House Deputy Speaker Lorenzo Tañada III said the nation’s remembrance of national hero Dr. Jose Rizal on his 150th birth anniversary should remind national leaders that patriotism and love of country can be emulated in dealing with the Spratlys issue.

The Spratlys problem is “now putting the country at the verge of what can be its strongest challenge ever on the protection of its territorial integrity and respect for the sanctity of the nation’s independence,” the lawmaker said.

Tañada issued the statement as Beijing, through its diplomatic channels, came out with a tough statement regarding its territorial claim on the internationally disputed Spratlys islands.

“Poorer as we are in resources, weaker as we are in terms of armaments, and lesser as we are in the number of soldiers compared to other countries, we are equal with other nations in terms of international rights, in the right to lay claim on islands and territories that are legally and historically ours, and in our claim for national dignity as a sovereign nation,” Tañada said.

The House leader added the bilateral diplomatic remedies that can be offered by both the Philippines and China should take the front seat in dealing with the on-and-off tiff on Spratlys.

Filipinos to be called ‘Rizalines’‘Gen. Artemio Ricarte’s Rizaline Constitution’By: Quennie Ann J. Palafox

    Decades ago, debates cropped up concerning the appropriateness of “Philippines” as our national name, “Filipinos” as our nationality, for the name Philippines is said to denote the slavery and colonization of a great country. Some proposed to abolish the name “Philippines” and adopt instead, a more patriotic name in order to establish what they believe to be an authentic national identity. One argument they raised was that the image of the Philippines abroad has been stained by such titles as “the most corrupt country in the world,” a “nation of domestic helpers and OFWs,” and other negative connotations. Others, such as certain regional groups have voiced their disfavor “Philippines” and “Filipinos” because of they consider these a disgrace to our country’s honor. 

    In 1978, Sen. Eddie Ilarde filed Parliamentary Bill 195, seeking to change the name Philippines to Maharlika. According to Ilarde, Maharlika is our ancient heritage, long before Western colonialists set foot on our shores. Maha is Sanskrit for noble or great while Likha is our own word for create, thus, Maharlika means “nobly created”. Further, as Ilarde averred, the memory of King Philip II, after whom the Philippines was named, should give us pride since his character and deeds do not merit emulation or perpetuation. During his reign the Moors of Granada and the people of the Netherlands revolted against his misgovernment which according to some historians contributed to the decline of the Kingdom of Spain and led to its bankruptcy. Not only was he criticized for his cruelty, but also for not being a good husband and father. Ilarde’s proposal to adopt “Maharlika” was attacked of its link to President

Ferdinand Marcos, as Marcos himself had in mind the same name. "Maharlika" was the name of his guerrilla unit which supposedly fought the Japanese invaders. Marcos’ claim later on was exposed as a hoax. 

    In his paper “Why We Should Change the Name Philippines”, historian Celedonio O. Resurreccion wrote that changing the colonial name is a world tradition: Nueva España was changed to Mexico, Formosa to Taiwan, Malaya to Malaysia, Dutch East Indies to Indonesia, and many others. What we were transformed from a colony to commonwealth, we changed the name of our country from “Islas Filipinas”, or “Philippine Islands”, which were plural concepts, to simply “Philippines”, which was a collective concept.  Etymologically, the name “Filipinas”, or “Philippines,” which means “islands of Felipe” refers to King Philip II of Spain. The name “Filipinas” was given by a Spaniard Ruy Lopez de Villalobos. Before Rizal, no one proclaimed himself a Filipino because the Spanish addressed the natives as Indios. The name “Filipino” was exclusively reserved for pure-blooded Spaniards born in the Philippine Islands. It was the martyred Fr. Jose Burgos, mentor of Jose Rizal’s older brother Paciano, who first used the name “Filipino” during the campaign to secularize and “Filipinize” Catholic parishies. Jose Rizal however, revived the idea of the Indio as Filipino when he wrote his 1879 poem, “A la Juventud Filipina” (To the Filipino youth).  

    Other national names that suggested to replace with the name Philippines are: Solimania (after Raja Soliman), Luzvimin (first syllables of the three major islands Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao), Perlas ng Silangan (from Rizal’s “Perlas del mar del oriente”), and Rizalinas (“islands of Rizal”). Jose Rizal aficionados strongly favor the name Rizalinas for they believe that Jose Rizal is the pride of the Filipino race and epitome of Filipino nationalism. For them, it is only right to name the country after him. In fact, Bolivia, a country in South America was named after Simon Bolivar, a leader who played a key role in the Latin America’s wars of independence from Spain. 

    Gen. Artemio Ricarte, known by his nom-de-guerre “Vibora” or viper and considered by the Armed Forces of the Philippines as the "Father of the Philippine Army", drafted a charter which he called the Rizal Constitution while in exile in the Island of Lamah in Hong Kong on March 31, 1913. 

    The Rizaline Constitution was an act of defiance against the American colonization of our country and a roadmap of a government attempting to eradicate foreign influence. When the forces of Aguinaldo were defeated by the Americans, Ricarte was among the revolutionary leaders who refused to take the oath of allegiance to the US government. In contrast with other revolutionists, Ricarte dreamed of freeing the Philippines from foreign invaders.

    Although Ricarte never met Rizal, Ricarte’s immense admiration and respect for this great hero inspired him to name our country “Rizaline Islands” and call its citizens “Rizalines”. Ricarte’s tribute to Rizal evokes that of the Katipunan of 1896. While Jose Rizal was not involved in the organization and

activities of the Katipunan, the Katipuneros drew inspiration from him and venerated him.  Rizal’s name was used as a password by the highest-ranking members who were called bayani.  

      Vibora’s Rizaline Constitution consisted of twelve chapters. In the first chapter of the constitution our country which was named “Filipinas” by Ruy Lopez de Villalobos would, according to him, be known as the “Rizaline Islands” with the inclusion of Guam and the Marianas Islands.  It also provided that all citizens of the islands would be called “Rizaline” including foreigners who would help the Rizalines acquire absolute independence and those who were born in another country of Rizaline parents. The Rizaline Republic will also adopt as a flag the ancient and well-known emblem of three colors (red, blue and white), with a sun and three stars. Perhaps, Ricarte was referring to the flag unfurled in Kawit, Cavite whose description is similar to what Ricarte had mentioned. The Rizaline constitution also provided a supreme government composed of “Three Powers,” each of them having president and vice president. These powers were the Executive Power, Advisory Power and the Judicial Power. The Constitution also maintained that the official language of the republic would be Spanish. 

    Unfortunately for Ricarte, his Constitution of the Rizaline Republic did not materialize. This charter, nevertheless, was a clear manifestation of Ricarte’s aspiration to have a free nation and perpetuate the memory of our foremost hero, Jose Rizal. The changing of our national name Philippines to a more nationalistic name continues to be a topic of debate up to this day.

 

A Few Thoughts on Freedom and Colonial Cultureby Ferdinan S. Gregorio

 According to Esteban de Ocampo, former Chairperson and Executive Director of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines, “Filipinos are by nature and tradition a liberty-loving people. The pages of their history are replete with revolts, uprisings, mutinies, insurrections, and rebellions to free themselves from injustices, abuses, vexations, discriminations and oppressions of conquerors, whether Spanish, Japanese or Americans. To borrow Sir Winston Churchill’s phrase, Filipinos have shed much ‘blood, sweat and tears’ in their fight for human freedom and national dignity”.  

On the 12th of June, the nation will celebrate its 113th Independence Anniversary. Independence Day is commonly associated with the freedom that we achieved after our heroes shed blood for the country by means of an armed resistance and propaganda movements. But for the youth today, the essence of celebrating a date that shaped our nationhood seems have vanished, making it a plain, red printed holiday in the calendar, free from work and classes. 

After more than a century ago, it would be interesting question to ask ourselves if we have totally attained

independence? Are we really independent or is it just a concept that we claim to boost our pride as a sovereign nation? 113 years after General Emilio Aguinaldo declared independence, the question remains the same- are the Filipinos truly free?

We are free from the dangers and horrors brought by the Spanish Guardia Civil or an American Soldier holding a loaded rifle. But we have succumbed to the subtle encroachment of neo-colonialism.  As defined by Merriam Webster, neo-colonialism is the economic and political policies by which a great power indirectly maintains or extends its influence over other areas or peoples. This influence is not merely economic or political, but also cultural. Such a system allows the supplanting of a people’s unique indigenous culture by that another. 

Neo-colonialism has allowed the invasion of globalization, free trade and commercialization in the Philippines, tools by which the transnational companies used to monopolize the world market. Globalization is like a cordon that symbolizes a no escape zone for the Philippines. The Philippines, due to high inflation rates and its devalued Peso, imports a lot of cheaper products from China, killing what remains of our local industries. In truth, our markets are flooded not only with Chinese products but those of other foreign countries, under such economic realities.

Every morning, we wake up and do the day’s routine. A typical Pinoy breakfast consists of hotdogs, bacons, pasteurized cheese, cereals and beverages, much of these are foreign products. Most of the Filipinos still use toothpaste that was introduced by the Americans many decades ago. Filipinos love to listen to hip-hop songs by foreign rappers and hate not being in on the latest American hit movie. Yes, Filipinos are still shadows of their colonial past, a past that is akin to a leech stuck to the national character.

Though sad but true, human labor is our main export today. We export our countrymen, families and friends in exchange for dollar remittances. It was our heroes’ dream to liberate the Filipinos from any form of foreign slavery, but today, extreme poverty forces Filipinos to work in foreign lands and ironically serve the same foreign masters who oppressed us before.  

During the Spanish and American colonial eras, the Philippines was politically and economically controlled by those two countries. The Spaniards labeled the Filipino race as Indio, to underscore our inferiority.  In a debate on the Treaty of Paris in 1898, U.S. Senator MacLaurin asserted that the possible annexation of the Philippines would mean the “incorporation of a mongrel and semi-barbarous population into our body politic, which was inferior to, but akin to the Negro in moral and intellectual qualities…”.   To the Americans, we belonged to the lowest class of civilization simply because we are Filipinos. We admit it or not, this mentality the Whites taught us is like a scar that marks our consciousness. Today, most of us still follow the standards of beauty set by our past oppressors. In fact, Filipinos patronize whitening products to erase their natural kayumanggi complexion and “assume” the

skin color of the Anglo-Saxon American. 

Recently, Sarangani Congressman and World Boxing Champ Manny Pacquiao voluntarily deactivated his Twitter account because of foul comments from English-literate critics who seemed to forget that English is not our native tongue. Before the Spaniards and the Americans conquered the Philippines, our ancestors used theAlibata and their respective regional dialects to communicate with each other. It is not a mortal sin if Manny Pacquiao commits errors in English grammar. When he becomes inarticulate to his native tongue, like a so called “Coño”, that is time for us to say boo to Manny. 

Religion is probably the most popular vestige of colonialism that was left by the Spaniards and Americans From animism, the Filipinos were drawn to the Christian doctrine. Islam, a dominant religion in Mindanao was not founded by a Filipino but by an Arab named Mohammad.  Our anitos were replaced by statues with Greek features. Today, a various sects are sprouting like mushrooms to teach Western theology.  

When we go to the movies, we patronize Hollywood films because our colonial culture has conditioned us to believe that local productions are inferior in all aspects. All of these manifestations of colonial culture and colonial mentality recall the words of Renato Constantino wrote in one of his books;

“The Americans established a system of education using English as a medium of instruction… English opened new vistas of Western culture to their dazed eyes and enabled them to write poetry about autumn and winter and snow on fir trees… But more important because of greater practical value…their rudimentary command of English enabled Filipino citizens to import Hollywood movies, to purchase large quantities of American publications, and to consume a phenomenal amount of American-made goods”.

 Where Jose Rizal visualized where Filipinos are now in his “The Philippines a Century Hence”; 

“Then began a new era for the Filipinos; little by little they lost their old traditions, the mementos of their past; they gave up their writing, their songs, their poems, their laws in order to learn by rote mother doctrines which they did not understand, another morality, another aesthetics different from those inspired by their climate and their manner of thinking. Then they declined, degrading themselves in their own eyes; they became ashamed of was their own; they began to admire and praise whatever was foreign and incomprehensible; their spirit was dismayed and it surrendered.” 

June 12, 1898 was a milestone event that all Filipinos should commemorate. However, the challenge this event presents before us every year is to achieve true independence. This kind of independence does not

stop with the absence of foreign military invasions but starts with the application of nationalist ideas by all Filipinos.

1872 and 1892: Cradles of NationalismMona Lisa H. QuizonHistory Researcher II

The years 1872 and 1892 are two significant periods in the history of the Philippines. These are the years that nationalism blossomed in the hearts of many Filipinos. The year 1872 marked the execution of the three martyred priests, Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora better known as GOMBURZA. The three were convicted and eventually executed by garrote due to their alleged participation in the Cavite Mutiny. Prior to their execution GOMBURZA made an impact in our history by leading the Secularization Movement.  They clamored for the rights of the Filipinos to oversee the parishes in the Philippines. According to them churches in the country should and must be administered by Filipinos. The Filipinos should be given the privilege to spread Christianity to the natives.   The three martyred priests had made their whole-hearted efforts to fulfill their visions. Fr. Burgos, for the matter, organized the Committee on Reforms, which campaigned for more liberal laws. Fr. Gomes, on the other hand, founded the newspaper La Vertad which served as an instrument in describing the unbearable conditions of the Philippines through the liberal articles made by Filipino clergymen headed by Fr. Burgos.  The GOMBURZA, undoubtedly, showed no sign of apprehension. Instead, they exhibited courage and strong aspiration to make the church pro-Indio.

      The actions done by the GOMBURZA transcended the Secularization Movement and rose into a higher level, the Filipinization Movement. Father Burgos, in particular, stressed the concept of nationalism through their visions. It goes to show that before the so-called middle class introduced nationalism and equality the secular priest had already gave birth to these ideas. 

      The execution of GOMBURZA became a burning fire that awakened the sleeping conscience of many Filipinos. Jose Rizal himself was awakened by this tragic event. His second novel, El Filibusterismo, was dedicated to the three martyred priest. 

      Rizal said in a letter published in La Solidaridad, “without 1872, there would be no Plaridel, Jaena, or Sanciongco; nor would the brave and generous Filipino colonies in Europe have existed. Without 1872, Rizal would now have been a Jesuit and instead of writing Noli Me Tangere would have written the opposite. Observing the injustices and cruelties fired my young imagination and I pledge to dedicate myself to avenge someday those victims. With this idea, I have studied and this can be discerned in all my works and writings. God will give me the opportunity someday to keep my vow.”

      On the other hand, the year 1892 was the time Andres Bonifacio, Ladislao Diwa, Teodoro Plata and

Deodato Arellano founded the secret society called Katipunan. The Katipunan was brought to life after the La Liga Filipina, which was founded by Jose Rizal, was discontinued and Rizal himself was arrested and then deported to Dapitan.  The Katipuneros no longer believed in peaceful means of change for the Philippine. The Katipunan aimed to overthrow the colonizers through armed struggle. Bonifacio led the nationwide campaign to put an end to the three centuries of oppression and abused by the Spaniards. The Katipunan showed that revolution was the key for change. Filipinos were clamoring for freedom and one way to achieve these was by joining the revolution. Katipunan became the inspiration of other revolutionary groups to continue the struggle for freedom. Bonifacio together with other Katipunan members planted the seed of nationalism in the hearts of every Filipino. 

      However, between 1872 and 1892, there was a new chapter in the Philippine history – the reform movement.  In order to prevent the danger of fighting the Spaniards in the Philippines, the sons of wealthy and well-to-do Filipino families migrated to Europe to campaign for reforms in the administration of the Philippines. Jose Rizal, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Graciano Lopez Jaena and others waged their war of propaganda against the Spanish colonial government but they failed to achieve their goal. 

      The year 1872 and 1892 gave birth to the nationalism of the Filipinos that triggered the 1896 revolution. The revolution demonstrated the courage and bravery of Filipinos which led to the proclamation of independence of our country on June 12, 1898 in Kawit, Cavite. Both 1872 and 1896 are important in the history of our country. What happened in 1872 and 1892 will be forever marked with honor. We owe to our forefathers the freedom we have today. It is now in our hands to continue to defend and protect our sovereignty.

Ang Pagbabagong-Anyo ng Bayanni Mona Lisa H. Quizon

Sinaunang Pamayanan

    Bago pa man dumating ang mga Espanyol sa ating bansa ay mayroon nang maunlad na pamayanan ang ating mga ninuno. Ang barangay na kinagisnan natin ngayon ay nag-ugat bago pa man sakupin ng mga Espanyol ang ating bayan. Ang barangay ang nagsisilbing pinakamaliit na pulitikal unit ng ating lipunan.  Ang ating mga ninuno noon ay nanirahan malapit sa katubigan gaya ng ilog at dagat kung saan ay nakapagbibigay ito ng pagkain at iba pang mga pangangailangan. Ang mga Tagalog ay isang halibawa ng mga tao na nakatira malapit sa katubigan (Ilog Pasig); ang salitang Tagalog ay nagmula sa dalawang salita ito ay Taga (from) at ilog (river) na ibig sabihin ay nakatira malapit sa ilog. Mayroon din mga ninuno natin na naninirahan malapit sa bundok.

      Ang bawat pamayanan ay may datu, raha, at pangat o pang-ulo na nagsisilbing pinuno ng kanilang lugar.  Ang pinunong ito ang namamahala sa pangaraw-araw na gawain sa kanilang pamayanan at

nagsasaayos sa mga isyu ng bawat kasapi. Sila ang tagapang-una sa ibat-ibang gawain sa barangay. Kaugnay nito ay mayroon ding tagapayo ang bawat barangay na tinatawag na “council of elders” na pawang kasapi ay mga nakakatanda sa barangay. Naniniwala ang ating mga ninuno na ang matatanda sa kanilang pamayanan ay mayroong malawak na kaalaman at karanasan na makakatulong sa pagdedesisyon ng mga isyu sa barangay.            Sila rin ay mayroong sariling paniniwala; sumasamba sa mga espiritu ng kalikasan at mga pumanaw na mga ninuno nila.  Ang babaylan ang nagsisilbing gabay nila sa kanilang mga seremonyas at iba pang ispiritwal na gawain. Karamihan sa mga babaylan na ito ay mga babae. 

    Samakatuwid, ipinapakita sa sinaunang pamayanan natin ang isang maayos na sistema ng pamumuhay. Ipinapakita rin dito ang isang maunlad na sibilisasyon taliwas sa sinasabi ng mga Espanyol na tayo ay mangmang o walang alam.   Sumasalamin din ito na ang lipunan bago dumating ang mga Espanyol ay nababatay sa papel na ginagampanan ng tao sa pamayanan na kung saan mula sa pinakamataas na posisyon tulad ng datu o raha hanggang sa pinakamababa, ang alipin, ay may kanya-kanyang gampanin at responsibilidad. Bukod dito pinapakita ang malaking papel ng babae sa lipunan at mataas na pagtingin sa mga ito.   

Pamayanan sa Panahon ng Espanyol

    Sinasabing kakaiba ang paraan na ginamit ng mga Espanyol sa pagsakop sa ating bayan kumpara sa ibang dayuhang mananakop. Ayon sa kanila ay kailangan baguhin ang pagkatao ng mga katutubo. Ngunit, papaano ba mababago ang katauhan ng mga tao? Dito ay kailangan ipasok ang bagong uri ng sibilisasyon, sibilisasyon na tinulad sa sibilisasyong medieval sa kanilang bansa. 

    Isang hakbang ay pagpapakalat ng mga misyonero sa ibat-ibang bahagi ng Pilipinas. Pinaghati-hatian ng ibat-ibang orden gaya ng mga Agustino, Dominikano, Pransikano, Heswita at Rekoletos ang mga lugar sa ating bansa upang masimulan ang puspusang pagkakalat ng bagong paniniwala. Dito rin sinimulan na iwaksi ang dating paniniwala na mayroon ang mga katutubo noon. Tinipon ng mga Espanyol ang mga katutubo sa isang bagong lugar na pinili ng mga misyonero na may kaayusang kolonyal at nakasentro sa simbahan, plaza at munisipyo.  

    Para sa mga Espanyol ang sibilisasyon ay kumakahulugan sa pagsasailalim sa kapangyarihan ng Hari ng Espanya at pagiging isang Kristyano.  Dahil dito, ipinasok ng mga Espanyol ang bagong istrakturang politikal, ekonomiya, relihiyon at kultura.            Pinakilala ng mga Espanyol ang sistemang reduccion na pumuputol sa ugnayan ng mga barangay sa isang pamayanan upang maging isang pueblo. Ginamit na istratehiya ng mga mananakop ang paraang ito upang maging madali para sa Espanyol ang pagkontrol sa mga Filipino sapagkat napapaliit nito ang bilang ng tao.                Ang salitang reducir ay termino na ginagamit upang tukuyin ang pagpapalit ng tirahan ng mga katutubo sa isang pamayanang may kaayusang kolonyal. Inilayo ng mga Espanyol ang mga katutubo sa kinagisnang pamumuhay at paniniwala nito. Ang mga barangay ay pinagsama-sama at ginawang isang

pueblo. Ang pueblo ngayon ang tinatawag na bayan. Nagbagong bihis ang dating mga barangay. Ang dating mga datu at raha ay nabawasan ng kapangyarihan; lumawak ang papel ng mga prayle, Espanyol at mga eletista sa pamayanan. Ang simbahan ang naging pinakamalaking istraktura sa pamayan; simbolismo ng katatagan ng bagong relihiyong dala nila.   

    Kung dati ang lipunan ay nahahati batay sa papel na ginagampanan ng mga miyembro ng lipunan; sa panahon ng Espanyol ito ay nahati base sa lahi (Espanyol, Filipino, Intsik). Ito rin ay nahati batay sa paniniwala o relihiyon (Katolismo, Islam o Pagano).     

    Ang mga lungsod ng Vigan sa Ilocos Sur at Lipa sa Batangas ay ilan lamang sa  mga konkretong ebidensya ng mga tipikal na mga bayan sa panahon ng kolonyalismo. 

    Tunay na nagbagong bihis ang bayan sa panahon ng paniil ng mga Espanyol . Bagong mukha at pagkatao na nagbubura sa ating nakaraan bilang isang tunay na Filipino.  Ngunit hindi rin maikakakila na may ilang katutubo na patuloy na ipinaglalaban ang nakagisnang kultura, paniniwala at pagkakakilanlan.

Rizal’s Settlement Project in Sabah by Quennie Ann J. Palafox

 The colonization project of Rizal in Sabah was a response to the Calamba’s land crisis which all started when Governor-General Terrero released a directive for the investigation of the friar estates to resolve the agrarian problems on the collection of land taxes and tenancy. Rizal was requested by the tenants of Calamba to conduct an investigation on hacienda owned by the Dominicans in Calamba and he submitted it to the Governor-General for appropriate actions. He found out that the hacienda of the Dominican Order comprised not only the lands around Calamba, but the whole town of Calamba. 

       Rizal’s exposure of the miserable plight of the tenants drew resentment from the friars. To make things worse, the Supreme Court of Madrid sided with the Dominicans and gave its recognition of the proprietorship of the lands in Calamba. It was mandated that tenants of Calamba be expelled if they fail to leave the hacienda before the date set by the law. Rizal’s family dispossessed from the Dominican-owned hacienda in Calamba in the absence of Rizal. Governor-General Weyler, who took the place of Governor-General Terrero, was sympathetic to the friars and so he deployed 50 soldiers from the peninsular regiment of artillery to drive out the poor tenants and the soldiers showed no mercy when they burned the houses as the tenants exceeded to the given 12 days to evacuate their belongings.

       On his trip to Hong Kong, Rizal by chance met an Englishman Mr. W.B. Pryor and his wife, who were on their way to Sabah (North Borneo) to whom Rizal had shared his idea of a Filipino settlement in Sabah. The owner of the territory, the Sultan of Jolo, had it leased to the North Borneo Company in 1878 and was duly recognized by Spain, Germany and England with the condition that Spanish sovereignty over the island of Jolo will be honored. What was in the mind of Rizal that he desired to establish Filipino community in Sabah? He said in his letter to Blumentritt on February 23, 1892: “if it is impossible for me to give my country liberty. I should like to give it at least to these noble countrymen of mine in other lands”. Based on this statement, we can conclude that Rizal was apparently considering of relocating his

family in Sabah where he can organize a Filipino community who would devote themselves in agriculture, he serving as the leader. He observed in Hong Kong that Englishmen governed their colony well far from the persecutions suffered by the natives of Philippines from the Spaniards. 

       Jaena, Luna, Bautista, Blumentritt and his other friends in Europe were delighted upon hearing the plan and expressed their support to the noble venture. While the project was commendable for most of his friends, Manuel Hidalgo, Rizal’s brother-in-law was not in favor. By January of 1892, Rizal had already prepared the agreement which was to govern the settlement of the Filipino colony in its relations with Sabah. The North Borneo Company offered permanent settlement for the emigrants and the sale or lease of lands for 999 years. None of the settlers would render free labor or be forced to serve in the military except the territory’s sovereignty is in threat. They would rule themselves with their own laws under the safeguard of the Company. In March, Rizal received a favorable sign when Mr. Pryor saw that Sabah needed manpower, and so he invited Rizal to come over to Sandakan. The company offered to undertake construction of buildings and planting of orchards, all payable in three years. Rizal in the absence of the governor of the island entered negotiations with the acting Secretary of the Government, Mister Cook, who also had to specify in writing the conditions of the settlement. He was received by the Governor on April 6, 1892, and on the following day he left for Hong Kong on board the Memnon.

       On his arrival in Hong Kong, Rizal obtained directly from Spanish Consul Governor-General Eulogio Despujol’s position over the issue of Sabah settlement. Despujol refused to answer the letter sent by Rizal asking his permission to allow the landless Filipinos to establish a colony in Sabah. Despujol had probably played safe by not entering into an agreement involving him, nor to give publicity to the aspirations of the would-be-settlers as well as their intention to renounce their nationality. The consul whom Despujol coursed his reply, informed that the Governor-General had received his letter but he considered the Sabah project anti-patriotic as the Philippines was short of labor to cultivate its lands, and that he did not favor the establishment of Filipino community in Sabah.        

Noli Me Tangere an Eye Openerby Mona Lisa H. Quizon

      During Rizal’s stay in various cities in Europe, he noticed that Filipinos were practically unknown. According to Leon Ma. Guererro, Filipinos were mistaken for Chinese in Spain and Japanese in Paris. Thus during the Paris Exposition in 1889 Rizal picked seven Filipinos including Juan Luna to be part of a society called Indios Bravos in order to uphold the dignity of the Filipinos and to have a sense of national identity. 

   Realizing the need for the Filipinos to be known in Europe, Rizal presented a proposal on writing a novel about the Philippines to the members of the Circulo-Hispano Filipino on January 2, 1884. The members generally approved his idea. But unfortunately, the project did not materialize because those who are expected to work with him did not write anything on the subject instead most of his fellow expatriates    are interested to write about women. Sadly the project died out; on the other hand Rizal became more determined to write his own novel about the Philippines.

 Rizal was inspired to numerous ideas on writing his first novel from the novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe, which portrayed the brutalities committed by the American (Whites) against the Negro slaves up to the Wandering Jew by Eugene Sue. He was even motivated by Luna’s Spoliarium. For

Rizal, Luna’s canvass conveyed the predicament of the defeated and the wretched agony of the human race. The Spoliarium was a reflection of the spirit of the social, moral and political life of Rizal’s time because it showed the Filipinos under the hardship and injustices in the hand of the tyrants. Indeed these inspirations provided Rizal the springboard to write a novel that will serve as an antidote to the stern illness of the society. Noli Me Tangere according to Schumacher can be considered as a charter of Filipino nationalism. It calls on the Filipino to return to the heritage of their ancestors; affirm equal rights to the Spaniards, regain his self-confidence and value his self-worth. It pushes the importance of education, dedication to the country and assimilating the aspects of Western culture that could enhance native traditions.

 The novel exposes the social maladies in the country during Rizal’s time and changes needed in the various sector in our society. Some of the reforms that Rizal cited in the novel were justice for the unfortunate, more respect for human dignity and greater security for the individual, less power in the constabulary and less privileges for the groups prone to abuses and corruptions. Though the novel is a work of fiction, it can be considered a true story of the Philippines during the last decades of the Spanish regime. The characters used by Rizal were inspired by persons who actually existed during that time.  

 Elias and Crisostomo Ibarra became the mouthpiece of Rizal. Elias cited the solutions for the needed reforms in the society. For Elias, revolution was the key for the change they wanted while Ibarra on the other hand believed that it is not yet time nor the Filipinos are ready enough to launch a revolution. Rizal’s connection to the revolution is indeed controversial; to some he may be regarded as hero because he serves as an inspiration while to others he is an anti-hero for the reason that he himself is against to this kind of uprising. 

 Again Guererro mentioned that Noli Me Tangere presented the problem, the need for change in the country during that period. On the contrary it did not offer any solution to address the issues presented. Nonetheless, the novel was a major turning points in the life our national hero. It became an eye opener to the society being corrupted by the oppressors while the common tao became blind of their rights and privileges. The lessons and values presented in the novel are inspirations for all of us. Rizal stresses the following: the devotion and humility of the Filipino woman, the hospitality of Filipino family, the respect and affection of parents to their children and the deep sense of gratitude to common people. And though he may not able to see the realization of all his dreams and visions for our motherland his efforts were not in vain.   

 As we commemorate another year on the heroism of Jose Rizal, may we instill in our minds and hearts the many things he had done for the Filipinos and for our nation.  In the end, Rizal said in his speech at the banquet of the Filipino students held at the Café de Madrid on December 31, 1883 “in my heart I have suppressed all loves, except that of my native land; in my mind I have progress; and my lips have forgotten the names of the native races in the Philippines in order not to say more than Filipinos”.   

Jose Rizal and the Revolution:Revisiting Renato Constantino’s “Veneration without Understanding”By Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay

      When we open the pages of history books in the Philippines, it is not surprising to see texts about the martyrdom of our most celebrated hero-- Dr. Jose Rizal. In fact, it seems that his name already occupied a permanent and prominent place in every publication that has something to say about the Philippines. 

 Truthfully, there is nothing wrong about immortalizing Rizal and his heroism in books and literatures read by several generations of Filipinos and non-Filipinos. Probably, most writers deemed that doing such is a fitting way of paying respect and gratitude to his contributions and sacrifices for the benefit of the Filipino people and of our nation. It’s just unfortunate that in trying to present him as an icon of heroism, he was placed in a pedestal that became too tough for Juan dela Cruz to reach.

      The national revolution that we had in our country from 1896 to 1901 is one period when the Filipino people were most united, most involved and most spirited to fight for a common cause—freedom.  While all aspects of Jose Rizal’s short but meaningful life were already explored and exhausted by history writers and biographers, his direct involvement in the Philippine Revolution that broke out in 1896 remains to be a sensitive and unfamiliar topic.       Historians cannot deny that Rizal played a major part in the country’s struggle for reforms and independence.  His writings, particularly the Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo were viewed as the guiding force for other patriots to rally for the country’s cause. While most of us believed that Rizal dedicated his life and labor for the cause of the revolution and venerated him to a certain extent, a brave historian rose up and went against the tide by making known to the public his stand that Rizal was NOT an actual leader of the Philippine Revolution.  While most of his biographers avoided this topic, it is important to note that this greatest contradiction in Rizal made him more significant than ever.

 In his Rizal Day lecture in 1969 entitled “Veneration without Understanding,” Prof. Renato Constantino tried to disclose the real Rizal and the truth of his heroism stripping off the superficial knick-knacks adorned on him by hagiographers and hero-worshippers.

      The very striking fact that Constantino forwarded was the notion that Rizal was not a leader of the Philippine Revolution, but a leading opponent of it.  Accordingly, in the manifesto of 15 December 1896 written by Rizal himself which he addressed to the Filipino people, he declared that when the plan of revolution came into his knowledge, he opposed its absolute impossibility and state his utmost willingness to offer anything he could to stifle the rebellion.  Rizal thought of it as absurd, and abhorred its alleged criminal methods.              Rizal in his manifesto put into premise the necessity of education in the achievement of liberties.  Most importantly he believed that reforms to be fruitful must come from above and that those that come from below are shaky, irregular, and uncertain.            Rizal’s weakness for this matter was his failure to fully understand his people.  He was unsuccessful in empathizing with the true sentiments of the people from below in launching the armed rebellion.   He repudiated the revolution because he thought that reforms to be successful should come from above.  It could be understandable that the hero thought of such because it was the belief of the prevailing class to which Rizal belonged.  It is also possible that Rizal disproved the revolution due to his belief that violence should not prevail.  In this case, Rizal unintentionally underestimated the capacity of those from below to compel changes and reforms.              This hesitation of Rizal against the revolution was supported by Dr. Pio Valenzuela’s 1896 account of the revolution after he was sent by Andres Bonifacio to Dapitan to seek Rizal’s opinion and approval in launching an armed rebellion against the Spanish administration.  In September 1896, Valenzuela before a military court testified that Rizal was resolutely opposed to the idea of a premature armed rebellion and

used bad language in reference to it, the same statement was extracted from him in October 1896, only that he overturned that it was Bonifacio, not Rizal, who made use of foul words.              However, Valenzuela after two decades reversed his story by saying that Rizal was not actually against the revolution but advised the Katipuneros to wait for the right timing, secure the needed weapons and get the support of the rich and scholarly class.  Valenzuela recounted that his 1896 statements were embellished due to duress and torture and it was made to appear that in his desire “not to implicate” or “save” Rizal, testified that the latter was opposed to the rebellion. This turn of events put historians into a great confusion, making Rizal’s stand over the Philippine Revolution, controversial and debatable, making him both hero and anti-hero.            Constantino, in reality did not disrobe Rizal the merit he deserves, what he did was a critical evaluation of Rizal as a product of his time.  He pointed out that even without Rizal, the nationalistic movement would still advance with another figure to take his place because it was not Rizal who shaped the turn of events but otherwise.  Historical forces untied by social developments impelled and motivated Rizal to rose up and articulate the people’s sentiments through his writings.  In fact, the revolution ensued even Rizal disagreed with it.  Finally, Constantino argued that to better understand the hero, we should also take note of his weaknesses and learn from them.

Rizal the Futuristby Dr. Pablo S. Trillana II on the 103rd Anniversary of the Martyrdom of Dr. Jose Rizal (1999)

"Protean is the word that comes to mind when we speak of the Filipino national hero Dr. Jose Rizal. Novelist, poet, teacher, linguist, ophthalmologist, sportsman, sculptor, essayist,thinker. He was all of the above. But there is one aspect of Rizal's brilliance that is seldom discussed -- Rizal as a futurist.  Rizal was always years ahead of his time."

Now that we are closing the door on one millennium and opening the door to the next, there could not be a more propitious time to dwell on this great man's prophetic insights.

Even before holism was adopted as a paradigm for the modern world, Rizal had already applied the theory to his school in Dapitan, where he strove to teach the "whole man". In addition to offering formal academic subjects, he taught his pupils boxing, swimming, fencing, agriculture, and the need for community services. As an important part of their education, he took them on venturesome excursions to test their mettle in real situations. For he believed it was in the unpredictable world where intelligence was needed most.

As a statesman without portfolio, his vision of the Filipino nation and his precepts for its guidance are as fresh today as they were a hundred years ago. In Noli Me Tangere, his first novel, Rizal warned Spanish authorities of the blood bath their colonial policy, or lack of policy, would lead to. In Noll's sequel, El Filibusterismo, he predicted the coming of a revolution while hinting, in the same breath, that the revolution would fail because the Filipinos lacked the arms and organization to see it through.

In his most prescient essay, Filipinas Dentro de Gen Anos, written in 1889, he foretold that Spain and the Philippines would eventually become equal independent partners in the world of geopolitics, that the

United States, after appropriating the Philippines for herself, would emerge as a new colonial power in Asia.

One might say that the predictions found in Noli and Fill were merely insights of an alert observer since they were based on the apparent worsening conditions of Spanish colonial rule in the country. But the predictions in Filipinas Dentro de Gen Anos is proof of a complex intellect. We must remember that at the time Rizal wrote the essay, the Revolution of 1896, which would lead to the creation of a Philippine Republic, independent of and equal to Spain, was more than six years away. And America's presence in Asia would not happen until the turn of the nineteenth century, long after he was dead.

Rizal foresaw the strengths and weaknesses of the Philippine nation today as it stands on the brink of a new and exciting world. Like a chastising father, he warned us, through the words of Padre Florentino in El Filibusterismo, that we will never have a successful state or bayan, until we also have a successful nation or bansa. There is a world of difference between the two. While statehood provides the infrastructure of government, it is nationhood that creates the temper of governance. What Rizal saw as an ideal nation-state was embodied in La Liga Filipina, yet another one of the hero's scenarios for the future. Organized on the basis of regional and district councils, La Liga Filipina was envisioned to unite the archipelago into one compact, vigorous, and homogenous body. Members were pledged to mutual assistance in the face of every want and necessity, to provide defense against injustice, to encourage education, agriculture, and commerce, and to study and apply reforms. In short, La Liga was a vision of a moral community in which all of the people worked together for the common good, for a better future.

That vision, upon which La Liga was founded, is as vital today as it was 100 years ago. Rizal, through his writings and his deeds, has given us a blueprint for our future. But what we do with it is up to us.

To this day, we are trying to attain Rizal's ideal of a mutual-aid society. The question is, are we trying hard enough? It is true that we have made great strides in many aspects of national life. But it is also true that all too often we lack the collective spirit to act as one in order to serve the good of all.

I'm not saying we are unconcerned as a people. Far from it. We can look back to two revolutions - the Revolution of 1896 and the EDSA Revolution of 1986 - to remind ourselves of what we can do and be, when we unite as a people with a common purpose. Should we ever forget, we need only to summon Rizal who wrote, "Very probably the Philippines will defend with indescribable ardor the liberty she has bought at the cost of so much blood and sacrifice. With the new men that will spring from her bosom and the remembrance of the past, she will perhaps enter openly the wide road of progress."

If, as Rizal suggests, the past holds the contours of the future, this nation has indeed a lot of solid ground on which to build the just, caring, and progressive society of the future.

Just as Rizal knew then, we must know now that we can move forward only if we work together, combining our energies toward a common goal and finding direction from the lessons of the past. Let the compass of history guide us into the next one thousand years.

The La Liga Filipina Today

      The Filipinos continued to seek reforms in the Philippines even with the hostile reaction of the colonial government. Their peaceful campaigns led to the establishment of various associations both in the Philippines and in Spain. Unfortunately, Spanish authorities ignored the campaigns of Filipino

reformist.

      Upon the return of Jose Rizal in the Philippines in July 1892, he organized the association called La Liga Filipina. This was a daring move of Rizal to achieve reforms for the nation.

La Liga was a brainchild of Rizal which was formally founded on July 3, 1892 in the house of Doroteo Ongjunco at No. 176 Ilaya St. Tondo, Manila. Among its officers were Ambrosio Salvador, president; Agustin de la Rosa, fiscal; Bonifacio Arevalo, treasurer; and Deodato Arellano, secretary. Some of its members were Andres Bonifacio, Mamerto Natividad, Domingo Franco, Jose Dizon, Apolinario Mabini, Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista, Marcelino de los Santos, Arcadio del Rosario, and Jose Ramos.        The La Liga sought to attain these aims: “to unite the whole archipelago into one compact, vigorous, and homogenous body; mutual protection for all in every want and necessity; defense against violence and injustice; encouragement of instruction, agriculture and commerce and study and application of reforms.” Rizal himself drafted the constitution of La Liga while in Hong Kong.

 The colonial authorities deemed this organization subversive, quickly arrested Rizal and deported him to Dapitan, Zamboanga del Norte. La Liga died too soon, even though there were still some members who continued its goals; other patriotic members signaled their plan of establishing a more radical group - the Katipunan. On July 7, 1892 Andres Bonifacio, Deodato Arellano and others formed this secret society as an alternative solution. They believed that attainment of freedom will be achieved by means of revolution. The Katipunan plan was to separate the country from mother Spain.

 The La Liga Filipina principles continue to be significant even today. Their dreams of national unity during those times are still dreamed by many Filipinos today. Many of us hoped for progress in various aspects of our society. Without unity there would be no development. Protection and defense against violence and injustice; improvement in our educational system, agriculture and commerce are means in realizing our dreams.

     We already attained independence from the colonizers; now freedom from economic inequity and national unity are the remaining challenges that we have to overcome. Hopefully, these visions and ideals of La Liga Filipina still remained in our hearts.

Remembering Rizalismoby Mona Lisa H. Quizon        To be Jose Rizal, the National Hero is to be immensely admired and also a huge challenge for him to do. However, he is no longer alive when he was proclaimed national hero of the Philippines. During his younger age, Rizal said to his sisters that someday people will build monuments in his honor, Rizal might have dreamed of becoming one of the important figures in our history or he just never thought that he will be what he is at present. Nonetheless, Rizal’s ideas served as inspiration to the challenges that we are facing today. 

  He was a man of peace with a vision. During the time that our nation was struggling against foreign colonizers, Rizal chose not to take up the guns against the oppressive Spanish government and friars, but instead worked peacefully for reforms. He sought equality among fellowmen under the Spanish rules. When the revolutionary group of Andres Bonifacio encouraged him to join the revolution he turned them

down and instead he told that the Philippines was not yet ready for an uprising. He believed that Filipinos were not equipped to challenge the Spanish forces in battle. Rizal emphasized the importance of education as a key to unlock the chains that prevent the Filipinos to step forward for freedom and face the world with pride. He envisioned Filipinos liberated with their own government. According to Rizal “the glory of saving a country is not for him who has contributed to its ruin. Hate never produces anything but monsters and criminals”

 He also showed sacrifices; he could have relished of his family’s abundance and enjoyed all the travel opportunities that he had, but, instead, he help his countrymen to see the light of freedom through his writings. The Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo awakened the souls of every Filipinos to assert their rights as citizens of this nation and more importantly as human beings. Because of his attacks to the Spanish government and church, he was sentenced to die by musketry. He showed heroism by ultimately sacrificing his life in Bagumbayan on December 30, 1896.

 Rizal stood as one of the great products of the Malay race. His peaceful means of reform makes him Asia’s first modern non-violent proponent of political reforms. He leads in the rejection of colonialism and the emergence of new Asian nations.    

 Indeed, Rizal’s ideas continue to make sense. He exemplified virtues of honesty, integrity, patriotism and peace. It is up to us to continue his aspirations and legacies. As we commemorate the 112th Death Anniversary of our National Hero, let us plant in our hearts the legacies of Rizalismo.