MANILA, Philippines -- Would you believe that the People Power Revolution that ousted the dictator Ferdinand Marcos in February 1986 and inspired re-runs in Asia and Eastern Europe is seen as a success by civilians but a flop by soldiers?
This came to light in a study by the Ateneo De Manila University's Department of Psychology and Institute of Philippine Culture which shows how disparate the views and feelings of the two groups are about "Edsa I.''
They differed on the "Edsa heroes'' and the crucial events that led to the phenomenon that was People Power. But the differences became more marked when it came to how they felt about the event.
The civilian respondents described People Power I as courageous, successful, strong, admirable, and good. And their military counterparts? Exactly the opposite.
"Their story is linked to how people want to feel about their group self, and that ‘feeling of and thinking about group self' also shapes the kind of story that the group holds,'' Political psychologist Cristina Montiel explained.
"So there are different stories. Even if the same thing happened to all of us, we have different stories in our collective mind.''
Hundreds of thousands massed at Edsa for days in February 1986 to back what at that point appeared to have been a failed military coup attempt and faced down tanks in a near-bloodless revolt that forced Marcos to step down, ending his 20-year rule.
For her study, "People Power I in the Public Minds of Filipino Civilians and Militaries: A Nonviolent Power-shift or a Military Coup?'' Montiel polled 200 alumni from AdMU and the Philippine Military Academy.
Fifty respondents each from AdMU and PMA (Class 1986), and another 50 respondents each from both institutions (Class 2006) were surveyed on the main question: “Was People Power I a non-violent power shift or a military coup?''
The idea was to probe these two social groups' collective image of Edsa I. The PMA and AdMU alumni were chosen as respondents because they were "critical student bases'' of the two institutions in 1986, Montiel said.
The findings of the study were presented in public on August 21, the 25th death anniversary of the Benigno Aquino Jr.
The respondents were first asked what they remembered about Edsa I, and then to write down people or groups who made the most impact -- good or bad.
The civilians from Class 1986 named the late Jaime Cardinal Sin, President Corazon Aquino, civilians, religious groups, and then AFP Vice Chief of Staff General Fidel V. Ramos.
Their military counterparts, also from Class 1986, identified Ramos, then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, the Rebolusyonaryong Alyansang Makabansa (RAM - then known as Reform the Armed Forces Movement), religious groups, and the military.
Interestingly, all the respondents from Class 2006 wrote down a similar set of influential figures, albeit in different order: Corazon Aquino, Ramos, Benigno "Ninoy'' Aquino Jr., Sin, and Marcos.
All listed down people power as the most important event that had a bearing on People Power I, but they differed on the rest.
For instance, the withdrawal of support by Enrile and Ramos from Marcos ranked next in importance among the military men, and Aquino Jr.'s assassination on August 21, 1983, among the civilians.
"They have a different sense of history of what events are important in 1986. They have a different storyline. Who were the heroes and who were the main actors, and what events made up People Power I,'' Montiel said.
"But in 2006, the understanding is already synchronized. The younger groups have cognitions or thoughts that are coming together,'' she added in an interview at the Psychology Department faculty center Friday afternoon.
For part two, the respondents were asked to describe Edsa I with the help of a set of 25 adjective pairs: good-bad, sad-happy, strong-weak, courageous-cowardly, successful-unsuccessful, admirable-not admirable, etc.
And they were asked to rate these on a scale of 1-7.
The pairs of courageous-cowardly, successful-unsuccessful, strong-weak, admirable-not admirable, and good-bad emerged with the highest loads.
In the courageous-cowardly pair, the civilians scored an average 6.4 (tending toward courageous), and the military 2.4 (tending toward cowardly); successful-unsuccessful (civilians 5.9, military 2.3); strong-weak (civilian 6, military 2.5); admirable-not admirable (civilians 6.3, military 2.8), and good-bad (civilians 6.2, military 2.9).
"So the military respondents from 1986 and 2006 feel that People Power I was bad, weak, disorganized, not militarized, cowardly, unsuccessful,'' said Montiel, who teaches Political Psychology, Peace Psychology, and Research Methods at AdMU.
The civilians, on the contrary, saw it in a good light.
When Montiel decided to compare only the responses of the younger generation, the differences were even more stark.
In the courageous-cowardly pair, the civilians obtained an average score of 6.12, against the military's 2.68; strong-weak (civilians 5.86, military 2.24); successful-unsuccessful (civilians 5.86, military 2.44); admirable-not admirable (civilians 5.94, military 3.28) and good-bad (civilians 5.8, military 3.38).
The different storylines about Edsa I were borne out of one group's need for social identity and importance, according to Montiel.
"In the social mind of civilians, it was a non-violent democratic transition, courageous, successful, admirable, and good,'' she said.
"This kind of story enhances civilian role in the world famous event, verifies the importance of civilians in democratic transitions, and inspires more civilian interventions like this one,'' she added.
In the mind of the military, People Power I was a military coup that turned civilian-led, and cowardly, unsuccessful, weak, not admirable, etc., according to Montiel.
"This kind of story downgrades the civilian role in the event. And it verifies and legitimizes military intervention to save democracy, and inspires nine more military interventions after 1986,'' she said.
So was People Power I a non-violent power shift or a military coup? Montiel said: "The contest of social representations lives on.''
