Rizal and socialism (2)

By Elmer Ordonez

MY earlier column (8/7) dwelt on the influence of socialist ideas on Rizal and his fellow propagandists in Europe. I noted that of the two contending strains of socialism in late 19th century, Marxist and anarchist, the latter had more impact on Rizal and Juan Luna, judging by their literary and art works. El Fili-busterismo has an “anarchist and putschist” for main character, Simoun, while Luna has paintings depicting the underclass of France.

Luna also has a letter to Rizal describing the pitiful conditions of workers in a Paris iron foundry and enthusing over Contemporary Socialism. (I recall my own encounter with Edmund Wilson’s To the Finland Station in the 50s, tracing the concept from Saint-Simoun, Owen and Fourier, Proudhon, Bakunin, Marx and Engels to Lenin.) If Luna had lived to the 20th century would he have developed into a full-blown proletarian artist?   

Rizal’s close friend Trinidad Pardo de Tavera had taken in two young Russian women who were in Paris as political refugees because of their nihilist views (nihilism is a variant of anarchism). Epifanio San Juan, Jr. surmises that the two women radicals could have been introduced by de Tavera to Rizal. However there is no mention of this in Rizal’s correspondence nor of any reply to Luna’s letter about his visit to the Parisian iron foundry. Nor is there any reference to radicals or their work except to Max Havelaar, the anti-Dutch colonial book written by the Dutch-Indonesian mestizo Edward Douwes Dekker using the pseudonym, Multatuli. At the time Rizal was annotating Morga’s Sucesos in the British Museum where he must have come across Max Havelaar and become interested in Philippine studies and Malay resistance to colonialism in the region. . (cf. John Nery, Revolutionary Spirit: Jose Rizal in Southeast Asia).

In 1898 ilustrado nationalist Isabelo de los Reyes met all kinds of socialists/radicals during his detention at the Montjuich castle prison, where Rizal two years earlier was confined for several hours before being shipped back to Manila to face trial for treason and the firing squad. De los Reyes as a deported filibustero in 1896 participated in violent street protests in Barcelona. Since then Filipino intellectuals (like Dr. Dominador Gomez, Aurelio Tolentino, Lope K. Santos, Faustino Aguilar, Herminigildo Cruz) and other labor leaders had been exposed to socialist books, here or abroad. In the 20s Marxism-Leninism arrived in Manila and labor groups, armed with this ideology, formed the Communist Party (1930).

Reader Alvin F. pointed out that utopian socialism was also an influence on Rizal, citing Dapitan as a manifestation. Indeed, In that quiet Mindanao town, Rizal, using his immense skills, tried to build a model community with progressive education, organic farming and cash crop cultivation, a waterworks system benefiting the whole town, free medicine for the poor, among other social services.

Having given up propaganda work with La Solidaridad, Rizal returned to Manila via Hongkong with his Tagalog translation of The Rights of Man and his agenda to organize the indios as a national polity toward their social and economic development and mutual protection, preparing them for self-government and ultimate liberation. These from the objectives of La Liga Filipina.

The Liga had a short life because of Rizal’s deportation to Dapitan. In his exile, he transformed the land that he bought along the coast into a mini-colony of students, some members of his family including his sisters, and his common-law wife, and the locals who work on the agricultural and livestock farms.

Rizal would have done these and more in the 6,000 acres made available to Rizal by the British authorities for his proposed Filipino colony in Sabah. Rizal’s proposal was rejected by the Spanish governor-general who would not spare Filipinos in a country already short of labor. He probably meant shortage of compulsory labor because the indios, disaffected for centuries, were fleeing from “bajo la campana” (under the bell) to the countryside or hinterlands where they were at risk of being branded tulisanes.

Rizal had for some time thought about a Filipino colony since the dispossession by the friars of Rizal’s family and other inquilinos and their tenants in the Calamba hacienda. If the Sabah project had materialized under progressive-minded Rizal it would have shown up Spanish governance.

Building ideal or model communities is the essence of utopian socialism. The term “utopian” is derived from Thomas More’s Utopia (1516); its precedents are Plato’s ideal Republic and St. Augustine’s City of God. In the first half of the 19th century, in the wake of the French revolution, socialism and communism (coined by anarchist Etienne Cabet) became current, with Karl Marx and Frederic Engels using the term in the 1848 “Communist Manifesto“ in a metaphorical way as “the specter haunting Europe” to scare the ruling classes beset with social upheavals.

Marx and Engels used “scientific socialism” as opposed to the “utopian” concepts of communitarian living of Saint-Simon, Robert Owen, and Charles Fourier who had anarchist ideas from the start like cooperatives, credit unions, mutual support, labor reform, and women rights (Fourier). In 1892 after the death of his comrade, Engels issued his Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. That year Rizal returned to Manila.

To be continued.
eaordonez2000@yahoo.com

Revolutionary Routes @ ManilArt 2011

will be at ManilArt 2011, the 3rd Philippine International Art Fair, today at 4 p.m. onwards (ehem :)

Book signing of “Revolutionary Routes” by Angela Stuart Santiago with guest National Artist for Literature Bienvenido Lumbera

August 26, 2011
NBC Tent, Bonifacio Global City
Taguig, Philippines

book’s still at launch price of P300, ManilArt entrance P200.  see you!

inquirer, blasphemy, sodomy

i leave it to radikalchick to respond to the world-class self-centered bigoted douchebag (in the words of carlos celdran) and his ilk who insist on their narrow shallow fallow takes on mideo’s art and censorship and the ccp.  but this letter to the editor from ernie lapuz of sto. tomas, batangas, calling out the inquirer on its “tunnel vision” and disconnect with reality, deserves to be shared and taken to heart (and mind).

WHEN ART SERVES AS A MIRROR FOR NATION TO SEE ITS REALITY

A fictitious literary character, Dorian Gray, kept a special portrait of himself. Dorian never aged a day and remained handsome through time. His portrait aged instead of him, and with every detestable sin he committed his portrait became more and more hideous.

“Poleteismo,” by Mideo M. Cruz, is a hideous portrait or artwork. It is so hideous and disgusting that it is being bashed over TV, radio, newspapers, and in the streets. And it’s quite understandable why people are angry, but this anger may have given even the Inquirer a bit of tunnel vision when its editorial on the artwork said, “If all this does not constitute sacrilege, blasphemy, or attack on religion, we don’t know what does.” Come on, surely the Inquirer knows of worse things than “Poleteismo” that constitute blasphemy and sacrilege. The paper writes about it every day. For instance, it has written about an absurd game show host who promotes mendicancy while idiotizing and exploiting the poor by making them salivate over thousand-peso hand-outs while he earns millions for himself. Doesn’t he make Christ look like Mickey Mouse or a clown every time he makes fun of the poor and declaring “All I want to do is help the poor”?

This paper writes about the abuses of the government and the Church. Can’t it feel in its hearts and guts that to call a cheating and utterly corrupt former president, her “First Plunderer” and their cohorts “devout Catholics” is more disgusting than a diseased male organ stuck on a crucifix? And when “Princes of the Church,” filthy rich “Evangelists,” “Ministers” and “Anointed Sons of God” ask and even demand favors (SUVs, a new superhighway along their vast prime property, special appointments, etc.) from government in exchange for their “constant support” of leaders who “steal from the poor,” they actually prostitute religion. Translate this reality into artwork and we may behold a full cathedral ceiling mural of Jesus Christ being held down by “most reverend” clergymen while being sodomized by hordes of “honorable” political leaders. Such an utterly sacrilegious, blasphemous, disgusting, offensive and hideous cathedral artwork will surely be despised, condemned and vanished.

Now what about the reality that is faithfully reflected in that virtual cathedral artwork? Do we see our reality as perfectly normal, acceptable or even handsome as Dorian, or should I say Juan? What kind of infernal gall have we in condemning people who hold up a mirror to us to show us bluntly the true state and configuration of our nation? “Poleteismo” is a reflection of the reality of Juan de la Cruz. And I thank God for the art that serves as our mirror. We can’t banish our collective ugliness reflected in the mirror by bashing that mirror. Surely, God’s mysterious ways are at work here as He Himself is holding that mirror to us. Art as a mirror reveals that it is us who actually commit the sacrilege. It is the reality of our nation, government, churches and ourselves that we need to reform.

—ERNIE LAPUZ
nitelites@rocketmail.com
Biga, Sto Tomas, Batangas

media & mideo
The real immaturity
The morality police came to town (with a lynching mob)

ashamed ! #aug23

WHY WHY WHY is president aquino snubbing the survivors and families of the victims of the august 23 hostage-taking massacre who are back in town, no matter how they fear and hate manila?  why has he denied them an audience with his excellent self as they commemorate the painful deaths of their loved ones exactly a year ago today?

WHAT WHAT WHAT is it about this president that he cannot find the time or the face or the grace to properly meet with these aggrieved hongkong chinese who deserve at the very least to be welcomed with shared sorrow and sympathy, at the very best to be heard, by cleaner ears, as they express their continuing, and very very valid, grievances re the botched hostage-taking?

the way i read lacierda’s explanation, it is because the bereaved chinese are accompanied by a democratic party legislator (james to kun-sun), therefore such a meeting would have “political color”, meaning i suppose that it would win points for the legislator but maybe not for the president who has a forthcoming state visit to the communist/socialist mainland?

Days before the first anniversary of the hostage tragedy, Lacierda expressed reservations over the group’s request to meet Aquino.

Lacierda said the request could have a “political color” since the group had been accompanied by a lawmaker with the elections in Hong Kong forthcoming.

But the victim’s brother stressed that they were never interested in politics.

“We are just normal citizens in Hong Kong. We do not know politics. What I can only see in this event is that my brother got killed without any reason. The rescue team in the Philippines could not save my brother. They could not save lives,” Tse Chi-hang said.

…Legislator To also urged the Chinese government to represent the group’s interest in the forthcoming state visit of President Aquino in Beijing.

“We want the Central People’s Government to take advantage of the meeting with the Philippine president in the coming several days to represent the interest of the families to negotiate for the settlement and apology for the Hong Kong families, Hong Kong people and Chinese citizens,” To said.

here’s more on the china visit by manila bulletin’s roy mabasa:

Aquino will be accompanied by senior foreign and defense officials, underscoring the importance the Philippine government has placed on the trip.

The visit was arranged as early as March amid the outrage in the country over Beijing’s execution of three Filipino drug convicts.

President Hu formally invited Aquino during last year’s Leaders’ Summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

Aquino himself confirmed earlier that an invitation from the Chinese government had been sent to him.

In an earlier interview, Chinese Ambassador to Manila Liu Jianchao said Chinese officials were open to discussing with President Aquino the Spratlys issue during his visit.

“Everything can be talked about, but we can talk about issues in a very good faith and goodwill, in a spirit of seeking well-measured settlement of these issues. More than this we can work ways to maintain peace and stability in the region where we have disputes,” Liu told the Manila Bulletin.

“I’m sure we have the wisdom to keep peace and stability in this region and at the same time both of us could benefit from such a stable and peaceful region,” he added. “In particular, we can cooperate in this region in exploring and developing the resources. This is going to be a wonderful arrangement and at the same time we can reduce the possibility for a possible conflict. So, this is going to be a wonderful one.”

Liu also welcomed the visit, pointing out that this will further promote “the wonderful relations between the two countries in many realms: in political confidence and trust, economic cooperation, trade, and people to people exchanges.”

wonderful daw, lol.  of course we have no idea what the quid pro quos are, ‘no?  given our trade and investment needs, lalo na our spratlys claim, it may be that the prez is walking on eggs, scared of ruffling mainland feathers.  for all we know a formal apology to the chinese government and to the hongkong chinese may be in the offing finally, but in the mainland and addressed to the highest officials first?  better safe than sorry?

unfortunately the snub here and now, when we are confronted with memories of that awful awful day that filipinos would rather forget but cannot, so shameful and disgraceful and horrible was it, boggles minds and hearts.  according to what values and ethics is it all right for the aquino government to behave like it owes the bereaved hongkong chinese nothing: no formal apology, no compensation from the government, and no heads of top guns rolling?

it doesn’t help that history channel‘s docu The Manila Hostage Massacre had as its star resource person no less than mediaman erwin tulfo who had the gall to pontificate re the authorities’ shortcomings.  tulfo, with mike rogas, in my book, deserves worse than the 10,000 peso fine imposed by the KBP for his ill-timed ill-advised intervention in a police matter involving endangered lives, and with international repercussions.

here’s the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility:

The KBP Standards Authority December 2010 decision declared that:

“The Authority finds cause to hold the following respondents liable for first offenses (against) certain provisions of the Broadcast Code, as follows:

“On respondents Radio Mindanao Network (Radyo Mo Nationwide, RMN), Michael Rogas, and Erwin Tulfo, for having violated Sec. 1, Art. 6, Part I of the Broadcast Code (Coverage of crimes in progress), the following penalties are hereby imposed: The sum of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) and censure on respondent Radio Mindanao Network; the sum of Fifteen Thousand Pesos (P15,000.00) and reprimand on respondent Michael Rogas; and the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) and reprimand on respondent Erwin Tulfo, all in accordance with the offense classification and range of penalties provided in Art. 4.1, Part III of the Broadcast Code.

“We, however, find no cause to hold Jesus J. Maderazo of RMN liable under the Broadcast Code.

“On respondent ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation, for having violated Sec. 4, Art. 6, Part I of the Broadcast Code (Schedule of Penalties for Grave Offenses) , the following penalties are hereby imposed The sum of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) and censure, in accordance with the offense classification and range of penalties provided in Art. 4.2, Part III of the Broadcast Code.

“On respondent Associated Broadcasting Company (TV5), for having violated Sec. 4, Art. 6, Part I of the Broadcast Code, the following penalties are hereby imposed: The sum of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) and censure, in accordance with the offense classification and range of penalties provided in Art. 4.2, Part III of the Broadcast Code.”

The penalties do not seem to be commensurate to the wrongdoing. Among its options, the KBP chose not to suspend Rogas and Tulfo for the major ethical offense of interviewing Mendoza during the most crucial stages of the crisis.

In the first place, however, the KBP decision, comparable to a mountain’s laboring to produce a mouse, had been almost a year in the making. In all that time, its Standards Authority simply decided not to include GMA Network Inc. (GMA-7) in its investigation because the network is not a KBP member.

lest president aquino and the kbp have forgotten: it was a shameful shameful shameful day and the survivors and families of the victims deserve an apology, compensation, and justice.

OMGWTF!!!
command responsibility
command responsibility 2
command responsibility 3
holding back
what if
brief narratives
ressa, media, flunk test
media & national interest
Truth and consequence
vilifying media
no laws broken, no heads rolling