New Trends in the Philippine Left-Wing Movement in the 21st Century

As an important political and social force in modern Philippine history, the core objectives of the Philippine left wing are to oppose social inequality, promote land reform, oppose imperialism, and strive for change through armed struggle or social movements. The Philippine left-wing movement has a long history, and left-wing political parties remain active on the political stage to this day, holding a certain representative significance among Southeast Asian countries. At the end of the 19th century, the outbreak of anti-colonial struggles and the development of the national liberation movement in the Philippines laid the foundation for the rise of the country’s left-wing movement. In the early 1930s, the founding of the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas-1930 (PKP-1930, hereinafter referred to as the “PKP”) marked the beginning of the Philippine left-wing movement. In the mid-to-late 20th century, with the successive establishment of multiple left-wing political parties in the Philippines, the country’s left-wing movement took on diverse characteristics. Since the 21st century, left-wing political parties have still held a certain influence in the Philippine political ecosystem. Reviewing the evolution of the Philippine left-wing movement and studying the development trends and main characteristics of the country’s major left-wing political parties will help us assess the prospects and trends of the Philippine left-wing movement, thereby deepening our analysis and reflection on left-wing politics and social movements in Southeast Asia.

作为菲律宾近现代历史中重要的政治和社会力量，菲律宾左翼的核心目标是反对社会不平等，推动土地改革，反对帝国主义，通过武装斗争或社会运动争取变革。菲律宾左翼运动历史悠久，左翼政党至今仍活跃在政治舞台上，在东南亚国家中具有一定的代表性。19世纪末，菲律宾反殖民斗争的爆发和民族解放运动的发展，为该国左翼运动的兴起奠定了基础。20世纪30年代初，菲律宾共产党（Partido Komunist ng Pilipinas-1930，简称“菲共”）的成立，拉开了菲律宾左翼运动的序幕。20世纪中后期，随着菲律宾多个左翼政党相继成立，该国左翼运动呈现出多样化特点。21世纪以来，左翼政党在菲律宾政治生态中仍具有一定的影响力。梳理菲律宾左翼运动的演变历程，研究该国主要左翼政党的发展态势与主要特征，有助于我们研判菲律宾左翼运动的前景与趋势，进而深化对东南亚左翼政治和社会运动的分析与思考。

I. The Development Process of the Philippine Left-Wing Movement

一、菲律宾左翼运动的发展历程

The Philippine left-wing movement is the result of the combined effects of colonial history, class contradictions, and social currents. Despite experiencing suppression and internal splits, left-wing political parties remain a force that cannot be ignored in the Philippine political ecosystem, and their development process presents an overall trend of tortuous progress.

菲律宾左翼运动是殖民历史、阶级矛盾和社会思潮共同作用的结果。尽管历经镇压与内部分裂，左翼政党仍是菲律宾政治生态中不可忽视的力量，其发展历程呈现出曲折前进的总体态势。

(I) The Rise and Early Development of the Philippine Left-Wing Movement

（一）菲律宾左翼运动的兴起与早期发展

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Philippines was in a transitional period from Spanish colonial rule to American colonial rule. The United States took over the Philippines from Spain in 1898 through the Treaty of Paris, and subsequently suppressed local armed resistance in 1902, formally establishing colonial rule. During this period, the socio-economic and political structures of the Philippines underwent drastic changes, with the principal contradictions in society manifesting as those between colonial rule and national independence, between landlords and peasants, and between the laboring class and the capitalists. Amid the interweaving of anti-colonial struggles and social reform movements in the Philippines, left-wing thought gradually emerged. In 1901, the politician Isabelo de los Reyes, returning from exile, brought to the Filipino people progressive foreign works on class and revolution and the emancipation of the proletariat, such as *Entre Campesinos* (Among Peasants) and *Vida e Obras de Carlos Marx* (Life and Works of Karl Marx), providing new ideological weapons for the Philippines’ struggle against Spanish colonial rule and the national independence movement. In 1902, Reyes, together with Hermenegildo Cruz, established the Philippines’ first modern trade union federation, the Unión Obrera Democrática (UOD), calling on the national working class to launch strikes to protest the oppressive labor policies of the bourgeois government and to fight for basic rights and welfare guarantees for workers. Under the influence of the Russian October Revolution, the class consciousness of Filipino workers and peasants gradually strengthened, and they actively participated in social resistance. As Marxism further integrated with the worker-peasant movement, labor leader Crisanto Evangelista and others founded the Progressive Workers’ Party of the Philippines (POF) in 1924, laying the foundation for the rise of the country’s left-wing movement.

20世纪初，菲律宾正处于从西班牙殖民统治向美国殖民统治的过渡时期。美国于1898年通过《巴黎和约》从西班牙手中接管菲律宾，随后在1902年平定当地武装抵抗，正式确立殖民统治。这一时期，菲律宾社会经济和政治结构发生剧烈变动，社会主要矛盾体现为殖民统治与民族独立、地主与农民、劳工阶级与资本家之间的矛盾。在菲律宾反殖民斗争和社会改革运动的相互交织中，左翼思潮逐渐兴起。1901年，流亡回国的政治家伊莎贝洛·德洛斯·雷耶斯（Isabelo de los Reyes）为菲律宾人民带来了有关阶级与革命、无产阶级解放思想的国外进步作品，如《农民之间》（Entre Campesinos）和《卡尔·马克思的生平和著作》（Vida e Obras de Carlos Marx）等，为菲律宾反对西班牙殖民统治的斗争和民族独立运动提供了新的思想武器。1902年，雷耶斯同赫梅内吉尔多·克鲁斯（Hermenegildo Cruz）组建了菲律宾首个现代工会联合会——民主工人联盟（UOD），号召全国工人阶级发起罢工抗议资产阶级政府的压迫性劳动政策，为工人争取基本权利和福利保障。在俄国十月革命的影响下，菲律宾工人和农民阶级意识逐渐增强，积极参与社会抗争。随着马克思主义进一步与工农运动相结合，劳工领袖克里桑托·伊万利斯塔（Crisanto Evangelista）等人于1924年成立了菲律宾进步工人党（POF），为该国左翼运动的兴起奠定了基础。

In the early 1930s, under the colonial oppression of U.S. imperialism and the oppression of the Philippine comprador big bourgeoisie, landlord class, and bureaucratic class, and in response to the increasingly strong calls for national independence and social liberation, Evangelista and others established the Central Committee of the PKP in Manila in 1930, officially inaugurating the Philippine left-wing movement. In 1931, the PKP held its First National Congress, where General Secretary Evangelista issued the “Appeal to the Filipino Working People” and put forward the Party’s minimum program: to overthrow the rule of imperialism and feudalism and establish an independent, democratic Philippines. The Party also committed itself to integrating Marxist-Leninist theory with the concrete realities of Philippine society, elevating the Philippine revolution to the level of a new-type national-democratic revolution characteristic of the era of imperialism. However, shortly after the PKP’s First Congress, the Manila Regional Trial Court declared the PKP an illegal organization, forcing its activities underground. In 1937, with the rise of fascism and Japanese militarism, the Comintern adopted a strategy of people’s war, calling on communist parties in various countries to unite with all forces that could be mobilized to form an anti-fascist united front. Under strong demands from the Filipino people, the U.S.-dominated Philippine Commonwealth government lifted the ban and restored the PKP’s legal status. During World War II, the PKP called for struggle against imperialism, the exploitation and enslavement of colonies and semi-colonies, class oppression, national division, and all forms of chauvinism.

20世纪30年代初，在美帝国主义的殖民压迫和菲律宾买办大资产阶级、地主阶级、官僚阶级的压迫下，为响应日益强烈的争取民族独立和社会解放的呼声，伊万利斯塔等人于1930年在马尼拉成立了菲共中央委员会，菲律宾左翼运动正式拉开序幕。1931年，菲共召开了第一次全国代表大会，总书记伊万利斯塔发布《告菲律宾劳动人民书》并提出了党的最低纲领，即推翻帝国主义与封建主义的统治，建立一个独立、民主的菲律宾。该党还致力于将马列主义理论同菲律宾社会的具体实际相结合，把菲律宾革命提高到帝国主义时代的新型民族民主革命的水平。然而，在菲共一大召开后不久，马尼拉地区审判法院宣布菲共为非法组织，迫使其活动转入地下。1937年，法西斯主义与日本军国主义势力抬头，共产国际采取人民战争的策略，要求各国共产党和一切可以动员的力量联合起来，组建反法西斯统一战线。在菲律宾人民的强烈要求下，美国主导下的菲律宾自治政府解除禁令，恢复了菲共的合法身份。第二次世界大战期间，菲共呼吁开展反对帝国主义、剥削和奴役殖民地半殖民地、阶级压迫、民族分裂以及一切形式的沙文主义的斗争。

However, in 1948, the PKP was once again declared an illegal organization. Under the violent suppression of U.S. imperialism and the Philippine bourgeois government, the main members of the Party’s Central Committee were all arrested, and the PKP’s armed force, the Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon (HMB, People’s Anti-Japanese Army), suffered heavy casualties. By the mid-1950s, the PKP’s armed uprising against the bourgeois government had failed, and the Party was forced to cease armed struggle and shift to peaceful activities to regroup, marking a period of low ebb for the Philippine left-wing movement.

然而，1948年菲共再次沦为非法组织，在美帝国主义及菲律宾资产阶级政府的强力镇压下，党的中央委员会主要成员悉数被捕，菲共的武装力量——菲律宾人民解放军（HMB）伤亡惨重。20世纪50年代中期，菲共反对资产阶级政府的武装起义宣告失败，党不得不停止武装斗争，转入和平活动以重整旗鼓，菲律宾左翼运动步入低潮时期。

(II) The Split and Diversified Development of the Philippine Left-Wing Movement

（二）菲律宾左翼运动的分裂及多样性发展

In 1965, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos came to power. As he continued the pro-U.S. policies of the previous administration, many left-wing figures were severely persecuted. During this period, the Philippine left-wing movement exhibited diverse characteristics. In addition to the communist party, a number of organizations and groups advocating democratic socialism emerged.

1965年，菲律宾总统费迪南德·马科斯（Ferdinand Marcos）上台执政，由于其延续了上届政府的亲美政策，许多左翼人士深受迫害。这一时期，菲律宾左翼运动呈现出多样化特点，除共产党外，还涌现出一批主张民主社会主义的组织和团体。

On the one hand, the PKP attempted to revitalize the left-wing movement by strengthening Party building. However, after the first major rectification campaign in 1966, factional strife within the PKP intensified. The “pro-China faction,” represented by Jose Maria Sison, split from the Party, leading a youth Maoist group to convene a congress for the reestablishment of the Party in 1968 and forming a new Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). In the 1970s, the original PKP organization signed the “National Unity Agreement” with the Marcos government, agreeing to abandon armed struggle and support the government’s “New Society” program. Although this organization still exists today, its political influence is relatively limited. The CPP, which split off and adhered to the guidance of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, adopted the slogan “overthrow the landlords, distribute the land,” aiming to mobilize peasants for land revolution. This move not only aligned with the social reality of the Philippines, where the rural population constitutes the majority, but also responded to the interests and demands of the Filipino working class and peasant masses. Consequently, the new organization rapidly grew in strength, becoming the most influential left-wing political party in the Philippines.

一方面，菲共试图通过加强党的建设以重振左翼运动。然而，1966年第一次大整风运动后，菲共内部派系纷争愈演愈烈，以何塞·玛利亚·西松（Jose Maria Sison）为代表的“亲中派”从党内分裂出来，带领青年毛主义团体于1968年召开了重建党的代表大会，组建了新的菲律宾共产党（CPP）中央委员会。20世纪70年代，原来的菲共组织与马科斯政府签订了《民族团结协议》，同意放弃武装斗争并支持政府的“新社会”计划，虽然该组织至今仍然存在，但政治影响力较为有限。而后来分裂出来的坚持以马列主义、毛泽东思想为指导的菲共以“打土豪、分田地”为口号，旨在发动农民进行土地革命。此举不仅契合菲律宾农村人口占多数的社会现实，更回应了菲律宾工人阶级和农民群众的利益诉求。因此，新组织力量迅速壮大，成为菲律宾影响力最大的左翼政党。

On the other hand, influenced by currents of democratic socialism in Europe and Latin America, some Filipino intellectuals and political figures advocated for advancing social reform through democratic means. In the 1960s, a number of organizations and groups advocating democratic socialism emerged within the Philippine left wing. In 1973, the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP) (hereinafter referred to as the “Social Democratic Party”) was formally established, putting forward political slogans such as “restore democracy” and “freedom and human rights.” Its main objectives were to overthrow the Marcos dictatorship, promote land reform, and strive for the restoration of political democracy and human rights and freedoms in the Philippines, thereby safeguarding fairness and justice in Philippine society.

另一方面，受欧洲和拉美民主社会主义思潮的影响，一些菲律宾知识分子和政界人士倡导以民主手段推进社会改革。20世纪60年代，菲律宾左翼中出现了一批主张民主社会主义的组织和团体。1973年，菲律宾民主社会党（PDSP）（简称“民社党”）正式成立，提出“恢复民主”“自由人权”等政治口号，主要目的在于推翻马科斯独裁政权，推动土地改革并争取恢复菲律宾的政治民主和人权自由，从而维护菲律宾社会的公平与正义。

In 1986, the first People Power Movement in the Philippines completely overthrew the Marcos regime. However, due to the increasingly exposed subjectivism and opportunist tendencies within the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), coupled with the prevalence of sectarian practices and growing tendencies toward fragmentation, the CPP and its mass organizations were gradually marginalized to the periphery of Philippine party politics during this movement. At the same time, the Social Democratic Party (SocDem), by actively promoting the democratic transition of the Philippines and participating in the reconstruction of its democratic society, gradually transformed from a revolutionary party into a parliamentary and participating party by leveraging the revolutionary opportunity and the wave of the movement, even becoming a governing partner in the coalition government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for a time.

1986年，菲律宾第一次人民力量运动的爆发彻底推翻了马科斯政权。然而，由于菲共党内主观主义和机会主义倾向日渐暴露，加之宗派主义作风盛行、分裂倾向日益加剧等原因，菲共及其群众组织在这次运动中逐渐被排挤至菲律宾政党政治的边缘地带。与此同时，民社党通过积极推动菲律宾民主转型并参与该国民主社会的重建，利用革命契机和运动浪潮逐渐从革命性政党转变为议会党和参政党，甚至一度成为阿罗约（Gloria Macapagal Arroyo）联合政府的执政伙伴。

In the early 1990s, in order to purge erroneous tendencies such as subjectivism and sectarianism within the party, the CPP carried out a second major rectification movement. Initially, the party was divided into the "Reaffirmationist" faction and the "Rejectionist" faction based on ideological differences. As factional strife escalated, the "Rejectionist" faction further split into multiple factions, such as the so-called Revolutionary Workers' Party of the Philippines (RPM-P) and the Workers' Party of the Philippines (PMP), which adhered to Marxism-Leninism but abandoned Mao Zedong Thought, and the Marxist-Leninist Party of the Philippines (MLP), which adhered to Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought while criticizing the CPP's sectarianism. Some of these leftist parties later split into multiple political factions; some parties began to advocate democratic socialism, while other organizations and groups continued to play a role in Philippine party politics as moderate leftists. The Philippine leftist movement in the 20th century generally exhibited characteristics of diversified development.

20世纪90年代初，为肃清党内存在的主观主义和宗派主义等错误倾向，菲共进行了第二次大整风运动。最初，党内因意识形态差异划分为“重申派”和“拒绝派”，随着派系之争的不断升级，“拒绝派”又陆续分裂为多个派系，如所谓坚持马列主义却又放弃毛泽东思想的菲律宾革命工人党（RPM-P）、菲律宾工人党（PMP），坚持马列主义和毛泽东思想、批判菲共宗派主义的菲律宾马克思列宁主义党（MLP）等。这些左翼政党中的一部分后来又分裂为多个政治派别，有的政党开始奉行民主社会主义，有的组织和团体则作为温和左翼继续在菲律宾政党政治中发挥作用。20世纪菲律宾左翼运动总体上呈现出多样化发展特征。

II. New Developments in the Philippine Leftist Movement in the 21st Century

二、21世纪菲律宾左翼运动的新发展

Since the beginning of the 21st century, Philippine leftist parties have achieved new accomplishments in the process of theoretical innovation and practical exploration, injecting new vitality into the development of the country's leftist movement.

21世纪以来，菲律宾左翼政党在理论创新和实践探索的过程中取得了新的成就，为该国左翼运动的发展注入了新的活力。

(I) Overview of Major Philippine Leftist Parties

（一）菲律宾主要左翼政党概况

Based on differences in guiding ideology and political stance, the major Philippine leftist parties can be divided into two categories: communist parties and social democratic parties. The main representatives of the communist parties are the CPP and the Revolutionary Workers' Party of Mindanao (RPM-M). The CPP adheres to Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, and its struggle practice aims to create conditions for the socialist revolution and construction of the Philippines. The party's highest goal is to achieve national and social liberation, ultimately realizing communism. At the same time, the CPP proposes the political line of "people's war," advocating first completing the Philippine national democratic revolution through a protracted people's war, and then advancing the proletarian socialist revolution. The Revolutionary Workers' Party of Mindanao (RPM-M) was founded in 2001, splitting from the CPP's "Rejectionist" faction. Ideologically, this party insists on being guided by Marxism-Leninism, opposes the CPP's political line of "people's war," and advocates promoting national reform through open democratic struggle and anti-imperialist struggle, ultimately advancing toward a higher stage of socialist revolution on a global scale.

基于指导思想及政治立场上的差异，可以将菲律宾主要左翼政党划分为共产党和社会民主党两大类。共产党的主要代表是菲共和棉兰老革命工人党。菲共坚持马列主义、毛泽东思想，其斗争实践旨在为菲律宾社会主义革命和建设创造条件。党的最高目标是实现民族和社会解放，最终实现共产主义。与此同时，菲共提出“人民战争”的政治路线，主张首先通过旷日持久的人民战争完成菲律宾民族民主革命，继而推进无产阶级社会主义革命。棉兰老革命工人党（RPM-M）成立于2001年，由菲共“拒绝派”分裂而来。该党在思想上坚持以马列主义为指导，反对菲共“人民战争”的政治路线，主张通过公开的民主斗争和反帝斗争来推动国家改革，最终在世界范围内向更高阶段的社会主义革命迈进。

The main representatives of the social democratic parties are the SocDem and the Party of the Laboring Masses (PLM). These two parties believe in democratic socialism and regard democratic elections as a legitimate means to achieve socialism. The guiding ideology of the SocDem originates from the ideological tradition of Philippine nationalism and the theories of Western European socialist parties. On the basis of recognizing the basic values of the Socialist International, this party also draws on the policy practices of various Western European socialist parties and formulates policies in light of the specific realities of the Philippines. Therefore, the SocDem calls itself a "nationalist, democratic, socialist, and revolutionary" Philippine party, taking "realizing democratic socialism" as its ultimate goal. The Party of the Laboring Masses was founded in 2009, with its members consisting of the CPP's "Rejectionist" faction and labor, community, and progressive groups. The PLM describes itself as a democratic socialist party, emphasizing the importance of democratic politics, popular participation, and social justice. Although this party does not explicitly state that it is guided by Marxism, it recognizes socialist principles to a certain extent.

社会民主党的主要代表是民社党和群众力量党（PLM）。这两个政党信奉民主社会主义，将民主选举作为实现社会主义的合法手段。民社党的指导思想源于菲律宾民族主义的思想传统和西欧社会党的理论，在对社会党国际基本价值观表示认同的基础上，该党还借鉴了西欧各社会党的政策实践，并结合菲律宾具体实际制定政策。因此，民社党自称为“民族主义、民主主义、社会主义和革命性”的菲律宾政党，将“实现民主社会主义”作为党的最终目标。群众力量党成立于2009年，其成员由菲共中的“拒绝派”和劳工、社区及进步团体构成。群众力量党将自己描述为一个民主社会主义政党，强调民主政治、人民参与和社会正义的重要性。该党虽未明确表示以马克思主义为指导，但在一定程度上认可社会主义原则。

(II) New Theoretical Explorations in the Philippine Leftist Movement

（二）菲律宾左翼运动在理论上的新探索

Since the beginning of the 21st century, Philippine leftist parties have engaged in theoretical innovation based on their own characteristics. They have not only deeply criticized the shortcomings of the capitalist system but also proposed new socialist visions suited to Philippine national conditions, promoting the development of the country's leftist movement to a certain extent.

21世纪以来，菲律宾左翼政党结合自身特点进行理论创新，不仅深入批判了资本主义制度的弊端，还提出了符合菲律宾国情的社会主义新构想，在一定程度上推动了该国左翼运动的发展。

1. New Critiques of Capitalism

1.对资本主义的新批判

The outbreak of the 2008 international financial crisis had a profound impact on the world, exposing the shortcomings of the capitalist system. Philippine leftists took this as an opportunity to further deepen their critical understanding of capitalism. The CPP points out that with the further intensification of the crisis of the global capitalist system, the internal contradictions and conflicts of imperialism are deepening. Developed capitalist countries led by the United States arbitrarily seek hegemony in the world, triggering a new round of economic recession that has spread globally, bringing more severe disasters to the people of the world. Currently, the global economy continues to be mired in low growth, with many capitalist countries on the brink of economic recession. The economic "recovery" after the COVID-19 pandemic has failed to restore production levels to pre-pandemic states. Business closures and large-scale layoffs are widespread; productive forces are being severely damaged and are in decline, and the socioeconomic conditions of the working class and laboring masses have further deteriorated. At the same time, capital oligarchs continue to accumulate wealth, further widening the gap between rich and poor. The continuous decline in the consumption capacity of the working class has caused consumer demand to lag behind production expansion, thereby triggering structural imbalances within the capitalist system. The RPM-M believes that capitalism has now penetrated every corner of Philippine social life, and the basic contradictions of capitalism are intensifying and spreading globally with unprecedented depth and breadth. In pursuit of profit, capitalists do not hesitate to sacrifice human welfare and disrupt social order. The PLM emphasizes that capitalism accumulates large amounts of capital while expanding through the exploitation of natural resources and wealth, and its development comes at the cost of Earth's civilization and human life. Today, state power in countries such as the United States, Brazil, and the Philippines remains in the hands of the bourgeoisie. Leftist forces urgently need to adjust their strategies and continue the struggle against capitalism and the bourgeoisie.

2008年国际金融危机的爆发对全球产生了深刻影响，暴露出资本主义制度的弊端。菲律宾左翼以此为契机，进一步深化了对资本主义的批判性认识。菲共指出，随着全球资本主义制度危机的进一步加剧，帝国主义的内部矛盾和冲突不断加深，以美国为首的发达资本主义国家在世界上肆意谋求霸权，引发新一轮经济衰退并波及全球，给世界人民带来更为严重的灾难。当前，全球经济持续陷入低增长状态，许多资本主义国家处于经济衰退的边缘。新冠疫情后的经济“复苏”未能使生产水平恢复至疫情前的状态，企业倒闭与大规模裁员现象十分普遍，生产力正遭受严重破坏并处于衰退之中，工人阶级与劳动群众的社会经济状况也进一步恶化。与此同时，资本寡头持续积累财富，进一步扩大了贫富差距。工人阶级消费能力的持续下降，使消费需求滞后于生产扩张，进而引发资本主义体系内部的结构性失衡。棉兰老革命工人党认为，当前资本主义已渗透到菲律宾社会生活的各个角落，资本主义基本矛盾更在全球范围内以前所未有的深度和广度激化并扩散。资本家为了追求利润，不惜牺牲人类福祉，扰乱社会秩序。群众力量党强调，资本主义利用自然资源和财富进行扩张的同时积累大量资本，其发展以牺牲地球文明和人的生命为代价。如今，美国、巴西和菲律宾等国家的政权依然掌握在资产阶级手中，左翼力量急需调整策略，继续同资本主义和资产阶级作斗争。

2. New Prospects for Socialism

2.对社会主义的新展望

Since entering the 21st century, under more complex domestic and international circumstances, Philippine leftist parties have actively explored the socialist path while drawing on new concepts of socialism from abroad, putting forward visions of socialism.

进入21世纪以来，在更为复杂的国内外形势下，菲律宾左翼政党积极探索社会主义道路，同时借鉴国外社会主义的新理念，提出了关于社会主义的构想。

In 2014, the CPP outlined its vision for the future socialist path of the Philippines from a macro perspective. First, under the socialist system, state power will serve the people, and the proletarian revolutionary party will play a leading role to properly coordinate contradictions among the people, enabling the broad masses to fully exercise their individual and collective rights. Second, the state must formulate a socialist constitution, and the socialist cause must be advanced under the leadership of the proletarian party, through extensive mobilization and consolidation of the people's strength, in coordination and cooperation with other democratic parties and mass organizations. Third, the surplus value previously seized by capitalists will be transformed into social capital, used to promote social production, infrastructure construction, public services, scientific research, cultural undertakings, national defense construction, and environmental governance. Finally, if socialism is realized in the Philippines, the country will implement public ownership in strategic industries, key resources, major transportation and communication facilities, and promote the recovery and sustainable development of the national economy through land reform and other bourgeois democratic reforms.

2014年，菲共从宏观层面对菲律宾的未来社会主义道路进行了展望。首先，在社会主义制度下，国家政权将服务于人民，无产阶级革命政党将发挥主导作用，以妥善协调人民内部矛盾，使广大人民能够充分行使个人和集体权利。其次，国家必须制定社会主义宪法，社会主义事业须在无产阶级政党的领导下，通过广泛动员和凝聚人民群众的力量，在与其他民主党派及群众组织的协同合作中推进。再次，将原先由资本家攫取的剩余价值转化为社会资本，用于推动社会生产、基础设施建设、公共服务、科学研究、文化事业、国防建设以及环境治理等领域的发展。最后，若社会主义在菲律宾得以实现，该国将在战略产业、关键资源、主要交通运输和通信设施等领域实行公有制，并通过土地改革和其他资产阶级民主改革，推动国家经济的复苏与可持续发展。

In 2020, in a speech titled “Capitalist Epidemic and Socialist Solutions,” Sonny Melencio, chairman of the Partido ng Manggagawa (Party of the Masses), pointed out that a socialist society is one that emphasizes solidarity and mutual assistance. Traditionally, the Philippines refers to the spirit of cooperation or community solidarity as “Bayanihan,” which stresses mutual aid and unity among people; it is a characteristic of interpersonal relations during the period of Philippine tribal society. In view of this, the Partido ng Manggagawa holds that, when responding to major crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, a society that emphasizes solidarity and cooperation neither takes market mechanisms and profit supremacy as its core principles nor is built on the basis of mutual competition, but rather takes unity and cooperation as its fundamental principle. Based on this concept, the party advocates integrating the spirit of cooperation into the vision of socialism.

2020年，群众力量党主席桑尼·梅伦西奥（Sonny Melencio）在题为《资本主义流行病和社会主义解决方案》的演讲中指出，社会主义社会是一个注重团结互助的社会。传统上，菲律宾将协作精神或社群团结称为“Bayanihan”，强调人与人之间的互助与团结，它是菲律宾部落社会时期人际关系的特征。鉴于此，群众力量党认为，在应对新冠疫情等重大危机时，注重团结协作的社会，既不会以市场机制和利润至上为核心原则，也不是建立在相互竞争的基础之上，而是以团结合作为根本原则。基于这一理念，该党主张将协作精神融入社会主义的构想之中。

Marx once pointed out: “Capitalist production collects the population in great centers, and causes the urban population to achieve an ever-growing preponderance. This has two results. On the one hand it concentrates the historical motive power of society; on the other hand, it disturbs the metabolic interaction between man and the earth, i.e. it prevents the return to the soil of its constituent elements consumed by man in the form of food and clothing; hence it hinders the operation of the eternal natural condition for the lasting fertility of the soil.” [11]11 Karl Marx, Capital, Volume 1, Chapter 15, Section 9. The translation follows the standard English edition. Based on a deep reflection on the relationship between man and nature, some Philippine leftist parties have stated that, at a time when the crisis of the capitalist system is deepening, a socialist alternative can only be built on an ecological foundation, repairing the ecology and protecting the environment in the process of production that meets human needs, so as to create conditions for the survival and development of future generations.

马克思曾指出：“资本主义生产使它汇集在各大中心的城市人口越来越占优势，这样一来，它一方面聚集着社会的历史动力，另一方面又破坏着人和土地之间的物质变换，也就是使人以衣食形式消费掉的土地的组成部分不能回归土地，从而破坏土地持久肥力的永恒的自然条件。”基于对人与自然关系的深度反思，菲律宾部分左翼政党表示，在资本主义制度危机不断加深的当下，社会主义的替代方案只有建立在生态基础之上，在满足人类需求的生产过程中修复生态并保护环境，才能为子孙后代的生存和发展创造条件。

(III) New Advances in the Practice of the Philippine Leftist Movement

（三）菲律宾左翼运动在实践上的新推进

Since the 21st century, the Philippine leftist movement has made new progress in the process of practical exploration. Leftist parties are committed to strengthening Party building and inter-party cooperation, laying a more solid foundation for promoting social change.

21世纪以来，菲律宾左翼运动在实践探索的过程中取得了新的进展。左翼政党致力于加强党的建设和党际合作，为推动社会变革奠定更加坚实的基础。

First, new measures in Party building work. Regarding the development and construction of the Party, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) held its Second Congress in 2016, reaffirming the Party’s basic nature and highest goals, emphasizing that the Party will long adhere to taking Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought as its guide to action and apply them to the concrete practice of the Philippine revolution. The Second Congress of the Party deeply summarized the experiences and lessons since the founding of the CPP, improved the “Program for People’s Democratic Revolution,” and reaffirmed the important significance of the socialist revolution. In addition, since the 21st century, the CPP has repeatedly emphasized strengthening Party building ideologically, politically, and organizationally, further promoting the development of the Philippine communist movement. The Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao pointed out that building a revolutionary party is not only a challenge for Marxists but also the central task of contemporary revolutionaries. Therefore, Party building must focus on the essence of global capitalism and its specific impacts in the economic, political, and ecological fields, formulating and implementing corresponding strategies to effectively promote the democratic process. Norberto Gonzales, chairman of the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (Social Democratic Party of the Philippines), emphasized at the “49th Anniversary of the Party’s Founding Conference” that the Party needs to continuously strengthen political and organizational construction, actively discuss social development issues with like-minded parties and organizations. At the same time, the Party also needs to cultivate a new generation of leadership, continuously striving to inherit and carry forward electoral politics and achieve the goal of democratic socialism. In August 2020, in a keynote speech titled “On the Current Political Situation: A Socialist Analysis,” Partido ng Manggagawa chairman Melencio pointed out that, as a revolutionary party, it must strengthen its ability to formulate strategies in order to effectively promote the development of class struggle. Therefore, only by continuously raising the revolutionary consciousness of the working class and Party members, enabling them to deeply understand the necessity of overthrowing capitalism, building socialism, and establishing a workers’ government, can the Party’s vitality and vigor be effectively guaranteed.

其一，党建工作的新举措。针对党的发展和建设问题，菲共于2016年召开党的第二次代表大会，重申了党的基本性质与最高目标，强调党将长期坚持把马列主义、毛泽东思想作为行动指南，并将其运用于菲律宾革命的具体实践中。党的二大深刻总结了菲共建党以来的经验教训，完善了《人民民主革命纲领》，重申了社会主义革命的重要意义。此外，21世纪以来，菲共多次强调从思想上、政治上和组织上加强党的建设，进一步推动菲律宾共产主义运动的发展。棉兰老革命工人党指出，建立一个革命性政党，不仅是作为马克思主义者的一项挑战，更是当代革命者的中心任务。因此，党的建设必须聚焦全球资本主义的本质及其在经济、政治和生态领域的具体影响，制定并实施相应策略，以有效推动民主进程。民社党主席诺贝托·冈萨雷斯（Norberto Gonzales）在“建党49周年大会”上强调，党需要不断加强政治和组织建设，积极与志同道合的政党和组织探讨社会发展问题。同时，党还需培育新一代领导班子，为传承和发扬选举政治、实现民主社会主义的目标而持续奋斗。2020年8月，群众力量党主席梅伦西奥在以《关于当前政治形势：社会主义的分析》为题进行主旨演讲时指出，作为一个革命性政党，必须加强拟定策略的能力，才能有效推动阶级斗争的发展。因此，不断提高工人阶级和党员群众的革命意识，使其深刻理解推翻资本主义、建设社会主义以及建立工人阶级政府的必要性，才能有效保障党的生机与活力。

Second, new progress in inter-party exchanges. Since the 21st century, the Philippine leftist movement has also made some new breakthroughs in inter-party cooperation. First, strengthening alliances with domestic parties and organizations within the electoral front. In the Philippine House of Representatives elections held in 2001, 2004, 2007, and 2010, the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas established an alliance with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and, under the leadership of the Arroyo coalition, formed a “majority” to run for election. Second, broadening exchanges among leftist parties. Since the 21st century, the CPP has established extensive inter-party relations with other leftist parties, such as the Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist), the Communist Party of Cuba, and the Communist Party of India (Maoist), actively participating in and organizing international anti-imperialist democratic struggles and carrying out political cooperation, striving to win rights and welfare for the oppressed people of the Philippines and other countries. Finally, deepening exchanges and connections with other international organizations. In December 2022, the International Communist League (ICL) was formally established; the CPP extended revolutionary greetings to 15 communist parties and organizations from 14 countries. After the death of CPP founder Jose Maria Sison, the International Communist League and many leftist parties around the world issued statements of mourning, fully affirming Sison’s revolutionary cause and contributions. As conflicts in northern Myanmar escalated and the Russia-Ukraine conflict became mired in a stalemate, the Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao issued a call for international solidarity to trade unions in Myanmar and Ukraine, calling on global workers and oppressed peoples to resolve conflicts through democratic and diplomatic means. In addition, in response to military attacks by the Turkish and Iranian governments against the Kurds, the Partido ng Manggagawa, together with non-governmental organizations such as the Socialist Alliance of Australia (SAA) and the Indonesian People’s Movement Union (KPRI), issued a statement calling for an end to the war through peaceful means.

其二，党际交往的新进展。21世纪以来，菲律宾左翼运动在党际合作方面也取得了一些新的突破。首先，加强同国内政党及组织在选举阵线中的联合。在2001年、2004年、2007年以及2010年举行的菲律宾众议院选举中，民社党与摩洛民族解放阵线（MNLF）建立了同盟关系，并在阿罗约联盟的带领下组成“多数派”参选。其次，拓宽左翼政党间的交往。21世纪以来，菲共通过与其他左翼政党，如西班牙共产党（马列主义）、古巴共产党、印度共产党（毛主义）等广泛建立党际关系，积极参加、组织国际反帝民主斗争并开展政治合作，力图为菲律宾及其他国家被压迫人民争取权益和福祉。最后，深化与其他国际组织的交流和联系。2022年12月，国际共产主义者同盟（ICL）正式成立，菲共向来自14个国家的15个共产党及组织致以革命的问候；在菲共创始人西松逝世后，国际共产主义者同盟以及世界多个左翼政党纷纷发文表示哀悼，对西松的革命事业及其所作贡献给予充分肯定。在缅北冲突不断升温、俄乌冲突陷入鏖战之时，棉兰老革命工人党向缅甸和乌克兰的工会组织发出国际团结的呼吁，号召全球工人和被压迫人民以民主和外交方式解决冲突。此外，针对土耳其和伊朗政府对库尔德人发动的军事袭击，群众力量党联合澳大利亚社会主义联盟（SAA）、印度尼西亚人民运动联合会（KPRI）等非政府组织发表声明，呼吁通过和平手段来结束战争。

III. New Characteristics of the Philippine Leftist Movement in the 21st Century

三、21世纪菲律宾左翼运动的新特征

Compared with the 20th century, the Philippine leftist movement in the 21st century has made new progress in theoretical innovation and practical exploration, while also presenting new characteristics such as leftist political fragmentation, flexible struggle strategies, and diversified strategic objectives.

相较于20世纪，21世纪的菲律宾左翼运动在理论创新和实践探索中取得新进展，同时呈现出左翼政治碎片化、斗争策略弹性化以及战略目标多元化等新特征。

(I) Leftist Political Fragmentation: Dual Factors Make It Difficult to Integrate Leftist Forces

（一）左翼政治碎片化：双重因素导致左翼力量难以整合

After the major split of the Philippine left in the mid-to-late 20th century, the country’s leftist movement, while developing in a diversified direction, did not show an obvious trend of fragmentation. Entering the 21st century, the divergences in ideology and strategic lines among Philippine leftist parties and organizations have continued to widen. Coupled with the dominant position of family political forces in the Philippine party political ecosystem, the leftist political and party system has gradually shown an obvious tendency toward fragmentation.

20世纪中后期菲律宾左翼大分裂后，该国左翼运动在朝多样化方向发展的同时，并未表现出明显的碎片化趋势。进入21世纪以来，菲律宾左翼政党及组织在意识形态和战略路线上的分歧持续扩大，加之家族政治势力在菲律宾政党政治生态中占据主导地位，左翼政治和政党体系逐渐呈现出明显的碎片化倾向。

On the one hand, the differentiation and opposition of leftist forces have exacerbated the fragmentation trend of the leftist movement. In the 20th century, because the differences between the “Reaffirmist” and “Rejectionist” factions within the CPP could never be resolved, the Party ultimately split. [12]12 The “Reaffirmist” (Reaffirm) and “Rejectionist” (Reject) factions emerged from a major split in the Communist Party of the Philippines in the 1990s over strategic orientation, with the former adhering to the original Maoist line of protracted people’s war and the latter advocating for a shift toward legal and parliamentary struggle. Thereafter, the CPP, relying on the military threat of its armed force—the New People’s Army (NPA)—infused sectarian ideology into the “Rejectionists” and young cadres, further intensifying ideological opposition within the Party, making the integration of the two factions extremely difficult. As the “Rejectionists” successively split into multiple forces and became independent political forces in the Philippine political ecosystem, the Philippine leftist politics in the 21st century gradually presented a trend of fragmentation. In order to compete for leftist discourse, multiple factions of the “Rejectionists” attempted to integrate leftist forces in 2005, establishing a pan-left alliance—Laban ng Masa (Struggle of the Masses)—including the Progressive Party of the Philippines (SanLakas), the Workers’ Party of the Philippines, and the Akbayan Citizens’ Action Party. However, because the parties could not reach agreement on issues such as ideology, electoral strategy, and interest distribution, the alliance failed to fully exert the effect of force integration in actual operation; when facing practical issues such as the Moro national self-determination struggle, the soldiers’ mutiny movement, and the grassroots construction of leftist alliances, the differences of opinion within the alliance were difficult to bridge. Therefore, under the circumstances where the CPP was marginalized and some opposition parties in the alliance went their separate ways, leftist parties and organizations were never able to form a united and unified camp.

一方面，左翼力量的分化和对立加剧了左翼运动的碎片化趋势。在20世纪，由于菲共党内“重申派”与“拒绝派”分歧始终无法消弭，该党最终走向分裂。此后，菲共凭借武装力量——新人民军（NPA）的武力威胁，对“拒绝派”及年轻干部灌输宗派主义思想，进一步加剧了党内意识形态对立，以致两派整合异常艰难。随着“拒绝派”陆续分裂为多股势力并成为菲律宾政治生态中的独立政治力量，21世纪菲律宾左翼政治逐渐呈现出碎片化的发展态势。为了争取左翼话语权，“拒绝派”的多个派系曾于2005年尝试整合左翼力量，成立了一个包括菲律宾进步党（SanLakas）、菲律宾工人党、并肩公民行动党（Akbayan）等在内的泛左联盟——群众斗争（Laban ng Masa）。然而，由于各党在意识形态、选举策略和利益分配等问题上难以达成一致，联盟在实际运作中未能充分发挥力量整合效应；在面对摩洛民族自决斗争、士兵造反运动、左翼联盟的基层建设等现实问题时，联盟内部的意见分歧难以弥合。因此，在菲共被边缘化、联盟中部分在野党分道扬镳的境况下，左翼政党及组织始终无法形成团结统一的阵营。

On the other hand, family political forces have severely obstructed the integration of leftist forces. There are over 170 entrenched clan families in the Philippines, each dominating their respective territories for generations, controlling more than 70 of the country’s 81 provinces and two-thirds of the seats in Congress. Throughout the general elections since the Philippines’ democratization process, district representatives from political families have consistently accounted for over 60% of the seats in the House of Representatives. This indicates that the outcome of the Philippines’ “democratic elections” has always been determined by political families, with family forces manipulating the country’s political power structure. Against this backdrop, fragmented leftist parties and organizations often choose to join centrist blocs or ally with other political forces to participate in elections, which not only exacerbates contradictions and antagonism among the left but also further increases the difficulty of integrating leftist forces.

另一方面，家族政治势力严重阻碍了左翼力量整合。菲律宾国内存在170多个割据一方的门阀家族，门阀们在各自的地盘上世代经营，控制着全国81个省中的70多个省和2/3的国会议员席位。纵观菲律宾民主化进程以来的历届大选，在国会众议院的选区众议员中，来自政治家族的选区众议员均超过60%。这表明，菲律宾“民主选举”结果始终由政治家族决定，家族势力操控了该国的政治权力格局。在此背景下，分崩离析的左翼政党和组织通常选择加入中间派或联合其他政治势力共同参选，这不仅加剧了左翼之间的矛盾和对立，也进一步加大了左翼力量的整合难度。

(II) Elasticization of Struggle Tactics: The Shift from a “Single Strategy” to a “Dual Strategy”

（二）斗争策略弹性化：从“单一策略”到“双重策略”的转变

In the 20th century, the Philippine left focused on armed struggle as a key means of overthrowing the bourgeois government and achieving socialism. Especially after José María Sison and others established the new Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), the Party’s emphasis on armed struggle further intensified, even elevating it to a strategic core position. After the great split of the left, various leftist parties recognized that the struggle against the bourgeoisie would be a long and difficult process. Since the 21st century, in the face of profound changes in the domestic and international situation, Philippine leftist parties have begun to explore a socialist path suited to national conditions, flexibly adjusting their struggle tactics and methods, achieving a “dual-track” approach of armed struggle and legal political participation.

在20世纪，菲律宾左翼侧重于将武装斗争作为推翻资产阶级政府、实现社会主义的重要方式，尤其是在西松等人成立新的菲共后，党对武装斗争的重视程度进一步提升，甚至将其推至战略核心位置。左翼大分裂后，各左翼政党认识到，与资产阶级间的斗争将是一个长期且艰难的过程。21世纪以来，面对国内外形势的深刻变化，菲律宾左翼政党开始探寻符合国情的社会主义道路，弹性调整斗争策略和方式，实现了武装斗争与合法政治参与“双轨并行”。

First, although the CPP claims to persist in armed struggle over the long term, it has also expressed a willingness to seek opportunities to restart “peace negotiations” with the government with an open attitude. Under the influence of the concept of “fighting while negotiating,” the government of Rodrigo Duterte conducted four rounds of peace talks with the CPP’s united front organization, the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP). Under the premise of basically maintaining a ceasefire, the two sides reached a series of agreements, such as reaffirming the *Joint Hague Declaration*, recompiling the *Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees*, and drafting the *Comprehensive Agreement on Social and Economic Reforms*. The peace talks reflect the CPP’s ability to adapt to changes of the times and meet the diverse needs of the people, indicating that the Party, while safeguarding established socialist achievements, has begun to explore a socialist path that meets the requirements of the times and the demands of the people, providing new ideas and methods for promoting the in-depth development of the Philippine leftist movement and comprehensive social progress. Second, the Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao (RPM-M), while not abandoning armed struggle, also conducted three rounds of peace talks with the government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, signing documents such as the *Local Consultation Rules*, the *Cessation of Hostilities Agreement*, and the *Joint Resolution on Further Advancing the Peace Process*. Thus, in the 21st century, while adhering to armed struggle, the RPM-M has also attempted to sign peace agreements with the government through the relatively “moderate” strategy of peace talks. This move is conducive to maintaining regional security and stability, creating conditions for local community development and reconstruction. The adjustment of struggle tactics not only reflects the flexibility and pragmatism of the RPM-M’s theory and practice but also demonstrates the Party’s concern for people’s livelihood and well-being. Finally, although the Philippine Social Democratic Party (SDP) insists on a “realpolitik” orientation, pursuing socialism that serves electoral politics, based on practical needs, various parties have also made corresponding flexible adjustments in their struggle tactics. Taking the SDP as an example, the Party initially became active in Philippine politics by jointly participating in elections with the bourgeois government. However, since the 21st century, the SDP has strived to unite with like-minded groups, organizations, and patriotic masses to jointly formulate strategies and policies promoting national economic, political, and cultural development, pushing Philippine state and society towards democracy and fairness. This approach preserves the SDP’s reformist ideas, satisfies the interests of its members, and caters to the practical needs of local people, facilitating greater voter support.

首先，菲共虽然声称长期坚持武装斗争，但也表示愿意以开放的态度寻求与政府重启“和平谈判”的机会。在“边打边谈”的理念作用下，杜特尔特（Rodrigo Duterte）政府与菲共的统一战线组织——全国民主阵线（NDFP）进行了四轮和谈，双方在基本保持停火的前提下达成了一系列协议，例如：重申《海牙联合声明》、重新编制《安全和豁免保障联合协定》、拟定《社会经济全面改革协议》草案等，和谈体现了菲共适应时代变化和满足人民群众多元化需求的能力，表明该党在维护社会主义既定成果的基础上，开始探索一条符合时代要求、满足人民诉求的社会主义道路，为推动菲律宾左翼运动的深入发展和社会全面进步提供了新的思路和方法。其次，棉兰老革命工人党在不放弃武装斗争的同时，也同阿罗约政府进行了三轮和谈，双方签署了《地方磋商规则》《停止敌对协议》以及《进一步推进和平进程的联合决议》等文件。由此可见，在21世纪，棉兰老革命工人党在坚持武装斗争的同时，也尝试通过和谈这一相对“温和”的策略与政府签署和平协议。此举有利于维护地区的安全与稳定，为当地社区的发展和重建创造条件。斗争策略的调整不仅体现了棉兰老革命工人党理论与实践的灵活性和务实性，也表现出党对民生福祉的关切。最后，菲律宾社会民主党虽然坚持以“现实政策”为导向，追求服务于选举政治的社会主义，但基于现实需要，各党在斗争策略上也进行了相应的弹性化调整。以民社党为例，该党起初通过与资产阶级政府联合参选的方式活跃于菲律宾政坛，但进入21世纪以来，民社党努力与广大志同道合的团体、组织和具有爱国主义精神的群众团结一致，共同制定促进国家经济、政治和文化发展的战略和政策，推动菲律宾国家和社会迈向民主与公平。这种方式既保留了民社党的革新理念，满足了党内成员的利益诉求，又迎合了当地民众的现实需要，有利于争取更多的选民支持。

(III) Diversification of Strategic Goals: Shifting from Political Movements towards Broader Social Movements

（三）战略目标多元化：从政治性运动向更广泛的社会运动方向发展

After the Cold War, the Philippine left gradually grew into a political force that could not be ignored. In this context, the 20th-century Philippine leftist movement focused on class struggle and land reform. Entering the 21st century, as new social contradictions became increasingly prominent, the Philippine leftist movement tended to develop towards broader social movements. After the outbreak of the 2008 international financial crisis, the social breadth of the Philippine leftist movement became more evident, successively setting labor rights, employment security, narrowing the gap between rich and poor, achieving gender equality, protecting the ecological environment, ensuring medical and health services, and strengthening infrastructure construction as the main goals of the movement.

冷战后，菲律宾左翼逐渐成长为一支不可忽视的政治力量。在此背景下，20世纪的菲律宾左翼运动侧重于阶级斗争和土地改革。进入21世纪，随着新的社会矛盾日益凸显，菲律宾左翼运动趋于向更广泛的社会运动方向发展。2008年国际金融危机爆发后，菲律宾左翼运动的社会广泛性体现得更为明显，陆续将劳工权益、就业保障、缩小贫富差距、实现两性平等、保护生态环境、保障医疗卫生服务以及加强基础设施建设等设为运动的主要目标。

The CPP emphasizes uniting all progressive forces in the new era, expanding the Party’s mass base through implementing land reform and establishing youth mass organizations. It also proposes building a broader mass alliance to better carry out large-scale mass movements in rural and urban areas, thereby achieving phased goals such as eliminating usury, reducing land rent, raising workers’ wages, and increasing sideline income. The RPM-M calls for cultivating more proletarian intellectuals with class consciousness to advance social movements for women’s liberation, ecological protection, and children’s rights, serving as supplementary struggles to the socialist movement. Furthermore, the Party supports and extensively mobilizes workers, peasants, and grassroots masses to develop self-help organizations such as cooperatives, thereby jointly promoting community construction and development. This indicates that the 21st-century Philippine leftist movement not only aims to improve the material living conditions of the broad worker and peasant masses but is also committed to enhancing people’s identification with and support for socialist ideology at the spiritual level, thereby providing strong support for broadly凝聚 social consensus, promoting Philippine social progress, and realizing the comprehensive development of the people.

菲共强调在新时期团结一切进步力量，通过实施土地改革和建立青年群众组织等方式来扩大党的群众基础，还提出要建立一个更广泛的群众联盟，以更好地在农村和城市开展大规模群众运动，进而实现消灭高利贷、减少地租、提高工人工资和增加副业收入的阶段性目标。棉兰老革命工人党呼吁培养更多具有阶级意识的无产阶级知识分子，以推进争取妇女解放、保护生态环境和保障儿童权益的社会运动，以此作为社会主义运动的补充斗争。此外，该党还支持并广泛动员工人、农民和基层群众发展合作社等自助组织，进而共同推动社区建设和发展。由此表明，21世纪的菲律宾左翼运动不仅仅是以改善广大工农群体的物质生活条件为目标，更致力于从精神层面上增强人们对社会主义理念的认同和支持，进而为广泛凝聚社会共识、推动菲律宾社会进步和实现人民的全面发展提供有力的支持。

The Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM) mainly focuses on issues such as labor rights, gender equality, and environmental protection, striving to build a leftist alliance among leftist parties, labor organizations, and progressive groups, serving the working people, environmentalists, women, community residents, and other marginalized groups. Since the 21st century, the Party has extensively carried out propaganda and education activities to help the public enhance democratic awareness, while using modern technology and social media to establish propaganda networks among workers and youth groups. Additionally, by uniting leftist splinter forces as much as possible and strengthening cooperation with regional and international progressive organizations, the PLM strives to expand its own influence while seeking to play a role at the legislative and decision-making levels, thereby better promoting national development and social change.

群众力量党主要关注劳工权利、性别平等和环境保护等议题，致力于在左翼政党、劳工组织及进步团体之间构建左翼联盟，使其服务于劳动人民、环保主义者、妇女、社区居民和其他边缘化群体。21世纪以来，该党广泛开展宣传教育活动，帮助公众增强民主意识，同时利用现代科技和社交媒体在工人和青年群体中建立宣传网络。此外，群众力量党通过尽可能地团结左翼分裂势力并加强与地区和国际进步组织的合作，在努力扩大自身影响力的同时，力争能够在立法和决策层面上发挥作用，从而更好地推动国家发展和社会变革。

IV. Prospects for the 21st Century Philippine Leftist Movement

四、21世纪菲律宾左翼运动的前景展望

Looking ahead, the future development of the Philippine leftist movement will largely depend on whether the country’s leftist parties can demonstrate stronger adaptability and creativity in the face of challenges. Due to differing ideologies and political stances among the parties, the overall political influence of leftist forces remains limited, and the development trend of the Philippine leftist movement is not optimistic.

展望未来，菲律宾左翼运动如何发展将在很大程度上取决于该国左翼政党在面对挑战时能否展现出更强的适应力和创造力。由于各党意识形态及政治立场不尽相同，左翼力量的政治影响力整体上仍然有限，菲律宾左翼运动的发展态势并不乐观。

(I) The Development of the Communist Party Faces Challenges Influenced by Various Factors

（一）共产党的发展受各种因素影响充满挑战

From its inception, the communist party in the Philippines has been committed to safeguarding the fundamental interests of the broad working people and the worker-peasant masses, taking the realization of communism as its political goal. However, influenced by subjective factors and external forces, the Philippine communist party faces considerable challenges in exploring a socialist development path with Philippine characteristics.

菲律宾的共产主义政党在成立伊始就致力于维护广大劳动人民和工农群众的根本利益，将实现共产主义作为政治目标。然而，受主观因素和外部势力的影响，菲律宾共产主义政党在探索具有菲律宾特色的社会主义发展道路上面临着不小的挑战。

First, the development of the CPP faces internal pressures and external challenges. As of the end of 2021, the CPP had approximately 150,000 members and a mass base of several million, a new breakthrough compared to its 100,000 members in 2019. However, in its long-term confrontation with the Philippine government, the CPP and the New People’s Army have repeatedly been designated as illegal organizations, and must simultaneously confront enormous pressure from both the domestic government and external powers. Under the influence of subjectivism, certain erroneous tendencies have gradually emerged within the CPP. For example, when establishing struggle guidelines, the Party’s high-level leadership relied excessively on abstract theoretical frameworks, neglecting in-depth analysis of domestic political, economic, and social dynamics, leading to decisions that deviated from reality. Furthermore, intra-Party splits caused by factionalism have weakened the Party’s organizational cohesion and combat effectiveness. Some leaders, when faced with dissenting voices within the Party, adopted methods of excluding different opinions to restrict intra-Party democracy, resulting in lagging theoretical innovation and strategic adjustment, thereby weakening the Party’s ability to respond to complex situations. These erroneous tendencies have, to a certain extent, undermined the CPP’s leading role in promoting social change and pose obstacles to its long-term stability and development. Now, with the successive deaths of the Party’s founder José María Sison, core leader Benito Tiamzon, and Secretary Wilma Tiamzon, a huge vacuum has emerged in the CPP’s leadership. If the CPP cannot promptly formulate a new development strategy, under multiple external challenges such as suppression by the bourgeois government, intervention by the United States and other external forces, and a lack of international support, the situation of internal strife and external threat will not only weaken the CPP’s political influence and social mobilization capacity but will also severely constrain the future development of the Philippine leftist movement.

首先，菲共的发展面临内部压力和外部挑战。截至2021年年底，菲共约有15万名党员及数百万群众基础，相较于2019年的10万名党员数量又有了新的突破。然而，在长期与菲律宾政府的对抗中，菲共及新人民军屡次被认定为非法组织，需要同时面对来自国内政府及外部强权的巨大压力。受主观主义影响，菲共内部陆续暴露出一些错误倾向。比如，党内高层在确立斗争方针时过于依赖抽象的理论框架，忽视了对国内政治、经济和社会动态的深入分析，导致决策偏离实际。此外，由宗派主义引发的党内分裂削弱了党组织的凝聚力和战斗力，部分领导人在面对党内不同声音时采取排除异见的方式限制党内民主，导致党在理论创新和战略调整方面出现滞后，进而削弱了党对复杂局势的应变能力。这些错误倾向在一定程度上削弱了菲共在推动社会变革中的领导作用，并对其长期稳定与发展构成了障碍。如今，随着党的创始人西松、核心领导人贝尼托·蒂亚姆松（Benito Tiamzon）及秘书长威尔玛·蒂亚姆松（Wilma Tiamzon）相继辞世，菲共领导层出现了巨大的真空。菲共若无法及时制定新的发展战略，在资产阶级政府的镇压、美国及其他外部势力的干预以及国际支持缺乏等多重外部挑战下，内忧外患的局面不仅将削弱菲共的政治影响力和社会动员能力，更将严重制约菲律宾左翼运动的未来发展。

Second, the development of the Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao is affected by regional factors, which to a certain extent hinders the development of the Philippine leftist movement and the formation of a leftist alliance. The Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao, which split from the CPP, is rooted in the rural proletariat and peasantry and mainly operates in rural areas in the southern Philippines. It must both coordinate land conflicts between the Lumad people and the Moro people on Mindanao, consolidating the gains of the Moro and other ethnic minorities’ struggles for national self-determination, and be constantly prepared to lead armed forces into armed conflict with the government. Although the Party actively engages with domestic and foreign revolutionary parties and organizations, striving to build a broader united front and to launch a socialist revolution in the Philippines, the increasingly severe fragmentation of leftist organizations and groups not only hinders the formation of a leftist alliance but also weakens the overall strength of the Revolutionary Workers’ Party of Mindanao and Philippine leftist parties.

其次，棉兰老革命工人党的发展受地区因素影响，在一定程度上阻碍了菲律宾左翼运动的发展和左翼联盟的形成。从菲共中分裂出来的棉兰老革命工人党，根植于农村无产阶级和农民，主要在菲律宾南部的农村地区活动，既要负责协调卢马德人同棉兰老岛上摩洛人之间的土地冲突，巩固摩洛等少数民族争取民族自决的斗争成果，又要时刻做好带领武装部队同政府爆发武装冲突的准备。尽管该党积极同国内外革命政党和组织接触，致力于建立更广泛的统一战线，争取在菲律宾发动社会主义革命，但左翼组织及团体日趋严重的碎片化倾向不仅阻碍了左翼联盟的形成，也削弱了棉兰老革命工人党和菲律宾左翼政党的整体力量。

(2) The Development of the Social Democratic Party Faces Great Difficulties

（二）社会民主党的发展举步维艰

In promoting the development of the Philippine leftist movement, the Social Democratic Party of the Philippines hopes to combine Philippine historical traditions with contemporary actual conditions, taking a middle path that promotes democracy between socialism and capitalism. However, due to constraints from various factors, its development faces great difficulties.

菲律宾社会民主党在推动发展菲律宾左翼运动的过程中，希望把菲律宾历史传统和当代实际情况结合起来，在社会主义和资本主义之间走一条发扬民主的中间道路，但因各种因素的制约其发展举步维艰。

First, the Social Democratic Party lacks internal cohesion and faces a series of strategic difficulties. Party chair Gonzales has publicly stated that during the period of opposing the Marcos dictatorship, the Party strictly carried out Party member education, emphasizing ideology and guiding thought. After the democratization process began, the Party was embroiled in debates over whether to remain a cadre party or transform into a mass party or an electoral party. After the Party’s transformation, many cadres applied to withdraw from the Party. This shows that the Social Democratic Party failed to effectively adjust its internal structure and strategic direction, leading to problems such as ideological divergence, difficulties in organizational transformation, and cadre attrition. In the future, under the dual pressures of economic globalization and capital expansion, the Philippines faces real dilemmas such as a widening gap between rich and poor, social injustice, and environmental degradation. As a party committed to achieving democratic socialism, whether the Social Democratic Party can propose practical and feasible plans adapted to the contemporary economic and political environment and gain broad support in society remains an urgent problem to be solved. Furthermore, in an increasingly complex political environment, how to secure a place in parliamentary elections and the democratization process, and thereby formulate practical strategies to promote social change, is also a major challenge facing the Party.

首先，民社党内部缺乏凝聚力，面临一系列战略性难题。民社党主席冈萨雷斯曾公开表示，在反马科斯独裁政权时期，民社党严格开展党员教育，强调意识形态和指导思想；民主化进程开启后，党内围绕“保持干部党还是转为群众党、选举党”的问题争论不休，而在党转型后，众多干部纷纷申请退党。由此表明，民社党未能有效调整其内部结构与战略方向，导致党内出现了意识形态分歧、组织转型困难以及干部流失等问题。未来，在经济全球化和资本扩张的双重压力下，菲律宾面临贫富差距加大、社会不公、环境退化等现实困境。作为一个致力于实现民主社会主义的政党，民社党能否提出适应当代经济与政治环境的切实可行方案，并在社会中获得广泛支持，依然是其亟待解决的问题。此外，在日益复杂的政治环境中，如何在议会选举和民主化进程中占据一席之地，进而制定切实可行的策略以推动社会变革，亦是该党面临的重要挑战。

Second, as a representative of emerging leftist forces, the People’s Force Party (Bayan Muna) will continue to promote the development of the Philippine leftist movement, but with great difficulties. In recent years, the People’s Force Party has focused on uniting leftist progressive forces to explore socialist alternatives suited to Philippine national conditions, actively participating in general elections together with other leftist parties and organizations to advance the leftist movement. However, as an emerging leftist party, the People’s Force Party has failed to propose feasible action plans and programs on how to empower the masses and lead them in creating a more just and equitable social system. Its Party constitution and platform need to be continuously improved in the process of adapting to the Philippine political ecosystem. Moreover, as can be seen from the 2022 election data, support for the Philippine left remains dismal. Therefore, for the People’s Force Party, which takes electoral politics as its main form of struggle, achieving democratic socialism through promoting socioeconomic reform will remain a long and difficult process.

其次，群众力量党将作为新兴左翼势力的代表继续推动菲律宾左翼运动的发展，但困难重重。近年来，群众力量党注重联合左翼进步势力探索符合菲律宾国情的社会主义替代方案，积极同其他左翼政党及组织一同参加大选，以推动左翼运动的发展。然而，作为新兴左翼政党，群众力量党在如何赋予群众权利、带动群众创造更加公平正义的社会制度等方面未能提出可行的行动计划和方案，党的章程和纲领需要在不断适应菲律宾政治生态的过程中加以完善。此外，从2022年大选数据中可以看出，菲律宾左翼支持率依旧惨淡。因此，将选举政治作为主要斗争方式的群众力量党，要通过推动社会经济改革来实现民主社会主义仍将是一个长期且艰难的过程。

Since its rise, the Philippine leftist movement has undergone a historical process of early development, splits, and diversified development, advancing tortuously through difficult exploration. Philippine leftist parties are rooted in their social environment and, under the influence of their respective theoretical positions, have gradually formed a diversified development trend. However, constrained by differences in ideology and political stance, the various Philippine leftist parties have never been able to form a united front of sincere solidarity, and thus find it difficult to shake the position of family dynasties in Philippine party politics. Only by putting leftist unity on the agenda as soon as possible can an important step toward the transition to socialism be taken. As Philippine socialist Herbert Docena stated, only by “building a broad, united, and democratic mass movement” can we “overthrow the dictatorship and confront other elites eager to retake power.” Considering the general trend of continuous adjustment and accumulating development of Philippine leftist parties in the 21st century, the leftist movement may encounter new opportunities in the process of deepening its advance. Looking ahead, what theoretical innovations and practical explorations Philippine leftist parties will undertake, whether the country’s leftist movement can demonstrate greater adaptability and creativity in the face of challenges, and whether its development can push the Philippines toward a more just, democratic, and sustainable path, all await further research and observation.

菲律宾左翼运动自兴起以来经历了早期发展、分裂与多样性发展的历史进程，在艰难探索中曲折前进。菲律宾左翼政党根植于所处的社会环境，并在各自的理论主张作用下，逐渐形成了多样发展态势。然而，囿于意识形态和政治立场的差异性，菲律宾各左翼政党始终无法形成一个精诚团结的统一阵营，因而难以撼动家族势力在菲律宾政党政治中的地位，唯有尽早将左翼团结提上日程，才能迈出向社会主义过渡的重要一步。正如菲律宾社会主义者赫尔伯特·多塞纳（Herbert Docena）所言，只有通过“建立一支广泛的、团结的和民主的群众运动”，才能“推翻专制并对抗其他急于重掌政权的精英”。考虑到21世纪菲律宾左翼政党不断调整和蓄力发展的大趋势，左翼运动可能在深入推进的过程中迎来新的契机。展望未来，菲律宾左翼政党将进行怎样的理论创新和实践探索，该国左翼运动在面对挑战时能否展现出更强的适应力和创造力，其发展能否推动菲律宾走向更加公平、民主和可持续发展的道路，有待进一步研究和观察。

Online Editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑