Critique

"A Country of Our Own" - Recommended book daw, as reviewed and advertised in a pinoy egroup.

_________________________________

.
I've already heard of U.S.-based David Martinez' book but have yet to acquire a copy. Thanks to one Gail Ilagan's review, though, for providing us a glimpse of Martinez' thoughts. Assuming Ilagan's interpretation of Martinez' intents is correct, and should these two writers find significant number of adherents on top of today's "federalistas" enough to make a movement that'll move the nation, then maybe one day we'll wake up having lost our pride about our 7,100 islands, replaced instead of having 7,100 countries more or less, at any given high tide-low tide interval in this part of the world.

.
Though I believe that the terms "filipino" and "Philippines", as we respectively call ourselves and country today, are huge misnomers with profound colonial and psychological implications to the collective and individual Filipino -- as the adoption of the terms could be attributed to the unforgivable mistake of our national heroes (Rizal, Aguinaldo, et.al.), and as our leaders across generations (save for some nationalists) "overlook" the anomaly to this day -- our pursuit of nation-building, however, has to continue toward its full realization... or we just altogether forget it. I surmise that after more than a hundred years since the Declaration of Independence, we're still at the infantile stage of nation-building as evidenced by Martinez' book and Ilagan's article.

.

I'm one with both writers' case regarding our "fabricated state" and "contrived national community". Why in God's name we are taxed to pet these "fabricated and contrived animals" is not entirely our generation's fault. Why "those Tagalogs marching at Mendiola and Ayala not asking Ilagan, et.al. what they want at this time” could partly be explained by road maps and the geography of Malacanang. And history could do the rest of the explaining, perhaps fully.

.

Anthony D. Smith, in his "Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era" explains that "territorial nations (like the Philippines) that emerged from former colonies were created in the way of the 'dominant ethnie' model, in which the culture of the new state’s core ethnic community became the main pillar of the new national political identity and community".

.

Based on the foregoing, I submit, this nation-state called "Philippines" is built upon the bias of, and to a certain degree, for, the (dominant) core ethnic group, Tagalog. But so are some other countries, like Indonesia and Malaysia, whose nation-building ways follow the "dominant-ethnie model". (Why at this juncture Spain comes to mind, with the Basques still pursuing their nationalist-separatist struggle against the dominant Spaniards. hmmm).

.

In our case, the malaise is that, what for generations we thought were "nation-building" attempts of the national leadership and the elite sectors were actually mere "State-making" efforts led by no less than ethnocentric leaders, past and present, that geared and shaped the State to be an ethnocratic one. First, since Christianity (or Catholicism) is the predominant religion in this country, our leaders who are mostly Catholics, and the State itself, discriminate against non-Christians, especially the Muslims and "cultural minorities". Who can forget Carlos P. Romulo's racist slur against the Igorots in his book "Mother America"? Second, as exemplified by Aguinaldo in his revolutionary government, then Quezon in his Commonwealth, Tagalog officials and personnel packed elite government positions, thus starting a "tradition". So when Marcos got hold of the reins of power and held the entire nation hostage to his guns and whims, we then saw the Ilocanization of the bureaucracy and the military hierarchy.

.

Our genuine efforts at nation-building (despite cultural diversity) wherein the development of a national language and national identity, among others, are continuously hoped for, now seem to have been reduced to just a "dream" and is merely paid lip service to. Hence, until now, regionalist/parochialist attitudes and outlook of many Filipino individuals have not vanished.

.

I wonder, by the way, what Martinez and Ilagan have to say about the Mindanao Muslims' struggle for statehood and independence. As opposed to Ilagan's "Republic of Antique", the Muslims' struggle for a BangsaMoro Republic, I'm sure, has more historical and political justification -- they who have not been conquered by the Spaniards and Americans, they who have maintained their religious and cultural identity; they, who in all these decades, live and fight by the slogan: "Moros, not Filipinos."

.

Further, had the MNLF succeeded in putting up their republic, it'll surprise no one if they'd build their nation via the dominant ethnie way, in which perhaps the Tausugs will play the "core ethnic community" caused by Misuari himself being a Tausug, if I'm not mistaken. The same model may also be anticipated for a "republic of Antique" with its ethnic groups and "cultural minorities".

.

(This may be irrelevant but I'll proceed anyhow :-)): I find it unfortunate for our kababayan Muslims' choice of the name "Moro". The term is rooted from the word "Moors", a derogatory label 16th century Spaniards and Portuguese used to call their servants -- much like today for some Europeans, when the term "filipina" would mean "domestic helper".

.

Identity. And perhaps pride... cultural and individualistic pride. These are the issues of Martinez and Ilagan, the same underlying issues that were carried in my previous post, excerpts of which I am re-posting here (with some corrections): "Have we asked ourselves why we allowed us to be called "Filipino", when the term originally meant and referred to full-blooded Spaniards born in the colony (Philippines), and who, in the racial and social divide during the Spanish colonial era, together with the peninsulares and perhaps to a certain extent the mestizos, were also regarded and hated by the indios as their oppressors? Was the adoption and acceptance of the term "Filipino" by the entire nation/people an unconscious act of embracing and identifying with our mighty conquerors with the false sense of fulfillment and vanity that we indios have finally brought ourselves to their level or class even at least in name, even when the color of our skin betrays us, even when we know we are not and cannot be like them? hence, the inferiority complex?"

.

The "bagong pinoy" should find out exactly who and what oppresses us. But more than inferiority complex and (false?) pride, what we Filipinos (particularly the federalistas, separatistas, secessionistas who take fondness in bashing "imperial Manila") should look into our history (and our genes?) are what the likes of Aguinaldo had bequeathed to us: capitulationist, even servile or slavish, tendencies.

.

The trapo and segurista that he was, Aguinaldo allowed himself to be exiled by the Spaniards in Hongkong. He came back and established the Republican Government, yes, with his Declaration of Independence explaining the symbols and colors of the flag, to wit: "...the colors Blue, Red and White commemorating the flag of the United States of North America, as a manifestation of our profound gratitude towards this Great nation." Then, in the war of resistance that ensued, Aguinaldo chickened out, surrendered and pledged allegiance to his new colonial amo. How easy this national hero switched from one amo to another! Revolutionary or not, Aguinaldo typifies the "pilipinong nangangamuhan."

.

So today, as symbolism goes, when Filipinos salute the flag, we somehow half-salute and pledge allegiance to the "great" U.S. of A. But of course, the greater psychological burden goes to Filipinos outside the dominant ethnie -- where, oh where, could they find their place in "the eight rays" of the sun, and even worse, in saluting the eight provinces symbolized by the rays.

.

Few somehow find it... when they migrate to "imperial Manila". Maybe as few as those Filipinos, like David Martinez himself, who have found or are still trying to find it, too... in "imperialist America."

.

If indeed one morning the indio will wake up in one of 7,100 nation-states in this part of the world, it is because history provided him with 7,100 pipedreams for whatever it is that'd make him "free".

.