Workers Manifesto for the New Millennium

Workers Manifesto for the New Millennium

by the Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino (PMP), an underground political party of the Filipino working class established January 30, 1999

From http://marxists.org/archive/lagman/works/globalization.htm

(This document was written by Filemon “Ka Popoy” Lagman when he was then secretary-general of the Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino [PMP], an underground revolutionary political party of the Filipino working class established January 30, 1999. It was published as a paid advertisement in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on January 30, 2000.)


A specter is haunting labor—the specter of Globalization.

Wage-workers in industrial and developing countries, skilled and unskilled laborers, manual and mental workers, urban and rural proletarians—all are ravaged by this global scourge with lost jobs and low pay, wage freeze and wage cuts, downsized and diminished benefits, factory closures and run-away shops, contractualization and casualization of labor, strike-breaking and union-busting.

As the sun rises on year 2000, labor cannot but ask: What does the future hold for the working class in the new millennium?

The prophets of Globalization talk of “free markets” and “free trade”. But how about freeing labor from wage-slavery?

Progress, they say, will ultimately trickle down. The point, however, is when? In every decade since the 1950’s, the working people produced more wealth than the total output of mankind since the dawn of civilization some 12,000 years ago. But the gap between the rich and the poor is wider and deeper than ever in history. Even in America, the richest of all nations, only one percent of its wealth is shared by 80 percent of its population.

Despite all the advances in social production, billions today still have no food on their tables, clothes on their backs and roofs over their heads. If this is the meaning of capitalist progress and civilization, how does it differ from a cannibal who has learned to use knife and fork? The last 100 years of capitalism has been a century of over-abundance for the owners of capital and utter deprivation for those who live only by the sale of their labor.

Using the yardstick of history, four centuries of capitalism is short compared to earlier social systems. But as soon as it emerged, its every progress has sparked epic class struggles. The last hundred years of capitalism eminently has been a history of wars and revolutions, of liberation struggles of oppressed nations against imperialist countries, and of class battles between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

Anti-capitalist revolutions broke out even as the rule of capital has yet to conquer the entire globe. At its peak, socialist states covered a quarter of the world’s area and a third of the human population.

The collapse of socialism in the last decades of the 20th century has emboldened the bourgeois elements of society to vilify it as a utopian dream. But what they pass off as the vindication of capitalism is merely their class bias showing. That communism inspired hundreds of millions to life and death struggle and Marxist revolutions were victorious in scores of countries is incontrovertible proof of their firm roots in material conditions and social realities.

The period of the two world wars ushered in the first wave of socialist revolutions. With hindsight and foresight, it was only a dress rehearsal for the real revolution that can now begin with the advent of the third world war—the global offensive of capital versus labor. The revolutionary proletariat will arise, like the phoenix from the ashes, stronger and wiser.

Globalization has inaugurated not a post-industrial society but the unadorned class rule of the international bourgeoisie and the insatiable pursuit of profit by monopoly capital. Class antagonisms have not been attenuated but on the contrary are heightened.

Proletarianization of the population proceeds as never before. Unarguably, the working class is the absolute majority in the world. The so-called services are being industrialized, that is put under the regime of mechanized production and social labor. The modern office is little different from the automated factory. In both, low pay, long hours and insecure jobs are the norm. Professions are transformed from independent livelihood into wage-labor. Mental workers are joining manual laborers in organizing unions to protect their interests as wage-slaves.

Globalization has unleashed not so much the creative power of capital as its destructive forces. The genie of finance capital has been liberated by the liberalization of trade and investment and has left a path of destruction in its wake. Intensified global competition is the anarchy of production multiplied and the crisis of overproduction internationalized.

Capitalism in the age of Globalization is hopelessly bound up in its innate contradictions brought to their peak. And the proletariat is inevitably impelled to revolt by the vicious attacks against their living standards and social rights.

Globalization by its very nature transforms the economic turmoil in one nation into a world crisis. It obliges the workers struggle in one country to become an international fight.

The world is witnessing the rebellion of the advanced forces of production against outmoded capitalist relations, the contradiction between the socialized forms of production and bourgeois private property exploding into crisis and revolution.

It is Marxism rather than capitalism that is passé. Marx was a visionary who saw far ahead of his time. What he described applies more to the Globalization of our era than the capitalism of his age. And what he foretold will only now truly come to be.

No doubt revolutionary movements which predict the fall of capitalism will be likened to religious sects which prophesize the end of the world. Let these conceited bourgeois pundits beware the lesson of history. The lords of capital will be no different from the slaveholders and landlords of yore who thought they would rule forever until the rising of the former working classes brought their delusions crashing upon their heads.

Let the capitalists celebrate the coming millennium with pomp and pretense for it will be their last. The bourgeois reich will not last a thousand years. Pax capitalista will not even survive the new century.

The first decade of the new millennium will be the eve of the socialist revolution in the era of Globalization.

The Battle in Seattle is the sign of the times. It comes on the heels of historic general strikes in France and South Korea, and in other advanced and backward countries. They are a portent of the brewing storm of working class revolution that will sweep imperialist Globalization to its grave.

The new millennium will see the titanic last battle between the forces of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The day of judgment is at hand and the armageddon of capitalism is near.

The workers have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workers of the world, unite!

Pagbabalik-Tanaw

Pagbabalik TanawSinulat ni Mona, dating manggagawa ng Temic na ngayon ay nasa New York na

mula sa: http://mulatkana.blogspot.com/2010/07/pagbabalik-tanaw.html
Thursday, July 8, 2010

Ilang taon na bang patay si Ka Popoy? Siyam, sampu? Ilang administrasyon na ba ang nakaraan, pero hanggang ngayon hindi pa rin nabibigyan ng katarungan ang kanyang pagkamatay. Tulad din ng napakadaming pinaslang dahil sa paglaban ng kanilang prinsipyo at paniniwala.

Sa tuwing makakabasa ako ng mga artikulo tungkol sa pinaslang na lider ng BMP, pakiramdam ko ba ay nagngangalit ang aking bagang. Hindi ko maipaliwanag ang galit na aking nararamdaman sa mga nagpatumba sa kanya. Napakarami kong akusasyong naririnig laban sa kanya noong siya ay nabubuhay pa. Mga akusasyon na wala namang mga batayan at konkretong ebidensiya. Mga samu't saring bintang. Mga urong na kaugaling Pilipino.

Sasabihin ng iba, bakit ba sobrang respeto ko ke Ka Popoy? Gusto ko itong sagutin sa artikulong ito. At sana ay mabasa ng mga galit at naghuhusga sa kanya. Noong panahon ng katindihan ng welga ng mga manggagawa ng TEMIC, at maglulunsad ng isang malaking mobilisasyon ay meron siya sa aming iminungkahi. Sa kabila ng aking pagkakaalam ng pagbaklas niya sa kabilang grupo, inatasan niya ako na makipag-usap sa ilang lider ng mga ito. "Isang hakbang upang pagkaisahin ang laban ng mga manggagawa".

Ibig sabihin, sa hakbang na iyon handa si Ka Popoy na kainin ang kanyang "pride", kapalit ng solidong pagsulong ng uring manggagawa. Palatandaan nang kalawakan ng isip, ng tunay na karakter ng isang tunay na lider ng masa. Ang paghingi namin ng tulong sa kabilang grupo ay maaaring isiping isang kahinaan naming mga welgista at ng grupong ng BMP sa panahon ng kagipitan. Bagama't napakatindi at hindi kayang pantayan ang ipinakitang pagkilos at pag aalsa ng mga manggagawa. Ngunit ipinakita ni Ka Popoy na ang laban ng uring manggagawa ay mas malaki at higit pa sa sarili at anumang hindi pagkakaunawaan.

Sa pakikipag-usap ko sa kabilang grupo, nagbigay sila ng kundisyon na tutulong lang kung hihiwalay kami o babaklas sa tulong ng Bukluran o BMP. Na noong panahon na iyon ay siyang nagbigay sa amin ng libreng serbisyong legal na walang kundisyon na kami ay magpapasailalim sa kanilang grupo.

Bumalik ako noon sa piket na laylay ang balikat. Pakiramdam ko ba ay iniwan ako ng isang kasintahan. Hindi ko maintindihan na ang problema ng uring manggagawa ay maisangtabi, dahil sa paksiyon, mga tsismis, galit at bintang. Sa isip ko parang wala dins iniba sa gobyerno. O ito ba ay kultura na wala talagang pagkakaisa ang mga Pilipino, na mga mistulang alimangong naghihilahan pababa at nagsisipitan.

Si Ka Popoy, nagkibit lang ng balikat. Hindi nga naman niya yun personal na kawalan. Kundi kawalan ng lahat ng inaaping uri. Ang sa kanya lang naman ay pagbabakasakaling interes para maibangon ang naghihingalong kalagayan ng mga manggagawa. Nagawa nga niyang halikan ang singsing sa kamay ni Kardinal Sin, sa harap ng pamunuan ng BMP at welgistang Temic. Sa layuning makuha ang simpatiya ng Kardinal para sa mga manggagawa. Sino kayang ateyista at rebolusyunaryo ang gagawa nito para sa kapakanan ng naaaping uri? Isang indikasyon ng kanyang karakter na "mas malaki ang laban ng manggagawa kaysa sa kanyang sarili."

Sa mga kilos-protesta ng mga welgista ng Temic, malimit makasabay ang kabilang grupo. Ang kanilang malahiganteng mobilisasyon. At nakakabingi ang kanilang sigaw at kantyaw ayon sa kanilang palagay laban kay Popoy. Nakatutok ang galit at bintang kay Popoy... mga insultong salita laban kay Popoy....na parang mas higit pa iyon sa pagbaboy at paglapastangan ng kapitalista sa karapatan naming mga welgista. Mas higit pa ba ang galit nila at bintang kaysa sa mahigit na isang libong manggagawa at ng aming mga nagugutom na pamilya?

Nakakalungkot. Matagal na pero parang itong sugat na hindi kayang hilumin ng panahon. Si Felimon Lagman para sa akin ay parang naging isang simbolo ng pagkakawatak watak ng bansa. Habang hindi nagkakaisa ang sambayanan, kaliwa, itaas man, kanan o gitna, hindi natin makakamit ang tunay na demokrasya. Katulad ng kasaysayan na kung saan ang Supremo ay ipinapatay mismo ng kapwa rebolusyunaryo. Kagaya din ni Ninoy na pinapaslang ng isang dayukdok na kababayan.

Hindi tayo ang magkakalaban. Hindi tayo ang dapat nag-iiringan at naghihilahan sa libingan. Mas higit na malaki ang problema ng sambayang naghahanap ng katarungan laban sa mapang-api at naghaharing uri.

Si Ka Popoy kung nasaan man siya, masasabi kong hindi nasayang ang kanyang buhay. Kung meron man siyang pagkukulang, natabunan na ito ng kanyang magiting na paninindigan sa paghanap ng katarungan para sa mga mahihirap. Sana sa mga nag-aakusa sa kanya, ilibing niyo na rin sa hukay ang inyong mga bintang at akusasyon na walang batayan.

"Ang tunay na magiting na lider o rebolusyunaryo ay humaharap sa kalaban ng may bayag. Walang takot kahit pa dumanak ang sariling dugo."

Foreword to the Book "Notes from the Underground"

FOREWORD

to the book "Ka Popoy: Notes From the Underground", which was launched on February 12, 2006 at UP Diliman

After Ka Popoy Lagman was felled by an assassin's bullet in February 2001, several texts lay unfinished in his computer at the underground house he was using at that time. The ideas left unfinished in those documents are lost forever to the revolutionary movement that he sacrificed his life for.

Still Ka Popoy's large body of extant writings that is yet to be collected may probably fill several volumes. From comprehensive critiques of the fundamental propositions of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) to short agitational pieces meant for mass distribution, the job of gathering Ka Popoy's work is a fitting tribute to a working class hero who combined a passion for fighting with a talent in writing.

Whether the scholar who seeks to study the remarkable history of the revolutionary movement in the Philippines or the partisan who seeks to resolutely advance the class struggle of the workers for socialism, Ka Popoy's writings are a rich and interesting resource. Or even to the concerned Filipino who in this period of apathy amidst crisis yearns for inspiration from real-life idealists who fought in frontlines of the struggle to change society.

This is just an initial attempt to collect and publish Ka Popoy's writings for a popular audience. It may be necessary to forewarn the reader that his works are hard though not dull reading.

Ka Popoy's writings not just deal with serious subjects but are weapons in the life-and-death class war. it is frequently argumentative whose logic is woven taut and rigorous to arrive at airtight conclusions and analysis.

Amazingly however it is written in a style that is not stereotypical and attentively adapted to the consciousness of the workers and the poor. In fact, Ka Popoy's polemics border on the vulgar and uses the language of the streets to elicit passion from its intended audience. Arguably it is witty, barring the opinion of the targets of his sharp critique.

To understand Ka Popoy's text, it is absolutely necessary to place in its context. He himself has said not a few times that his ideas and beliefs have evolved and developed through time and experience.

Assembled in this first volume of Ka Popoy's collected works are the so-called counter-theses to the basic principles and organizational norms of the CPP.

Within the new revolutionary party - the Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino (PMP) that Ka Popoy headed in its founding in January 1999 - these documents are known as the Counter-Theses I and Counter-Theses II. Written in the period of the great split within the revolutionary movement, the counter-theses sought to deepen the critique of the CPP on basis of theory and tactics.

Among the two, probably more well known are the Counter-Theses I which was penned in February 1994. It has to be remembered that the debate within the CPP that was sparked by the infamous paper of Joma Sison called "Reaffirm Our Basic Principles and Rebuild the Party," matured into a schism on the basis more of organizational, even personal, issues. The Rejectionists who petitioned for a party congress to resolve the disputed Reaffirm paper were forced to break away because the party leadership brooked no opposition from within and were intolerant of inner-party debate.

Contrary to common knowledge, the split transpired without the benefit of debate along fundamental principles and ideological lines. It was the Counter-Theses I that first attempted to ground the split on the firm foundation of a Marxist-Leninist critique of the Stalinist-Maoist principles and practice of the CPP.

Thus The Counter-Theses I dealt with the questions of the analysis of Philippine society, the class line of the party program and the strategy of protracted guerilla war.

The first document of the Counter-Theses I demolished the orthodoxy of the semi-feudal and semi-colonial analysis of Philippine society that for the longest time was the dogma of activists since the period of the First Quarter Storm. Instead Ka Popoy argued on the basis of Marxist theory that Philippine society was indisputably capitalist though obviously backward. Or to use his own colorful description, "mongrel or mongoloid" because Philippine society is a "mixture of the worst features of two opposing modes of production" or "afflicted by an abnormality in its fetal stage of development."

In the next document, Ka Popoy critiqued the Maoist "mass line" of the CPP and called for a Leninist "class line" to be reflected in the basic program of the party. It put to task Joma for "obscuring and glossing over the struggle for socialism in his obsession for national democracy." In its platform and practice, the CPP acted as a revolutionary of the people rather than of the proletariat.

For Ka Popoy, the CPP's semi-feudal and semi-colonial analysis served simply as an alibi for the protracted war that was a vulgarized form of revolution. This he argued in the last document of the Counter-Theses I. Reviewing the history of the Chinese revolution, he proves that Joma's protracted war is a trying-hard copycat of Mao's strategy that was successful in the peculiar conditions of their society. And reexamining Marxist theory, he illustrates that reducing revolution into war is not just a gross distortion but also a fatal mistake. In his words, "We started a war in 1969 without a revolution. By 1986, because of this war strategy, we missed a revolution."

Continuing on the track of the first, the second set of Counter-Theses was composed in 1995. The documents usually called "Reoryentasyon" and "Reorganisasyon" called for correcting the compass of the work and role of the party during the democratic struggle. These two papers form one integral whole arguing the case for reorienting the party and reorganizing its work towards a correct exercise of the vanguard role of the working class in the struggle for democracy.

In the distorted practice of the CPP, it assumed the vanguard role in the democratic revolution by directly organizing the people - primarily the peasants in the countryside - and by directing the mass organizations in the struggle for "national democracy" thru secret party groups. Ka Popoy called this distortion as the sin of vanguardism.

In its stead he reasoned that the party indeed aspires for leadership over revolution but it is the working class itself and not its party that exercises the vanguard role in the people's struggle for democracy. The working class assumes this vanguard role through its frontline position in the actual struggles and by striking an alliance with other classes especially the peasantry in the common fight for democracy. It is the primordial task of the party to conscienticize and organize the workers so that they can exercise this vanguard role.

It follows then that the party instead of scattering itself among people, concentrate on organizing the class struggle of the workers - both in the formal and informal sector, in the cities and countryside. Towards this end, he contends that the party must cultivate the dynamism of workers organizations and its movement instead of secretly manipulating them.

Ka Popoy maintains that the party must remain underground in a situation of brittle bourgeois democracy as presently exists. And party group remain secret to evade surveillance of the enemy but not so much in the eyes of the masses for in fact communist elements guide them as the most dedicated activists and leaders.

In the last document of Counter-Theses II entitled "Islogan", Ka Popoy ridicules the CPP for brandishing an incorrect strategic slogan and having no tactical slogans to rally the workers and the people in the twist and turns of history. No wonder he states that the CPP was left behind by the rapid change in events during the twilight of the Marcos dictatorship and the post-EDSA regimes.

The paper "Islogan" is in fact unfinished for it should have ended with a proposal for a set of tactics and a tactical slogan for the tactical situation based on an analysis of the objective condition and subjective forces during the mid-1990s.

The limitation would be resolved in the founding platform and propositions of the PMP that Ka Popoy wrote in late 1998. The "negative formulations" of Counter-Thesis I and II in the period of the CPP split served as preparation and basis for the new "positive formulations" of the Theses and Program of the newly founded PMP.

Liham - May 28, 1994

LIHAM NG BAYANI
SA MGA KASAMA’T KAIBIGAN

(Ginunita ng mga kasama, kaibigan at kamag-anak ang ika-9 na taon ng pagkamatay ni Ka Popoy Lagman, bayani ng uring manggagawa, noong Pebrero 6, 2010. Bilang pagpupugay ng pahayagang Obrero sa kadakilaan ng bayani, inilathala rito ang isang sulat ni Ka Popoy sa mga kasama noong Mayo 28, 1994, dalawang araw matapos siyang madakip sa isang lugar sa Lunsod Quezon.)


May 28, 1994

Rebolusyonaryong pagbati sa lahat ng kasama't kaibigan,

Una sa lahat, humihingi ako ng paumanhin at pag-unawa sa aking pagkakabihag. Labis kong hinamon sa aking kapahangasan ang dambuhalang makinarya ng reaksyunaryong estado at minaliit ang pansariling kaligtasan.

Pero dapat makita na ginawa ko ito sa aking kagustuhang magampanan ang aking tungkulin anuman ang mga patibong ng kaaway. Alam na alam ko ang sinusuutan kong mga panganib. Pero may mga gawaing hindi makapaghihintay, mga tungkuling dapat gampanan. Hindi ako kagaya ng nagpapanggap na lider na nagpapasarap sa Utrecht habang ang mga kasama dito sa Pilipinas sa magkabilang panig - ay nangangahuli't nangangamatay.

Inaasahan ko sa inyong lahat na panatilihin ang diwang ito - na harapin ang lahat ng sakripisyo at peligro sa ikasusulong ng kapakanan ng masang anakpawis at sambayanang Pilipino habang pinag-iingatan ang sariling kaligtasan na siyang aking pagkukulang.

Nais ko ring tiyakin sa lahat na hawak man ako ng kamay n bakal ng kaaway, kailanman ay hindi nila mababali ang aking rebolusyonaryong paninindigan. Nagtagumpay man ang militar na ako'y bihagin, nananatiling malayang-malaya ang aking rebolusyonaryong diwa na nakayakap nang mahigpit sa ating simulain. Tinitiyak ko na hindi ko ipagpapalit ang aking prinsipyong pampulitika para lang sa personal na paglaya, bulukin man nila ako sa bilangguan o hatulan ng kamatayan.

Ngayon, higit kailanman, dapat patunayan na ang ating kilusan ay nakatindighindi sa paa ng naturingang mga lider kundi nakapader sa prinsipyo't simulain ng bawat isa sa atin. Ang kilusan ay susulong at magtatagumpay dahil ito'y tama't makatarungan, at ito'y hindi magagapi sa simpleng pagkakabihag ng sinuman - anuman ang katungkulan. Ang ating lakas ay nasa katumpakan ng ating ipinaglalaban. Tandaan natin ito, mga kasama!

Mabuhay kayong lahat!

Domeng

A Maverick Proletariat

A MAVERICK PROLETARIAT

by Jose Torres Jr.

The Sunday Paper, Vol. 2, No. 17, Feb. 11-17, 2001

He lived a life of a revolutionary and died in a fashion almost always fated for someone like him. In his death, Filemon "Ka Popoy" Lagman, inspired by his native and seemingly uncontrollable "extreme militant tendencies" left behind a trail of ideological chaos that has thrown the Left in disarray.

His ideas definitely stirred not only the progressive sector, but the whole society itself. His style of presenting - and insisting - his ideas on those around him was invariably described as "convincing," "obnoxious" and "downright arrogant."

Ka Popoy has many images to different people that elicit a whole spectrum of emotions from admiration to disgust. It was a testament of the complexity of his character.

His allies say he is a big loss to the progressive movement. And even his critics admit that Lagman's "extreme militant tendencies" played a very important role in the development of the Filipino people's ideological consciousness.

Ricardo Reyes, vice president of the party-list Akbayan and former secretary general of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CCP), where Lagman once belonged, said the Philippine Left would have been different without Lagman.

With the death of Ka Popoy, the progressive movement has lost "a superb organizer and a very fertile mind" for developing the workers' movement from a worker's perspective, Reyes told The Sunday Paper. He said Lagman's dedication to the labor movement is his "distinct contribution."

With Lagman's brutal death in the hands of his assassins "the working class lost a very vocal and a very ardent advocate."

Here are some of Reyes thoughts about Popoy as told to The Sunday Paper:

"More than any activist coming from the ranks of the intellectuals in his generation, he is the most conscious about developing workers' lives. Popoy viewed the Philippine revolution and Philippine society from a framework very close to the Leninist thought; that's why he was able, and made it a point, to draw the line, and even to criticize all the postulates of the Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong Thought."

"He expounded his thoughts through articles he wrote, although most of the time he did it through vocal, argumentative and very forceful debates. He will always be remembered for his positive and negative traits. Both the positive and negative in him, however, were striking."

"He was always criticized for rubbing people the wrong way and for his abrasiveness and his style of argumentation, which is to crush his opponent to defeat."

"He distinguished himself as an urban organizer. He seriously studied the urban movement as a whole and conceptualized strategies and tactics. In the '80s, he was very strong in pushing for insurrection within the general framework of the Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong ideology."

"As a leader, he exuded great quantities of a revolutionary, believing in what he was doing and exuding confidence. He exuded it in great quantities and was able to capture a large followings."

"He was also an intellectual and he always made it a point that his ideas were well-crafted ideologically and theoretically in order to agitate."

"He can be a very good agitator depending on the setting and circumstances. But mainly he was most distinguished as an agitator within the organization. He is not the crowd agitator type, but in committee meeting, he is one. Given more time, however, he might be able to develop the skills necessary of a street agitator."

"I have not yet seen anybody who comes quite close to his ability and passion. I hope there will be. I hope that persons should come from the working class, from the organic intellectuals among the working classes, from his followers."

"We had many differences. I was one among the few that he always see to it to distinguish himself from. We have very substantial differences in our approach to looking at the Philippine problems, strategies and even modes of organizing and interpersonal relationships. Maybe we had different upbringings as individuals and in the movement, so we have also differing choices."

"He was among the first in the CPP who really had a better appreciation of the legal parliamentary struggle, closer to its actual potential, although he was not original in pushing for the urban guerilla strategy. He was, however, the one who advocated the idea of the insurrectional potential of the urban masses and its insurrectional prospects. He has a keener appreciation for it."

"His lack of appreciation of the impact of the countryside and the Filipino feudal culture on the progressive movement was one of his weaknesses. Maybe it was because of his exposure and experiences."

"His other weakness is on how he looks at the mode of the Philippine economy. He underestimated the semi-feudal character of Philippine society. His favorite term is transition to capitalism. But I believe that experience teaches us that it is not a stage that would end in its logical conclusion of capitalism as Popoy wanted to believe in."

"He died a revolutionary to the end. When we left the CPP, we defined a revolutionary in its classical sense. A revolutionary is not only that who advocates armed struggle or follows a certain ideological line. A revolutionary is one who looks at the problem, and as he encounters more tools for understanding development believes in it and moves for a radical structuring of the empowerment process."

"A revolutionary is one who really breaks the structures of the disempowerment of the masses. Empowerment is not only about rights but also access to capital, land and even information. He continues to believe in the socialist dream before it was brought to a level of canons."

"We will miss Popoy because it's different if there's a Popoy in the movement. There's always somebody who questions and do something different. It's a different experience if there is one who plays a maverick role, that's Popoy."

A Revolutionary to the end

A REVOLUTIONARY TO THE END

by Jose Torres Jr.

The Sunday Paper, Vol. 2, No. 17, Feb. 11-17, 2001

He was a dreamer until the end. He dreamt of a society where those who toil could taste the sweetness of the fruits of their sweat and blood. He was a rebel, too, a revolutionary who wanted change. Filemon Lagman wanted a world where the voice of the working class is heard and their dreams fulfilled.

In the last few days of his life until the very day of his ambush. Lagman was discussing with union leaders the formation of the Partido ng Manggagawa. The day of his burial, February 12, will also be the day the party is born.

The Partido ng Manggagawa, however, should not be confused with the clandestine Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino (PMP), which was allegedly founded by Lagman on January 30, 1999. The PMP was formed by former underground cadres who earlier left or were expelled by the Maoist Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) due to iedological differences.

Parliamentary struggle

The Partido ng Manggagawa is Lagman's legacy to the working class whom he served from more than three decades. Lagman once said that although he views "bourgeois elections" as nothing but a periodic opportunity for workers to choose who among the ruling class will be given the chance to fool and rob them, "I find nothing inconsistent in participating in the bougeois parliamentary struggle for the purpose of advancing the mass struggle."

For instance, the Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP), anothetr labor group formed by Lagman, upholds the mass struggle as its "basic form of struggle." The group, however, said they are also prepared to participate, in a "flexible way," in the electoral struggle "to develop the parliamentary flank of the mass movement."

Lagman played an important role in the formation of Sanlakas. He described it as "a broad coalition for the people's general welfare, for nationalist and democratic struggle, and the people's legislative and political agenda." Sanlakas won a seat in the House of Representatives in the 1998 elections.

"We expect it to develop its own initiative and integrity as an organization independent of the working class and political forces within the coalition," Lagman said in an earlier interview.

Although the BMP exerted its influence to support Sanlakas' political line and program, the labor group made it a point to uphold Sanlakas' organizational structure and principles. Lagman believed that Sanlakas could only be effective if it can fully develop its own positive identity, dynamism and spontaneity in the general democratic movement and not allow "conspirational organizations" to manipulate its organizational processes.

"We would like to see Sanlakas develop as a major political force in the people's struggle for freedom and democracy," said Lagman.

This coming May, Sanlakas would participate in the elections as a representative of a broader sector of society while the newly formed Partido ng Manggagawa would mainly carry the issues of the labor sector.

Popoy's trust rating

Lagman worked in the underground movement for years, but he gained popularity comparable to that of a minor Cabinet Secretary.

In 1998, a survey made by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed that 37 percent of the public had heard of, or had ever read about, Popoy Lagman. SWS's Mahar Mangahas said that would make the revolutionary, "not quite nationally famous, but moderately well-known."

The SWS had the data in its archive because Popoy's brother, then senatorial aspirant Edcel Lagman, commissioned the survey group to obtain it. What Edcel basically wanted, Mangahas said, was to find out whether the fact of Popoy's being his brother was a burden to his bid for the Senate.

SWS analysis showed that Edcel was getting better-than-average proportions of votes from people who trusted Popoy and even from those merely neutral about Popoy. From those who positively distrusted Popoy, Edcel's votes were simply average. So there was no loss to Edcel, and everything to gain, from Popoy's becoming better known.

In the said survey, the public's regard for Popoy was rather neutral. Among those who knew him, 30 percent said they trusted him and 28 percent said they did not, for a net trust rating of merely +2. A plurality of 36 percent chose to sit on the fence between trust and distrust, and the remainder did not answer at all.

Mangahas explained that using the net trust score, Popoy appears to be relatively trusted in Luzon (net trust of +10 in the northern half and +11 in the southern half) but relatively distrusted in Metro Manila (-8), Visayas (-6), and Mindanao (-3). As might be expected, he is relatively trusted by the D and E socio-economic classes (net trust of +5 in both cases), but relatively distrusted by the ABC classes (-8).

"I would say that, for a person formerly with an underground rebel movement, having a neutral public image is already quite favorable," Mangahas said.

A revolutionary life

Lagman's revolutionary life started when he quits his studies at the University of the Philippines and went underground during the martial law years. Lagman rose from the ranks to the chairmanship of the Manila-Rizal regional committee of the CPP in mid-70s.

Under Lagman's leadership, the committee won a certain level of autonomy, even devising new and creative ways of pursuing their Leftist ideology. He developed a formidable "united front" with the so-called middle forces. CPP higher-ups, however, ousted Lagman from the Manila-Rizal committee and reassigned him to the Bicol region.

By the mid-80s, Lagman was sent back to Manila and regained the leadership of the committee. He later declared urban warfare urban warfare against the Marcos dictatorship using the urban hit squad Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB).

By the early '90s, Lagman and most of the leading cadres of the Manila-Rizal committee decided to breakaway from the mainstream CPP. Among those considered by the CPP leadership as expelled included Lagman; Arturo Tabara, head of the Visayas commission; Romulo Kintanar, former chief of the New People's Army; and Ricardo Reyes, former CPP secretary general. A war of words among these individuals ensued and lasts even to this day.

The groups that bolted the CPP in 1993 were mainly the Lagman faction and the Tabara faction in the Western Visayas. There were other smaller factions, such as the one headed by Ike delos Reyes in the Moro area of Central Mindanao, but these groups tended to gravitate around the main ones. Another faction surfaced in Central Luzon in 1997.

The CPP said Lagman could swagger because he was able to gather some trade unions under the BMP "and co-opt some organizations in urban poor communities."

Lagman and Tabara, meanwhile, tried to hold common activities in the second half of 1993. But the formation of a common political party could not get beyond idle talk, said a CPP leader. An attempt to form "a national coordinating body" in late 1993 failed because Lagman and Tabara wanted all the other factions to join them. In early 1994, the breakaway groups began to go their separate ways.

Lagman and Tabara continued to look for common grounds and entered into an alliance. Consequently, the Tabara faction adopted Sanlakas and formed its chapters in Cebu, Negros and Panay. Tabara's Revolutionary Proletarian Army (RPA) and Lagman's ABB were later merged. The breakaway group from the Moro area also adopted Sanlakas and the RPA.

The Revolutionary Workers Party (RWP), which Tabara launched in the Visayas, was supposed to be formed in Metro Manila with Lagman. But the plan was snuffed out by the breakup of the Tabara-Lagman alliance.

"Too smug about the strength of his faction and his control over it, Lagman was unaware that he stood on shifting sand. Too occpied with dealing with politicians and capitalists, he found out too late that even some of his trusted lieutenants had abandoned him," an article in the NDF website says.

One of those who deserted Lagman was Nilo dela Cruz, the alleged ABB head. Dela Cruz initiated the formation of Alab Katipunan in 1998. The other blocs that parted ways with Lagman, however, did not join Alab Katipunan.

Lagman suffered another blow when Tabara sided with Dela Cruz. Consequently, the Tabara faction reportedly disenfranchised Sanlakas in the Visayas. Some elements, however, remained with Lagman's Sanlakas after the Tabara faction split in 1998. Tabara and Dela Cruz retained the RPA-ABB alliance.

As if these were not enough, Lagman's "theoretician," Sonny Melencio, and a youth group (the smallest faction of Kamalayan) also abandoned him in 1998. Melencio set up the Socialist League. Later, the Socialist League initiated the formation of the Socialist Party of Labor. The SPL included the Rebolusyonaryong Partido ng Proletaryo (RPP, a faction of the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas), a faction of the Cordillera People's Liberation Army (now a government paramilitary group) and a faction of Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP).

"These splits and realignments greatly weakened the Lagman faction," said the NDF article. "He can no longer mobilize a sizable number of workers and urban poor residents. Neither can he make any more armed threat to politicians and capitalists," it added.

Reinventing the labor movement

But Lagman's magic continued. When he formed the Brotherhood of Union Presidents (BUP), which boasts of a membership of 1,000 union presidents, observers said the labor leader, "disrupted the established structure of top federations." He was also described as having envisioned "the rebirth of a militant trade union movement in the country."

To prove his point, Lagman and his BMP helped organize the 120,000-strong 1996 May Day demonstration in Metro Manila, the largest under the administration of then President Fidel V. Ramos. The rally was later followed by a strike demanding tax reforms, in which 160,000 workers participated.

The mobilization was sponsored by the BMP, the Fraternity of Union Presidents of the Philippines (KPUP) and the National Confederation of Labor (NCL), all influenced by Lagman.

While the NCL is a mass-based national trade union center, the KPUP claims to be a grassroots organization of 747 local union presidents. The BMP traces its origins to the split within the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), when the entire regional chapter in Metro Manila split away in 1993. This occured during the same time when the major split took place in the CPP.

In an interview with the progressive Green Left Weekly magazine, Lagman said he was confident that the labor movement in the country is "on the upswing." He said the revolutionary movement has been mustering its "second wind" with a strong working class character.

Explaining what he believed where the changes in "organizational structures of the working class movement," Lagman said Filipino workers are still greatly handicapped in their struggle for their rights and welfare.

More than 85 percent of the labor force in the country is still unorganized. Unionized labor is deeply fragmented while most federations remain under the stranglehold of "mendicant and mediocre leaders," Lagman explained. He added that the level of unionism has stagnated at the factory level. "It cannot seem to advance to organizing struggles along industrial lines."

He said it was the single most difficult objective limitation of the labor movement.

Lagman hit even the so-called progressive wing of the workers movement that, he said, failed to upgrade the backwardness of trade unionism.

"After decades of labor organizing, it failed as a motive force in the unionization and the unification of labor. It pays more attention to its factional rivalry with conservative trade union centers while paying lip service to trade union unity, which is pivotal in upgrading the labor movement. It relies excessively and almost exclusively on militant collective struggles, ignoring the objective limitations arising from the backward developmentof trade unionism," he said.

Lagman wished that the emergence of groups like theKPUP, NCL, BMP and later the Partido ng Manggagawa (PM) would become the start of an "all-out effort of a new breed of labor leaders and organizations whose aim is to reinvent the labor movement and radically change the structures and complexion of trade unionism in this era of imperialist, neo-liberal globalization."

Lagman wanted to form a "revolutionary socialist, legal mass organizations" which would assume a pivotal role in advancing the "class struggle and the general democratic movement."

With BMP in mind, Lagman said the center should distinguish itself, as a mass organization, from a political party in assuming a vanguard role in the socialist and democratic struggles.

He said the BMP considers the advancement of the democratic struggle its most immediate political task in the struggle for socialism. However, Lagman also believes that in advancing what he called the people's democratic movement, "the motive and decisive force is the working class movement." He emphasized the necessity of the concentration of forces in organizing the working class.

Lagman said that for the working class to assume a leading role in the democratic struggle of the people, "they must view this struggle as a necessary condition for socialism. They must understand the struggle for democracy from a socialist perspective, and therefore, the necessity of socialist awakening of the mass of workers.

He pinpointed to specific projects that his group has undertaken - the workers' school, workers' magazine and workers' radio - which he said primarily serve political consolidation. He also dreamt of a workers' law firm whose aim is to upgrade the legal flank of the trade union movement and a workers development bank that would become a major effort in undertaking the economic struggle.

Onward with the dream

Filemon "Popoy" Lagman died dreaming. He was a few days away from fulfilling one of his most treasured wishes - the establishment of the Partido ng Manggagawa, the workers very own political party that is preparing to participate in the coming mid-term elections.

Sanlakas Rep. Renato Magtubo believed Ka Popoy did not die in vain.

"We will make sure that his very last project - the Partido ng Manggagawa - will be a success," he said. Ka Popoy firmly believed that union presidents should be the voice and representative of the working class in the halls of Congress. His followers said they will not fail him.

Suspects and Victims

SUSPECTS AND VICTIMS

by Annie Ruth Sabangan and Luis Gorgonio

The Sunday Paper, Vol. 2, No. 17, Feb. 11-17, 2001

The kind of life he led invites the kind of death he suffered.

Not even the supposed "safety" that the University of the Philippines, which prides itself to be the bastion of activism, was enough to protect Filemon "Ka Popoy" Lagman from the fury of his assassins on that fateful Tuesday afternoon.

It was not totally unexpected. Ka Popoy was a revolutionary, a man who fought the powers-that-be for many years, a man who wanted to change the system, a man who made a lot of enemies.

He may have known that death would come so soon. He was with his son Dante and partner Michelle walking towards the Bahay ng Alumni building along Balagtas Street inside the University of the Philippines Campus when the killers came.

Gunmen pumped four bullets into the labor leader's head before fleeing, leaving Ka Popoy sprawling, soaked with his own blood, on the pavement a meter away from the building's main stairway.

Ka Popoy's death has put everybody - from the left, center to the right of the political spectrum - into a situation where everybody could be both suspects and victims.

In and out of the underground Leftist movement, the maverick, tenacious and abrasive leader gained so many enemies. The mainstream Left led by exiled Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) founder Jose Ma. Sison branded him as "incorrigible" rebel when the former rejected Sison's call to rectify his "insurrectionist" behavior and reaffirm the Maoist revolutionary strategy of a protracted people's war.

As founder of the urban hit squad Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB), Lagman eliminated "fascist tormentors" from the military and the police. He brought agony to the "enemies of the people" - the usurers, capitalists and abusive local officials.

Seen as one of the biggest headaches of government, Lagman was put behind bars twice in the mid-90s: first for a murder complaint and second to prevent him from causing the country embarrassment during the Apec summit in 1996.

Even when he decided to work "above ground," Lagman was not spared from the indignation of those who thought that the issues he espoused - increased salaries for workers and the improvement of the plight of the urban poor - were mere form of extortions.

Such was the interpretation of Popoy's detractors when he entered into a deal with the PEA-AMARI on behalf of slum dwellers and when he helped workers at the Philippine Airlines during a labor dispute with management.

Added to Lagman's long list of enemies is the pro-Estrada clique whom he, along with other Leftist groups, brought down through the Edsa II phenomenon. The Arroyo administration could also be another suspect after Lagman's Sanlakas and BMP called for the ouster of the newly installed chief executive.

"It's payback time." This could probably be what was in the mind of Ka Popoy's killers. As he himself said a week before he died, "the likes of Popoy Lagman has only two destinations - in prison or in the graveyard."

While it could be ascertained that the mastermind of the murder did it out of revulsion, it is hard to pin down the perpetrator due to the number of suspects with varying motives. As what Ka Popoy's brother, former Rep. Edcel Lagman said, "We are not excluding any persons or any groups. We will have to make a thorough investigation."

Lagman had a rift with Sison and Nilo Dela Cruz, his former comrade in the Manila-Rizal committee of the CPP. He also caught the ire of the capitalists and the underworld, the military and the police, the government, and the Estrada administration. Each of these groups has one reason or another to silence a "stubborn" mass leader who refused to make compromises.

As there are many suspects, there are also many theories that try to explain Lagman's killing. First, Lagman could have been a victim of the factions in the Leftist movement. There are two suspects under this theory: Sison's New People's Army and Dela Cruz's RPA-ABB.

Both groups believe, however, the murder was the handiwork of the military to isolate the progressive block from wielding influence in government.

They claimed that Lagman's death could be perceived as a message to other Leftist leaders to "make it easy" on the Arroyo administration.

Crispin Beltran, head of Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), said Lagman's "Resign All" call during the height of the campaign to oust former President Estrada was unpopular.

"HIs and his group's follow-up on the line, to wit: 'Gloria is not the people's choice,' and their anti-trapo campaign could have generated a political backlash."

Both Sison and Dela Cruz, however, accused each other of Lagman's murder. Sison said Dela Cruz might have settled a score with Lagman after their previous disagreements over the control of protection money.

Dela Cruz countered that Sison's group included Lagman in its order of battle for years.

"Who has a track record in eliminating former comrades who refused to follow the dictates of that man from The Netherlands? Who is very intolerant of their comrades' different views on how to wage a revolution? Isn't it that it was Sison's group who ordered the execution of Fr. Conrado Balweg and Bartolome Quizon?"

Other members of the RPA-ABB claimed that Sison's allegation could be part of a "smear campaign" to prevent them from entering into peace negotiations with the Arroyo administration.

Satur Ocampo, former spokesman of the National Democratic Front (NDF), however, said that "only a bitter war of words erupted, nobody was executed" when the split occurred in the Leftist movement.

"We also had tactical alliances with the other factions during EDSA II, thus I think there is really no basis for them to hurl those accusations."

Other militant groups and people from government also theorized that Lagman's killing might have been a signal for a start of destabilization plot by rightist elements against the Arroyo administration. They said that the incident was very similar to what happened after Corazon Aquino was catapulted into power after the 1986 Edsa phenomenon when labor leader Rolando Olalia and youth activist Lean Alejandro were killed.

Military sources also flaunted the idea that Lagman's killing could have been the handiwork of hit squads organized by pro-Estrada groups to destabilize the government. These groups are allegedly composed of the remnants of the Kuratong Baleleng gang and other criminals from Mindanao.

The original plan, military sources said, was to launch a coup d’état against the Arroyo administration. When the plot failed, they decided to create hit squads that would sow terror in urban areas.

If there are many suspects, there are many victims, too. Lagman's family, of course, is the first to suffer the pain. The working class whose aspirations were articulated and fought for by Ka Popoy would be second. And, of course, the many factions in the progressive movement, whose wounds from the purges and splits have yet to heal, can become casualties.

Pagkakaisa - akda ni Ka Popoy Lagman

PAGKAKAISA
ni Ka Popoy Lagman

Nalathala ang sulating ito sa magasing TAMBULI ng Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP), Disyembre 1998

Sinumang nag-iisip ng tunay na pagbabagong panlipunan ay dapat lutasin ang saligang paraan kung paano kakamtin ang malawak na pagkakaisa ng prinsipal na pwersa ng pagbabagong ito – ang uring manggagawa.

Hanggang ngayon, malaking mayorya ng manggagawang Pilipino ay hindi organisado kahit sa unang grado ng makauring pagkakaisa sa anyo ng lokal na unyunismo. Samantalang ang manipis at hati-hating hanay ng organisadong paggawa ay nahaharap naman sa lumalaking banta ng anihilasyon sa panahong ito ng makabagong globalisasyon.

Sa ganitong kalagayan, ang tungkulin ay hindi lang paano ang saligang paraan ng pag-oorganisa kundi paano ito mapapabilis para tumugon sa mabigat na hamon ng kasalukuyang pakikibaka.

MAKAURING PAGKAKAISA

Di dapat ipagkibit ng balikat ang mabagal na pag-oorganisa. Hindi ito simpleng problema ng kakapusan ng sapat na dami ng mga bihasang organisador. Ang mismong kakapusang ito ay resulta ng parehas na problemang siya ring dahilan ng mabagal na pag-unlad ng pagkakaisa ng masang manggagawa.

Dapat nating repasuhin ang nakagawiang mga paraan ng pag-oorganisa. Ito’y hindi supisyente at epektibong nakatutugon sa pangangailangang malawakang pagkaisahin ang masang manggagawa bilang isang uri.

Ang tinutukoy natin ay ang pag-oorganisa sa anyo ng lokal na mga unyon para sa pang-ekonomyang pakikibaka. Ang pag-oorganisang pang-unyon at pakikibakang pang-ekonomya ay ginawa nating nag-iisang daan at natatanging paraan para pasimulan ang pagkakaisa ng mga manggagawa.

Liwanagin natin na wala tayong anumang intensyong maliitin o bawasan ang importansya ng pang-unyong pag-oorganisa at pakikibaka. Isang makamandag na kapitalistang propaganda ang inilalakong pananaw na lipas na ang unyunismo sa panahong ito ng globalisasyon.

Ito’y nananatiling pinakasaligang organisasyon ng uring manggagawa at pinakamabisang proteksyon ng masang anakpawis sa kapitalistang pang-aapi laluna sa panahong ito ng globalisasyon.

Pinakamalinaw na katibayan ng nagpapatuloy nitong bisa’t halaga ay ang paghuhumiyaw at paggugumiit ng sektor ng kapital at nga kapitalistang estado na sagkaan at sugpuin ang unyonismo dahil balakid ito sa landas at batas ng globalisasyon.

Ang ating pinupuna ay hindi ang mismong unyonismo at ang importansya nito kundi ang nakagawiang paraan na halos idinadaan at isinasakay ang buong tungkulin ng makauring pag-oorganisa sa kaparaanan ng unyonismo.

Kung tayo’y ordinaryong mga unyonista na ang nilalayon lang ay mag-unyon, natural lang na ikonsentra ang buong atensyon at paraan sa unyonismo. Kaso’y hindi tayo simpleng mga unyonistang ang nilalayon ay simpleng mapabuti ang kalagayan ng pagiging sahurang-alipin ng manggagawa at makipagtawaran na lang sa presyo’t benepisyo ng pagpapaalipin sa kapital.

Ang pinakalayunin natin ay wakasan ang sistemang ito ng sahurang pang-aalipin, wakasan ang pagiging kalakal ng lakas-paggawa at wakasan ang paghahari ng kapital sa lipunan sapagkat narito ang pinakaugat ng kahirapan at kaapihan ng uring manggagawa at masang anakpawis.

Para sa layuning ito, ang pinakasaligang rekisito ay mapagkaisa ang masang manggagawa bilang uri. At magaganap lamang ang makauring pagkakaisang ito kung sila’y magkakaroon ng kamalayan na sila’y nabubuhay sa kapitalistang lipunan bilang isang depinidong uri na may depinidong makauring mga interes.

Narito ang malaking depekto ng ating saligang paraan ng pag-oorganisa. Nawawaglit sa ating kamalayan ang pinakalayunin ng ating pag-oorganisa – ang palawakin at palalimin ang makauring pagkakaisa ng masang manggagawa. Kung mulat tayo sa layuning ito, sa bawat sandali ng ating pagkilos, di mangyayaring maiimbudo ang pag-oorganisa sa kaparaanan ng pag-uunyon, at siguradong ikokombina ito sa iba pang paraan.

Ang ibang paraan na ito, na siyang mas esensyal na paraan ng makauring pag-oorganisa, ay ang pampulitikang pag-oorganisa, ang pag-oorganisa sa masang manggagawa bilang pwersang pampulitika. Ito ang tunay na kahulugan ng pag-oorganisa sa masang manggagawa bilang uri.

KAMALAYANG MAKAURI

Ilang daang libong manggagawa sa Pilipinas ang organisado sa mga unyon samantalang milyun-milyon, humigit-kumulang sa 95 porsyento ng uring manggagawa ang hindi organisado.

Ilan sa kanila ang mulat-sa-uri? Ibig sabihin, paano ang turing ng isang manggagawa sa kanyang sarili bilang isang manggagawa, paano ang kanyang tingin sa pagiging manggagawa sa umiiral na lipunan.

Mabuti pa ang kapitalista sapagkat malinaw ang kanyang turing at tingin sa uring manggagawa. Alam ng bawat kapitalista na para umandar at lumago ang kanyang negosyo, hindi sapat na mayroon siyang mga makina, materyales, atbp., bilang puhunan. Balewala ang lahat ng ito kung hindi makakatagpo ang kanyang kapital ng lakas-paggawa – ang natatanging kalakal sa mundo na hindi lang nagpapaandar kundi nagpapalago sa kapital. Ang nag-iisang kalakal sa buong mundo na nag-aangkin ng kakayahang lumikha ng halaga. Isang kalakal na habang kinukunsumo ay lumilikha hindi lang ng katumbas ng kanyang presyo kundi ng halagang sobra sa kanyang naging presyo na ang katawagan ay sweldo, ng sobrang halagang ang katawagan ay tubo.

Narito ang sikreto’t mahika, ang kamandag at bagsik, ng sistemang pang-ekonomyang tinatawag na kapitalismo. Kailangan ng kapitalismo ng isang uri sa lipunan na ang tanging ikinabubuhay ay ang pagbebenta ng lakas-paggawa. Ito ay isang seksyon ng populasyon na dapat ay walang ibang ikabubuhay kundi ang magpaupa ng lakas-paggawa. Walang ibang ikabubuhay dahil wala silang anumang pag-aari na maaaring magamit para sa kanilang kabuhayan kundi ang kanilang lakas-paggawa.

Isang lakas-paggawa na nagkakaroon lang ng silbi sa umiiral na sistema kung bibilhin ng may-ari ng kapital at gagamitin sa produksyon. Gagamitin sa produksyon ng mga kalakal na siyang porma ng ekonomya ng tinatawag na kapitalismo. Produksyon ng samu’t saring kalakal na tumutugon sa samu’t saring pangangailangan ng tao. Mga kalakal na pawang likha ng lakas-paggawa. Lakas-paggawang tagapaglikha ng lahat ng kalakal sa mundo pero walang tigil na binabarat ang presyo sa pinakamurang halaga at hinahamak ang dignidad sa pambubusabos. Lakas-paggawa na galing sa pawis at dugo ng mayorya ng tao sa kapitalistang lipunan na ginagawang modernong mga alipin ng iilang panginoong may kapital.

Ngunit hindi ganito ang turing at tingin ng mayorya ng mga manggagawa sa kanilang sarili, sa kanilang paggawa, sa kanilang pagiging manggagawa. Para sa isang manggagawang hindi mulat-sa-uri, ang tingin niya sa pagiging manggagawa ay simpleng hanapbuhay, isang porma ng okupasyon. Ang turing niya sa kanyang mga kapwa manggagawa ay simpleng katrabaho o kaparehas ng trabaho, namamasukan sa may-ari ng kapital para kumita ng sahod o sweldo kapalit ng kanyang pagtatrabaho.

Madaling makita ng mga manggagawa ang katusuhan at kalupitan ng kapitalista. Pero tinatrato nila ito bilang naturalesa ng tao at hindi naturalesa ng kapitalismo. Sa batayang ito, hinahangad niya ang pagkakaroon ng unyon para sa pansariling proteksyon at para ipaglaban ang kanyang mga karaingan. Pero kadalasan ay hanggang dito lang ang kanyang pananaw sa pagkakaisa. Magkaroon ng isang lokal na unyon para pangalagaan ang interes bilang mga empleyado ng isang kompanya – ang kanilang seguridad sa trabaho, ang kanilang regular na umento, ang kanilang mga benepisyo. Ngunit lahat ng ito ay para lang mapabuti ang kanilang kalagayan bilang trabahador ng kapitalista, hindi ang mapalaya ang sarili bilang sahurang-alipin ng kapital.

Ni hindi nga niya tinatanaw ang kanyang sarili bilang alipin ng kapital, bilang alipin ng sahurang sistema ng kapitalismo. Hindi niya tinitingnan ang kanyang sarili bilang alipin dahil ang konsepto niya ng pagiging alipin ay pwersahang pinagtatrabaho. Walang kalayaan, walang karapatan. Napaniwala ang manggagawa na siya’y namasukan sa isang kapitalista nang kusang-loob. Anumang oras na ayaw na niyang magtrabaho para sa kanyang kapitalistang amo, siya ay may ganap na kalayaang umalis at maghanap ng ibang pagkakakitaan. Alam rin niya na mayroon siyang mga karapatang ginagarantiyahan ng mga batas, at mas ang problema’y ang implementasyon ng mga ito.

Ngunit ang hindi niya namamalayan ay ang katotohanang ang ginagarantyahan lang ng mga karapatang ito ay ang kanyang kalayaang paiigihin ang kondisyon ng kanyang pagiging alipin. Hindi ang kalagayang baguhin ang mismong sistemang ito ng modernong pang-aalipin. Totoong hindi siya aliping pag-aari ng isang indibidwal na kapitalista. Ang hindi niya namamalayan ay pag-aari siya ng buong uring kapitalista dahil hangga’t wala siyang ibang pagkakakitaan bukod sa pagpapaupa ng kanyang lakas-paggawa, obligado siyang mamasukan sa ibang kapitalista, obligado siyang magpailalim sa kapangyarihan ng kapital.

Maari ring mangyaring sa sikap o swerte ay makaipon ang isang manggagawa. Makapagpundar ng maliit na negosyo, at sa ganitong paraan, makaahon sa pagiging ordinaryong sahurang manggagawa. Maaring “palarin” na umasenso ang sinumang indibidwal na manggagawa ngunit absolutong hindi pwedeng “umasenso” ang buong uring manggagawa at makawala sa tanikala ng pagiging manggagawa sapagkat anong mangyayari sa kapital kung wala ang paggawa, paanong magkakaroon ng kapitalista kung walang uring manggagawa. Maaring mabuhay ang isang lipunan nang walang uring kapitalista at ito ang sosyalismo, pero hindi pwedeng magkaroon ng kapitalismo nang walang uring anakpawis na panggagalingan ng murang lakas-paggawa.

Narito ang kasagutan kung bakit hindi mabuo ang pagkakaisa ng manggagawang Pilipino. Hangga’t hindi umaabot ang kamalayan ng mga manggagawa sa kanilang pag-iral sa kapitalistang lipunan bilang uri, imposible ang kanilang malawak at matatag na pagkakaisa at pagkakaorganisa bilang pangunahing pwersa ng pagbabagong panlipunan. Hangga’t wala ang ganitong kamalayan sa uri, obhetibong umiiral ang mga manggagawa sa lipunan ngunit hindi masasabing ganap na umiiral bilang uri dahil ito ay dapat mangahulugan ng kamalayan sa pagiging isang uri, kamalayan sa kanilang komunidad ng interes bilang uri.

Maaring maorganisa sa mga lokal na unyon ang mga manggagawa, maaring maorganisa sila sa malalaking pederasyon. Ngunit mananatili pa ring biyak-biyak ang kanilang hanay, mananatiling mailap ang tunay na pagkakaisa ng manggagawang Pilipino hangga’t ang organisadong mga manggagawa ay hindi mulat sa kanilang pag-iral bilang uri, hangga’t hindi ang kamalayang makauri, ang kamalayan sa kanilang makauring mga interes ang nagbibigkis sa kanilang pagkakaisa at pakikibaka.

PAG-OORGANISANG PAMPULITIKA

Ang pagkakaorganisa ng mga manggagawa bilang uri ay di maiiwasang maging pulitikal ang katangian sapagkat ang tunay na kamalayang makauri ay pulitikal ang nilalaman. At ito ang tunay na pinangingilagan ng uring kapitalista at ng kapitalistang estado at ginagawa nila ang lahat ng paraan upang sagkaan ang ganitong pag-unlad ng kilusan ng uring manggagawa. Ang mismong mapanupil na reaksyon ng kapital at estado sa banta ng makauring pagkakaisa ng anakpawis kahit sa porma ng unyonismo ay agad nang nagbibigay ng pulitikal na katangian sa pagkamulat ng manggagawa bilang uri sa kapitalistang lipunan.

Imposibleng hindi maging pulitikal ang makauring pagkamulat ng masang manggagawa bilang uri sapagkat imposibleng matanggap ng manggagawa ang kanyang pagiging kabilang sa isang uri nang hindi nauunawaan ang posisyon ng manggagawa sa sistema ng produksyon ng lipunan. Kapag nailugar niya ang kanyang sarili sa posisyong ito, imposibleng hindi mahagip ng kanyang pananaw ang mapagsamantalang relasyon sa produksyon ng kapitalistang sistema, ang kabuuang katotohanan ng sistema ng sahurang pang-aalipin, ang batas ng paglitaw, pag-unlad at pagbagsak ng kapitalismo bilang isang sistema.

Kung ang pagbubuo ng unyon ang labis na kinasisindakan ng bawat indibidwal na kapitalista, ang kinahihindikan naman ng kapitalistang estado ay ang pampulitikang pagkamulat ng masang manggagawa bilang isang uri, bilang isang pwersang pulitikal na may pulitikal na partido sa pinakauluhan nito. Ang transpormasyon ng kilusan ng uring manggagawa sa isang kilusang pampulitika, ng kaisipang pang-unyon sa kamulatang pampulitika, ng pang-unyong pagkakaisa sa pampulitikang pagkakaisa ng uri ang simula ng paglaya ng uring manggagawa sa kapangyarihan ng kapital – ang paglaya ng kanyang kaisipan mula sa kaisipan ng naghaharing sistema. Hindi lang ang katawan ng manggagawa ang inaalipin ng kapital kundi pati ang kanyang kaisipan. Ang kasunod ng ispiritwal na paglaya ng uring manggagawa ay ang transpormasyon nito sa materyal na pwersang pisikal na magbabagsak sa reaksyonaryong sistema.

Ang pampulitikang pag-oorganisang ito ang nawawaglit at napag-iiwanan sa pagkilos. Nangangarap tayo ng pagdami ng unyonisadong mga manggagawa pero nawawala sa ating isip ang paglago ng kanilang pampulitikang pagkakaorganisa bilang uri. Sa likod ng ating isip ay para bang madali na ang pampulitikang pag-unlad ng mga manggagawa sa batayan ng kanilang pang-unyong pagkamulat. Ito ay may aspeto ng katotohanan ngunit may peligro rin na mabahura sa antas ng unyonismo na siyang nagaganap. Kaswal masyado ang pagtrato natin sa pampulitikang pag-oorganisa habang ang ginagawang krusyal ay ang unyonismo.

Baliktarin natin ang ating pamamaraan sapagkat ito ang tuwid na pamamaraan. Mas sigurado ang pang-unyong pag-unlad ng masang manggagawa kung ito’y nagaganap sa batayan ng pagsulong ng kanilang pampulitikang pag-unlad. Mas dadami ang determinadong mga organisador kung konsolidado ang pampulitikang kamulatan ng mga unyon. Mas gagaan ang pang-araw-araw na pag-aasikaso ng mga unyon kung titining ang kanilang pulitikal na konsolidasyon.

Dapat lamang pag-ibayuhin ang paglawak ng unyonisadong hanay ng mga manggagawa. Bawat unyon na ating maorganisa o maugnayan ay dapat kagyat na asikasuhin ang pampulitikang pagkamulat. Ngunit hindi dapat mangyayaring mapako, maimbudo o mabahura ang pampulitikang pag-oorganisa sa kaparaanan ng unyonismo. Tuklasin at paunlarin natin ang paraan ng pampulitikang pag-oorganisang mabisa at malawakan nating naisasagawa nang independyente sa pag-oorganisang pang-unyon habang tinitiyak na ang pang-unyong pag-oorganisa ay kagyat na naisusulong sa pampulitikang pagkakaisa ng manggagawa.

Kung tutuusin, dapat ay mas madali ang magbuo ng grupo o sirkulong pampulitika ng lima hanggang sampu katao sa bawat kompanya (tawagin natin na mga buklod) kaysa magbuo ng unyon na kinakailangang dumaan sa mga ligal at teknikal na proseso. Upang mapatampok ang pampulitikang tungkulin at katangian ng BMP, mas wasto at mas mahusay na ang magiging ispesyalisasyon nito ay ang pagbubuo ng network ng mga grupo o sirkulong pampulitika sa pinakamaraming kompanyang maaabot nito na mas nakatuon sa pampulitikang pagkamulat, pagkakaisa, pagkakaorganisa at pakikibaka ng masang manggagawa bilang uri.

Oryentasyon ng mga buklod na ito ang aktibong paglahok sa pang-unyong pakikibaka nang hindi binabago ang prinsipal na diin sa pampulitikang pag-oorganisa. Bawat lider, organisador at aktibista ng BMP ay dapat magkaroon ng mga target na kompanyang tatayuan nila ng mga buklod. Dapat ay walang tigil ang araw-araw na pagbubuo ng mga buklod na ito hanggang sa malatagan natin ang mayorya ng mga kompanya sa buong bansa ng ganitong network ng sosyalistang pagkakaisang makauri bilang preparasyon sa paglubha ng krisis ng globalisasyon at pag-igpaw ng kilusan ng uring manggagawa sa antas ng pampulitikang pakikibaka. Lagumin natin ang karanasan sa pagbubuo ng Kauri at iangkop at paunlarin ito sa pagbubuo ng mga buklod. Ikonsentra natin ang Kauri sa mga pook ng tirahan ng masa samantalang ang mga buklod ay mas sa mga pook ng trabaho natin itayo.

Ang ekspansyon ng mga bagong kompanyang tatayuan ng buklod ay dapat tuloy-tuloy na dumaloy at dumaan sa mga natural na koneksyong gaya ng mga kamag-anak at kaibigan ng ating mga aktibong pwersa na kung pipigain natin ang potensyal na ekspansyon ay siguradong tumatagos sa napakaraming kompanya. Ang ispesyalisasyong ito ng BMP sa ganitong tipo ng pag-oorganisa ay mangangahulugan ng pagpapakahusay sa gawaing propaganda, ahitasyon at edukasyon.

Sa pamamagitan ng tuloy-tuloy na paglawak ng organisadong network ng mga buklod ng BMP at mga pulitikalisado nating mga unyon, ipakilala natin ang BMP bilang militanteng ekspresyon ng pampulitikang pagkakaorganisa ng uri at behikulo ng kanilang pampulitikang pakikibaka. Itransporma natin ang BMP sa isang organisadong makinarya ng pampulitikang propaganda at pakikibaka ng sosyalistang kilusan sa bansa na ang araw-araw at oras-oras na inaasikaso ay ang pagpapalawak at paghihinang ng makauring pagkakaisa ng manggagawang Pilipino at ang pangunguna ng uring ito sa pampulitikang pakikibaka ng sambayanan para sa kalayaan at demokrasya.

Kwento ng Isang Nalimutang Bayani - ni Mona ng Temic

http://mulatkana.blogspot.com/2009/03/kwento-sa-isang-nalilmutang-bayani.html

KWENTO NG ISANG NALIMUTANG BAYANI
sinulat ni Mona na dating manggagawa ng Temic sa kanyang blog na mulakana

Taong 1997 nang makilala ko si Felimon Lagman o Ka Popoy. Nakilala bilang kakampi at isang timbulan ng mga taong nalulunod at walang makapitan. Kami ng mga mangagawa ng Temic na sinibak ng walang pakundangan at awa ng kapitalista ng Temic, isang kompanya na pag aari ng Aleman..mga dayuhang kapitalista!

Nakita ko sa pagkatao ni Ka Popoy ang tunay na pagiging maka masa. Nakasama namin siya sa maraming pagkakataon ng aming pakikibaka, upang labanan ang sistemang bulok na umiiral sa bansa. Ang paghahari at pamamayagpag ng kapitalista at gobyernong Ramos na wari ay manhid sa hikbi ng mga naaping mga manggagawa.

Si Ka Popoy..walang kinakatakutan. Naalala ko pa ng minsang magalit siya sa mga taga Department of Labor, dahil sa hindi nito pagkilos sa problema ng mga mangagawa ng Temic. Sinabihan niya ang mga ito na parang mga "pagong na nakasakay sa suso". Minsan din niyang sinabi sa media na ang secretary of labor na si Ginoong Quisumbing ay walang b'y'g. Wala siyang kinaiilagang tao, kung sa tingin niya ay tama ang kanyang pinaglalaban at ito ay sa kapakanan ng mga manggagawa.

Maraming kwento sa buhay ni Ka Popoy. Minsan niya akong nakwentuhan ng maikling parte ng buhay niya nang samahan niya kami sa kulungan. Matapos kaming arestuhin ng mga pulis sa Department of Labor, 70 kaming ikinulong sa pelota court. Nilapitan niya ako at lumupasay din sa sementong inuupuan ko..upang kamustahin kung gaano nasaktan pagkatapos ng brutal na dispersal. Nakita niya nagkulay talong ang aking mga braso na noong ko rin lang napansin. Napaluha ako kase pakiramdam ko.. inalo ako ng isang ama. "Wala lang yan, aniya". Ang asawa ko ay binaril at pinatay ng mga militar. At hindi ko man lang nakita ang kanyang burol, dadag niya pa. Doon din niya pinakilala sa akin ang kanyang anak na si Dante.

Ganun si Ka Popoy, nauna pa siya sa istasyon ng pulis na pagkukulungan naming mga welgista. May kasama ng abogado upang umalalay sa amin. Noong ipasok kami sa pelota court pumasok din siya upang ikulong ang sarili kasama namin. Hindi rin siya pumayag na ihiwalay ng kulungan ang mga opisyales ng unyon sa mga miyembro. Nakitaan ko rin siya nang pagkahinahon. Na noong minsan siya pa ang umaawat sa amin kapag nabubuyo kami ng aming galit na nararamdaman. Pinaalalahanan niya kami na gawing legal at tama ang lahat sa pakikibaka.

Mahigit sampung taon na ang nakakaraan, ngunit papano ba makalimutan ang isang tao na nakita kong nagsakripisyo ng wala namang hiniling na kapalit na kahit ano? Iginalang niya ang a ming desisyon na hindi mapasailalim ng BMP noong panahong yaon, dahil sa maraming kadahilanan. Sinamahan niya kami sa pagtagas ng aming mga pawis at luha sa pakikibaka laban sa mapang aping gobyerno at kapitalista.

Taong 2000 ng ako ay mapilitang mangibang bansa. Pagkatapos manlupaypay sa kawalan ng hustisya mula sa gobyerno ni Ramos. Mabigat na umalis ng sariling bayan upang sumagupa at hanapin ang sarili sa bansa at sentro ng imperyalismo at kapitalismo. Sa bansa ni Uncle Sam (laban man ito sa aking kalooban) , ito lang alam kong paraan upang buhayin ang aking pamilya.

Para akong ibon na naputulan ng dalawang pakpak. Namulat ang aking mata sa napakalalim na problema ng iniwang bayan. Na sa aking nagdidilim na pananaw ay wala ng pag asa.

Pagkatapos ng ilang taon, nakita ko si Ka Popoy sa isang dyaryong Pilipino sa New York... wala na siyang buhay. Pinaslang ng walang awa ng mga halang ang kaluluwa. Ano pa nga ba ang magagawa ko kundi lumuha. Ang luhaan ang isang tao na sa aking paningin ay isang bayani ng mga mahihirap at naaapi. Isang tapat na kaibigan na handang magbuwis ng buhay para sa bayan.

Maaaring nagupo ng mga kriminal ang pisikal na katawan ni Ka Popoy ngunit hindi ang kanyang prinsipyo at pinaglalaban. Ang kanyang mga nagawa sa maraming tao ay isang ugat na ibinaon sa lupa na muling uusbong upang muling lumago at magbunga. Upang isang araw ay magbigay ng pag asa sa bawat isa.

Ang alaala ni Ka Popoy ay hindi mabubura sa puso ng kanyang mga naging kasama, kaibigan at karamay. Sa takdang panahon, kikilalanin ng lahat ang kadakilaan ng kanyang pagkatao. Sa kabila ng mga maling paratang laban sa kanyang katauhan. Ang katotohanan ang siyang mamamayani.

Isang saludo sa bayaning nalimutan ng bayan!

Sino si Ka Popoy sa Akin? - ni Tita Flor Santos

SINO SI KA POPOY SA AKIN?
ni Tita Flor Santos
lider-organisador ng Sanlakas
organisador ng Metro Manila Vendors Alliance (MMVA)

Sino si Ka Popoy sa akin?

Siya ang isa sa nakatulong luminaw ang aking pananaw at direksyon hinggil sa isang lipunang sosyalista.

Siya ang nagbigay inspirasyong magpatuloy kumilos, mag-organisa at magsakripisyo kahit sa harap ng krisis at mga problemang nararanasan bilang fulltime na organisador.

Siya ang nakilala kong napakatapang na kasama, lider-manggagawa, at lider-masa, lalo na noong nakasama ko siya sa laban sa lokal na pakikibaka sa Freedom Island para sa disenteng paninirahan ng mga maralita, kahit na nakataya ang kanyang buhay dahil sa internal na tunggalian sa area.

Siya ang nagtiwala at nagturo sa akin na maging matapang, manindigan, maging mapagpasya, paglalapat ng mga angkop na taktika at porma ng pagkilos at pangangasiwa ng LMS (local mass struggles) sa mga komunidad, gaya ng Sitio Mendez, Freedom Island, North Triangle, Fort Bonifacio at Antipolo.

Sa kanya ko rin natutuhan ang iba't ibang estilo ng pangungumbinsi at pangangalap ng rekurso at pinansya para siguradong matuloy ang mga gawain at kampanya.

Siya ay isang matapat at tunay na kasama dahil diretsong pinupuna ang mga resulta ng mga gawain ng mga kadre kahit na masakit na puna upang maging hamon para mapahusay ang pagkilos at maging matagumpay.

Siya ay sensitibo sa mga pangangailangan at problema ng mga kasama at mabilis umakto at mag-intervene pag may conflict sa loob ng kolektibo. Nagbibigay siya ng panahon, nakikinig sa mga reklamo at sinisikap itong ayusin at mag-unify.

Siya ay simpleng tao at may sense of humor.

Sa panahon ng mga kumperensya at pulong, nakikipagkwentuhan siya at nakikipagbiruan kahit sa personal at pang-organisasyon na usapin.

Malaki ang kanyang inambag sa pagpapanday at pagpapaunlad ng aking sarili bilang kadre, organisador at lider-masa dahil sa natutuhang mga aral mula sa kanya, teoretikal man o mga karanasan at praktika, at lahat ng ito ay nakatulong sa pagsustine sa aking commitment na patuloy kumilos sa ating kilusan para sa pagbabago tungo sa pagkamit ng sosyalistang lipunan.