Toppling Dictators — the 3.5% Solution
On August 21, 1983, former Philippines Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. returned to the archipelago nation from his exile in the United States. Ostensibly, the former senator came back to face down the country’s dictator, Ferdinand Marcos. But, upon Aquino’s arrival at Manilla Airport, army soldiers boarded the plane, forced him onto the tarmac, and murdered him in a hail of bullets.
Filipinos had lived under the rule of Ferdinand Marcos for eighteen years, beginning with his legitimate election as president in 1965. But by 1972, Marcos’ declared martial law, further solidifying his hold on his people through a kleptocratic government rife with corruption and willingness to use grotesque brutality to hold power. Historians estimate that more than 70,000 people were arrested for political agitation, 35,000 people tortured, and 3,000 people murdered during Marcos’ dictatorship.
Marcos and his wife Imelda profited immensely from his position. Billions of dollars were stolen from the country’s treasury and diverted to Marcos’ pocket, while everyday Filipinos struggled to make their own lives bearable. Imelda’s extravagant lifestyle was a press favourite, with one of the most visible excesses being a personal shoe collection of over 3,000 pairs.
But with the assassination of Aquino, Filipinos could tolerate no more. Aquino’s funeral procession attracted an estimated 7 million people, the largest in Philippine history. Many consider this event to be the new beginning of the oust Marcos movement. Marcos declared an election for 1986, and at the urging of Catholic Cardinal Jaime Sin, Aquino’s widow Cory declared her candidacy for the presidency. The election was rife with fraud, with Marcos declaring himself the winner. But the people were done with the dictator. Led by Cory Aquino, a civil disobedience campaign was organized around the country. Even a faction of the military, the Reform the Armed Forces Movement (RAM), rose to oppose the regime. The Philippines was now boiling over, with years of oppression and resentment firing the hopes of everyday people for a better life and moving them to action on the street.
Marcos sent loyalist army forces to oppose RAM, with the epicentre of the confrontation being Manila’s Epifanio de los Santos Avenue. Thousands of everyday Filipinos converged on the avenue, placing themselves between the two opposing army forces, offering them food, flowers, and prayer.
Marcos ordered his military to disperse the crowds, but the army began to splinter in their support for the strong man, with many defecting to the rebel side. As crowds gathered outside the presidential palace, US President Ronald Reagan called Marcos and told him his time was over and that he would no longer receive the US government’s support. American forces evacuated Marcos and his family to Hawaii, and on February 25, 1986, Cory Aquino was sworn in as President.
This non-violent civil disobedience in the Philippines became known as the People Power Revolution. Harvard professor Erica Chenoweth has researched the power of non-violent movements and uncovered some interesting insights. Chief of these is that non-violent protests are very successful. Of course, recent history is replete with examples of successful civil disobedience campaigns, including those led by Mohandas Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Working with Maria Stephan, a researcher at the International Center of Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC), Chenoweth and Stephan analyzed 323 violent and nonviolent movements between 1900–2006. They published their findings in Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. The book’s central thesis is that nonviolent movements are twice as likely as violent movements (53% vs 26%) to effect lasting political change, especially if they engage just 3.5% of the population in a sustained manner.
Chenoweth believes that if movement draws as little as 3.5% of the population to action, this represents a tipping point. At the peak of the People Power Revolution, an estimated two million people had been mobilized (the Philippines had a population of 55,800,000 at the time.) Chenoweth thinks that non-violent movements that can rally the sustained support of 3.5% of the people are so powerful because:
· Non-violent protests can be openly discussed, thereby attracting a larger audience, whereas violent protests require much more secrecy, drawing a small group of active participants.
· Non-violent protests can attract more people with several ways to participate while maintaining a moral high ground. Marches, boycotts, and general strikes do not require high skills or knowledge. Violent protests, by definition, involve weapons and bloodshed and thus repel more people than they attract to the cause.
· Because non-violent protests attract broader participation, it is much more likely that they will also draw in the people charged with maintaining public order; the police and military. When an army is ordered to shoot into a crowd of their fellow citizens, they would not know if they were shooting at their own family and friends. Many of Marcos’ soldiers refused orders for this very reason.
· The more people that participate, the more reach the movement will have into the halls of influence and power. Dictators cannot rule by themselves. They need the participation of the bureaucracy, judiciary, public enforcement, and dozens of other institutions that form a functioning society.
Of course, we do not need to look far to see that non-violent protests can be quickly routed with violent government suppression. And while Chenoweth’s research showed that non-violent movements failed 47% of the time, she found that most of these failures resulted from the inability of the protest leaders to achieve the 3.5% participation rate in a sustained, resilient way. As a result, the study’s statistics overwhelmingly favour civil disobedience as a powerful way to effect political change.
Insight and Application
Leaders should court broad grassroots support for their initiatives but build this support upon resilient, multi-leg strategies. Successful non-violent protests regularly use these principles in the structure of their movements. Common tactics include general strikes, boycotts, marches, demonstrations, work-to-rule, sit-ins, and various other methods. When leaders engage their audience in multi-layered, integrated strategies, the likelihood of successful outcomes increases rapidly.
Would you do me a favour? Please follow, clap and share the content if you liked it. Thank you!
This is a story in the new book I’m writing, Leadership Parables, which will feature leadership lessons in highly memorable short story form. But I need your help. If you remember an anecdote that influenced the way you think about business and leadership, let me know. If your suggestion is selected, you will receive a copy of the book and credit as a contributor. If you would like to know when the book is released, please add your name here. And, if you have an idea to share, please contact me at kurian@strategypeak.com.
This is a story in the new book I’m writing, Leadership Parables, which will feature leadership lessons in highly memorable short story form. But I need your help. If you remember an anecdote that influenced the way you think about business and leadership, tell me about it. If your suggestion is selected, you will receive a copy of the book and credit as a contributor. If you would like to know when the book is released, please add your name here. And, if you have an idea to share, please contact me at kurian@strategypeak.com.
Also, check out my first book, The 7 Essential Stories Charismatic Leaders Tell, click here: https://amzn.to/2PSHgmB
