much involved in the political game. And Ramos controls the police, which is a particularly repressive body.
There is no question of having any illusions. And it is true that there have not beeen any key social or economic transformations. The strategic facts of the situation have not changed qualitatively. This is often invoked by the left that tends too often to minimize the importance of what happened in February. Nonetheless, something definitely changed, something important. And today we have to take the maximum advantage of the possibilities in the situation. We have to make the maximum possible gains. That is what we are concerned about now.
You are familiar with the pamphlet that serves as our point of reference. (1) It is not a rounded program, good for all times! To take the maximum advantage of the present situation, to exploit all the potential, we have to operate on two levels. On the one hand, we have to make a common front with all democratic elements against the neofascists. On the other hand, we have to bolster popular
'Popular democracy: realising a possible dream, ' VPD, 1986.
5
Question. Shortly after your release, together with Boy Morales, also an ex-prisoner, you launched the Volunteers for Popular Democracy. What is the place of this new organization in the Filipino left?
Answer. Too many people have tended to overestimate our project. What we are trying to do with the VPD is simple. It was in the detention camp, a few days before being released, that we started to discuss it. After Cory's victory, it seemed likely that we would soon be released. The problem was what to do then.
We tried to analyze the political situation and certain tasks that we saw as necessary. The dictatorship had not been completely dismantled. In this area, the struggle was to continue.
In opposition to those forces that wanted to consolidate an "elitist democracy," it was necessary to fight for the rise of a popular democracy. Don't think that this is a conception. It is only a descriptive term, including in particular the idea of a direct democracy not dependent on the traditional parties, as well as the idea of political pluralism and a multi-party system.
There was a clear need to fight for the application of a policy in accordance with the needs of the people and of regrouping the left forces, as well as centrist currents. Hence the necessity for a political coalition.
Moreover, after our release, something happened that we had not anticipated. That is, ministers and freshly appointed progressive officials asked us to help them come up with guidelines for their work. For this purpose, we set up a working group.
On the one hand, the VPD have thus set up a working group helping the government's liberal and progressive wing; and on the other they intervene in the mass movement, outside of the government, to assist in the formation of a political coalition.
Q. In this perspective, what position do you take toward "alliances" of activists, such as Bayan and Lakas, and toward the political movements?
A. We could have become members of Lakas ng Sambayanan. But a section of the "yellows" [yellow is the color of the Aquino forces], as well as sections of the National Democrats showed a certain lack of enthusiasm for this prospect. On the other hand, we did not want to go into Bayan. So, we decided to do something else. But it was not to form a third alliance between Lakas and Bayan. We want rather to help to build bridges between these groupings, to be a link. We do not want either to be a new party or to be identified with an existing party.
In view of our political history and choices, we naturally have been identified with the national democratic movement. We are not trying to run away from this political identity! But we are making a conscious effort to get liberal democrats, social democrats and national demo-
International Viewpoint 8 December 1986
democracy against the supporters of elitist democracy.
This problem is not a new one. It dates back to 1983, after the murder of Ninoy Aquino and the entry into struggle of new opposition sectors. In prison, we analyzed that there were two legal opposition currents - an elitist traditional current and a distinctly popular current.
Even though the situation has changed after the overthrow of Marcos, the strong pressure brought to bear by neofascist forces makes it necessary to maintain a broad democratic front. We cannot remain indifferent to the conflicts going on in the government administration.
We are ready to support the liberal wing so that it will be stronger. But the liberals must also understand that without the left or in opposition to the left they will be impotent. Against the danger of a return to elitist democracy, we are fighting for popular democracy.
Q. Can you specify more what you mean by popular democracy?
A. Up till now we have only begun to take up this question. We do not yet have enough theoretical studies on this at our disposal. Moreover, we have to study the various concrete experiments that have been made in this realm. We have not yet tried out real forms of popular democracy.
It was in a speech by Cory that I first saw the expression "popular democracy"! I looked for the source of the formula. I found out that it was a social democrat who had given Cory the idea. He himself had picked it up from elements of the independent Marxist left in the Philippines. So, I am not the only one to use the expression!
Everyone has to give their own definition of popular democracy. The important thing, it seems to me, is the theme of councils, of popular councils. That is new. We should help to promote the emergence of such councils. This is a timely question. It is even a subject of the constitutional discussions promoted by the Law Center at the University of the Philippines.
I am thinking in particular of mechanisms such as the right to recall elected representatives at any moment, the right of direct initiative regarding elections and adopting laws and the possibility of recourse to referendums. These are some of the elements of a popular democracy.
There still are few Filipino writings on this subject. I am working on this now. I might also cite the work of Alex Magno, Ed Garcia and Conrado Guerrero. (2) What we want to do is to help in carrying out a concrete test of popular councils, based for example on a municipality where the mayor is a progressive.
Q. Since the February Revolution, a series of discussions have been started up in the Filipino left, including in the CPP. Is this a demonstration of richness or of weakness?
A. For the Philippine left, including the CPP, in the present context, I don't think that these debates are a negative factor. On the contrary, I think that they are a positive factor for all of the left. Left activists were often seen as politically too passive in this area. To the extent that I can judge the reactions of the progressive milieu, I have the impression, for example, that the reaction to the announcement of the CPP's self-criticism and of the existence of an internal debate has been favorable. The CPP was, therefore, capable of having an internal debate after all.
I don't think that debate for debate's sake is always a good thing. I don't think that the mere existence of such a debate is in itself the ultimate test of democracy. I think that a democratic spirit has to be further developed in the left. But it is important to note that the debate that is needed now could get underway and that differences can be expressed.
Q. In an interview that you gave in 1980, you stressed the influence of the education passed on by the family, Church and the schools, which has not prepared Filipinos for exercizing their democratie rights. (3) Even in the national democratic movement, you noted then, movement, you noted then, "the exercize of democracy remains weak. Are you still concerned about that?
A. Yes, of course. But we encounter a lot of problems in this area. For example, in the Filipino left there is an "oral culture" as regards discussion. Today, after the experience of the boycott of the last presidential elections, a lot of people are expressing their opinions. But the discussion within the left remains poorly struetured. To get to the bottom of things, you have to be able to pursue a debate, including at a theoretical level, in writing. Otherwise, it cannot be taken up in the movement as a whole, on a national scale. And you have to be able to recognize that there are a lot of unresolved questions. We don't have all the answers, far from it. Unfortunately, few writings are appearing, and they do not do justice to the oral debate. A new tradition of debate has to be incorporated.
Q. What is the history of Christians for National Liberation (CNL)?
What role has this component of the NDF played and what role can it play? Is it to be the CPP's "religious fraction," or a distinct political current?
The CNL has hever been the CPP's "religious fraction" - the question has never been posed in such terms - but rather the religious section of the NDF. Let us look back briefly over the history of the CNL.
At its origin, the CNL appeared as an independent formation. It was not the result of a project worked out by the national democratic circles at the time the NDF did not yet exist). It was not the result of a decision by the CPP. It was a spontaneous development.
But when martial law was imposed on the country in 1972, the CPP was the only organization that provided an apparatus able to protect activists from repression. The CNL therefore benefited from the capacity for underground work of the apparatus led by the CPP. As for the CPP, thanks to this association, it was able to gain new cadres.
It was in 1981, at the Second Congress of the CNL, that this current defined a real project of its own, transforming the Church. This was not part of the traditional concerns of the Marxist circles of the CPP. But the latter faced an insoluble dilemma with regard to the Church.
It was difficult to get along with the Church as it was, but it was just as impossible to destroy it. For some Marxists, the project put forward by the CNL was "rightist," for others it was "ultraleftist." But given the dilemma they were in, they did not oppose this attempt to transform the Church.
The CNL had thus sort of "looped the loop." They redeveloped an autonomous and distinct character within the framework of a common struggle. That was demonstrated on the organizational, political and ideologicaltheological levels.
For a long time, the CNL did not much concern themselves with theology. They were busy with politics. But theology always kept coming back to the surface! It could not be ignored, and it was necessary to take it into account directly. We
2. Alex Magno and Ed Garcia teach at the University of the Philippines. Ed Garcia is a former Jesuit priest who began his political career in 1970 in founding Lakasdiwa (Spiritual Force). He radicalized, and subsequently spent seven years in Latin America. He returned to the Philippines in 1981 and became general secretary of Lakas.
3. "We must transform structures," interview given to "Breakthrough' (revised version, 1980), republished in Edicio de la Torre, "Touching ground, taking root,' p. 186, Social-Pastoral Institute, Philippines, 1986.
International Viewpoint 8 December 1986
PHILIPPINES could not get rid of theology and its vocabulary. We had to fight on every ground, including that one.
The process of evolution that I am describing is not yet completed. The situation remains ambiguous. Our theological tradition is much weaker than in Latin America. And on the side of Filipino Marxism, there is also a theoretical void on the question of the Church.
The "old party" [the PKP, the pro-Moscow party from which the present CPP emerged in 1969] has remained almost silent on this question. We are still back with Marx, Engels and Lenin. In this respect also, Latin America is more advanced, as shown by the book Fidel and Religion.
Fidel Castro was ready to confront this problem directly. He goes a lot further in this respect than any leader of the CPP. It should be said that we have been marked by the a Maoist origin into the NDF - the independent Marxists and social democrats. At that time, a new program of the NDF was prepared. This fusion did not come off.
Nonetheless, the attempt at a reciprocal opening made at the time bore fruit. It helped to overcome the former hostile relations and to establish informal relations of practical cooperation.
In the future, it is possible that the NDF, which is itself a united front, will become a component of a broader united front with other forces, including in an underground revolutionary struggle and not only in the framework of legal or semi-legal Founding of t mass activity. Other military forces are appearing such as the CPLA [Cordillera Popular Liberation Army]. We will see what the situation looks like when there is a new repressive turn.
I would say that for the progressive movement in the Philippines, the problem is how to build a real coalition without losing sight of the strategic facts of the struggle. And how, in this perspective, to incorporate better than in the past international factors, such as the role of the Soviet bloc; and national ones, such as the role of the social democrats. There is still a lot that must be studied. he east-Asian communist tradition, which was forged in countries where Christianity is not part of the dominant cultural tradition, as it is in the Philippines and in Latin America.
Q. What sort of front does the NDF represent?
A. The development of the NDF was deeply marked by the martial law under which the country lived in fact from 1972 to 1986. Under these conditions the CPP, along with the Moro National Liberation Front in the Muslim communities, was the only organization able to operate effectively.