Communist Insurgency in the Philippines (catch all)

[charter6]

Pinoyme,
I'd disagree with your first statement that MacArthur's antipathy towards the Huks contributed greatly to the start of the Huk Rebellion.

I think that the basic motivating factor behind what became the Huk movement was the changing nature of the tenancy system in Central Luzon -- traditional relationships between tenants and their hacenderos broke down over the issue of non-contractual benefits as the Philippines began to modernize governmentally and legally under American control, and the firm grip the landowning class had on most organs of government and the courts led to peasants seeking alternative means of addressing their grievances, first in the form of striking and general unrest, and later in the form of armed revolution.

You do bring up the point that Communist Parties, and the PKP in particular, were committed to competing politically rather than militarily after World War II. The PKP did in fact compete politically in the form of Popular Front politics in the 1946 elections. It was only after their failure in these elections, at least partially due to widespread voter fraud and corruption, that they turned military struggle.

Also worth noting that the Manila faction was essentially wrapped up in 1950 when Lava and the rest of the Secretariat was captured. After that you have peasant leaders like Taruc running the show almost exclusively.

[pinoyme]

Hi Charter 6:

The Popular Front did not fail in Central Luzon. That was where they got Congressment elected through the Democratic Alliance Party.

These Congressmen were unseated, allegedly by deft maneuvers by then-President Manuel Roxas. The DA opposed amendments to the Philippine Constitution , which would grant Americans parity rights in the economy.

I shall not argue with you over economic theory, as I personally believe economic protectionism has what has stalled the Philippines from fulfilling its potential.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that with the DA out, the way was paved for amendment of the Philippine Constitution.

On the social tensions prevailing in Central Luzon beginning the 1930s, I agree with you on this.

But non-recognition of the Huks' contributions to the guerrilla effort was a grave historical injustice and contributed greatly to tensions in Central Luzon immediately after World War 2.


Rascal though he was, it was to Marcos' credit that he finally recognized the Huks in the mid-1970s shortly after he declared martial law.

Incidentally, the incident which finally sparked the Huk rebellion was the murder of a popular Left-leaning peasant/labor leader in Central Luzon.

The Cold War is over now. The Huk rebellion can now be examined for what it was: yet another peasant rebellion in a country full of such rebellions.

Cheers.

[charter6]

Right, but overall the PKP did not accomplish its goals in the '46 elections, and that was when party leaders began to look towards armed struggle as the answer.

I'm not arguing over your characterization of non-recognition of the Huks' contribution in World War II -- it was an injustice. I just don't think that injustice really played too great a role in causing the Huk Rebellion, regardless of the public statements made to that effect by the PKP. Central Luzon was a powder keg, and had been since the 1930's. The Roxas government did nothing to diffuse the tension there after the war, and paid the price.

[pinoyme]

Charter 6:

In 1946, the goal of the PKP was parliamentary struggle. This was to be done through Popular Front tactics. The Democratic Alliance was made up of left-inclined liberals, agrarian populist/socialists, intellectuals, and a faction of the hard line nationalist movement.

The PKP had no illusions about its overall strength. Its base was confined to Central Luzon, and parts of the Southern Tagalog region also in Luzon. It had small pockets of influence in Manila--among left-leaning intellectuals and a labor federation, the Congress of Labor Organizations. It had a toehold among port workers in the in the Western Visayas in the central islands of the Philippines.

The decision to overthrow the government through armed struggle was made in 1950. However, between 1946 and 1950, there were several skirmishes between the Huks and the Philippine Constabulary, town policemen, and armed civilian guards of landowners.

In 1946, the Huks registered with the government. In the 1960s, Maoist leader Jose Ma. Sison pointed this out as a glaring example of the inept leadership of the PKP by the Lavas.

I am anti-Communist. But historical facts are historical facts. After all, the Cold War is over.

Cheers.

[charter6]

We're not really disagreeing on too much here, except I take serious issue with the idea that between '46 and '50 there were only "several skirmishes". By '48, Quirino had committed the regular army to the Huk fight after the failure of the constabulary to control the situation -- the Huks it should be noted more than held their own. Aurora Quezon was killed in April '49. Most of the literature on the Huk Rebellion marks the events of 1950, particularly Magsaysay's appointment, as the turning point of the war, not the beginning of the war.

[pinoyme]

Hi:

From 1946 to 1950, the PKP was still trying to broker a modus vivendi with the national government.

It was only in 1950 when the PKP politburo decided to call for a revolution which would put them in Malacanang, the presidential palace within two years.

The skirmishes were localized incidents, but they were several. President Quirino called in the Philippine Army, because the incidents were already too many. Besides, the Philippine Constabulary had the bad habit of cozying up with local power brokers.

Let it be pointed out that the PC was basically a police force with M1 Garands and a few 30 caliber machine guns.

Meanwhile, it seems you are citing Philippine literature of the Cold War. This must be now be taken with some skepticism and a more sober examination of the facts.

Quirino had been demonized, but it turns out he was a very capable leader even if aristocratic.

Magsaysay will always be revered. However, historical evidence shows that had he not died in a plane crash in 1957, his shortcomings as an administrator while President would have finally been coming home to roost.

[charter6]

I just don't buy into the fact that the violence from '46 to '50 wasn't organized at a higher than local level. That just does not mesh with the facts. Stalin University was reopened in '46, Taruc re-formed the General Headquarters at Mount Arayat in the spring of '47. The assassination of Aurora Quezon wasn't a random act of localized violence -- it was a calculated escalation (one that it should be noted was disastrous for the Huk cause).

I disagree with your characterization of Quirino as capable. Quirino's failure to react in a timely fashion to the Huks, and his unwillingness to clear out dead-wood and corruption from his government were major catalysts of the rise of the Huks.

I agree with you on Magsaysay, his strength was never his administrative ability. His personal, charismatic leadership style though and his ability to connect with the peasants contributed tremendously to the fight against the Huks, and his leadership more than any other factor turned the tide of the rebellion.