So i skimmed Parlade's graduate thesis and here are some interesting things i found...

He recognizes that the duty-free trade agreements the US imposed on the Philippines extended the colonization of our country. He explicitly called it neocolonization.

He recognizes that the core of the insurgency is the problem of land tenure created by the US and maintained by the subsequent failed land reforms.

He recognizes the claims of economic growth under Marcos was volatile and relied heavily on the US. This will be proven when inflation rampaged the economy under Martial Law.

He subscribes to the fantasy that Magsaysay was the great Filipino leader. If he hadn't died prematurely he could have pushed the Philippines towards progress(capitalism post-land reform).

He's adept at the history of the PKP-1930. He knows his history. The Taruc-Lava splits. The idiocy of the revisionist leaders etc.

He's no Marcos loyalist, Marcos used Martial Law to fatten his cronies and he acknowledges the excesses and abuses of the Military and Police at the time.

This led to the resurgence of the insurgency under the fresh leadership of young Maoists like Sison. Which connected the urban worker movement to the peasant movement.

My point is not that there is anything progressive about Parlade. In today's Ph when we associate fascism with Duterte, he reminds us that it predates Duterte by decades. His is a fascism generated by the liberal establishment (Magsaysay, Aquinos, Arroyo) of post war Ph.

Considering his current actions and his newfound prominence in the anti-communist Task Force, one can say that he lives in a fantasy world where he found his Magsaysay in Duterte.

Kay Parlade ko rin pala natutunan, communists assassinated the wife of Manuel Quezon, Señora Aurora Quezon, and their daughter. Tanga tanga mo talaga Taruc kahit kelan.