Towards a Nation of the Working Masses:
Up the People's Republic!
By: Kat Ulrike
At this present time, the Philippines tries to preserve the national sentiment in the hearts and minds of the people.
Whether it is in a form of a cultural group, political organisation, or a trade union centre, these and more would say trying their best to promote and cultivate national sentiment, trying to save from extinction the its history, heritage, anything that keeps a nation thriving if not great. That the public life of the nation has been generally so much identified with the struggle for cultural, what more of political emancipation, all from which its people actively contributed about with all their lives; while on the other hand, seeing the economic side of the national situation has rather recieveth a very small amount of attention- an issue that's "only to be discussed by experts".
With this, there is a danger that from those who trying to distort or dilute national sentiment, reducing its significance by neglecting vital living issues, to those of turning historical studies into a mere worship of the past, turning nationalism into a tradition – "glorious and heroic indeed", as what Ireland's Connolly said, "but still only a tradition."
And these would say "provide inspiration" to uplift a nation, yes indeed, but not enough to steer the tide of revolution. A Filipino athlete may win the prize, or a giant skyscraper somewhere in Mega Manila be praised as a country's feat, but these cannot end the centuries-old chains that binds this nation: that of landlords and corrupt bureaucrats supporting interests of both Uncle Sam and Fu Manchu.
Perhaps, in this month supposedly commemorating this country's "independence", let the folk again remind what Connolly saidth:
"If the national movement of our day is not merely to re-enact the old sad tragedies of our past history, it must show itself capable of rising to the exigencies of the moment."
And in it must show to the folk, to the masses that this nationalism isn't about lamenting after ashes but of lighting the fire, something more than the "pride" being prodded by the order and the idealisation of the past, but instead, of seeking truth from facts, of creating a distinct and definite answer to the problems of this ever continuing past and a political and economic creed capable of adjustment to the wants of the present and in the future. But the error caused by disregarding the socioeconomic cause to fight for national independence is clear: for Filipinos didn't fought for civil rights alone or for the sake of reviving their lost culture. As history showeth that the most of the working folk was and is driven by their hunger to fight for their lives as well as their communities.
For sure some would dismiss it as "mere idealism", a "folly", but the ones who wished to break the bonds from the colonisers and domestic exploiters tend to invoke something despite the limitations brought by their time. But this time people wished to break away from this ever-continuing past in order to build a better future as Filipinos.
And this future is far from the follies the order presented, a debt driven one that benefited the landlord and the corrupt bureaucrat, whose flag waving apologists, no matter how they recognise the problem still dismissing it in favour of their delusion- flaunting its apostasy to the traditions of the Revolution of their forefathers the order "praised about" in this independence month; where the power of the purse has established a new tyranny under the forms of freedom, making laws that represses while pretending about the restoration of order.
At this moment, this note wishes for a republic whose people carries the ideal that at times serves as lodestone to the oppressed with the promise not just freedom, justice, and prosperity, but also a renaissance that's more than a showcase of knowledge and talent, but of dynamism, a struggle to take back the future. Especially in this days an nights of disquiet and rage:
Of tenant farmers and farmworkers all ground between feudal landlordism and the cash crop economy; of workers in the cities, regardless of their sector yet suffering from the exactions of the slave-driving capitalist and the corrupt bureaucrat, living uner threat both by labour laws and "technology". All these labouring folks are toiling away all their lives for a wage barely sufficient to keep body and soul together as well as their families- only to realise getting their pay reduced due to taxes and various sorts of dues that in the end benefited the corrupt than going directly to the nation's needs. This misery continues even as society "marches into the path of progress", a misery hidden behind the structures of glass and steel, or the smile and joy of a beautiful Filipina.
Thus, this linking together of national aspirations with those hopes of those common folks, of working masses who have raised the standard of revolt against that system of imperialism of which the United States and the rising fading-"red" China as most aggressive types trying to upheld their interests by both hard and soft power-of existing treaties and new rephrased agreements enough to snare the country with false hopes and tangible repressions, of bureaucrat capitalists trying to maintain their personal interests while feigning service to the country and to the flag and at the expense of the working folks, and of feudalism that bounds the majority into the soil with injustice as landlords conniving with international capitalism seeking for raw materials. For sure orderists would downplay these major social ills, describing as passe if not meaningless as they justify unequal treaties and more to exploit the people while claiming as "patriots". It is not surprising that in any sense, trying to import elements of discord into the ranks of earnest nationalists, and would serve to place in touch with "fresh reservoirs of moral and physical strength" sufficient to lift the cause of the Philippines to a more commanding position than it has before.
It may be pleaded that with the ideal such as those of a People's Republic, implying, as it does, a complete political and economic revolution would be sure to affect every sector, including those of alienating well-to-do supporters, who would dread the loss of their property and privileges. This matter has been an issue during the 1896, or 1870 attempts for independence, especially when these calls also ran contrary to their interests- for as in the past, the national struggle doesn't just limit to those of redeeming the nation, but also to reclaim what as rightfully theirs, like the right to till by the peasants, that for the order, a loss of their property and privileges.
***
What does this objection mean? That must conciliate the privileged classes in the country regardless of their exploitation- "think about 'national unity'" as one may say.
But if one may think or ask, can this "unity" and "conciliation" disarm their hostility by assuring them their privileges especially in the economy? will not be interfered with. That is to say, that one must guarantee that the government will still continue foreign-dictated and interest-driven policies with some piecemeal compromises with the poor, while the armed forces, police, courts, the laws and the corrupt bureaucrats will guard the fraudulent gains of compradore capitalist and despotic landlord from the masses just as remorselessly as in the past when the country was colonised.
On no other basis will these privileged classes unite with. Does one expect the masses to fight for this ideal?
When one talks about liberating the country, does it only mean the land alone or its culture, reviving heritage and tradition? Or is it the people who sustains this nation's survival? If the latter, then how to free them from the system that binds them into bondage for centuries?
Remember, as what Ireland's Connolly said, that:
"...all systems of political administration or governmental machinery are but the reflex of the economic forms which underlie them."
Ever since the Spaniards, and then the Americans colonised the Philippines what everyone sees the fact that these conquerors in the past forced upon the country a property system founded upon coercion, exploitation, even murder. They would utilise legal and extralegal means just to upheld their interests from the Encomendero to the Multinational companies, that even until this present when their domestic stooges continue their vassalage and pretending the country as "independent" complete with flag and a government. But so long the present order involves the continual practice of legalised spoliation and fraud, then this "semicolonial, semifeudal" kind of existence is found to be the most suitable form of order by which this exploitation can be protected by law and by force when the fears of the privileged demands it.
And like what happened in history, the masses, being the creators of history, is willing to take back the future that's supposed to be theirs. As Nationalists, what more as Socialists (with the capital "S") and Revolutionaries, should be willing to destroy the entire tree from its root, trunk, and branch that brutally materialistic order to which like the English language being adopted as its own after got from the Americans, as far more deadly foe to those of foreign rule and subsequent vassalage, than the superficial thinker who imagines it is possible to reconcile Nationalism with those of insidious but disastrous forms of economic subjection be it feudal tyranny, bureaucrat-capitalist corruption, imperialist-neoliberal-globalist bullshitry; baneful fruits of Conquest of which the compromiser Pedro Paterno, the "Pacificados", to those of this present Duterte regime– as precursors and apostles. These capitulationists would say wanting to maintain the peace when in fact trying to maintain their interests even it requires reducing or outright sacrificing the belief in nationhood, to which it resulted to the death and despair of many nationalists like Andres Bonifacio, Apolinario Mabini, or Crisanto Evangelista.
At present the country's flag continues to fly alone at Malacanang Palace, Senate, and at the Batasang Pambansa. Of course the order will say that the country as "free, united, and independent" while continues to exploit the masses either by issuing exorbitant taxes, levies, to those of policies that benefited the compradore and the landlord while acting as vassals to either Uncle Sam or Fu Manchu. With this would say that even the flag of the nation flies, so long as the people remains exploited, and unless one set about the organisation of this "Republic of the Masses" the efforts to "win back the land, the nation and its future" would be in vain.
And in speaking of those imperialists, both the United States and China would still rule over through her allies in the government, the capitalists with its various multinational/transnational companies, financiers with its moneylending organisations (IMF-WB or AIIB), anything that has planted in this country and watered with the blood, sweat, and tears of the masses.
***
For sure orderists would say "move on" and "past is past" in regards to this matter. Knowing that they are still indebted to their former masters who continues to dictate with "softer" tones and "safer" phrases. But unless the nation is truly capable of becoming its own self by unlocking its forces that "keeps a nation great" then how sham that independence is- for imperialism such as from both United States and China would still rule up to thy ruin, even while offering some hypocritical homage to Freedom whose cause the order had betrayed.
Or is it because the order is even scared of socialism even it meant the realisation of National independence? For sure the Jacobin-influenced Bonifacio did notice that the revolution of his has a "social character" elitists ought to shrug it off or treat it "as little as possible", but this "social character" is more than just fighting for freedom alone but rather having the will to seize the means that sustains them as a nation the way they claim back their faith and honour - if "national consciousness" is the democratic foundation for justice and social solidarity between members of the same people, as the Greek tradition understood it ("Ethneos"), then that advent of Socialism can only take place when the revolutionary proletariat, together with the peasantry and other patriotic forces, altogether as the organised forces of the nation and having the national and social consciousness will be able to build a new social organisation that's in line with the natural march of development.
For just like Democracy, Nationalism without Socialism – without a reorganisation of society on the basis of a broader and more developed form of that common property like which the majority of the folk fought for from the days of Bonifacio or those of Crisanto Evangelista and Benigno Ramos - is only national recreancy.
With this one would say that a "Philippine Republic" that adheres to National and Social interest would then become a natural depository of people's power. That republic has to become a tool for the construction of the new society and a weapon of social emancipation, the only power which would show in its full light all these class antagonisms and lines of economic demarcation at obscured by the mists of bourgeois-centric "unity".
For now orderists, trying to cling in their interests on the pretense of "national unity" had so far succeeded in inculcating to the people their perverted versions of freedom, justice, and morality; or even democracy and discipline to the people and becomes as if as its own belief; but the question is, until when this perversion of such belief persist? For sure one, two, three till more would realise that these perverted versions may be "wrong" therefore comes the idea to seek truth from facts in order to gain what is true and to fight back as possible.
This writer would may say "pardon for the thought" in expressing this note, but as any deeply concerned patriot would think that having little attention to economic and social matters within the national issue- especially those of the working folk has forgotten that these working folks are the ones who till and forge their country of theirs; what more that by letting the traders and landlords dominate much of economic, political, and even cultural affairs, all for their vested interests and not about their love for the nation.