Study Guides (248,368)
Canada (121,499)
POLI 369 (4)

Lecture Notes Pre-Midterm

33 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science
POLI 369
Erik Kuhonta

January 7, 2014 Thailand was not colonized strategic buffer zone between British and French Thais aimed to keep nominal independence What long-term effects did colonial influence have on institutions? What difference did it make that some countries were colonized but one was not? Why is there variation in the development of colonized nations (Nigeria v. India v. Singapore)? Regime type • Variation • Democracy: Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand [impending military coupe?] • ?? • Authoritarian regimes: Loas, Vietnam • Monarchy: Bruni oil • Burma recent change form authoritarian to parliamentary (not democracy, but less authoritarian, liberalizing trend) • Why have some transferred to democracy while others have not? o Should expect Singapore to push for democracy because of per capita wealth, yet it doesn’t. Why? • Why have some countries been able to sustain democracy, while others have been unable to do so? • What effect does regime type have on economic growth and stability? o Does some form of discipline/coercion benefit economic growth? • Why do some states have more capacity than others (coercive/infrastructural)? o What is the effect of strong states on development and stability? o What is the relationship between regime type and state capacity? Economic development • What are the political foundations of SEAsia’s remarkable economic growth rate? • To what extent has the state been a force in economic development in the region? o NEAsia has distanced itself from rest of developing world is SE reasons similar to NEAsia (did state play a significant role)? o How replicable is the SEAsian experience for other developing countries? o Why has SEAsia been able to re-emerge after financial crisis of 1997/98? o What are the costs of these economic growth rates? Equality, environment, social structure, etc. Ethnic and religious diversity • Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam Buddhist • Maratimes historically Islamic, but with some current variation o Phillipines became heavily Christian (when?)  Spanish • Rich diversity is a construct of nations created by colonial empires borders make no sense Chinese populations spread through SEAsia • Crisis lead to frequent ethnic violence against the Chinese • Best integrated into Thailand in both business and political spheres • Could democracy be useful in mitigating ethnic conflict? • Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world. o Strand of Islam is more pragmatic/syncretic/moderate than many areas of the middle east International relations • Has ?asi…? reached to goals it set for itself? • If it has secured peace, what have been the costs in terms of security? January 9, 2014 Keywords: 1. Geography a. Nanyang i. Word for “South Seas” [Chinese] b. Nampo i. Southern Direction [Japanese] c. SEAlargely defined from the outside d. Papa New Guinea and Sri Lanka are not part of SEA, despite Theravada Buddhism shared w/ Sri Lanka, Taiwan shares ethnicity but isn’t part of SEA e. Mainland and Maritime SoutheastAsia i. Mainland Theravada Buddhism (Vietnam shares Mahayana Buddhism with China/Japan/Korea) 1. Except for Thailand, all shared socialist/communist regimes for at least significant period ii. Language of Malaysia and Indonesia distinct but similar (both from Bahasa Melayu) 2. What is SEA? a. Begins with WWII, the Japanese army invade SEAquickly i. Attack Northern Malaysia, etc. b. Southeast Asia Command i. Created by allied powers in response to Japanese ii. “SEA” constructed by west? iii. Headquarters were in Sri Lanka c. ASEAN –Association of SoutheastAsian Nations i. Created to provide basis for social/economic interactions among members ii. Provide for some political security, reduce the role on inter-state conflict, weaken role of communist within SEAcoutnries iii. Headquarters in Bangkok, Founding members Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and the Philippines, now includes 10/11 (no East Timor) d. Study of SEA in US during Cold War (Yale, Cornell, etc.), funded by Rockefeller, Ford, etc. i. As you get academic interest, increased thought of SEAas one unit (institutionalized) ii. Artificial aspect of creating a region 1. SEAmay be better thought of as ethnic groups with commonalities rather then separate nation-states 3. Pre-colonial Period a. Kingdoms conceptualized as mandala polity, galactic polity, theatre state b. Mandala Polity i. Based on a circle of kings ii. Idea of diffused political power, structured around ?trigature? relations iii. Power is not conceptualized territorially, but in control of population. 1. Demonstrated in the provision of tribute (Bunga Mas, etc.) 2. Radiates like a cone of light form the centre iv. Vassel state can appeal/pit against each other larger states v. Just because one vassel state is paying tribute, doesn’t mean theya ren’t getting tribute from others vi. Bunga Mas 1. Small tree with gold put on its leaves, symbolic that a kingdom/village that is subservient to another would provide their bunga mas to another 2. Would also have to provide soldiers c. Galactic Polity i. Stanley Tanbiah ii. Similar to Mandala Polity, with focus on mainland SEA states of Burma, Thailand, and Cambodia iii. Goal was to ensure Buddhist enlightenment, courts supposed to reenact cosmic visions on earth 1. Preserve the divine by ruling justly/in Buddhist terms iv. Legitimacy comes form following Buddhist precepts 1. Demonstrate merit by following Buddhist rules d. Theatre State i. Clifford Gertz ii. Studied 19 century Bali iii. Argued that kingdom in Bali was based on spectacle and ceremony, and that its power came from (not military, but) spectacular rituals iv. Rituals were not meant to strengthen the monarchy, but the monarchy existed in order to propagate the rituals v. Not that the kingdom is sustained by the rituals, but that the rituals are the very basis of the kingdom e. River Valley i. Cultivation of rice f. Mountain People i. Able to escape domination by valley ii. Hill tribes in Thailand – Hmong still independent form national authorities in Bangkok iii. Live by slash and burn agriculture g. Seafarers i. Live in housing structures on stilts above water ii. Largely bamboo houses iii. Many made living through boats, function as traders, pirates, warriors, and mercenaries iv. Very important in bringing trade and war to SEApre-modern kingdoms h. Slash and BurnAgriculture i. Villagers will cut down trees and use terrain until it is fully exhausted ii. Use without thought of regeneration, then move to other areas iii. Heavily criticized, though some argue there is a good reason for why it is practiced. January 14, 2014 Midterm: • 11 countries • Capitals • Waterways/rivers/seas • Relatively large cities (not capitals, but mentioned in lectures fair game) Spanish took over Phillipines • Magellan (?) • Unable to defeat Islamic in [where?] south o UntilAmericans viciously subjugated Muslim population in 1898 Keywords: 1. Dutch East Indies Company a. Heavily interested in trade, but not religion (like Spain was) b. Goal: exert monopoly over spice trade in “East Indies” Indonesia c. Came in 1596 i. Stayed until early 19 century Dutch government in charge of Netherlands Indies Not DEIC Company no longer a major player d. SEAprovided many resources spices, Clove, nutmeg, such as raw materials and cash crops crucial for Industrial powers in the West 2. Galleon trade a. Spaniards interested in religious prostilization, used Manila as entrepole for trade between Mexico and China b. Use ships to bring silver from Mexico to Manila, trade silver w/Chinese for exports such as porcelain and silk c. European rivalry for prestige more resources/territory stronger monarchy d. Late 18 century, other western powers join in SEA(British Singapore, Malacca (after Portuguese and Dutch), Malang, all become part of Malaysia i. Important trading points for the British 3. Straits Settlements (Penang, Malacca, Singapore) a. Very important to trade for British (they had control of India) b. Could go form India/Indian ocean, go through straits, South China Sea, onward to China c. British moved more deeply into Malay Peninsula into sultanate?? i. Acted as a neutral policeman in the warfare among “gangs” or warring groups of Chinese in tin mining 1. Created anxiety that would spill over into Malay, British step in to “resume order”  excuse to penetrate into Malaya, what is now Malaysia ii. Created federated and unfederated states 1. Federated British ruled more directly (customs, tradition) 2. Unfederated allow traditional structure to remain relatively untouched 3. All states had district officers/advisors who had political impact 4. King Chulalongkorn (Rama V) – Siam a. Significant empires, main rivals were Burmese, significant control over Laos and Cambodia (paid tribute) b. Tried?? To escape colonization i. Threatened on east side, Mekong river a clear dividing line between modern day Laos and Thailand that’s where the French stopped ii. British locked of Malaysia, defined as their colony c. Siam was still nominally independent d. King Rama V i. Reigned from 1868-1910 th ii. 5 king of 1782- Chukri?? Dynasty iii. Meiji restoration 1868 reformed modernized Japan in light of threat form western powers/colonialism iv. Seen as a great king because he was a modern reformer in light of the threats that both Japan and Thailand faced v. Realized empire would be dismembered if he didn’t act to reform kingdom vis a vis the colonial powers vi. The French had taken over Cambodia and Laos, sent their ships inland the Bangkok shelled at the palace of the king, threatening 1. King was deeply depressed by realization that Siam stood no chance against the French vii. Reformed the bureaucracy and the military 1. Not centralized or rationalized, contending spheres of power, not arranged in rational terms 2. Would thus be defined in terms of functions, not authorities of aristocrats 3. Army centralized and made more cohesive, standing army developed in Bangkok sent out to borders, impose authority over regional princes viii. If the British or French wanted to, they could have taken over Siam 1. Realized that Siam would be more useful to them as a buffer zone to prevent conflict between the British and the French 2. Left sovereign, but smaller ix. Took crisis as an opportunity to reform and systematize 1. Reforms became foundation for a relatively effective state 5. Colonial policy of divide and rule/divide et impera a. Colonial regimes carried geographical structures of modern antion states b. Pre-colonization, there was no Burma, Vietnam, Philippines (Spanish King Phillip) i. There were pockets of culture and ethnicity, but not as defined today. c. Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines have a lot in common i. Largely Muslim (pre-colonization) ii. Similar languages iii. Similar customs, traditions, dances, architecture iv. Not inconceivable that the whole region could have become one nation state “Malayan federation” discussed post-war (which WW?) v. Distinct nation-states because of colonization vi. The Dutch-Indonesia vii. British-Malaya viii. Spanish-Philippines d. Endowed region with modern functional state bureaucracies e. Bureaucracy pre-reform was patrimonial, personalistic, clientalsim  not granted based on merit but on hierarchy and connections to monarchy i. Extent of rationalism differed across the colonial powers ii. Philippines Spanish created very weak institutions iii. British in Malaya and Singapore developed significant bureaucratic capacities, schools for civil servants, corporate norms and discipline graduates could then enter bureaucracy iv. Burma failed to build up strong bureaucracies 1. Seen as an appendage to empire in India, not given as much emphasis v. Created small growing, educated middle class, now given chance for employment, prestige and higher incomes f. Radically simplifying ethnic identities of Malay people i. “Make society more legible” Jim/James? Scott ii. Also creating something artificial 6. Plural society 7. John Furnivall a. Concept of the plural society b. Emerges from imposition of colonial power on the tropics c. Distinct form diversity and pluralism in west d. In tropics there is no common heritage and no common will, no collective consciousness (Emil Durkheim) e. Characterized by: i. Plurality of ethnic groups that share public space with nothing in common except the market ii. Dominance of material interest over ethical concerns iii. Absence of a social will or collective consciousness iv. Atomization of society “Is a medley, the people mix but don’t combine, it is a crowd, but not a community.” Each group seeks its own advantage over the other, pursue there own self-interest against the other, critique of laissez-faire policies, wants them to have more in common 8. Caciques 1858-1900 • French take over modern-day Vietnam, Cambodia, and Loas • British had Burma, next to India • French came late o Much more repressive, viscous, violent towards the Vietnamese and Laotians  More punitive (although all were quite repressive) o Laos and Cambodia were seen as tributary states to monarchy in Bangkok  Seen as direct threat to Siamese kingdom in Bangkok (see #4) January 21, 2014 Post-War Indonesia New modern nation-states were unable to hold their countries together; democracy appeared a failed experiment authoritarianism emerged as an alternative to keep states together.  1960s seen as a disappointment by western historians, obvious developing countries wouldn’t follow western path to democracy • Darul Islam o Largest country in SEA o Largest Muslim country in the world o Democracy collapsed into authoritarian “guided democracy” o 1965 coupe, “Year of Living Dangerously”  Massacre of 500 000, emergence of General Suharto, established military regime from 1966-1998  Now a democracy o Parliamentary government in 1950  Armed forces wanted more credit/role for defeating Dutch  Unhappy with democracy “Not in harmony with Indonesia’s spirit or personality” (Takarno??)  Takarno skeptical because democracy felt hypocritical, given that western democracies had maintained democracies while subjugating colonies • Didn’t believe democracy could address complexities of post-war Indonesia • Regional/sectarian instabilities • Religious and ethnic issues • Geographically vast  16 years of ideological civil war defining essence of Indonesia’s identity  Islamist forces in SW Jave calling for own region  Struggle between communists and the army Tukarno’s loss of power o 1948-1949: Nagara Islam Indonesia formed in SW Java  Full-out revolt against democratic republic of Indonesia o 1953: province of Ashet??? Seeking independence from Jakarta (also Islamist) o Islamists opposed to:  Disliked the idea of pantasila?? (5 principles to sustain Indonesia had included respect for God, adherence to faith, but hadn’t named religion as one of the principles God wasn’t defined too much of a concession to Christians/Hindus/nominal Muslims believed Islamic principles should be a t the core of Indonesia)  Opposed to the rise of the PKI/Communist party nd • 2 largest communist party inAsia, becoming very powerful in economic weakness • Represented a great threat to their vision; should be eliminated • Tensions cut across class/ideological lines • Santri o More fundamentalist Muslims o In general were from more wealthy sectors of society, landlords, significant property o Joined army in massacringAbangan in 1965 500 000 people • Abangan o Nominal Muslims o Less strict, less syncretic/orthodox o Lower sectors of society; peasants, farmers o Attracted to the PKI • Guided Democracy o 19(5?)65: 4 parties o Authoritarian o Political parties would be represented in the cabinet, but would act more as advisory board to Takarno, concerned with national consensus/unity o National Council would represent all interest groups in Indonesia (peasants, workers, women, Islamic groups) o Make sure that Indonesia would remain cohesive from centralize in the Presidency o General expression of the popular will, but not a majority expression of the popular will o Will embodied in national leader with a revolutionary vision (Takarno) o Held together by balance of power between military and PKI  Balance guided democracy could succeed  Artificial compromise because military and PKI detested eachother  By 1960s balance began to unravel  Takarno need both, but as the balance began to unravel, Takarno began to shift toward the PKI instead of the army due to ideological beliefs  More he moved to the left, the more the Islamist forces began to agitate for a coupe of Takrno  Inability to manage economy ultimate downfall • Basket-case. • Per capacity income falling since 1958, 1965 gone below 1940 pre-war level • Hyperinflation • Cost of living doubled every 12 months leading up to 1964 • 1965 prices were doubling every few weeks • Climax: the October 1965 coupe that devastated Indonesia • Mugjawarah o Principle of guided democracy o Practice in Indonesian villages when villagers got together and made a decision in unison, rather than through a majority vote o Collective discussion would lead to a decision that satisfied most people o Flexibility, compromise, harmony • PKI (Indonesian Communist Party) o Strong support in countryside • Masyumi o Party: modernist form of Islam, largely in towns/outer islands • Nadhatul Ulama o More in countryside, involved in massacres of communist • PNI (Indonesian Nationalist Party) o Party of Takarno o Fulfillment of national revolution o Believed that the centralization of power in his hand, creation of corporatist structures, would allow vision of politics to get implemented o Believed that parliamentary democracy was to fragmented, needed central power to get things done  Reduce poverty  Remove colonial influence  Take over economic production and distribution  Wanted the state to act as a significant force for national transformation • 1965 Coup o (1955?)Elections: mostly equal between 4 parties stalemate/gridlock in parliament o Led Takarno to call for abrogation of parliamentary democracy, established guided democracy o Mystery as to who initiated it, many different contentious views o 6 top generals in the army were assassinated and bodies dumped in a well  Not clear who killed them, but became apparent that communist party had been plotting something, wanted to eliminate top military brass  On the day they were killed, Takarno went to meet PKI leaders/air force leaders, saw them congregate together  Some say it was PKI, some say it was army themselves • Suharto o Takes control of army after assassination o Makes clear he is going to respond to deaths, begins a purge of leftist leaders in military, then PKI itself o Takes Takarno under house arrest o Established “New Order” o Dominance of the military January 23, 2014 • Arts 260 12:30 pm Post-war Philippines and Thailand Philippines highly educated bodes well for democracy • Poor record for rights for lower classes • Economic growth but economic inequality and poverty • Patron-client system of politics: patron and the client both gained benefits form the relationship because they exchanged favors in relationship o Structured polity from top to bottom o President established allies at provincial level, etc. all the way to the village (barangay) o President and elites could count on provincial/local allies to deliver votes o Villagers would have to follow directives of village chiefs and vote in favour of own network linked up to national leaders o Villagers indebted/pressured to vote as village head wanted because they’d been given material benefits (cash, medicine, household items, clothes, agriculture supplies), essentially bribes for villager votes o Exchange of favors o Party system between Nacionalista and Liberals  Intense competition, not much ideology but based on elite groups, frequent party-switching  No nationalist struggle in emergence of parties formAmerican control • Nationalist struggle against Spaniards andAmericans originally, but pacified by theAmericans eventually  Led by elites, not bottom-up grassroots structure to these parties. Don’t stand for concrete policy or programs.--> personalistsic, based on factions not ideologies  Elections often marred by violence  Thugs often hired to attack opponents, canvassing officials, etc. o Personalistic are not about parties or ideologies, but about family dynasties that have regional control VIOLENCE  Struggles for control of local areas/provinces  Because the politics is so personal, they end up evoking a lot of violence because losing an election is not over values, but is a destruction of a family’s network of power. o Post-war economics good, significant literacy and education compared to other Asian nations o 1960s: economic social conditions worsened, beginning with agriculture faltering  Little government investment  Net exporter of rice post-war, but by 1960s was a net importer or rice  High rural unemployment, shifted and moved to cities, created significant crowding and squatting areas, instability  Cities had problem of development because manufacturing was in decline (policy of Import/Substitution/Industrialization [ISI]) instead of selling exports, developing countries would manufacture goods. BUT it didn’t allow for competition state make tariff barriers and raise exchange rate to buy capital inputs at a lower price protecting domestic industry from competition, ultimately uncompetitive because it is heavily protected  ISI ran course because: • Focus on capital-intensive rather than labour intensive (no emphasis on employment) • Protected by state, no incentive to be effective or productive • Products themselves had a limited domestic market  Companies lay off individuals, unemployment increases • Nacionalista Party • Liberal Party • Ferdinand Marcos o From northern Philippines and wife Emelda o Elected president in 1965 o Unlike last 5 presidents weren’t form old oligarchy o From relatively well-off families but not old money  Significant, meant Marcos would play politics in a different way from the oligarchs  Different sense of what is fair/acceptable o Social conditions worsened considerably o False promises o State was unable to tax and bring in revenue o Increasing debt, borrowed heavily o Relied too much on export commodities of limited number, not enough to sustain revenst for the government o Re-elected (1 to do so) in 1969, but considered one of the dirtiest in Philippine’s electoral history o Becoming unstable and polarized o Sharp inflation/crappy economy o Significant student demonstrations challenging government over inequality and bad economic policies o Active communist party o Traditional oligarchs were unhappy with Marcos and were working with radicals to try to oppose/undermine government o September 1972 declared martial law in response to overthrow government, dictatorship for 14 years (1986?) (1983 when oligarchs decided Marcos had to go)  US government supported dictatorship  NYT called him “symbol of strength in time of uncertainty” • New Society o Echoes Suharto’s new order o Common sentiment for dictators o Promised economic growth and stability, middle class willing to accept given instabilities of late 60s o Hired a number of technocrats and had clear agenda of development that was attractive to the middle class o Marcos’political base came from technocrats and the army  Initially, seemed he was giving technocrats significant room to craft rational economic policies  Belief that there could be significant economic reform  Rationalized macroeconomic policies, credits and services to farmers, land reform  *****Initial years of dictatorship the economy grew at relatively respectable rates  Began to take over economic surplus • Crony capitalism o Marcos and cronies took over major industries in Philippines o Monopoly on sugar, coconut, cigarettes, beer o Preferential access to credit, commissions on government transactions o Started using treasury and central bank as personal bank o Dubbed: “crony capitalism” o Capitalism based on monopoly, brute force, and special access for relatives and friends of the president  Special access is key, only for a small circle to benefit from o Now a general term but was used specifically to refer to the political economy of the Philippines o 1980s economy further declined  Skilled and unskilled wages in Manila half of 1962 level  1982 unemployment over 24%  Began to realize that the new society was an excuse for plundering of the nation by Marcos and his cronies  Opposition (conservative oligarchs and leftists) became more evident o 1983 Bining Makeeno??? Shot and killed, dumped on tarmac after returning form exile o 1986 call for elections uprising Thailand post-war had elections and very short-lived democracy • Mid-1940s has communists, leftist, competing against conservative forces o Left quite active o Democracy collapsed after military intervention b/c Thailand sided with Japan in WWII and after WWII run by Pridi, given smaller role • KingAnanda Mahidol(n) o Mysterious death (shot in head in his bed) in 1946 contributed to democratic collapse o Unclear what happened o Grandson of King Chulalongkorn • Pridi Bhanomyong o Post-war leader o Studied in Paris, leading intellectual at Thammosat University o Force for political change, also the regent of KingAnanda, seen as anti- monarchy, led resistance in 1932  Blamed for Ananda’s death, that he was involved or allowed it  Ultimately had nothing to do with it, but the effect was done, hounded out of the country • Phibul(n) Songkram o Led military government that replaced Pridi o Not interested in democracy, more militaristic o Changed Siam to Thailand partly because he wanted to make a reference to the ethnic Thai who make up central Thailand o Wanted to modernize, introduced last names, made men wear hats, told men to kiss their wives on way to work o Numerous coupes (18 since 1932) o Late 40s-1973 o Often army on one side vs. navy and air force (more left) on the other side • Sarit Thanarat o Pushed Thailand’s economic growth o Ruled form 1958-1963 o Compelled to first economic boom, growth of about 8% in 1960s o Created Bank of Thailand, budget office, social development board, major macroeconomic institutions, gave technocratic direction to economy o Quite corrupt, pocketed $150 million, but did produce development that led to increasing middle class o Also white-collar professionals emerge in 1970s o 1973 massive upheaval largely by university students taking on larger proportions with middle class  Challenge military regime because general in charge tries to put son as successor son is brutal and corrupt  Protest strongly, police fire on students, clash on streets, military begins to step in • 2 individuals stopped expansions o Army chief decides not to lead army against the students o King BhumpionAdulyadej intervenes and tells generals unacceptable to attack general sent to exile o 1976 middle class anxiety, fear that Thailand was veering too far left  1975 monarchy in Laos collapsed, South Vietnam had gone to communist party  King allowed exiled generals to come back to Bangkok • Students at Thammasat University demonstrated in 1000s against their return • This time, military unleashed paramilitary forces and they attacked the students: lynching, burning, shooting, imprisonment  October 1976 democracy collapses, military declares another coupe Post-war pattern of instability in SEA.Attempts at constitutional government, but in their place emerged dictatorships justified by order and stability. Some delivered stability (Suharto), Philippines/Marcos did not. Tensions between stability and quest for democracy: Samuel Huntington developing countries didn’t need democracy but order and stability, military regimes can do this January 28, 2014 • Third wave of democratization o Transitions to democracy in SEA o Coined by Samuel Huntington o Mid 1970s-Early 1990s o Europe at TOTC o Second Wave in post-war period  Constitutional parliamentary regimes being built across the developing worl/rebuilt in Europe o 3 wave : 1974 military coup in Portugal that restored a constitutional regime o ***Look up in texts o 140 countries hold multi-party elections (some aspects of formal democracy) o SEAincludes the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, and East Timor o Indonesia is most democratic country in SEA(rankings?)  Much later transition (1999) compared to Philippines and Thailand o What is democracy? At least about right of people to choose their leaders in a free and fair manner  Relatively competitive elections as a minimum threshold  About respecting freedoms of opinion and assembly, civil rights, rule of law, and accountability  Free and fair elections are the absolute minimum for pseudo drdocracy  3 level of equity is more questionable as to whether it is required by democracy o Philippines st  1 in region  Overthrow of De Marcos that lasted from 1972-1986  Deeply corrupt and brutal authoritarian regime  Overthrown through mass demonstrations (people power revolution or Edsa Revolution)  Downfall of dictatorship unexpected, resounding effect globally  Influence on other democratic struggles in eastern Europe and China • Could have an overthrow through civil society that is unarmed and peaceful • Benigno Aquino – “Ninoy” o Exile in Massachusetts o Wealthy o Marcos and Aquino rose to prominence at similar time, dated Marcos’ wife o Marcos was more successful because he was more ruthless  Declared martial law in 1972, imprisonedAquino even though he was popular with opposition  Released toAmerican exile o 1983 Aquino returns to the Philippines because it is time to challenge Marcos  Seen as only figure who could unite the opposition  As he stepped down from plane, he was surrounded by media, shot, and body was dumped on tarmac  Turning point!  Before this, opposition disagreed about many factors, but all saw assassination as excessive  Disagreement about who did it, Marcos may have been to smart, but some say wife arranged it  Relentless protests and strategic stuff  Negative growth of economy for 2 years  Marcos calls snap election in February 1986, trying to prove legitimacy  5 parts • Church o Ambivalent relationship with Marcos o Actual people were exposed to Marcos vocally, joined guerillas w/communist movement o Many priests in agreement with Marxism as response to dictatorship o Bishops more conservative, less anti-Marcos  Some supported the regime  Others were critical but cautious o Cardinal Sin?? Important role in negotiating with Marcos unsuccessful  Turned against Marcos afterAquino’s death, realized his wife was only unifying figure left: CorazonAquino • Middle class o Core of the opposition in civil society to Marcos in 83 onwards o Worked to protect the ballots and count votes, detail fraud and intimidation the government o Crucial to rallying in the streets during campaign and protected rebel armed group people power revolution and overthrow • Rebel armed forces • 2 others? • Corazon Aquino – “Cory” • Cardinal Jaime Sin • RAM – Reform theArmed Forces Movement o Faction of military unhappy with Marcos for politicizing the military, positions were being given to people without merit o Began plotting to launch a coup o Long-run wanted to professionalize military, short-run Marcos had to go o Campaign and RAM happening at the same time o Election occurs, Marcos andAquino both argue that they have won the election (a few days of stability) o Marcos realizes impending coup, prepares to strike o Officers go on street with weapons, ask people to protect them from the military  Cardinal Sin crucial for gathering of protectors o Known as People Power revolution o ½ million people stood against tanks and forces for over 4 days
More Less

Related notes for POLI 369

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.