Myles Israel-Pardo
Humanities Grade 10
Mr. Diamond
16/03/2023
To what extent has non-violent protest been successful in obtaining change?
Although less common than violent revolutions, non-violent protests have been
successful in obtaining change in many cases in modern history. They are defined as "symbolic
acts of peaceful opposition," and nonviolent protest is frequently employed to oppose a particular
issue or policy, or inversely promote a cause. Nonviolence has been used as a powerful tool to
highlight injustices and violations of human rights and to push for social, political, and economic
change. Acts of protest include marches, vigils, picketing, posters, sit-ins and other forms of
protest gatherings. In order to impact and promote change, nonviolent action entails a
commitment to using nonviolent and innovative methods (such as acts of protest and persuasion,
noncooperation, direct action, civil disobedience, boycotts, strikes, and education) to oppose
repressive forces. Without doubt the American Civil Rights movement led by Martin Luther
King, and the Indian Salt Marches led by Mahatma Gandhi are among the most historically
famous nonviolent protests. However, this paper will explore the extent to how peaceful protests
can be an agent of change by analysing a smaller and lesser known nonviolent protest, the 1986
People's Power Revolution in the Philippines. While the amount and diversity of protesters, the
multitude of different protest methods used and a firm commitment to nonviolence were
important factors in the success of these protests, the defection and support of the military and
the political elite was the most important element because these protests needed to rally loyalty
from both security forces and a certain political elite. This is especially true if a protest wants to
topple a government. Obtaining loyalty from security forces is key as they are often themselves
the agents of repression. This paper will therefore argue that support from the military and the
elite is the most important factor to ensure a successful nonviolent revolution, although other
factors such as the numbers and diversity of the protesters, the diversity in methods and a
commitment to active non-violence are also important factors.
Chenoweth, a Harvard Professor, states that a nonviolent campaign needs support from a
large and diverse population, protests cannot be only student led for example, this is too small a
body, change has to be desired from all sectors of society, if it is to be successful. Indeed, the
People’s Power Revolution or EDSA movement had not only domestic support, it is estimated
that 2-5 million Filipinos took to the streets in Metro Manila and in cities and villages across the
country during this 4 day revolution; but was also supported by a large diaspora of exiled
dissidents. Furthermore, it was supported by a diverse group of citizens: students, rich and poor,
young and old and not only by the majority of Catholic Filipinos but also those from other
congregations. The minority Muslim and Chinese Filipino populations were also ardent
supporters of the revolution. Moreover, US President Ronald Reagan ultimately withdrew
American support for Marcos after the ‘snap’ elections, which weakened the newly re-elected
President's position. Although the protest only lasted 4 days, the protestors were able to remain
in place as water and food was provided by supporters, which allowed them to keep up their
numbers and not desert their position. Overall, this was a movement for the people and by the
people, and was not politically hijacked by any particular group, even though the Catholic
Church was particularly active in the calls for protests, as can be clearly proven by the appeal
made by Cardinal Sin broadcast over Radio Veritas in which he asked Filipinos to create a
human shield to protect Army Generals and politicians who had turned their backs on Marcos
and openly disobeyed his calls to crush the uprising. All in all, it can be seen that big numbers
reflect a wide public opinion which can then gather momentum and contribute to success,
something that the EDSA movement had plenty of. So support from a multitude of different
citizens who stood together as a united front was crucial to the success of the EDSA, but this sole
factor is not sufficient to explain the success of the movement.
Moreover, Chenoweth further argues that a nonviolent protest is successful when there
are diverse campaigns and variations in method, this means that the protests take on a multitude
of forms and activities. The EDSA movement, although short and sweet, employed a plethora of
different methods. Resistance came about in the form of street masses and prayer vigils led by
priests, nonviolence was further practised by priests and nuns kneeling before tanks to stop their
advance. Sister Soriano, an activist nun even recalls how the crowds along the EDSA road
formed a human cross which the pilots could see from their aerial view which also, according to
her dissuaded these Christian pilots from firing on their fellowmen. Ordinary civilians blocked
tanks by sitting in front of them, offering cigarettes, food and sweets to the soldiers, basically
disarming them with sweets, pleading with them to defect and join the movement. Young girls
walked among the tanks handing out flowers. Hundreds of thousands answered Cardinal Sin’s
call to surround Camp Crame and Camp Aguinaldo where rebel officers were holed up; they
created a human cordon so that Marcos’s troops could not reach them. They blocked army bases
and stopped troop movement by blockading streets, parking buses and their own personal
vehicles at intersections as well as chopping down trees to halt any army advance to the Camps.
So, it is evident that the EDSA movement implemented various forms of nonviolent protest,
however, these manifestations of protest cannot, even when coupled with a diverse and sustained
support, effectively explain the successful outcome of the protests.
Thirdly, Cheoweth posits that for nonviolent protests to be successful, they have to be
unwaveringly nonviolent, otherwise they could encounter violent counter attacks. Throughout
the 4 day EDSA revolution, often referred to as the “bloodless” revolution no single gunshot was
fired, and no one was hurt or killed. Sister Soriano states that the slogan after the rigged ‘snap’
election was ‘ballots not bullets’, this is a testament to the peaceful aim of the protests. The fact
that no one single person was killed is evidence of the nonviolent ethos of the protests. The
protests which were largely Church led also helps explain the nonviolent nature of the revolution.
Just by listening to Cardinal Sin’s speech when he states: “I would only wish that violence and
bloodshed be avoided. Let us pray to our blessed lady to help us in order that we can solve this
problem peacefully “, it is evident that avoiding violence was a priority. The religious activists
believed that no one had to be killed in order to bring about change and this idea was
compounded by their faith, proven numerous times when for example a priest led a procession of
protestors to the Channel 4 Television studios to support a group of rebel soldiers. Avoiding
violence is obviously a crucial tenet of nonviolent protests, which the ESDA undoubtedly was,
furthermore advocates of nonviolence claim that violence from the protestors side only justifies
violence from the oppressors side, which can ultimately lead to failure and violent repression.
However, it is difficult to ascertain whether the fact that this nonviolence was a major
contributing factor to the success of the revolution.
Despite all the above, which were important elements for the success of the protests, the
most important contributing factor to the success of the People’s Power Revolution was
undoubtedly the defection of the Army and many politicians. For instance, a group of rebel
soldiers in Manila took over the state run TV station, Channel 4, and cut off Marcos’s
inauguration speech mid-sentence, the rebel troops were then supported by thousands of ordinary
citizens who surrounded the TV studio. In this particular example, several platoons of loyalist
soldiers tried to take back control of the government run channel, but they were soon surrounded
by civilians shaking their hands and offering them food, this ultimately eased the tensions
between the loyalist troops and the protestors. The Commander eventually agreed to withdraw
his men, therefore allowing the rebel troops to broadcast news updates and appeals from the
dissident elites and army Generals in the camps to rally even more assistance and disrupt the
state controlled media. Further evidence of how Army defection is important was the fact that
many soldiers disobeyed their orders and did not attack the protestors, tanks did not try to
advance or clear the human blockades in front of them as ordered by Marcos, and as already
mentioned pilots did not disperse the crowds with air raids. Basically allowing the protestors to
continue their fight. Lastly troops started to be inspired by the rebel Generals who were their
leaders and seven helicopter gunships landed at Camp Crame to join the rebels in what was a
kind of domino effect. Overall, there is clear evidence that support from the military and elites
against the regime is crucial if a nonviolent movement is to succeed as they are often the
instruments of control of the regime and their support is invaluable to overthrow a government.
It is important to note that non-violent protests are not always successful and can
sometimes result in violence from those in power or from counter-protesters. Additionally,
non-violent protest may not be effective in all situations, and in some cases, violence may be
necessary to achieve change. However, this was certainly not the case in the Philippines in 1986,
whose successful nonviolent revolution was a powerful agent of change which toppled the
dictator and Kleptocrat President Marcos. All the ingredients needed for a successful nonviolent
protest as listed above: a commitment to nonviolence, a diverse population of supporters and a
multitude of different forms used were in the mix and were important agents of change. But
perhaps as already argued in this paper the one most important contributing factor was the
defection of the military and the elite. Without their support and disobedience the protests could
have been a bloody affair since Marcos had ordered them to fire on the crowds. State run TV was
useful in rallying even more supporters and proving to Marcos himself that he was no longer in
power. In fact, all the actions of the military were critical to the fall of President Marcos. As can
be seen, the People's Power Revolution had all the elements listed by Chenoweth for a successful
nonviolent protest, this ‘weapon of choice’ protects the citizens but is ultimately successful when
the regime’s major sources of power such as civilian bureaucrats, economic elites and above all
the security forces stop obeying regime orders.
BIBLIOGRAPHY MLA9
“Appendix: A History of the Philippine Political Protest: Govph.” Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines,
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/edsa/the-ph-protest-appendix/.
Chenoweth, Erica. “Think Again: Nonviolent Resistance.” Foreign Policy, 24 Aug. 2011,
https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/08/24/think-again-nonviolent-resistance/.
Fisher, Max. “Peaceful Protest Is Much More Effective than Violence for Toppling
Dictators.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 1 Dec. 2021,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/05/peaceful-pro
test-is-much-more-effective-than-violence-in-toppling-dictators/.
Gavilan, Jodesz, et al. “Key Players in the 1986 People Power Revolution.” RAPPLER, 20
Feb. 2023,
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/122057-key-players-1986-people-power-re
volution/.
“A History of the Philippine Political Protest: Govph.” Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines,
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/edsa/the-ph-protest/#:~:text=During%20those
%20momentous%20four%20days,of%20President%20Ferdinand%20E.%20Marcos.
Nicholasen, Michelle. “Why Nonviolent Resistance Beats Violent Force in Effecting
Social, Political Change.” Harvard Gazette, Harvard Gazette, 22 Apr. 2019,
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolent-resistance-beatsviolent-force-in-effecting-social-political-change/.
“People Power in the Philippines.” Nonviolence 3.0, 25 Feb. 2022,
https://nonviolence3.com/history/philippines/.
“The People Power Revolution, Philippines 1986.” Origins, 1 Feb. 1970,
https://origins.osu.edu/milestones/people-power-revolution-philippines-1986?lang
uage_content_entity=en.
Rappler.com. “Listen: Cardinal Sin's 1986 Appeal for Filipinos to Go to EDSA, Support
Ramos and Enrile.” RAPPLER, 23 Feb. 2022,
https://www.rappler.com/nation/audio-jaime-cardinal-sin-1986-appeal-go-edsa-sup
port-fidel-ramos-juan-ponce-enrile/.
“Remembering EDSA: Podcast Interviews by PCIJ • A Podcast on Anchor.” Anchor,
https://anchor.fm/rememberingedsa.
OPVL N°1
My Dear People, I wish you to pray, because it's only through prayer that we may solve this problem.
This is Cardinal Sin speaking to the people, especially in Metro Manila. I am indeed concerned about
the situation of Minister Enrile and General Ramos. I am calling our people to support our two good
friends at the camp. If any of you could be around at Camp Aguinaldo to show your solidarity and your
support in this very crucial period, when our two good friends have shown their idealism, I would be very
happy if you support them now. I would only wish that violence and bloodshed be avoided. Let us pray
to our blessed lady to help us in order that we can solve this problem peacefully - Cardinal Jaime Sin
https://www.rappler.com/nation/audio-jaime-cardinal-sin-1986-appeal-go-edsa-support-fidel-ramos-juan-ponce-enrile/
Origin
This is a primary source. It is a transcript of a radio speech
by Cardinal Jaime Sin broadcast live on Radio Veritas in
1986. Radio Veritas was a church-run independent radio
station, and in 1986 was the closest the world had to the
internet!
Purpose
The purpose of this speech was to encourage and appeal
to Filipino citizens to rally around and support the rebels
against Marcos’s troops, by becoming a human shield
around the camp. The intended audience was therefore all
the supporters of the protests.
This speech was broadcast on the independent
Church-run Radio Veritas. Radio Veritas played a critical
role during the mass uprising. Former University of the
Philippines president Francisco Nemenzo stated that:
"Without Radio Veritas, it would have been difficult, if not
impossible, to mobilise millions of people in a matter of
hours."
Value
This is an enormously valuable source, it is a primary
source which provides direct evidence of the subject that
is being researched: the People’s Power Revolution in the
Philippines in 1986. It is a valuable source of information
as it is the direct transcript of a speech made by Cardinal
Sin to appeal to all Filipnos to assemble around Camp
Crame and create a human shield to protect 2 rebel
officers who had defected from Marcos’s army and sided
with the protestors.
The fact that it is a Church representative and it starts
with “I wish you to pray'' emphasises the nonviolent
aspect of the EDSA revolution. It is an interesting source
as it shows that the Church was positioned against the
regime and the power & influence that the Cardinal
believed he had over the Filipino people.
Its value also lies in the fact that the speech is clearly
addressed to the population living in Manila, the capital.
This is where the power lies and where everything
actually happened.
This source is also valuable in that it highlights the
peaceful nature of the protests, how nonviolence was
requested and shows us how the Church played an
important part of the revolution and its nonviolent ethos
This source helps us understand the urgency of the
situation at the time and it gives the impression that
nothing was really planned.
Another interesting factor to take away from this source is
that it immediately informs us and the audience of the
time that highly positioned politicians and army
personnel had started to defect and turn their backs on
Marcos which would be a way of informing the population
that their protests were working and that there was hope
to be had.
It also informs us that not only was this a matter of
urgency but in hindsight that it was a critical turning point
in the movement as highly positioned members of the
establishment were turning away from Marcos which was
a major factor in the success of the revolution.
Limitations
Even though this source is extremely valuable it does have
its limitations. This is mainly because we don’t know why
the Church was against Marcos, was it for political
self-serving interests or self-preservation? Or was it
because they were truly interested in the good of the
people and country?
Nothing is not purposely addressed and there is no
particular propaganda in this speech, it is just that
without context it is hard to know why Cardian Sin is
trying to protect the rebels against the regime.
Also, upon reading this appeal, we must ask ourselves
what was the relationship between the Church and the
Army, something that we cannot know by reading this
transcript although it is a question we need to ask
ourselves.
OPVL N°2
PODCAST: Sister Luz Emmanuel Soriano
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/rememberingedsa/episodes/Sister-Luz-Emmanuel-Soriano-e1e
ofm9
Origin
This is a primary source. It is a first hand account of Sister
Luz Emmanuel Soriano, a nun who was part of the EDSA
movement in 1986.
Purpose
This podcast is part of a series of interviews by The
Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism who
interviewed 20 Filipinos, some of whom were the main
players at EDSA, in 2006 to mark the 20th year of the
1986 People Power. These interviews were uploaded in
February 2022 for all those interested in the movement,
whether it be Filipinos, historians, those interested in
nonviolent protests etc.
This is an important and useful first hand account of
someone who actively participated in the EDSA protests.
Sister Soriano provides a detailed account of exactly what
happened during those 4 days on the Epifanio De los
Santos Avenue (a ring road around metro Manila).
She recounts how the
Value
This is a first hand eyewitness account of the events
during the EDSA movement in the Philippines in 1986.
This source has authority as it is a real witness of the
events, recounting them. We are provided with detailed
information which corroborates what we already know in
hindsight of what happened and secondary sources
confirm this account. However, the actual interview is
given 20 years after the event, so one has to be a little bit
careful about the accuracy.
This source is valuable to my essay as it confirms that the
protestors came from all walks of life, rich/poor/
young/old/ from all congregations of the Catholic church/
students etc
It helps my paper as it describes how the peaceful
protestors managed to halt the advance of the tanks,
troops and planes that Marcos had ordered to crush the
uprising.
It corroborates the commitment to nonviolence as Sister
Soriano talks about ‘kneeling down with the rosary’ and
how the soldiers were also Christians and therefore could
not kill their fellowmen. She mentions the slogan they
used: ‘use ballots not bullets’ which again emphasises the
nonviolent nature of the protests. She talks about how you
don’t have to kill one another in order to bring about
change, and this is directly relevant to my paper.
She talks about how the soldiers needed guts to disobey
their orders from the Commander in Chief and retreat and
therefore not open fire on the protestors, she says that this
was a ‘miracle’, this is not valuable to my paper but again
emphasises the faith of the protestors.
Limitations
The only real limitation of this source is the faith aspect
from Sister Soriano, the interview often refers to her faith
and how the Christian aspect was a factor that contributed
to the successful outcome of the protests. Sister Soriano
assumes that the pilots disobeyed orders because of their
faith, this is perhaps true but we would need further
evidence from an actual pilot for example to give this
argument any credibility, so this is a limitation in the
source. Sister Soriano believes that the pilots could see
that the protesters along the EDSA road had formed a
cross with their bodies and so this deterred them from
shooting and prompted them to retreat, referring to it as a
‘miracle’.
PLAN:
Thesis
While the amount and diversity of protesters, the multitude of different protest methods used and
a firm commitment to nonviolence were important factors in the success of the People’s Power
Revolution in the Philippines in 1986, the defection and support of the military and the political
elite was the most important element because these protests needed to rally loyalty from both
security forces and a certain political elite. This is especially true if the protests want to topple a
government. Obtaining loyalty from security forces is key as they are often themselves the
agents of repression.
Paragraph 1:
Main Idea: a successful nonviolent protest needs a sustained participation from a large and
diverse population, the protests cannot be only student led for example, this is too small a body,
change has to be desired from all sectors of society.
● It is estimated that up to 2 million Filipinos took to the streets in Metro Manila and across
the country.
● Not only did the majority population of Catholics protest but were also joined by the
minority Muslim and Chinese Filipino population.
● The US under then President Ronald Reagan supported Marcos, but after the ‘snap’
elections and the beginning of the protests, the US withdrew their support of the dictator
and Kleptocrat.
● The Catholic Church was also a staunch supporter of the protesters and even called for
the general public to join the protests.
Paragraph 2:
Main Idea: Moreover, Chenoweth argues that a nonviolent protest is successful when there are
diverse campaigns and variations in method, this means that the protests take on a multitude of
forms and activities.
● Resistance came about in the form of street masses and prayer vigils led by priests
● Nonviolence was further practised by priests and nuns kneeling before tanks to stop their
advance.
● Ordinary civilians blocked tanks by sitting in front of them, offering cigarettes, food and
sweets to the soldiers, basically disarming them with candy, pleading with them to defect
and join the movement, young girls walked among the tanks handing out flowers.
● Hundreds of thousands answered Cardinal Sin’s call to surround Camp Crame where
rebel officers were holed up. He asked them to block army bases and any troop
movement.
Paragraph 3:
Main Idea: Furthermore, Cheoweth posits that for nonviolent protests to be successful, they
have to be unwaveringly nonviolent, otherwise they could encounter violent repression.
● Throughout the 4 day EDSA revolution, often referred to as the “bloodless” revolution no
single gunshot was triggered, and noone was hurt or killed.
● Cardinal Sim appeals to Filipinos to commit to nonviolence: “I would only wish that
violence and bloodshed be avoided. Let us pray to our blessed lady to help us in
order that we can solve this problem peacefully “
Paragraph 4:
Main Idea: Any nonviolent movement needs to rally loyalty from both security forces and a
certain political elite. This is especially true if the protests want to topple a government.
Obtaining loyalty from security forces is key as they are often themselves the agents of
repression, but political and business elites are also important, allowing, for example, to disrupt
state controlled media.
°Troops begin to defect in increasing numbers. Seven helicopter gunships land at Camp
Crame to join the rebels.
°A small group of rebel soldiers in Manila take over channel four, a government-run TV
station, cutting off a Marcos speech in mid-sentence. Tens of thousands gather outside to defend
the station while the opposition begins broadcasting news updates and appeals from Enrile,
Ramos and Aquino for more assistance. When several platoons of loyalist soldiers try to take
back channel four, they are surrounded by civilians. A priest walks up and leads the crowd in the
Lord’s Prayer. People begin shaking the soldiers’ hands and giving them McDonald's
hamburgers, doughnuts and orange soda. The tension eases. After a while the commander agrees
to withdraw his troops.
Historical Context:
The 1986 Philippines People’s Power Revolution was an immediate reaction to rigged
‘snap’ Presidential elections that put incumbent President Ferdinand Marcos back in power. He
had been a ruthless dictator and kleptocrat since he took power in 1972. Marcos declared early
elections in the belief that doing so would solidify US support, silence protests and criticisms in
both the Philippines and the US, and finally put the issues surrounding the death of his
opposition Benigno Aquino Jr. to rest.
4 key factors according to Chenoweth of successful nonviolent protests:
In order to explore the extent to which nonviolent protests can be successful, it is useful
to understand the criteria required for a successful nonviolent campaign. Four key elements have
been identified by Chenoweth, a researcher at Harvard {1}. Firstly, Chenoweth states that a
successful nonviolent protest needs a sustained participation from a large and diverse population,
the protests cannot be only student led for example, this is too small a body, change has to be
desired from all sectors of society. Secondly, and crucially, the movement needs to rally loyalty
from both security forces and a certain political elite. This is especially true if the protests want
to topple a government. Obtaining loyalty from security forces is key as they are often the agents
of repression, but political and business elites are also important, allowing, for example, to
disrupt state controlled media. Thirdly, protests need to be diverse in the methods employed,
ranging from marches to sit-ins to strikes. And finally to never waiver from the ideal of
nonviolence, many advocates of nonviolence claim that violence from the protestors side only
justifies violence from the oppressors side. This can ultimately lead to failure and violent
repression.
Criteria
People’s Power Revolution
Large & diverse population
Domestic and exile diaspora support. Support
from Ronald Reagan who withdrew the USA
support of Marcos.
Millions gathered in the street in Metro
Manila and cities and villages across the
country.
Young/old/ rich/poor/ Students/ Catholics and
other congregations. Muslims and Chinese
Filipinos.
Military and elite loyalty
Counter repression from powers in charge.
A faction of the military refused to side with
Marcos and go against the people especially
in Camp Crame.
Church support.
2 generals defected to the popular people's
movement and were interned.
Troops defected and disobeyed Marco’s
orders. The army withdrew support and sided
with the people.
Diverse campaigns and variations in method
Broadcast news of the Marcos’s human rights
violations and ill gotten wealth.
Citizen support was rallied through Radio
Veritas.
Church
Prayer vigils
Took over Channel 4 state controlled tv
station
Church and civilians handed out soft drinks
and food to soldiers.
People stop tank advances by sitting in front
of them.
Street masses.
Commitment to nonviolence
EDSA is often referred to as the ‘bloodless’
revolution. No gunshot was fired. The slogan
was ‘ballots not bullets’ after the rigged snap
election.