Rambol at the market

By Noel Galon de Leon

The incident that took place outside the Iloilo Central Market at around 4:30 in the afternoon was more than just a street fight between vendors. According to Josefino Barroca, the conflict started when one bolantero insisted on taking a specific vending spot while another refused to give way. What followed was a confrontation that escalated into a physical clash, eventually involving other vendors from both the Iloilo Terminal Market, also known as Super, and those already stationed at the Central Market.

At first glance, the event appeared to be a simple case of misunderstanding and aggression. However, when examined through the lens of conflict theory, the situation revealed a deeper structural issue. The theory, developed by Karl Marx, argues that society is constantly shaped by tensions between groups competing for limited resources.

In this case, the resource in question was space. The vending spots outside the market were not just physical locations. They represented access to customers, income, and, ultimately, survival. For the bolanteros, securing a good position meant the difference between earning enough for the day and going home with little to nothing.

The involvement of vendors from Iloilo Terminal Market added another layer to the conflict. These vendors were scheduled under the city government’s market day system, which rotates vendors across different markets. While the intention of this policy is to distribute opportunity, it unintentionally increases competition in already crowded spaces like the Central Market.

As I reflect on this, it becomes clear that the fight was not simply about personal pride. It was about livelihood. Each vendor was defending their right to earn. The refusal to give up a spot was not stubbornness. It was a rational response to economic pressure.

Conflict theory helps explain why such tensions are inevitable. When resources are scarce and demand is high, individuals are pushed into competition. In this environment, cooperation becomes difficult, and conflict becomes a natural outcome.

What is striking is how the system places vendors in opposition to one another. Instead of fostering unity among people in similar economic situations, the lack of structured space and clear regulation forces them into rivalry. Vendors from Super and Central Market, who share similar struggles, end up as adversaries.

The proposal by Barroca to implement a numbering system for vendors is an attempt to restore order. While this may reduce immediate conflict, it does not address the root cause of the problem. The core issue remains the insufficient space for the growing number of vendors.

Barroca also noted that the number of bolanteros continues to increase weekly. This detail is important. It suggests that more people are entering the informal economy, likely because of limited formal employment opportunities. The market becomes a fallback option for survival.

From a broader perspective, this reflects inequality within urban development. While cities modernize and infrastructure improves, not everyone benefits equally. Informal workers are often excluded from formal planning processes, leaving them to compete for whatever space is available.

The suggestion to close Aldeguer Street to accommodate more vendors further highlights the severity of the situation. It shows that existing market spaces are no longer sufficient. Urban space itself becomes a contested resource.

What I find most compelling is how this incident challenges the idea that development automatically leads to order and progress. Despite organized scheduling and government intervention, conflict still arises. This suggests that development without inclusivity can intensify existing inequalities.

The role of law enforcement in bringing the involved vendors to Iloilo City Police Station 1 was necessary for immediate resolution. However, it only addressed the symptoms of the conflict. The underlying economic tension remains unresolved.

Another important aspect is how easily the public might judge the vendors. It is tempting to label them as unruly or undisciplined. However, such judgments ignore the structural conditions that shape their behavior.

Through the lens of conflict theory, the vendors are not simply troublemakers. They are individuals navigating a system that offers limited opportunities. Their actions, while aggressive, are rooted in necessity.

The division between vendors from different markets also reflects how scarcity creates boundaries. Even within the same socioeconomic class, competition can lead to fragmentation. This weakens collective action and reinforces the cycle of conflict.

As I think more about it, I realize that the market is a microcosm of society. The struggles seen in this small space mirror larger issues of inequality, access, and power.

The idea that conflict is abnormal is challenged by this perspective. In fact, conflict becomes expected in situations where resources are unevenly distributed. The rambol is not an exception. It is a pattern.

What makes this situation particularly significant is its visibility. Unlike hidden forms of inequality, this conflict is public and immediate. It forces observers to confront the realities faced by informal workers.

The increasing number of vendors also points to systemic economic issues. If more people are turning to vending, it indicates gaps in employment and social support systems.

In this light, the market day system, while well-intentioned, may need to be reevaluated. Without sufficient infrastructure, redistributing vendors may simply relocate the problem rather than solve it.

I also find it important to consider the emotional dimension of the conflict. Stress, uncertainty, and financial pressure can heighten tensions and make confrontation more likely.

The incident is not just about space. It is about dignity and the right to earn a living. Being forced out of a spot can feel like being denied that right.

The lesson I take from this is that solutions must go beyond surface-level regulation. Addressing inequality requires structural changes that provide fair access to resources.

Conflict theory offers a powerful framework for understanding this. It shifts the focus from individual behavior to systemic conditions.

The rambol outside Iloilo Central Market is not merely a case of disorder. It is a reflection of deeper social and economic inequalities. As Karl Marx suggested, conflict arises where there is imbalance. Until that imbalance is addressed, similar incidents will continue to occur.

This realization challenges me to look beyond immediate events and consider the broader systems at play. Only then can more meaningful and lasting solutions be imagined.

***

Noel Galon de Leon is a writer and professor at the University of the Philippines Visayas, where he teaches in the Division of Professional Education and at UP High School in Iloilo. He is also the secretary of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts-National Committee on Literary Arts.