What do you think?
Rate this book
A Movement Divided: Philippine Communism, 1957-1986
Ken Fuller's previous book, Forcing the Pace: The Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, from Foundation to Armed Struggle, traced the history of the PKP from 1930 to the mid 1950s. In A Movement Divided, he continues the story until the fall of Ferdinand Marcos in 1986.
The author traces the PKP's painstaking attempts to rebuild, its conclusion of a political settlement with Marcos in 1974, and the development of the increasingly anti-imperialist stance which informed its approach to Marcos. The three congresses held by the PKP during this period are considered in detail, as are the two splits which occurred-that leading to the formation of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) in 1968, and the "Marxist-Leninist Group" split in 1972.
The current volume considers the CPP's "semifeudal" characterization of the mode of production, its approaches to religion and alliances, and its "protracted people's war." The book differs from most other studies on this subject, discussing the growth of Maoism in China and the manner of its introduction to the Philppines, and arguing that it is impossible to achieve an accurate view of the CPP's impact unless it is considered alongside the PKP and the developments in which that party was involved when the split occurred.
The author traces the PKP's painstaking attempts to rebuild, its conclusion of a political settlement with Marcos in 1974, and the development of the increasingly anti-imperialist stance which informed its approach to Marcos. The three congresses held by the PKP during this period are considered in detail, as are the two splits which occurred-that leading to the formation of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) in 1968, and the "Marxist-Leninist Group" split in 1972.
The current volume considers the CPP's "semifeudal" characterization of the mode of production, its approaches to religion and alliances, and its "protracted people's war." The book differs from most other studies on this subject, discussing the growth of Maoism in China and the manner of its introduction to the Philppines, and arguing that it is impossible to achieve an accurate view of the CPP's impact unless it is considered alongside the PKP and the developments in which that party was involved when the split occurred.
- GenresHistory
475 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2011
1 person is currently reading
28 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 11, 2021
I liked this much more than the first volume of this trilogy on the development of Philippine Communism. Fuller’s point of view emerges more clearly here and it makes more sense why he’s spending so much time writing these books.
In the discussion about communism in the Philippines he feels that the PKP has been left out of the picture, which he must think is a shame because their analysis of the end of the Marcos regime was much more prescient than that of the CPP-NPA faction, which he feels has been in their history endlessly misguided by their dependence on a Maoist rhetoric that barely applies to the Philippine situation, as well as being fervently anti-Marcos when they needed to be anti-imperialist. They are also blamed for the split of the communist movement, and most of it appears attributed to the character of Sison himself.
Is this a fair analysis of the situation? I don’t know, but it’s presented convincingly enough and has succeeded in tempering any interest I had to read the writings of Sison. Maybe I still will, I don’t know.
In the discussion about communism in the Philippines he feels that the PKP has been left out of the picture, which he must think is a shame because their analysis of the end of the Marcos regime was much more prescient than that of the CPP-NPA faction, which he feels has been in their history endlessly misguided by their dependence on a Maoist rhetoric that barely applies to the Philippine situation, as well as being fervently anti-Marcos when they needed to be anti-imperialist. They are also blamed for the split of the communist movement, and most of it appears attributed to the character of Sison himself.
Is this a fair analysis of the situation? I don’t know, but it’s presented convincingly enough and has succeeded in tempering any interest I had to read the writings of Sison. Maybe I still will, I don’t know.
Displaying 1 of 1 review