File(s) under permanent embargo
The Philippine democratic uprising and the contradictions of neoliberalism: Edsa II
journal contribution
posted on 2001-10-01, 00:00 authored by Benjamin ReidSelect responses to the January 2001 uprising against the government
of President Josef ‘Erap’ Estrada in the Philippines demonstrate a great
deal about certain contradictions and paradoxes implicit in neoliberal conceptions
of democratic governance. This paper presents a critique of these conceptions,
based on a radical democratic outlook. Dubbed EDSA II—given its
location at the same place as the 1986 Epifanio de los Santos uprising against
President Ferdinand Marcos—the uprising resulted in Estrada’s replacement by
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and a different faction of the Philippine political elite.
Despite never seriously threatening the hold and influence of traditional political
elites in the Philippines, the uprising was criticised by some Western commentators.
Their criticisms were founded on mistaken interpretations of events
and are a reflection of these commentators’ increasing reluctance to endorse any
forms of popular political mobilisation and resistance. Their reluctance is a
reflection of their neoliberal conception of democratic governance, which
privileges the building of institutions to promote market efficiency over issues of
power and social change.
of President Josef ‘Erap’ Estrada in the Philippines demonstrate a great
deal about certain contradictions and paradoxes implicit in neoliberal conceptions
of democratic governance. This paper presents a critique of these conceptions,
based on a radical democratic outlook. Dubbed EDSA II—given its
location at the same place as the 1986 Epifanio de los Santos uprising against
President Ferdinand Marcos—the uprising resulted in Estrada’s replacement by
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and a different faction of the Philippine political elite.
Despite never seriously threatening the hold and influence of traditional political
elites in the Philippines, the uprising was criticised by some Western commentators.
Their criticisms were founded on mistaken interpretations of events
and are a reflection of these commentators’ increasing reluctance to endorse any
forms of popular political mobilisation and resistance. Their reluctance is a
reflection of their neoliberal conception of democratic governance, which
privileges the building of institutions to promote market efficiency over issues of
power and social change.