 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| No Soul By Antonio C. Abaya May 29, 2003 The recent publication by Anvil of the Philippine edition of Benedict Anderson?s ?Imagined Communities? occasioned a thoughtful piece by Columnist Raul Rodrigo in Today (May 20) and a personal reminiscence from Columnist Patricio Abinales in the Philippines Free Press (May 17). I had previously heard of the book but never got around to reading it; I must do so now that it is available at a reader-friendly price. In the meantime, let me comment on Raul?s quote of what must be the essence of Anderson?s thesis: ?(The nation) is imagined as a community, because, regardless of the actual inequality and exploitation that may prevail in each, the nation is always conceived as a deep, horizontal comradeship.? Raul is correct this ?deep, horizontal comradeship? has continued to elude us Filipinos. Writes Raul: ?Whatever national comradeship we feel is neither deep nor horizontal..? Why this sense of nationhood has eluded us, and why whatever national comradeship we feel is neither deep nor horizontal, should concern thoughtful Filipinos because it is in the righting of this wrong, in the definition of our national soul, that we Filipinos can redeem and rediscover ourselves. And I do not mean becoming anti-American and anti-capitalist, which in essence is how Marxist-Leninist ideologues, who have transformed this country into a black hole forever lost and wandering aimlessly in time-space, continue to define that soul. James Fallows wrote that we suffer from a ?damaged culture?. We have a weak sense of nationhood. Our circle of loyalty has a uniquely small radius, limited to family, clan, tribe, ethno-linguistic group, but rarely expanding to cover nation. To some extent, this is true. Unlike the Japanese or the Koreans or the Chinese or the Indians, we are not heirs to a great and ancient civilization. When the Europeans first came to impose their culture, this archipelago was largely inhabited by animist tribes; only parts of Mindanao had been settled by Muslim colonists from what is now Indonesia.. Unlike the Indonesians, the Cambodians, the Burmese, we have no Borobodur, no Angkor Wat, no Pagan to remind us of a spectacularly rich heritage. The closest that we have in the way of monuments are our Catholic mission churches, some of truly remarkable architecture, but if they remind us of anything it is that we are an anomaly in this part of the world: that we are an outpost of a civilization that has no authentic roots in the indigenous soil. But the absence of any outstanding monuments to a past civilization has not deterred the Malaysians or the Singaporeans from succeeding in defining their national souls. A task much more complex for them because they are ethnically, linguistically and religiously much more diverse than we are. And yet, look at them, seemingly united in building their nation and going from success to success, and then look at us, forever quarrelling with each other, with a weak sense of nationhood, and going nowhere fast Judging by their success and our failure, I would say that the difference lies in the political culture and the political leadership. First, our political culture is defined to a large extent by the political system and values inherited from the Americans: jealously liberal, nominally egalitarian and ideologically protective of the individual (and his family or tribe) rather than the national community. Political liberalism has not been beneficial to the Philippines. It has allowed Marxist-Leninists to infiltrate and influence practically every sector of Philippine society: media, the clergy, academe, labor unions, student bodies, women?s groups, environmentalists, government employees, public school teachers, fisher-folk, urban poor, peasants, even Congress. Since Marxist-Leninists will never be content unless and until a communist government is in power, the culture of unremitting protest against everything that smacks of capitalist profit-seeking (oil prices, bus fares, power and water rates, PPA, Bt corn, tuition etc) has been and will continue to be a permanent feature of our political life, magnifying a conflict when there is one, creating one when there is none, crippling the efforts of the government, any government, to arrive at consensus and unity, and all designed to create an environment conducive to their revolution. (In Malaysia and Singapore [as well as South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia and Thailand], by contrast, communists are pointedly and specifically excluded from their political life under pain of indefinite detention without trial, allowing their governments the stability and civil peace to concentrate on economic development.) Nominal egalitarianism has helped trivialize our politics and idiotize our masa by opening the doors of public office to anyone with the least common denominators. It is simply inconceivable that a patently illiterate and ignorant person like Erap, or a mere TV news reader like Noli de Castro, can ever be elected prime minister of Malaysia or Singapore, where the idea of setting high standards for public office is not considered offensive to political correctness. The American glorification of the individual, over and above the community, has created in the Philippines a political milieu where the emphasis is on the rights of individuals, rather than on their responsibilities to the community. Thus in the Philippines, everyone and his grandmother is a vociferous critic of government, but relatively few individuals bother to pay any income tax to allow that government to function. In Malaysia and Singapore, it is the other way around: there is consensus that there are many circumstances where the good of the community must prevail over the rights of the individual. Thus the good of the greater number is considered more important than the right of individuals to espouse certain political advocacies considered inimical to the greater number. In such a community-oriented society, it is easier for the political leaders to define the national soul and to nurture a ?deep, horizontal comradeship,? and to define the national soul, among the citizens, than in an individual-oriented one like that of the Philippines. American-style liberalism has stunted the growth of our sense of nationhood. A further reason for our weak sense of nationhood is the distance in time from the Golden Age of our history ? the Propaganda Movement and Revolution of 1896 against Spain ? to the post-World War II and post-EDSA generations. We have no living memory of our most glorious days as a nation, and whatever we know of that period is mere book-learning, a blur in our collective memory that is soon and easily overwhelmed by the latest must-have fads of the consumer revolution. Unlike the Vietnamese, who are acutely aware that millions of their fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, and sons and daughters willingly sacrificed themselves for the sake of the motherland. Unlike the Chinese, who were led during their modernizing years by authentic veterans of the Long March. Unlike the Malaysians and the Singaporeans, whose sense of nationhood was forged during the struggle against, first the British, then against the Communists, in the 1950s and the 1960s. But a major reason for our lack of national soul is the failure of our political leaders, both to articulate and define that soul, and to translate that concept, abstract and ephemeral as it necessarily must be, into concrete programs of governance that would have meaning even to the most humble citizen. I will delve into this next week. ***** The bulk of this article appears in the June 7, 2003 issue of the Philippines Free Press magazine. |
| OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �No Soul� Tony, This is a great article! Congratulations and God Bless you! Bobit Avila, [email protected] June 03, 2003 ................................................................................... Tony, The failure of the political leaders is the failure of the Filipinos. Could they be leaders if Filipinos did not like them to lead? Gras Reyes, [email protected] June 04, 2003 ��������������������������. Dear Mr.. Abaya: I have ruminated on this precise topic for some time now, and agree with you that there is absent amongst our people the fabric of national identity to bind us. Thus far, our efforts to identify ourselves as global Filipinos have been continents wide, but inches deep. Have we, as Filipinos conquered and reconquered time and time again, finally decided on which culture, or civilization we truly identify with? Is it the Malay race, the Western-Judeao-christian civilization, or something in between? I suspect that this lack of national identity has been the root of our societal ills; and unless we, as a people address this core issue with the help of government, we can never be on the same page with each other on the national issues on which all stakeholders need to work cohesively, and coopeartively on. It also strikes me that most of our proud references to past history are to the defeats of our people. The execution of Rizal, the failed Balintawak REvolution of 1896, culminating in the murders of the Bonifacio brother and the Pact of Biak-na-Bato in 1897; the American conquest of the Philippines from 1898 to 1902; the various rebellions throughout the Philippine Islandsduring the American colonial Administration; and the fall of Battan and CVoregidor. We have, what appears to me, a sad naostalgia for defeat. What has Philippine society created to uplift the condition of the masses and under-served Filipinos since Independence in 1946? One wonders. If we now stand proud because our compatriots have travelled far and wide throughout the globe to find a better quality of life, and concommitantly, send subsistence funds to the homeland, that is not very much to say about our progress as a people. I eagerly anticipate the second installment of your article. thanks for your thoughts. Jose G. Caedo, [email protected] Mayor's Office On Disability 401 Van Ness Ave. Ste. 300 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554 6060 (415) 554 6159 fax June 04, 2003 �������������������������� Dear Mr. Abaya, A few years ago, while visiting the museum at the basement of the Central Bank, I saw handcrafted belts and other ornaments made of gold. According to the description attached, these were made in the 11th century in the Butuan City area where they were found. I thought to myself then, this is something we can be proud of, yet I didn't learn this in school! I wonder how many of our compatriots know that once upon a time our ancestors had this ability as well as access to such a precious commondity. I always enjoy reading your columns even if at times I disagree with your views. Thank you for continuing to keep me on your list of addressees. Gerry Bulatao, [email protected] June 04, 2003 �������������������������� It is difficult to walk the thin line that separates anti-Americanism/imperialism and pro-Lenin, and in many ways you have articulated what my heart often screams in frustration. It is good to meet a kindred soul sometime in the journey (except perhaps on matters of population where we differ radically - try listening to Ed Soreta sometime). Regards, Connie, [email protected] June 05, 2003 ���������������������������� Dear Mr. Abaya, By and large, I agree with your views and am thankful that you express them so boldly. I just noticed that in your last piece, entitled, "No Soul," you delved too much on the political dimension of our life as a people. For sure, actions and non-action of politicians of every possible orientation play a huge role in the development or maldevelopment of our country and, consequently, our people. You touched on tribalism. I agree. Those in power are there to protect their tribe and this does not include the majority of the people. Thus, the people cannot and do not identify with those in power. Yet, no one has the will to change the system. So, what happens is that those who want power simply just grab it from those who have it. So, no real change occurs. But, I digress. Our nation, or no nation for that matter, is borne out of its politics. There are other factors in the making of nationhood. Our religious institutions, for instance. Surely, the church plays a factor. Our educational system, so important in the molding of minds, has been left to the machinations of government. There is no real attempt on anyone's part to critique this, or at least, I don't see any. I don't see any popular clamor to overhaul the educational system except to suit market demands. Our social institutions? The Filipino family? The neigborhood? We have no voice and shape. I, for one, am guilty of doing nothing. After having graduated from U.P. and from activism, I have done nothing to awaken my volunteerism. Why is that? Now, however, I am beginning to see again. I want to do something, but what? This is the national malaise. We know we are sick, but we have a problem getting out of inertia. Is it hopelessness? If so, then it is worse than death. If you, indeed, have reached this far, then I thank you for your patience and look forward to your next piece. Sincerely, Veronica C. Lim, [email protected] June 07, 2003 MY REPLY. Many people, like you, �want to do something� but do not know what. This is the failure of the political leaders, that they have not designed a governance module that allows for people who want to do something significant for their country to actually do it, and thereby participate in nation-building. I am convinced that many people are aching for such a leader, but, alas, our political culture produces only mediocrities. ����������������������������� Dear Mr.Abaya, I'd like to comment on your latest article "No Soul". I was particularly interested in reading it because it was like reading, with due differences, an editorial about the problems of my country, Italy. I am sure that you will agree with me about the many similarities between the Souls of Filipinos and Italians. Funny enough also even today in Italy there are still people ( starting from our prime minister Berlusconi) who blame the Communists for all that is going wrong, although there are very few Marxist-Leninists left. You blame the lack of sense of nation in the Philippines to the political culture inherited from the Americans. But what about Italy? We did not inherit our culture from America. So I believe that the problem runs deeper than political culture. We also have many monuments to look back to, but still little sense of nation. Perhaps the similarity is that Italy was also divided for centuries into many small "islands" States. We share the same individualistic and egalitarian values. But these can be very good values if properly balanced. In fact I believe that the vitality of the Filipino society will be a very big asset in the long term. I do not believe that the political leaders can articulate and define the Soul. On the contrary they can be only the "innocent mirror" of the nation's Soul or the national collective consciousness. So the answer is not easy, but only proper education can uplift and create a real national consciousness. On the other hand we already need to start thinking in terms of global consciousness. But this is the next step. Best regards, Ugo Guido, [email protected] June 09, 2003 MY REPLY. Thank you for your comments. I was not aware that Italians are also groping for a sense of nationhood despite a superabundance of monuments to past great civilizations and an established national culture. I do not know the cause of your malaise. You do not believe that the political leaders can articulate and define the national soul, and they can only be the �innocent mirror� of it. If this were true, heavens forbid, then we Filipinos cannot hope for anything better than Erap or Fernando Poe Jr., since these two ignoramuses best reflect the choices and aspirations of the stupid masa, who make up the majority of the population. ���������������������������� I always enjoy reading your thoughtful, and thought-provoking pieces. If I don't respond, it's not because I don't appreciate what you do, it's just that I get caught up in too much else. In your article "No Soul" you highlight that the Left always opposes everything. But so, too, does the Philippine Catholic Church. It too, complains of high oil prices, PPA, BT Corn, etc. Yet it rarely proposes anything positive. It opposes mining, for example, which could bring wealth to the countryside, when what it should do is support mining but pressure the government to ensure it is done responsively. All the best. Peter Wallace, [email protected] June 09, 2003. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |