The KMP (peasant movement of the philippines) movement generation, activity, and continuity in philippine society 4 5

KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 133 CHAPTER IV Philippine Peasant Movements and Organizations And the KMP Peasant politics thrives in the Philippine social landscape. The Elsonian framework of the “disappearing peasantry” (Elson, 1997) is hardly applicable either to the Philippine case or to various others, e.g. Thailand. And even if the Elsonian argument could be stretched to speak for these countries, “the end of peasantry does not mean the end of peasant politics” (Baker, 2001: 26). Rural or peasant movements could emerge “involving people who may derive a majority of their income from the urban economy, but who want to protect the rural base which still serves as their social security and cultural anchor” (ibid.). This chapter deals with peasant movements and organizations in the 1980s and 1990s. Its organization revolves around two basic arguments. First, movement emergence, activity, and continuity owes much to the persistence of significant agrarian structures that are reflected in the goals and issues carried out by said movements and organizations. Second, the emergence and development of the KMP (Peasant Movement of the Philippines) demonstrates concrete political, organizational, and ideological continuities while manifesting the comparable conditions of movement emergence and collec tive action generation discussed in the preceding chapter. The first section describes the range of peasant actors in Philippine society. I analyze the politics of these organizations and the environment that facilitated their emergence and proliferation. Against this backdrop, I introduce the subject of study by presenting a brief history of the KMP and examining its politics. Lastly, the conclusion punctuates the chapter by linking the historical section (Chapter III) with KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 134 the present-day peasant politics and movement and underscore movement continuities. A. Present-day Peasant Movements and Organizations The 1980s and 1990s witnessed a remarkable emergence of peasant organizations and movements. A variety of factors and their convergence could be pinpointed to have directly or indirectly made this phenomenon possible. In what follows I analyze briefly the societal conditions between the 1980s and 1989s to carve the environment in which movement emergence transpired and then discuss the various peasant formations. 1. Facilitative Conditions The structure of political opportunities significantly influences movement emergence, activity, and continuity. In the last two decades several changes unfolded in Philippine political environment. First, the Marcos government lifted martial law in January 1981. The formal lifting of military rule directly and indirectly encouraged social and political activists to go out into the open and express their dissent against the Marcos dictatorship and aspirations for social change . Second, the three-day EDSA uprising (24-26 February 1986) put an end to the Marcos rule and the event created the so-called euphoria for political openness. 131 Formal democracy was restored through Aquino’s ascendancy as president via extraconstitutional means. In 1987 and 1988, congressional and local elections were held respectively. Interestingly, the communist left through the Partido ng Bayan (PnB, People’s Party) fielded eight candidates in the national elections but lost. This phenomenon reflected the widely held notion of the existence of a democratic space and the openness of the new government. Nonetheless, several progressives were 131 EDSA stands for Epifanio De Los Santos Avenue. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 135 able to enter government through appointments and elections but they were eventually “eased” out. 132 Third, the promulgation of the 1987 Freedom Constitution and the enactment of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (R.A. 6657) on 10 June 1988 further uplifted the hopes of the agrarian population and pro-land reform advocates for a significant and lasting social change. The pro-people stance of the Aquino government enticed peasant organizations from different political poles. The years 1986 to 1987 were characterized by an arduous lobbying of peasant organizations and alliances to pressure the Aquino government in implementing a genuine agrarian reform. The laborious effort, of which KMP was a major participant, spawned a broad-based peasant coalition, the Congress for Peoples’ Agrarian Reform (CPAR). Several years after, the Local Government Code of 1991 was implemented and further encouraged the participation of NGOs and POs in local government units. Fourth, it was between the mid-1980s and early 1990s when NGOs gained prominence and dominated Philippine civil society. Not a limited number of these organizations engaged in agrarian reform and rural development advocacy and implementing development projects for the rural sector. In short, the last two decades witnessed an expansion of civil society. 133 Another factor that led to the proliferation not only of open peasant movements and organizations but also NGOs points to the evolving character of the CPP -NPA. The tactical blunder, as the CPP admitted in one of its documents, of calling for a boycott in the 1986 snap presidential elections rekindled a 1979 debate 132 These were Butch Abad, Aquilino Pimental, and Augusto “Bobit” Sanchez (Personal communications with social and popular democrats). 133 An expansive ‘positive’ literature on NGOs exists in the Philippines. See, among many others, Aldaba, 1993; Clarke, 1994 & 1998; Ibana, 1994, Rocamora, 1994; Silliman and Noble, 1998, and ESCCRT, 1997. On the other hand, refer to P.J. James (1995) for a strong critique of NGOs and their real intent. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 136 within the party of the same nature, that is, to participate or boycott the congressional elections. The party implemented the non-participation policy. As for 1986, some of the key people involved in this debate, like the late Mr. Filemon “Popoy” Lagman, again disagreed vehemently with the policy. 134 And in early 1993, the Manila -Rizal regional committee bolted from the CPP and rejected not only the leadership of Jose Maria Sison but also the whole party. As such, they referred to themselves as ‘RJs’ or the rejectionist faction. 135 As a result, top leading cadres and members of the party have disaligned themselves from or quit the revolutionary movement. Today we can see them working with NGOs, engaged in their own businesses, others have been appointed in top government positions and joined think tanks, some have taken the path of being partisan scholars, while others have just kept silent and went on with their ordinary lives. This fall-out likewise contributed to the expansion of civil society, particularly of NGOs. The expansion of political opportunities, however, does not guarantee a rechanneling of political participation toward institutional bounds. Contrary to the belief of the majority of peasant-based organizations and movements, the KMP for instance and other formations for that matter continue to engage the Philippine state through extra-institutional means. Theirs is experiential and ideological. “Political opportunities are” hence “relative and acquire meaning only in relation to a movement’s social base and collective strategy” (Boudreau, 2001: 48). 2. Of Movements and Organizations 136 137 134 Interviews with former full-pledged CPP members, names withheld. Personal communications with particip ants to the split, names withheld. 136 For the sake of brevity, I could not avoid but to use numerous abbreviations for the names of movements and organizations. I also directly translated the Philippine names of these formations to the English language. 135 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 137 The expansiveness of non-governmental organizations and movements in Philippine society is reflected by three typologies that aim to grasp their character and scope. First, David for instance presents a four-part categorization of Philippine NGOs. “The first category is comprised of academics, religious leaders, and other professionals and they are termed as non-governmental individuals (NGIs). The second one pertains to membership-based organizations that include professional, academic, and civic organizations (PACOs) and grassroots people’s organizations (POs). POs can be further subdivided into government run and initiated POs (GRIPOs) and genuine, autonomous people’s or ganizations (GUAPOs). The GUAPOs have organized themselves beyond the community and/or workplace through sectoral and geographic alliances. The third pertains to ideological forces namely national democrats, democratic socialists, social democrats, and liberal democrats. Finally, there are those institutions or agencies that support grassroots organizations or the NGOs. These NGOs are further classified as development, justice, and advocacy NGOs (DJANGOs), traditional NGOs (TANGOs), funding agency NGOs (FUNDANGOs), and mutant NGOs (MUNGOs) that are further subdivided into GRINGOs, business-organized NGOs (BONGOs), and fly-bynight entrepreneur organizations or COME N’GOs” (David 1998, pp. 26-48). On the other hand, Ferrer also uses a four-part differentia tion of civil society groups: “They can be distinguished as to the nature of organization, that is, its function or role may be service-oriented, for advocacy, research or training, may be ideological or political, organic (community) or indigenous or traditional (clan, tribe); or be based on nature of composition (e.g. sectors, classes, ethnic groups, gender); as to organizational level, that is, organizational membership may be as individuals or groups; and scope of operation and/or membership may be at the most basic territorial unit (e.g., neighborhood) or national and international; as to organizational origin, that is, it may be initiated by government, interest groups, or particular institutions (business, church, academe) or by individuals; and as to perspectives / ideology, that is, their operational frameworks may be defined by some ideology, philosophy, religion, or culture” (Ferrer 1997: 2, emphasis on the original). On a more specific plane, Franco categorizes the peasant struggle into three political poles. “The outright opposition (far left) is represented by KMP (Maoist -inspired, CPPinfluenced) that perceives CARP as inherently limited and implementation is impossible. Thus, wittingly or unwittingly, sides with the anti-reform land-owning elite and real estate developers in calling for the scrapping of CARP altogether. Nonetheless, it acknowledges the continued importance of anti-reform resistance. The second pole, uncritical collaboration (center -right) is exampled by AR Now! 137 I am gratefully indebted to Ms. Marge Ibañez of CODE-NGO who introduced me to Mr. Rolly B. Ascuncion of PAKISAMA who in turn unselfishly shared his work on profiling peasant movements, organizations, and coalitions. The contents of this section were largely derived from the document “Situationer on the Peasant Movement in the Philippines: 1992 to 1998”, PHILINK, January 1999. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 138 (which is of a pro-Ramos social democratic orientation) relies on formal-legal means to move lands and lays exclusive emphasis on the state for implementation. It also perceives CARP as inherently limited and little has been achieved. It is nonetheless, pro-CARP and anti-Morales. And the third pole, critical engagement (left -of-center radical reform pole), is represented by PARRDS138. It does not only rely on formal-legal means to move lands but more importantly on organized social pressure from above and below to drive land reform. This actor advances a pragmatically neutralist pro-CARP stance and views that implementation is possible but also acknowledges the continued importance of anti-reform resistance” (Franco, 1999, pp. 1-4; 1997, pp. -4). The three typologies, with emphasis on the third, are by no means insignificant in understanding the nature of peasant formations in Philippine society. Their application, however, should be qualified so as to put into effect a contextualized analysis. Instead of trying to establish or formulate a general pattern or mode of analysis it would better to treat these organizations on an empirical level and in a relational manner with government and agrarian reform and rural development adversaries. The CPAR for instance could not neatly be boxed along the categorizations presented. It was rather a collective spontaneous reaction of agrarian reform advocates to grab the opportunity of initiating a meaningful agrarian reform program. The CPAR, formed on 21-23 May 1987, is thus far the biggest, broadest, and longest coalition of peasant and peasant-based organizations, movements, and advocates. It was comprised 93 organizations led by 12 national peasant and fisherfolk organizations – AMA, AMIHAN, BMMLL, KABAPA, KMP, KAMMPIL, FFF, LMP, LMMP, NFSW, PAKISAMA, and PAMALAKAYA (PPI 1998, p. 72). 139 Upon the implementation of CARP, CPAR criticized the program as basically not comprehensive and ridden with many loopholes. On this note, the coalition called for 138 PARRDS stands for Partnership for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Services. AMA stands for Association of Agricultural Workers, AMIHAN for National Federation of Peasant Women, BMMLL for Association of Small Fisherfolks in Laguna Lake, KaBaPa for Movement of New Filipina, KMP for Peasant Movement of the Philippines, KAMMPIL for Association of Small CocoFarmers in the Philippines, FFF for Federation of Free Farmers, NFSW for National Federation of Sugar Workers, PAKISAMA for National Federation of Peasant Organizations, and PAMALAKAYA for National Federation of Fisherfolk. 139 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 139 a multi-sectoral conference that was participated by 600 sectoral representatives. In this conference (25-26 June 1988), the People’s Agrarian Reform Code (PARCODE) was formulated and approved to challenge CARP.140 The CPAR, for six years, became a center of activities for agrarian reform advocacy. Through lobbying, dialogues, mobilization, and electoral participation, the coalition advocated for various issues that concern not only the rural sector but the general population as well. These issues ranged from land conversion, fishery issues and aquatic reforms, palay and rice prices, coconut levy, rights of peasant women, food security, environmental destruction, natural calamities, skills training, militarization, peace, the ousting of U.S. military bases, to the issue of foreign debt. 141 In June 1993, however, CPAR imploded due to politico-ideological and other differences between member organizations (PPI, 1998: 74). Critical Collaboration with the Philippine state and its institutions has been a defining characteristic of most peasant actors.142 Like the FFF and the PRRM, an overwhelming majority of peasant societies in the last three decades has resorted to institutional means in struggling for agrarian concerns, nonetheless in varying degrees. Their politics is rather primarily directed toward influencing the state and other dominant social forces through formal-legal means and participation in the implementation of government programs and policies and in the delivery of services to the peasants.143 In pushing for reforms and serving the interests of their constituents, these peasant formations intermittently receive support from government in the 140 Mariano in LINANGAN IV 1990, p. 134; PPI 1998, p. 72. For a more detailed account of CPAR’s experiences, refer to Goño 1995. 142 The term collaboration is used to describe the act of cooperating and working with government agencies and other institutions of the state. 143 These organizations (for example PARRDS), however, claim that they also or equally rely on “organized resistance from below” in pushing for reforms. See Borras, 1997. 141 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 140 implementation of NGO-PO-GO programs, hold planning workshops with DAR, work hand in hand with certain government agencies and officials in formulating and implementing agrarian-related policies. Examples of these are the AADC, dKMP, KAMMPIL, KASAMA-FPO, and the PAKISAMA, and COIR (PHILINK, 1999). In some cases, others have developed long-term working relationships with government, e.g., the FFF, SANDUGUAN, PKSMMN, SCFO, and the AMA (ibid.). Embarking from Franco’s typology, a concrete example of the critical engagement grouping is PARRDS or the Partnership for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Services that was established in 1993. It is comprised of NGOs like PEACE144, KAISAHAN 145, KAMMPIL146, PPI147, PRRM, CARET, ELF, CFPI; of former national democratic peasant groups, which are identified with CPP -initiated or –controlled organizations like the dKMP148, PEACE, PPI, and Siglaya 149; of popular democrats like the PRRM and the MPD (Movement for Popular Democracy); and of and independent socialist formations like the BISIG 150 and CARET. On the other hand, AR Now! (The People’s Campaign for Agrarian Reform Network, established in 1997) is constituted by formations like the AADC, 144 The Philippine Ecumenical Action for Community Empowerment Foundation is also of ND origins and a research and advocacy format ion. It is currently involved in the struggle against the land grabbing and conversion case in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. 145 KAISAHAN (UNITY) together with SALIGAN (Alternative Legal Assistance Center), BMFI (Balay Mindanao Foundation Inc., and SENTRA (Center for Genuine Agrarian Reform) are para-legal support groups for peasants. KAISAHAN, SALIGAN, and BMFI provide support to a broad array of peasant groups including dKMP, PAKISAMA, and KASAMA-FPO. 146 Established in 1991, KAMMPIL (Association of Small CocoFarmers in the Philippines) was a founding member of the COIR (Coconut Industry Reform Movement). 147 The PPI or Philippine Peasant Institute is an advocacy and research support organization that severed ties with the KMP in 1993. 148 dKMP (Democratic Peasant Movement of the Philippines) was established in 1993 when it severed ties with KMP. Its leader, Jimmy Tadeo (the expelled leader of KMP) is currently a board member of the Land Bank of the Philippines. 149 A faction that bolted from the CPP -NPA in 1993. 150 Bukluran sa Ikauunlad ng Soyalistang Isip at Gawa or Unity for the Advancement of Socialist Thought and Action. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 141 PAKISAMA, KAMMMPI, and the KASAMA -FPO151 and member NGOs (ANGOC, BMFI, CARRD152, ICSI, PASCRES, PARFUND, PDAP 153, PhilDHRAA154, SALIGAN, and WAND). The political attitude of these two groupings toward government and state projects is likewise carried by other organizations and networks such as the AMA 155, MORE-AR156, SANDUGUAN157, PKSMMN 158, and the SCFO159. (PHILINK, 1999: 50) The PAKISAMA was spawned by a series of grassroots consultations in 1986 after the EDSA uprising. It is affiliated with other several coalitions and formations like the NPC, Green Forum Philippines, PHILINK, PKSMNN, COIR, and the 151 The KASAMA-FPO or the Federation of People’s Organizations is a multi-sectoral formation whose main membership is comprised by farmers and farmw orkers also includes small vendors, jeepney drivers, and small fisherfolks. 152 The Campaign for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development or CARRD together with ICSI (Institute of Church and Social Issues) and PASCRES (People’s Alternative Study Center for Research and Education in Social Development) are research and advocacy centers. 153 Established in 1986 and basically remains a partnership of six Philippine NGO networks and a number of Canadian NGOs. It has focused on estate/site development (post-land trans fer in 10 pilot areas through its PPSE (Promoting Participation in Sustainable Enterprises) program and sustainable agriculture. 154 The PhilDHRAA together with ANGOC (Asian NGO Coalition), PDAP (Philippine Development Assistance Program), Tambuyog, CERD, and SIKAT (involved in community-based coastal resource management), and ATI (Appropriate Technology International), PhilNET -RDI (Philippine Network – Rural Development Institutions), and COIR are peasant support organizations for the development or adaptation of appropriate technologies and sustainable agriculture and fisheries. 155 AMA (Alliance of Workers in Agriculture) was established in 1976 and was formerly known as MASAKA (Association of Free Farmers) that is identified with the underground armed movement of PKP (Baltazar 1998, cited in PHILINK 1999). Its network organizations are SAMAMA (Association of Small Fisherfolks), KMM (Small Farmers’ Association), UMA (Agricultural Workers’ Union), KMB (Farmers’ Association in the Hinterlands), KMT (Association of Sugarcane Farmers), BMA (Salt Workers’ Association), UMN (Coconut Workers’ Union), MALAYA (a women’s organization), and KaBaPa (Society of New Filipina). 156 The Movement to Oppose and Resist Exemptions to Agrarian Reform is an issue-based coalition formed in 1995 and is comprised by the FFF, dKMP, KASAMA-FPO, and PAKISAMA. 157 SANDUGUAN (“Unity in Blood”), a federation formed in 1987, is primarily concerned with organizing and strengthening cooperative rural banks. 158 The PKSMMN (National Coalition of Organizations of Coconut Farmers and Farmworkers) is a broad coalition formed with the support of Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) officials. Among others, its network organizations include AMA, AMMANI, ARBA, ASTKK, APKN, BUKLOD, COFFRA, DLPI, D-JPAT, FAITH, FFF. F:RF, KAMMPIL, KASAMA-FPO, KAMMMPI, KAMALAYAN, KOMMMPAK, LMP, MARANAO, NAMAHAMIN, NFSCFO, PAKISAMA, PASALEY, SIPAG, SCFO-Q, TASK, and UGMA, most of which were established during and after the martial law period (PKSMMN Brochure, nd.). 159 The SCFO or Sm all Coconut Farmers Organization was organized by the PCA in the late 1980s. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 142 PNPC.160 PAKISAMA has a total of 42 affiliate peasant organizations federated at the provincial and municipal levels and are located in 32 provinces throughout the country. It is also in the process of building two sectoral organizations namely LAKAMBINI for peasant women groups and MAMAMYAN for fisherfolks (PAKISAMA Brochure, nd.). Formed in November 1995, the AADC or the Agri-Aqua Development Coalition is said to have a sphere of influence in 22 municipalities in the five provinces of Regions 9, 10, 11, and 12. Its other network organizations are the Mindanao Environment Forum (MEF), Mindanao Coalition of Development NGO Networks (MINCODE), the National Peace Conference (NPC), KAMMMPI or the Federation of Small Fisherfolks in the Philippines that was established in 1997 and a board member of the AADC in Mindanao, Another basic characteristic of the majority of these members is their overriding focus on specific agrarian issues such as cooperatives, coco levy, fisheries code, liberalization of agricultural trade, agricultural prices, rice cartels, food security, productivity and technology161, leasehold implementation, agrarian reform fund, etc. On the other hand, they fail to or not link these important problems to the more general issue of landlessness and agrarian reform and the political-economic orientation and system of Philippine society. Consequently, there is an imminent danger of overlooking land reform and the impa rtial implementation of agrarian reform. Moreover, others would tend to focus only tactical issues that can muster maximum media projection. 160 NPC stands for National Peace Conference, PHILINK for Philippine NGOs for International Concerns, and the PNPC for Philippine National Peasant Caucus. 161 In February 1999, I had the chance to sit in on one of the assessment meetings of a PhilDHRAA chapter in Davao. The group’s concern was primarily focused on the improvement of productivity and technology in a rubber plantation. Nothing was mentioned or discussed with the farmworkers regarding the CARP implementation and when I secretly asked one of its staff, he just replied to me by saying “bear with us, we avoid politics”. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 188 peasant organizers were ambushed and killed by armed men believed to be MSDC security guards. Two months later, Francisco Marasigan and Maximo Carpinter (members of UMALPAS-KA) were simply gunned down by the FEPI-MSDC security guards on the evening of 13 February 1997 in the village of Papaya. The guards were apprehended by the Nasugbu police but were eventually released without trial. In November of the same year, another active member was also brutally murdered by the same security force. And more than a year later, two more members, Terry Sevilla and Roger Alla , were likewise executed by armed men on March 1999. Coming from a fiesta celebration, they were intercepted by “men in uniform” on their way home to Calayo. 244 The daunting presence of these armed goons and mercenary security guards, however, is not the only imminent danger that the residents of the hacienda have to live with. Since the land conflict, their used-to-be peaceful place have become militarized wherein not a month would pass that the army or the police would not conduct reconnaissance operations in their villages. In May 1997, the hacienda was used as a training ground by a company of soldiers from the Regional Special Action Force (RSAF). But the village folks clearly recall that never was their place used as a military training ground. 245 And on 21 August 2000, not less than 60 members of the Philippine Army conducted their usual operations in Hacienda Looc and concentrated their forces in the Calayo area for at least days. 246 check me out. He bought a pack of Champion cigarettes and took a long good look at me. I returned the “compliments” by staring at him in the eyes but the occasion cost me a good night sleep. 244 According to the barrio folks, their bodies were riddled with bullets coming from high-powered guns and signs of torture were very evident. 245 Interviews with Vicenta Bautista (70 years old) of Calayo. 246 According to the residents, the military and police always make the excuse of maintaining peace and order and searching for NPA rebels lurking in the area which according to the them have been sighted in 1997. I was there and one can just feel the tension brewing within the UMALPAS-KA. Almost every hour, the members would check the security of other members and relay critical information to ensure the safety of the residents and theirs as well. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 189 Not only lives did the movement sacrifice in the struggle but also the economic activities that has caused considerable misery to its members. With grave threats and actual physical harm being casually directed upon them, members and non-members have limited if not stopped their agricultural endeavors. 247 As a result, the peasants’ economic status has considerably deteriorated. Former middle peasants have become lower-middle or oven poor peasants, the lower-middle ones became poor, and the poor ones poorer. Moreover, the movement has survived its years of struggle mainly through credit spending. With a debit balance of tens of thousands of pesos, the leaders and members maintain that a lot more would be lost if they surrender their cause. 248 On the other hand, another major resource to support the daily activities of UMALPASKA comes from donations from researchers, sympathizers, and supporters. The support, however, is far from being sufficient. On the other hand, the whole ordeal created an instant dialogical discourse between members, non-members, and the pro-conversion members. It likewise welded bitter antagonisms between families and social ties as they found one another on different sides or caught in between the conflict. 249 The situation, however, proves thus far to be more beneficial to the movement’s political cause. Through discussions, “we are able to demonstrate in theory and practice that the state and its apparatuses are there to defend the interests of the landlords and capitalists and that the only way to hold on to our lands is 247 A concrete event to depict these economic harassments occurred when the security guards of MSDC burned the house of Maria Masucol on 15 September 19 98 because her husband did not heed to the warning that they could no longer get any crops from the land they are tilling (CyberDyaryo), 12 May 1999. 248 Rutten (2000, pp. 215-252) refers to this practice as high-cost activism. 249 Lily D. clearly described how former long-time friends became bitter rivals, how close relatives became enemies, and how their used to be loving relationships with neighbors turned sour because of the land conversion dispute (Interview on September 8, 2000). KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 190 through a protracted struggle based on unity and militant collective action”.250 As a result, several former members of the now -defunct SAMA -CA are already apologizing to the organization and more and more non-members are giving their sympathy and support to defend Hacienda Looc from government and real estate developers. 251 F. Toughened by experience Despite their shocking effects, the events and consequences of political confrontation failed to shatter and silence the movement. In effect, the members and residents have seemingly becom e more politically aware, determined, and militant as they have proven in practice the real intent of government and real estate developers. Every time FEPI-MSDC and government agencies make a move they made it a policy to file petitions and counter appeals and expose their unscrupulous maneuvers. On March 1999, for instance, UMALPAS-KA made use of the radio station (ABS-CBN 6:30 News Flash program) to expose the dredging activities in Maniba Creek, Balaytique and the adverse effects of such in the prope rties and crops of the residents. 252 In the burial ceremony of Sevilla and Alla, they marched the streets of Calayo to expose and condemn such atrocities and get the sympathy of the people. This was dubbed as the Calayo Death March. Believing that Mayor Raymund Apacible is as guilty as Max Limeta in the crimes that have been committed against them, the movement likewise elevated their 250 A political insight from Gemo and Philip (Vice-president), September 2000. Interview with Mr. Nardo Oreta during the culminating activity of the PEOPLES’ CARAVAN 2000 in Mendiola, Novermber 30, 2000. 252 Then DENR Secretary Cerilles, however, dismissed the complaint by Mr. Moi ses Ermita (complainant) and permitted FEPI to continue its “rehabilitation measures” that will allegedly prevent flooding and siltation. On the other hand, Mr. Edmond P. Maceda (FEPI Vice-President, Environmental Affairs Division) promised that compensation for the damages caused by the measures would be provided. (Source: Letters of Hon. Antonio H. Cerilles to Mr. Moises Ermita and Mr. Edmond P. Maceda, dated 12 May 1999, Republic of the Philippines, Department of Environment and Natural Resources). 251 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 191 protest to the municipal level. 253 In February 1997, hundreds of residents of Calayo marched to the town hall to condemn the harassments and the collaboration of local government agencies with the FEPI-MSDC. On 25 March 2000, the members of UMALPAS-KA stormed the municipal hall and the headquarters of PNP Nausgbu to revile the senseless assassination of their comrades. And on Se ptember 2000, the movement celebrated its 5th year anniversary by engaging the municipal council into a 3-hour dialogue to express their grievances and “reaffirm that only death can make them give up and vacate their lands”. 254 The case of Hacienda Looc being “sold” by the Nasugbu Mayor is no different from the case of Arayat Mayor Benigno Espino. He is the leading agent in persuading and threatening peasants to give way for the 5-year construction of the Pampanga Delta Development Project (PDDP). This major development project of the past Ramos administration consists of two components – Irrigation and Flood Control. The irrigation component would affect the southeastern part of Pampanga (Arayat, Mexico, Sta. Ana, Candaba, San Luis, San Simon, Masantol, and Macabebe) and while the flood control component would affect Masantol, Minalin, Apalit, and several towns of Bulacan. Funded by the OECF-Overseas Fund of Japan, the total project costs is estimated at PhP 5.6 billion (S $139.103 million). On the other hand, it is estimated that 45 villages would be erased from the map of Pampanga and Bulacan, covering 20,000 hectares of agricultural and fish farms, and consisting of 9,478 houses, 69 253 Son of former Nasugbu Mayor Rosario Apacible. Among others, Nardo Oreta and Rene Garbo are the most vocal about this. As they related, “… when our struggle began in 1995, we have already projected that we would be lucky enough if we survive the first three years”. This stand was again put into practice when the FEPI-MSDC made another attempt to bulldoze the uplands of Balaytigue in November 2000. Members of the UMALPAS-KA Balaytigue chapter staged another human barricade and camp-out to block such efforts. 254 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 192 churches, and 74 schools. The total estimated amount of property that would destroyed stands at PhP 10.9 billion (S $375.862 million). This is the main reason why the regional formation NO TO PDDP! (Philippines) was formally launched on 16 November 2000. The people of Pampanga and Bulacan simply ask this question: “What on earth has pushed the Ramos administration to enter into an agreement with Japan to undertake a project that would cause damages almost two times it cost? 255” They hence conclude that this is just another one of those many “development projects” undertaken by government for the BIG PEOPLE and not “us”, the little people. 256 At the national level, UMALPAS-KA, in coordination with KMP, SAMBAT, and KASAMA-TK, has also launched numerous oppositional activities such as pickets, demonstrations, camp-outs and vigils in the offices of the DA, DAR, and the Supreme Court. In April 1997, the movement spearheaded a 3-day demonstration dubbed as the DAR Camp -out. On 15 April, copies of CARP books, CLOAs, and Supreme Court and DAR decisions were burned to manifest their inutility and condemn their pro-landlord and pro-developer stance. And on 16 April, its leaders and members locked the gates of DAR with an extraordinarily big padlock and fenced the gates with big bamboo shanks. As for the FEPI, they trooped the streets of Ortigas, the central business district of Mandaluyong, and held a picket cum demonstration in front of its office on March 1997 and waved placards bearing the statements “Fil-Estate – LANDGRABBER, MURDERER!!!” and “HEY, THERE’S BLOOD ON YOUR STOCKS!” In the succeeding year, the UMALPAS-KA, DAMBA, HABAGAT, and 255 This is one of the biggest question raised by the participants in the launching of the “NO TO PDDP – Philippines, 16 November 2000, Arayat, Pampanga (Personal accounts). 256 DAYUS: Capampangan Peasant Free Press; Issue #1, Jan-April 1999; and “NO TO PDDP! (Philippines) Launching Papers”, 16 November 2000, Arayat, Pampanga. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 193 KMMLT in coordination with SAMBAT, KASAMA-TK, and KMP launched the “Oppressed Batangas Folks Manila Camp-Out” in front of DAR from 14-17 April 1998. 257 The activity aimed to highlight DAR’s six years of nakedly pro-landlord decisions under Ramos administration and Garilao bureaucracy. The 800-strong delegation further condemned the massive CLOA cancellatios, land grabbing and scams, and human rights violations in Hacienda Looc, Hacienda Roxas, Patugo, Lian, Rosario, and San Juan (KMP, PUP, March 1998, pp. 3, 6). Furthermore, in coordination with KMP, SENTRA, and PILC, the movement launched a national press conference on 17 August 2000. Press people from the broadcast and print media in Manila joined the activity and witnessed the declaration of the unwavering commitment of UMALPAS-KA to the struggle. 258 In turn, they published several articles in the newspapers and broadcasted the grievances and experiences of the movement in radio stations. One of the latest engagements of the movement in national protest actions was during the 2000 October Peasant Campaign. Together with other peasant organizations in Southern Luzon, UMALPAS-KA participated in the October 16 nationwide signature campaign against agro-chemical transnational corporations (TNCs). On 28 October, the movement took part in the culmination activity of the celebration of the Peasant Week by marching into Mendiola 259 and from 28-30 257 DAMBA stands for the “Association of Farm Workers in Batangas”, HABAGAT for the “Foundation of Batangeño Fisherfolks” while KMMLT stands for the “Small Fisherfolks Movement in Lake Taal” 258 During the press conference, the UMALPAS-KA led by Gemo demonstrated their grim determination in condemning real estate-government connivance. In his own words, “… they cannot force us to vacate our lands. Sad it may be, we are willing to defend our land to the last…” (Personsal accounts). 259 Mendiola refers to the historical place where activists march and demonstrate their disappointment and resentment with government. It is the place where Malacañang, the office of the President, is located. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 194 November, the members took part in the People’s CARAVAN 2000 260 that likewise culminated with a demonstration cum vigil in Mendiola. The movement has likewise ventilated its cause at the international level. In the first week of August 2000, Filipino Americans living in the US went to Calayo and integrated with the people. They represented the organizations like the League of Filipino Students – Los Angeles chapter, New Patriotic Alliance (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan ) – International, and the GABRIELA – International. Having learned from the movement’s experiences, they launched a series of educational and fund raising campaigns in December 2000 to project and gather support for the UMALPAS-KA in the U.S In the same month, the hacienda was likewise chosen as one of the sites of study for the International Fact Finding Mission conducted by international organizations such as La Via Campesina (LVC - The Peasants’ Plight) and the Food First International (FIAN) to assess the state of agrarian reform implementation in the Philippines and other parts of the world.261 The occasion was a big eye opener for the members and non-members of UMALPAS-KA. They were simply overwhelmed by 260 The campaign, “CARAVAN 2000: LAND AND FOOD WITHOUT POISONS” was an international and national mass mobilization, education, and direct action towards the development of an alternative to demonstrate how poor countries stand against (imperialist) globalization. In particular, it was a protest against the domination and control of TNCs over their lives and the disastrous effects of pesticides, agricultural genetic engineering, land conversion, food insecurity, and environmental destruction. Similar activities were likewise held in India, Bangladesh, Japan, Korea, and Indonesia. 261 LA VIA CAMPESINA (LVC) is an international movement of small and middle peasants, agricultural workers, rural women and indigenous in more than 63 countries in the America, Asia, Africa, and Europe. The main aim of LVC is to develop the solidarity and unity in diversity between rural organizations in order to promote economic relations based on equality and justice, the defense of their lands, food sovereignty, and a sustainable agricult ure based on small and middle producers. FOODFIRST INFORMATIONS AND ACTIONS NETWORK (FIAN) is an international human rights organization working for the right to feed oneself and with members in more than 50 countries. FIAN aims to contribute in the implem entation of International Bill of Human Rights. It works in particular for the right to feed oneself of persons and groups threatened by hunger and malnutrition. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 195 the fact they are really not alone in their struggle. As for the non-members, they were dumb-founded to witness the kind of support the organization is getting. 262 Moreover, at the opening of the International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD, December 2000), UMALPAS-KA constituted 25% of the 500-strong delegation that staged a demonstration in Tagaytay City to confront DAR Secretary Hor acio Morales with their agrarian problems. Unfortunately, the delegation was not permitted to enter the premises of the conference site and by the order of Morales, the security guards moved to disperse their formation. Negotiations ensued and three delegates from the ICARRD who joined the demonstration intervened to avoid violent confrontation. The UNORKA (National Coordination of Local Autonomous Rural People’s Organizations), however, was permitted to enter such premises because of its pro-CARP stand. 263 But with the decision on July 2000 coming directly from the office of deposed President Estrada, the UMALPAS-KA and its network NGOs and POs and movements have conceded that they may never win the battle within the formal- legal institutions of the state. To this effect, they have concluded that the use of extraparliamentary and non-legal means should be intensified. This was manifested by a concluding remark during the movement’s 5th anniversary: “This is the land where our forefathers have lived through countless generations. Without any help from government, we have managed to develop and sustain our economic activities and live a happy peaceful life. This land is 262 This describes the scene when members and leaders marched to the shore of Calayo on 22 August to greet the foreign visitors and KMP delegates. They likewise passed by the house of the village captain, Mario Limeta, for protocol and walked through the houses of non-sympathizers. Mario Limeta just have to smile and admire the national and international support for UMALPAS-KA (Personal accounts). 263 According to sources from academic circles and NGOs (January 2002), the UNORKA seems to currently represent the defunct dKMP. In 1999, however, some “news” spread across academic, NGO, and activist circles that someone from government and the Fil-Estate Properties Inc. went to Utrecht, Netherlands and paid Jose Maria Sison (founding chairman of the CPP) the amount of PhP20 million. This was allegedly to put a stop to the peasant protests in Hacienda Looc. However, it is already year 2002 and the UMALPAS-KA and KMP continue to advance their cause of defending Hacienda Looc against land conversion and defy state decisions. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 196 ours, our life. We are here because of the land and the land is here to be made productive and provide our necessities – not to fulfill the whims and caprices of the rich, landlords, real estate developers, and government. To take it away from us is synonymous to extinguishing the very basis of our existence. Hence, we rather die fighting and get buried in our lands and let future generations realize that their land has been purified and nurtured by valiant human blood 264 and not with poisonous fertilizers used for fairways and greens”. G. Assessment of Outcomes Movement outcomes could be understood based on general categories like redistribution of political power (McAdam, 1997: 462), changes in public policy (Amenta, Carruthers, and Zylan 1992), changes in public opinion, impact on other movements (Meyer and Whittier, 1994; McAdam, 1988) and biographical consequences (Taylor and Raeburn, 1995; McAdam, 1989). In general terms, the struggle of UMALPAS-KA could be declared as an ideal success for social movements in the 21st century based on the following grounds. First, the movement was able to expand the political space at the local level – that prior to the struggle, the residents of Hacienda Looc were “never” consulted by the local government regarding their welfare and participation to local development. Today, the residents through the movement can engage the municipal government and other state institutions into a dialogue and assert their basic rights. Second, unsuccessful attempt by real estate developers and government to convert Looc into a tourist area inspires other movements confrontin g the same problem. This aspect relates to the concept of movement spillover – that positive outcomes of movement activity at the village level reinvigorates movement dynamics not only at the provincial, regional, and national levels, but at the international level as well. 264 General consensus of the UMALPAS-KA Leaders’ Council held in the first week of September and was likewise firmly supported by its members during the celebration of the movement’s 5th anniversary. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 197 Third, the fundamental measure of the Hacienda Looc struggle could not be gauged in terms of changes in public policy and public opinion. The resistance against land conversion did not prompt concerned government agencies to change or amend their policies but rather moved to implement the decision in favor of real estate developers. Public opinion, on the other hand, remains ambivalent and could not suffice to measure movement success. And strangely enough, the residents of Hacienda Looc were able to maintain control over their land and defy dominant powers in society. This, perhaps, is the most solid indicator of movement success. There are, however, complicating factors with the success of UMALPAS-KA. First, the movement considers its victory a fragile and temporary one. Members and leaders believe that sooner or later they will have to confront the same problem again with government and real estate developers. 265 This is a constant problematic for movements primarily relying on extra -parliamentary means in fighting for the interests of their constituents. Second, SAMA-CA (the counter-movement) may have been immobilized but pro-conversion elements are still present. The animosity spawned by the struggle between villagers and relatives formerly close to one another may yet be stirred by external conditions, e.g., sabotage by powerful stakeholders. Third, the alleged ties of villagers with the elements of the CPP -NPA have been the justification of extensive militarization of their hacienda and the same could be used to pressure peasant activists. Fourth, government could ultimately impose its authority for the sake of “national development”, implement court orders in favor of real estate developers, compel its armed forces to take over the land, and eventually evict the Hacienda Looc 265 Interviews with SAMBAT and UMALPAS-KA leaders and members at Mendiola, October 29-30, 2000. According to them, “we have no illusions that our struggle is over”. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 198 residents. The success, therefore, of UMALPAS-KA could be considered a momentary gain. H. Conclusion The oppositional politics of KMP at the micro-level demonstrates how a local movement organization could challenge dom inant powers in society. UMALPAS-KA opposed the land conversion project of government and real estate developers by carrying out protest at different levels and through specific movement means. 1. Local Engagement As a local movement organization, the anchor of UMALPAS-KA’s oppositional politics is rooted at the village level. It was through direct confrontation with real estate agents and accomplices that the movement was able to defend Hacienda Looc against land conversion. The struggle, however, was not confined at the local level. UMALPAS -KA participated in national and international protest actions to ventilate its demands. It is this conscious effort that provides a national and international character to the movement’s opposition to land conversion. It is also the same process, which I would like to call political scaling, that made movement participants realize how local problems are often influenced and shaped by broader factors at the national and international levels, e.g., land conversion and agrarian reform vis-à-vis liberalization and globalization. 2. Local Movement Processes and Structures Crucial to the development of UMALPAS-KA as a movement were ideology and consciousness building, organization, and mobilization. These means enabled the movement to initiate and sustain political opposition at the local level, propagate their cause at national, and international levels and weather the aggressive measures of government and real estate developers. In turn, the concrete social and political gains KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 199 UMALPAS-KA has won in the struggle were achieved through extra-parliamentary and non-legal actions. a. Ideology and Consciousness Building The UMALPAS-KA leaders and members developed an insurgent consciousness – a realization that change is imperative and doable (Smith, 1991: 6770). The class-based ideology acquired by movement through political education has strengthened its resolve to oppose land conversion and defy the real estate developers and government. Through concrete consciousness-raising activities and socialpolitical experiences, movement leaders and members acquired a good understanding of their struggle. From a local problem of land grabbing and environmental destruction, their struggle disclosed to them the nature and practice of land conversion is but a function of a flawed program for agrarian reform and development. They have come to grasp that landlessness and concentration of landownership and exploitative and oppressive agrarian relations have long plagued the agrarian structure. From here the national and international dimension of the struggle became pronounced. They started to question the development orientation of Philippine government, contest the structure of the whole social system, and ultimately associate their land problem to what they refer to as “imperialist globalization and plunder”. b. Organization The movement advocated peasant concerns, grievances, and struggles and brought them to the attention of the state and the larger population. UMALPAS-KA served as the channel to express the grievances of the people of Hacienda Looc – land conversion and land grabbing, environmental destruction, human rights KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 200 violation, implementation of agrarian reform, poverty, and social justice. This could not have been possible if the movement did not ally itself with larger movements like SAMBAT, KASAMA -TK, SENTRA, and KMP. Moreover, the PILC supported the movement and helped in the legal aspect of the struggle. On the cultural side, symbolic expressions of the movement’s goals and aspirations took the form of songs, slogans, and cultural activities. These expressions were significant in maintaining unity among its leaders and members. While class politics seems to be a constant element, members and leaders alike invoke on the concrete adverse changes in their lives that would result from land conversion and environmental destruction. c. Mobilization Through the struggle against land conversion, UMALPAS-KA has succeeded in engaging the previously “apolitical” residents of Hacienda Looc and other sectors in collective political actions to challenge the power of political opponents. With Hacienda Looc peasants at the forefront, various sectoral and multi-sectoral organizations and movements supported their struggles. Through organized collective actions, UMALPAS-KA demonstrated to FEPI-MSDC and the Philippine government that the movement is a force to reckon with. Similar with the development of its organization, the movement relied on the existence of established organizations or movements to boost its campaign. At the provincial, regional, and national levels the SAMBAT, KASAMA -TK, and KMP respectively helped in launching protest actions. At the international level, organizations and movements like the FIAN and the La Via Campesina helped in soliciting international support for its cause. It should be noted, however, that the KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 201 movement relied significantly on informal networks at the early stages of its formation. Another interesting mobilization aspect refers to the militancy of the actions of UMALPAS-KA. From its confrontation with real estate developers UMALPASKA approached the different government agencies for help. The testimonies, however, of the different agrarian reform offices (village, municipal, and provincial offices) simply validated the findings of FEPI-MSDC that the hacienda is unpopulated and not suitable for agriculture. Consequently, the peasants resorted to other state institutions such as the Department of Justice, Court of Appeals and Supreme Court but again found itself at the losing end. On this note, the movement did not have any other choice but to use extra-parliamentary and non-legal means and it succeeded, interestingly. d. Movement Outcomes and Consequences The foiled land conversion project and the continued of the Hacienda Looc residents over their lands signify two things. First, UMALPAS-KA succeeded in strengthening the bargaining power of peasants, fisherfolks, and residents of the hacienda. They have likewise demonstrated that unity is a major key to success. From a vantage point, the strengthened bargaining power of the movement has transcended, thus far, the peasant movement adage of the late 1980s as posed by Edelman (1999: 188) – that there are two ways to kill an organization, with repression or money. The political opponents the movement have not only used money or repression to kill the movement but a combination of those. Remarkably, the economic and extraeconomic coercion (court and presidential decisions and military atrocities) that are being used to suppress UMALPAS-KA have only strengthened its resolve. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 202 At any rate, the most concrete proof of the positive effect of UMALPASKA’s political opposition is that the residents of the hacienda still control their lands. Directly defending the interests of constituents proves to be a major barometer in measuring movement outcomes and consequences. If the movement relied on the decisions and policies of government and rules of the game set by the state they would have long been evicted from their land and lost their cause. Unity and militant political opposition were also the key factors for the initial success of KMP’s local chapters in Central Mindanao – the BUFFALO (Bukidnon Free Farmers’ and Agricultural Laborers’ Association); TAMARAW (Tried Agricultural Movers Association of Active Workers); LIMUS (Landless Inhabitants of Musuan); and the KASAMA -Bukidnon (Farmers’ Association in Bukidnon). These organizations were able to forge a MOA with the Central Mindanao University (CMU) regarding their lease of 400 hectares within the campus premises for years with a rent of PhP 4,000 per hectare per year. They have been fighting for land control for more than ten years and at least people have been killed by security guards in the process of implementing eviction orders since 1991. The negotiations were held on 19 February 2000 in the CMU gymnasium and were attended by the organizations, Dr. Mardonio Lao (CMU President), Congressman Antonio Zubiri, Councilor Alice Resus, DAR, DENR and NIA officials, teachers, students, and 2,000 peasants (KMP, LINANG June 2000, p.3; LINANG APRIL 2001, pp. 3, 10). 266 In sum, the struggle of UMALPAS-KA epitomizes the oppositional politics of KMP at the local level. In turn, these experiences and struggles serve as a foundation of broader processes of peasant politics and political contestation. They are likewise a critical reflection and representation of a bigger struggle for agrarian and societal 266 For a historical account, see Corrine Canlas in Rural Development Studies, PPI 1992, pp. 69 -87. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 203 change. Consequently, local oppositional politics acquires a broader meaning and goal due to the existence of a larger social movement. It is therefore instructive that the investigation of these local oppositional politics be linked to the national peasant movement, that is, the KMP. [...]... Mariano and Danilo Ramos (KMP National Leaders) 1 85 KMP 1993 Constitution KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 158 government declared a total war against the progressive and nationalist forces and the CPP -NPA This explains probably the inactivity of the founding members of the KMP in the period under consideration The 1990s, nonetheless, proved to be the molding years... KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 1 45 Central Luzon is one of the many regions in the country that possesses a tradition of peasant political activity – the 1 7 45 agrarian revolts, the Palaris uprising in 1762, the Katipunan Revolution of 1896, the Sta Iglesia movement in 1903, the emergence of peasant organizations in the first two decades of the 1900s, the establishment... the next chapter proceeds on with the investigation of the movement dynamics of one of the largest and militant peasant formations in Philippine society KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 1 64 Chapter V Oppositional Politics at the Local Level KMP challenges the state and other dominant social forces through oppositional politics This process of contesting dominant... Proceedings, 24- 27 July 19 85 168 KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 150 Board (FAB), Luzon Secretariat of Social Action (LUSSA, CBCP), and the Philippine Peasant Institute (PPI) Advocacy of peasant issues and critical researches of emerging and existing agrarian conditions were the main contribution of these institutions They also participated in mass demonstrations and. .. Philippine society a Political orientation Established on 24 July 19 85, the political pedigree of KMP has so far been influenced by five historical junctures in the history of peasant movements in the Philippines: the Katipunan Revolution of 1896; the establishment of the KPMP in the 1920s (the first class-based peasant organization), the PKP in 1930, and the HUKBALAHAP/HMB and PKM days in the 1 940 s and. .. establishment of the PKP in 1930 and HUKBALAHAP/HMB and the PKM in the 1 940 s, the MASAKA in 19 64, the CPP-NPA in the late 1960s, and the AMA in the 1970s The tradition continued remarkably in the 1980s and the agrarian concerns were not different basically from past grievances In 1981 another wave of peasant reorganization brewed in Central Luzon ‘Old and new’ peasant activists and leaders, and revolutionary... KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 1 54 transpired under the “Freedom Constitution” that contains the longest bill of rights in Philippine history The abovementioned conditions are important factors that significantly contributed to the organizational slump of the KMP between 1987 and 1990 There were, however, other factors to be considered and they point to the. .. Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 155 2 The Politics of KMP1 76 The oppositional character of KMP could be grasped by analyzing its political orientation, orga nizational structure and dynamics, agenda, and strategies and program of action By examining these aspects, I highlight the movement s peculiar characteristics vis-à-vis the majority of peasant movement and organizations in Philippine. .. Secretary of Agriculture of the KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 152 Macapagal administration (Interviews with KMP President; Tadem, 19 85: 75) Other figures involved were Memong Patayan and Andong Hilario Tadem (ibid.) was quite critical of a perceived KMP s dependence on middle class elements and the need to strike deeper roots in the countryside” In a similar... Caravan 1 64 Interviews with Mr Loreng Tiongson and Mr Rod Tuazon, General secretary and President, of AMGL (10 December 2000) These provincial chapters, particularly the AMC and AMB preceded the formation of AMGL KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 148 became an annual undertaking 1 65 The activity culminated in a 3-day kampong bayan (people’s camp-out) in front of the . organizations in the first two decades of the 1900s, the establishment of the PKP in 1930 and HUKBALAHAP/HMB and the PKM in the 1 940 s, the MASAKA in 19 64, the CPP-NPA in the late 1960s, and the AMA in the. organizations, and the participation of middle forces. a. Naissance of KMP KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 1 45 Central Luzon is one of the many regions in the. KMP: Movement Generation, Activity, and Continuity in Philippine Society 133 CHAPTER IV Philippine Peasant Movements and Organizations And the KMP Peasant politics thrives in the Philippine