STRUCTURAL CONDUCIVENESS: BLOODY CAMERA AND RADIOS

The unfolding of the 1986 People Power Revolution in the Philippines is a mere
manifestation of the value-added theory specifically in the context of structural
conduciveness. This theory explains that certain elements within a society such as
social organizations and media, plays an important role in sparking collective action.
For instance, a country is uneasy for t has a lot of inequalities or unfair laws, this
might stir a situation where many people feel raged and frustrated and willing to unite
to spark change.
Ferdinand Marcos Sr. knew the importance of media, on how the media will be one
the major weapons of the opposition against him. One of the pioneering example of
structural conduciveness, is the media shutdown during the conducted snap
elections in the Philippines in the 1986 People Power Revolution manifests the
concepts of structural conduciveness. The media shutdown during the snap
elections in the Philippines in the 1986 People Power Revolution exemplifies the
concept of structural conduciveness within the value-added theory. Letter of
Instruction No. 1, issued by Marcos on September 28, 1972, gave the military
permission to seize control of key media companies, such as the ABS-CBN network,
Channel 5, and several radio stations around the nation. This occurred during the
first week after he proclaimed martial law. The Letter of Instruction used the media
outlets' ties to the Communist movement as grounds for this widespread confiscation
of media assets. Marcos specifically charged that the mainstream media was
spreading stories exposing the administration's shortcomings in order to fan the
flames of the Communist movement and undermine it.
Also, the arrest of the watchdogs of the governments; journalist and media owners.
Teodoro Locsin Sr, was arrested and put behind bars on the very first week of the
Martial Law. ABS-CBN owner himself, Eugenio Lopez was also arrested in Fort
Bonifacio. These people are a clear manifestation of the authoritarian rules of the
Marcos regime. Aside from that, more journalist were harassed and intimidated.
This was also the time when Pro-Marcos media were only allowed to broadcast
information towards the Filipino people. This was operated by Marcoses trolls and
cronies painting their names in gold. Report from rappler, stated that ABS-CBN was
taken over by Roberto Benedicto, a Marcos crony, who owns the Banahaw
Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). Channel 4 was taken over by the Ministry of
Information's National Media Production Center (NMPC), which went on to become
the official TV channel of the government. The provincial stations were taken over by
the Kanlaon Broadcasting System (KBS), another television network owned by the
Benedicto family, to use as a platform for government mass media peace-and-order
initiatives. The Voice of the Philippines, the Philippines Broadcasting System, the
Daily Express, and Radio Philippines Network were among the other media outlets
under Marcos' authority. People established an underground media in the 1980s
when activists started community newspapers and Filipino journalists began writing
for the so-called mosquito press, as the mainstream media turned into a propaganda
tool for Marcos.
With the curtailing of the media’s freedom to disseminate information, it became
easier for Marcos to downplay ethical standards during his time and challenged more
individuals to access viewpoints which made communication intricate. This shift in
media landscape galvanized the public to share a common ground and oppose
against the government’s oppressive tactics and call for change the historic EDSA
Revolution. Keep in mind that, we all have the right to access right, just and
unbiased information. The rallying cry for change spread like wildfire through these
mediums, drawing in diverse sectors of society, from students to religious groups
and political figures.
Ultimately, an important feature of any democracy is the free circulation of
information. For people to properly assess what is happening in the country, what
their leaders are doing, and how all these affect them, they have the fundamental
right to obtain and engage this information. Forms of media like the newspaper,
radio, and television play a vital role in ensuring that key information reaches the
people. (https://martiallawmuseum.ph/magaral/breaking-the-news-silencing-the-
media-under-martial-law/ )

STRUCTURAL STRAIN: Golden Era’s Boon or Bane

True individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence.
People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made
- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Did your parents tell you the Philippine Economy was at its finest during Marcos’s
regime? Well, in fact there was really a Golden Era, but exclusively only for the big
businesses’ elites and not for the common Filipinos. One among the numerous
examples of structural strain during the Marcos regime was the Philippine’s
economic collapse and widespread poverty by the Filipino populace. Ferdinand
Marcos painted the concept of the “Golden Era” by closely working hand by hand to
the US government, asking help through economic from acquiring military support.
This was also the implementation of neo-liberal policies, and massive debt from the
creditors that caused severe economic crisis during the regime.
The Marcos regime received a USD 5.5 billion loan from the US-led International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group, along with neoliberal economic
restructuring that reduced wages, facilitated foreign exploitation of the nation's
resources, destroyed domestic industries, and encouraged the export of Filipino
labor. The neoliberal road taken by the succeeding governments, which severely
undermined the economic rights and living standards of the Filipino people, was
made possible by the work of Marcos Sr.
Furthermore, during Ferdinand Marcos’s presidency, it crafted greedy measures that
cut down the Filipino wages. The introduction of the Presidential Decree No. 27,
series of 1972. “Decreeing the emancipation of tenant from the bondage of the soil,
transferring to them the ownership of the land till and providing the instruments and
mechanics therefor.” It promises to address land reform, promised. This decree
affected the agriculture workers, particularly Filipino farmers of rice and corn. It
aimed to give land to tenant farmers, but the process of obtaining this property
meant paying less to landowners, which had an unintended negative effect on the
farmers' earnings and standard of living. By dispersing land, the decree sought to
reduce the disparity in income between workers and landowners. It did, however,
have an impact on some agricultural laborers' earnings, which led to a drop in pay for
those workers who relied on these areas for their living. It just emphasized the typical
playing cards of the old marcos regime, that exploit the working class to harness
make themselves and the bourgeoisie sector being bourgeoisie.
It’s the irony of the Philippine economy “Mayaman ang Pilipinas pero naghihirap ang
sambayang Pilipino”. Why is that the Filipino farmers themselves who feeds the
country and yet they are in the bottom of the social triangle? This wage reduction
and discontent rooted from different policies and practices were part of the socio-
economic factors that contribute to the emergence of the 1986 EDSA PPR. This was
the determining factor of the farmers to oppose against the oppressive governance.
It made them forward the calls and advocacies of Filipino farmers; launching protest
holding the quote “Ipaglaban ang tunay na repormang agraryo”.
There’s so much hope for the said presidential decree, that local farmer’s would be
given a privilege, but it turns out as a big smoke screen to capitalize the powerless.
The filipinos was completely disappointed that they were unable to meet their
expectation, combine with their overarching dissatisfaction with the Marcos regime.
Factors were contributing that led to the widespread unity and collective action
during the People Power Revolution at EDSA.

BULLETS ON YOUR HEAD: Growth and Spread of Generalized Belief

The growth and spread of generalized belief, in simple terms, refers to the way an
idea or belief becomes widespread among many people in a community or society.
In the context of value-added theory, this means that for a movement or change to
happen, lots of people need to understand and agree about what the problems are,
why they happen, and how they could be fixed. It's like when many people all around
agree on a particular problem and the reasons behind it, and they share the same
idea about how things could be made better. When this belief or idea is shared by
many, it can lead to everyone working together towards a common solution. This
shared belief becomes the driving force behind a movement or a significant change
in a community or society.
In this subsection of the value-added theory explains that for a movement to happen,
the public needs to understand the magnitude of the problems, why they happen and
how they will strategize to fix it. It’s like making a SWOT analysis for a certain
drawback, determine the statement of the problem scrutinizing the reasons behind it
and share the same idea on how to resolve it. When this belief overlaps and shared
by many, it can lead to everyone working to forward for change. It becomes an
impetus behind a movement or a significant change in a community or society. With
this, the human rights violations under the Marcos regime can be a good example on
how it significantly contributed to the growth and spread of generalized belief,
creating a shared belief and understanding among the Filipino people.
With all the overwhelming number of systematic abuses such as the lawful arrest,
torture, intimidation, disappearances and extra judicial killings created a trust issues
and atmosphere of fear among the Filipino people. The regime was lethal,
particularly for individuals who opposed Marcos and were either assassinated or
vanished. 11,103 people, according to HRVVMC, had experienced rights breaches
as a result of the regime. However, the count was limited to individuals whose
requests for compensation under the Human Rights Reparation and Recognition Act
of 2013 had been granted. According to Amnesty International (AI), the Marcos
regime killed, tortured, and imprisoned 107,200 people. Meanwhile whilea large
number of innocent people are behind bars, the Marcos administration is living in
opulence and acquiring what they want. The perpetuator of the high culture herself,
Imelda Marcos. Her famous collection of branded shoes explains that the more
shoes she had, the more people died under her husband’s regime.
As a person, when you take of all the political biases, come to think of it if its ethical
to kill innocent people without abiding to the laws. Numbers of journalist was also
killed under the regime, because of them holding the line against the oppressive
Marcos regime. These violations were rampant and affected various of sectors of
society, and instilling a sense of rage and injustice among the Filipino people. With
the presence of media, it spread like virus and fractioned people to rise against
oppression. People realized that we can’t kill people as if they were little legos, their
grief for their loss loved ones was the determining factor to evoke a revolution.
Mass mobilization resulted from a shared sense of rage and a shared conviction that
justice and the restoration of civil rights were necessary. This common concept
brought people from all areas of life together, despite their differences in connections
and backgrounds. As a result of their coordinated activity at EDSA in 1986, which
served as a statement of their united opposition to the oppressive rule and violations
of human rights, Ferdinand Marcos was eventually toppled and democracy was
introduced back to the Philippines. This historic shift was made possible by the
widespread conviction that justice and a better society are essential.
"The rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened."
- John F. Kennedy

PRECIPITATION FACTORS AND MOBILIZATION FOR PARTICIPANTS OF

ACTION
One of the major incidents that spared during the Marcos regime was the
assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino Jr, where it became a watershed
moment. In 1983, Aquino was a major vocal critic of the Marcos regime, and became
somehow the leader of the opposition. With the cameras rolling, he was still brightly
smiling inside the airplane and as he stepped down, he was shot dead in the airport,
which is now the Ninoy Aquino International Airport. His assassination video clips
were captured by cameras which led the whole country to load their gun and prepare
for a revolution against the Marcos regime. The event rippled across the nation
sparked outrage and galvanizing opposition to the government. People were
alarmed what could the Marcos regime would do, during that time the country’s
conduciveness was a big question mark for the Filipinos.
In 1983, the assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino Jr. became a
watershed moment. Aquino, a vocal critic of the Marcos regime, was shot dead upon
his return to the Philippines. The event reverberated across the nation, sparking
outrage and galvanizing opposition to the government. The news of his
assassination, broadcasted extensively through television and radio, acted as a
catalyst that ignited widespread public dissent. Filipinos, unified in grief and anger
over the assassination, turned to various media platforms to express their discontent
and mobilize against the government. Newspapers, radio broadcasts, and television
coverage served as conduits for information sharing, rallying citizens and inciting a
collective desire for change.
Protest and rallies erupted following Aquino’s death; reports of public gatherings,
exchanging of dissenting opinions and the coverage of the government’s reaction to
the growing number of oppositions were shared to the while nation. Citizen
engagements also amplified as stories of injustice and political repression where
shared, creating a common ground for revolt. The whole nation grieved for Benigno
Aquino, since it a culture shocking event that the major Marcos government critic
was shot dead, and who would you blame?
It was one of the major bad shots of the Marcos regime towards the Filipinos, though
there were reports that a certain gunman was identified, its still a question lingering
in mind. Knowing the greedy and ill Marcoses, they can present themselves as “non
bloody hands” in Benigno Aquino’s tragedy.
In this case, the precipitation factors and mobilization for participants for actions is
connected. In a way that the assassination of Benigno Aquino was the inciting
incident that mobilized participants for collective action to call for change following
her husband’s assassination. The political spectrum was literally changed after
Aquino’s death.
Many facets of society were inspired by Corazon Aquino's bravery and her
outspoken criticism of the Marcos government. Her advocacy for justice and
leadership inspired not only the Aquino family's followers but also a wider range of
opposition parties, political activists, religious institutions, and common people who
all believed that justice and change were necessary. The demonstration that
Corazon Aquino organized in response to her husband's passing served as a spark
for people to take collective action. It represented the start of a coordinated
campaign against the repressive government.
It’s also important to note that in February 20, 1986 after Marcos proclaimed himself
as the winner of the snap elections. The fifty parliamentarians from the opposition left
in protest. The following day, Aquino organized a "victory rally" during which she
demanded the launch of a campaign of civil disobedience that would include
bankruptcies, media outlets, and other businesses that backed or were owned by
Marcos and his associates. Even though there are clear evidences of election fraud,
he paved his way in sitting for presidency. Corazon Aquino also called civil
disobedience and led a people’s victory rally at Luneta, boycotting the organizations
and institutions led by the Marcoses.
This was also the start of the historic People Power Revolution at EDSA,
demonstrating the strength and effectiveness of a unified and mobilized populace
working collectively towards a common goal.
Mechanism for Social Control
Ultimately, this last subsection of the value-added theory broadly explains the
overarching reason why did the 1986 EDSA revolution emerged. From the
perspective of Mechanism for Social Control, the People Power Revolution of 1986
and the EDSA Revolution in the Philippines provide an excellent example. This idea
suggests that the responses and deeds of individuals in positions of authority to
uphold or restore order have a significant impact on the course of collective behavior.
In this framework, the EDSA Revolution's starting point and result provide a clear
example of how the people's and government's activities converged to change the
country's sociopolitical terrain.
It shows the overall reaction of the Marcos regime. The martial law coined by the
Marcos states that he should assume command on direct operation for all of the
facets of the government and with all these rules and command will be in his broad
jurisdiction. This is clearly an example of authoritarian ruling, the arrest of innocent
people, media repression, extra judicial killings, threats and other forms of human
rights violation is the reaction of the government towards the huge populace.
On the other hand, when there's a disruption in this order or when people challenge
the established norms, those in power may respond in different ways, such as using
authority, persuasion, or even force, to restore order or maintain their control over
the situation. The response from those in authority can significantly impact the
direction and outcome of collective behavior within a society.
Even for some people it was the “prime years” of the Philippines, wherein fact
thousands of life were ended because of this oppressive rules. Wherein, according
to Rappler, the Marcoses looted the nation's finances, with estimates ranging from
$5 billion to $10 billion. The Marcoses' ill-gotten wealth is still being pursued by the
Presidential Commission on Good Government, which has recovered at least P170
billion in the last 30 years. Aside from the billions in riches that had been acquired
unlawfully, there were many violations of human rights in those days. According to
Amnesty International, over 70,000 individuals were detained, 34,000 were
subjected to torture, and 3,240 died between 1972 and 1981. Numerous sorts of
torture were inflicted upon thousands of people during this dark era in Philippine
history. Inmates suffered from strangulation, beatings, and electrocution. Either
cigars or a flat iron was used to burn them. After pouring water down their throats,
they were beaten until they came out. Objects were shoved into the genitalia of
women who had been stripped naked and sexually assaulted.
These series of inhumane actions lead to the emergence of the 1986 People Power
Revolution and resulted in overthrowing a dictator in the front of many people. It’s a
shared understanding among people that standing up for what is right is the right
thing to do and more powerful when you people unite with each other. For collective
action, makes the tyrannic government more threatened, intimidated and forced to
leave their position and champion democracy. Also, this explains that non-violent
movements are possible to occur in a country and technically succeed. Thus, based
from the people way back in 1986, Corazon Aquino was their best shot in
rearranging the political and democratic landscape of the Philippines.