The 1986 Edsa Revolution and the 2016 elections

Thirty years ago this week, we threw out a dictator and his family in a display of People Power. While it is often called the Edsa Revolution (because of the venue for the largest, most visible protests on Feb. 22-25, 1986), it was in fact a nationwide protest with rallies held in other cities nationwide. And while many events preceded it, one event in particular provided the basis and trigger for the final action that was People Power: the Feb. 7 snap election that resulted in Cory Aquino winning the presidency over Ferdinand Marcos.

More than half of our population—and about half of our voting-age population—were not yet born in 1986 or are too young to remember what happened then and the implications of those events on our lives today. It is easy to dismiss People Power as an event that happened so long ago. Yet the link may be closer than we think.

The development of the Philippines has been fairly well-documented since 1986. Economic growth, investments, debt ratios, and other economic indicators have shown significant signs of improvement. Political and governance institutions have been rebuilt and strengthened, and a vastly expanded democratic space has enabled social institutions to play larger roles in society.

This is not to say that all is perfect. Poverty, corruption, environmental degradation, and other social and developmental ills still remain. On the other hand, I shudder to think what might have continued had People Power failed in 1986. At that time, economic growth was dropping and corruption and social unrest were on the rise. The country was likened to a “social volcano.”

But equally as important as 1986 were the developments that have occurred since then. These provide even more valuable lessons for all of us, and especially for those born after 1986. We have had five presidents and seven elections since 1986, counting the off-year elections for lawmakers and local officials when presidents were not elected. Our choice of presidents and elected officials had a clear bearing on how the country developed and on how our economy and political and social institutions performed. These provide us powerful lessons on the value of leadership and the consequences of the choices we make as voters, as well as the options that our political parties offer us as voters. While I believe that voters share some of the credit or blame for the quality of political leadership, I hold political parties equally responsible. Their responsibility, after all, is to present us with good candidates—something that some parties have absolutely failed to do.
That our country and economy have been on a roller coaster since 1986 is a bit of an understatement. One can almost track the level of economic growth, corruption, confidence, or even competitiveness and match that to an administration and its president. Leadership matters. It may not be a guarantee of progress—as we have seen—but it is an important factor. Without quality leadership and management, it is difficult to imagine how the country can continue to move forward in a world that has grown even more challenging in just the last few years.

In many of my speaking engagements, or, more often, in private conversations, I have been asked who to vote for on Election Day. My answer has always been that I look for four qualities in a leader: integrity, vision, management, and empathy.
I consider integrity the most important. We have been misled too many times by elected officials with no integrity that we cannot risk going without this quality. The consequences are too great. Vision is important, but without management skills, it still means nothing and is just another unfulfilled vision. And finally empathy, the ability to feel what others are feeling. With empathy comes communication, the ability to reach out. That combination can give people hope and build up trust—important elements when you want to inspire people to support programs and pull in the same direction. My bottom-line question has always been: Who do you think will be best for the country? It applies to all positions, from the president to the vice president, senators, congressmen, governors, mayors, provincial board members and local councilors.
The road from Edsa I in 1986 to Election Day in May may appear to be long, but the connection is actually closer than you think. Thirty years is not a terribly long time. Many of the people who were around then are still around now, and they include both citizens and politicians. One need not look too deep into the candidate list for president and vice president to see who were there, what they did, or who they were connected to at the time.

Tigers do not change their stripes, and neither do most candidates. How they behaved then and through the 30 years ensuing will more or less tell you how they will conduct themselves if elected to office in May. So, if you still think that People Power 1986 doesn’t mean much to us, please think again. The answers are staring at us, if we just bother to reflect a little on the last three decades.

Guillermo M. Luz (gm.luz@competitive.org.ph) is the private-sector cochair of the National Competitiveness Council.