There is a growing confusion in the entire Filipino nation as to how to deal with the four days of peaceful revolution in February 1986 that resulted in the overthrow of the Marcos dictatorship and the restoration of freedom to the " showcase of democracy in the Far East."
That bloodless uprising from February 22 to 26 has come to be known as the Edsa People Power Revolution, and it has left an indelible mark in the history of contemporary popular movements worldwide.
But because Filipinos are a hopelessly impressionable people, there is hardly a new and novel thing that happens in the Philippines that is not at once replicated and imitated until it is squeezed bone dry of its last ounce of practicality and beneficence.
That was what happened to the Edsa People Power Revolution of 1986. Whenever there is reference to that proud moment in the history of the country, it is almost always as Edsa I, since there is now a need to differentiate it from Edsa II, Edsa III and maybe even Edsa IV.
That is because Filipinos, having found People Power as a potent means to effect sudden political change, lost no time in coming up with Edsa clones, such as Edsa II that drove Joseph Estrada from Malacañang, and Edsa III, that tried but failed to evict the incumbent president.
Now there are talks of once more summoning people to the streets for an Edsa IV. If such an undertaking succeeds, it succeeds only in removing a president. But it will fail the very cause of democracy whose name certain misguided sectors of the population wrongfully invoke.
Democracy may be a government of the people, for the people and by the people. But since it is impractical to engage all of the people, the next best thing in a working democracy is the utilization of a representative system of government.
That is why we have leaders to represent the people and their interests, because engaging entire populations can be cumbersome, messy, and prone to violence. Edsa I worked because it was quick, it was easy, it was peaceful, and it got rid of someone universally hated.
But even popular democracies need strength and stability to survive. We cannot go on forever engaging in popular upheavals even if the object of such upheavals are unpopular. That is because any disruption in the life of a nation will always stall its forward momentum.
Even the beneficial result of an upheaval cannot prevent a starting over, a going back to square one. And that in the end will bring us nowhere. If we have to have changes, let it be by way of resiliency, of a capacity to adapt to changes without losing step.
There is growing confusion among Filipinos on how to deal with the celebration of Edsa I because there is marked disappointment in how it has become trivialized by the many other Edsas spawned in its aftermath, all of which have not served the interests of the nation.
But the nation should not be confused. There is real reason to celebrate Edsa I. Let us not confuse Edsa I the event with the other Edsa that only serve to disappoint and fail popular expectations.
There is real cause to celebrate Edsa I as an event, because it brought to the fore all that we can be proud of as Filipinos. If the other Edsa failed as an event, it is because they were already pursued with vested interests.
The original Edsa was spontaneous. There was no blueprint to topple anything. People just rose with no thought of achieving anything. They were simply fired up by having had enough and this lack of any preconceived notion was what gave them courage. It was simply immaculate.
People are confused because they already have a target, and targets, especially those that are missed, can only bring disappointment. And that is why people are no longer that enthusiastic to embark on another Edsa. The first should have been the last.