25/09/2025
A Fractured Opposition
Lessons from September 21 'People Power'
Unlike EDSA I and II, where Filipinos stood united against a single leader, the recent September 21 demonstrations revealed a fractured opposition: divided groups and fragmented venues, scattered protest rallies and conflicting objectives all weakened the momentum and failed to shake the government. 'People Power' succeeds only when voices converge on one front, reminding us that unity is the heart of the power of the people.
Every generation faces its own test of democracy. With the rising anger over corruption and bad governance, many are once again looking up to the legacy of 'People Power' as a model for change. But history teaches us that not all protests are equal: only those that achieve focus, unity, and sheer presence have the force to compel the powerful to yield.
If the goal is to revive the spirit and impact of 'People Power', then the venue should be only EDSA like when Filipinos had forced Ferdinand Marcos Sr. and Joseph Estrada from office. The strength of those uprisings lay not in dispersal, but in a single concentrated front that became impossible to ignore.
History proves the point. In February 1986, the four-day EDSA Uprising drew an estimated two million Filipinos along Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA), creating a human barricade of prayers, rosaries, and unarmed citizens. In January 2001, EDSA II once again became the epicenter, as nearly a million people gathered to demand Estrada’s resignation. In both times, the unity of one site turned protest into political change.
The difference between EDSA I and II and the September 21 attempt to stage another People Power movement is, however, striking. Filipinos from across political persuasions stood united with one overriding goal: the removal of what people perceived as discredited leaders. By contrast, the September 21, 2025 mobilizations revealed deep divisions, not only in the choice of venues but also in the very objectives of the protests. Some called for ousting Marcos Jr., others rallied against the Dutertes, still others merely sought accountability for corruption. This lack of shared clarity and purpose has weakened the movement and explains its seeming failure to capture the same moral force that defined earlier uprisings.
During the recent September 21 protests in Metro Manila, various groups of differing persuasions i.e. anti-BBM advocates, anti-Duterte blocs, church leaders, youth coalitions, and civil society networks and the Left, organized parallel rallies at the EDSA Shrine, Luneta, Mendiola, and elsewhere. The “Trillion Peso March” was staged at the EDSA People Power Monument, while “Baha sa Luneta: Aksyon laban sa Korapsyon” gathered thousands in Luneta. Organizers included the Church Leaders Council for National Transformation (CLCNT), 1Sambayan, and student councils from different universities such as UP, Ateneo, De La Salle, and Miriam College, alongside various activist coalitions. Yet the dispersion of groups across multiple venues diluted what could have been a more concentrated and symbolically powerful mass action. It could have been stronger if focused only on EDSA and Mendiola.
Let us also admit something uncomfortable: President Marcos Jr. played his cards well. By allowing the Left, the Pinks, and other opposition blocs to fight among themselves, the real national issue was blurred. A lot of followers, swayed by slogans and personalities including celebrities who added noise rather than clarity, were misled into believing that the Dutertes were the main enemy, rather than the systemic corruption itself. Instead of confronting the root of the problem, people were diverted into factional battles that only benefited the sitting President. This is the dangerous power of money and patronage in politics: it can bend principles, cloud judgment, and lead masses of followers into blind obedience. And unless this cycle is broken, we may well remain stuck in the same politics of division and manipulation until 2028.
If the intent is merely to highlight corruption in government, then protests across different venues may suffice. In fact, much of the outrage has been fueled by reports that ₱1.9 trillion has been spent on flood-control projects in the last 15 years, with many alleged anomalies remaining unaddressed. But noise alone is not enough. History has shown how protest actions could quickly lose steam and fade without clear strategy or a unifying ground, leaving grievances unresolved and momentum wasted.
Not all successful movements have followed only the Philippine example. In Nepal, youth-led protests in September 2025, fueled largely by Gen Z anger at corruption, economic inequality, and even restrictions on social media, mobilized massive crowds and sustained demonstrations that ultimately forced Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli to resign.
Nepal’s experience shows how determined, united, and sustained dissent can topple entrenched power when strategy and focus converge.
Even if demonstrators occupy the streets for days and nights but without the unified force of an EDSA-style stand, the goal will remain elusive. Nonviolent uprisings succeed when people converge on one site, hold it with persistence, and refuse to disperse until power yields. That was the lesson of 1986, when two million Filipinos toppled a dictatorship, and of 2001 when a million more forced a president to resign. Above all, protests must be sustained, not for hours or not even for a single day, but for days on end, disciplined and unrelenting. Anything less risks being remembered not as a turning point, but as another moment that came and went.
The lesson is clear: true 'People Power' is not about scattering discontent, but about forging unity at a single front. EDSA is more than a place; it is the enduring symbol of what Filipinos can achieve when they gather with one voice and one purpose. If the people wish to reclaim that legacy, they must return to the road where democracy was once defended, and where it can be defended again.
Echoes of the South
By Dr. Darwin Rasul III
