Celebrating Rizal's birth by reaffirming ideals in the face of struggle

Celebrating Rizal's birth 

by reaffirming ideals in the face of struggle 

 "Hold high the brow serene, 

O youth, where now you stand; 

Let the bright sheen 

Of your grace be seen, 

Fair hope of my fatherland!" 

- Jose Rizal

As this note is in one with the folk in commemorating the 159th birthday of National Hero Dr. Jose Rizal, let the folk remember his courage and commitment to serve the country that gave freedom and identity as Filipinos. 

Dr. Jose Rizal taught his people the importance of having love and patriotism for their nation. All after recent events be it the past Covid19 pandemic, of seeing same personages with empty and half-baked promises, and the inconveniences brought by politics and socioeconomic problems, as the country attempts to adapt to the new normal, may the folk cultivate the same fortitude and resiliency that Dr. Jose Rizal demonstrated in his struggle for the independence, freedom, and equality of all Filipinos.  

However, Rizal's message was and is, not limited to that of the Filipino. To cite Elias Fuentes (Tan Malaka), Rizal is a radical that has the right to question the current status of Asia and to assert the right of Asians to self-determination, something that today's Filipinos have to assert back in the face of being besieged by local and corrupt despots and of foreign lords. Fuentes even considered the "great Malayan" as an "Indonesian" before Indonesia was created, all because of his aspirations of a free and united Nusantara (archipelago). The inclusivity, according to Professor Ramon Guillermo, reflects the Indonesian Revolutionary’s belief that “Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines actually formed a single nation before European colonialism tore them apart" and that "Rizal and Andres Bonifacio are at the "summit" of the "mountain of Great Indonesia" because “they still have a significant role to play in raising the Indonesian people from the inferiority complex caused by European colonialism.”  

Call Rizal's works and aspirations to the Filipino folk as idyllic if not irrelevant in this current setting of institutionalised forgetfulness and reductionism, but to the concerned, Rizal's message as well as that of other heroes and martyrs is itself a flame that has to be ignited back and give light, warmth to the nation that needs a profound sense of self determination. Why did this note say so? Believing that through today's contemporary mindsets of crass consumerism and the bankruptcy of intellectuals, the treatment of heroes and its lessons are being reduced to some totem poles if not rendered irrelevant, moot, and academic. Will those truly concerned simply disregard and "move on" as most so? As stated in a previous post from a month ago, the existing order, in treating heroes as totem poles, would parrot Rizal or any other personality expressing hope for the present and future generations. But, given the current inconveniences, should these generations be contented to continue being exploited? 

Let this note that commemorates his Birth all strive to be as courageous and resilient as Rizal was, willing to go beyond parameters by any means as to overcome the current obstacles facing the country.  

When Educators and Artists oppose Marcos's "Bagong Pilipinas" hymn and pledge as "political propaganda"

When Educators and Artists

 oppose Marcos's "Bagong Pilipinas" hymn and pledge 

as "political propaganda"

The mandate by Malacañang to have schools, and national government agencies, sing and recite the "Bagong Pilipinas" hymn and pledge in weekly flag ceremonies was met with opposition from artist and teachers groups, who described it as "awful," "forgettable," "impractical", and a move "reminiscent of the political propaganda tactics seen during the Martial Law years." 

 As last Monday, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin signed Memorandum Circular 52, which was approved by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and attempts to instill the ideas of "Bagong Pilipinas." The directive covers national government agencies, government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs), and educational institutions, including state universities and colleges (SUCs). 

 “To further instill the principles of the Bagong Pilipinas brand of governance and leadership among Filipinos, all national government agencies and instrumentalities, including GOCCs and educational institutions, such as SUCs (state universities and colleges), are hereby directed, and LGUs are hereby encouraged, to integrate the recital of the Bagong Pilipinas Hymn and Pledge in the conduct of weekly flag ceremonies, subject to existing laws, rules and regulations,” Memorandum Circular No. 52 said. 

However, not all people find the hymn and pledge inspiring, but rather cringy and served a particular interest such as the current administration, especially from that of an educator or an artist whose duty is to inspire people, especially the youth in order to contribute in various fields for the nation. 

 Admin need not to enforce brand of governance 

but work honestly for the common good - TDC 

According to the group Teachers Dignity Coalition (TDC), claims that the memorandum order is unneeded, unworkable, and unrelated to teaching kids about nationalism and patriotism.

 “This initiative is a superficial attempt to instill a brand of governance that, instead of genuinely educating schoolchildren about nationalism and patriotism through the exemplary lives of our national leaders, resorts to mandatory recitations and songs,” the TDC said in a statement. 

 “True nationalism and patriotism cannot be enforced through hollow rituals or the blind worship of national symbols, let alone a piece of propaganda,” TDC added. 

 The TDC emphasized that the administration should not impose its own style of governance, but rather work honestly in the interests of Filipinos to "truly inspire and educate the youth."

 “The people in power have a duty to be responsive and responsible, exhibiting genuine love for the country through their respect for human rights, adherence to the rule of law and an active fight against corruption,” the TDC said. 

 “They must foster social justice through meaningful actions and legislation, not through the forced singing of a propaganda song and the recital of a pledge that appears redundant. The best way to teach our children about nationalism and patriotism is to show them leaders who lead by example, demonstrating their commitment to the country through their actions, policies and dedication to public service,” the statment added. 

 Furthermore, the group stated that the national anthem is sufficient to remind students of their responsibilities to the country. 

 Why not address social issues 

than create delusions through flimsy notions?

 Meanwhile, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers denounced Marcos's directive as it aims to divert attention from real and pressing socioeconomic issues the country has facing, interpreting that the order as an obvious attempt to impose a flimsy notion of "progress and nationalism" through symbolic gestures than the need for tangible solutions to address the country's perennial problems.

 "The Marcos Jr. administration appears to be prioritizing symbolic gestures rather than addressing the severe economic and social issues plaguing Filipinos," said Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) Philippines Chairperson Vladimer Quetua in a statement issued on Tuesday, June 11. 

"While we grapple with low salaries and wages, soaring costs of living, and chronically underfunded education and social services, the President chose to implement ceremonial measures to further promote his government branding which, in reality, for almost two years, has been failing to bring significant progress to the lives of the Filipino people," Quetua lamented.

 "What we need are tangible solutions to these problems and not attempts to shape public perception," the ACT Chairperon added. 

Furthermore, the order was also criticized by that said group since the memo went beyond the mandates of the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines, and hence it is seen as unconstitutional. Republic Act 8491, often known as the Flag Law, "does not provide the Office of the President the authority to create and require a new hymn to sing or pledge to recite during flag ceremonies in the country," and former Far Eastern University law school dean Mel Sta. Maria, said that the Flag Law did not give the Office of the President any authority to create or add a hymn or pledge in flag ceremonies, and overstepping from the said law is again unconstitutional.

In a message from X (formerly Twitter), the barrister and former Law dean stated that the flag law already provided an oath of allegiance.

 The "Bagong Pilipinas" hymn and pledge, also according to Congress of Teachers and Educators for Nationalism and Democracy (CONTEND), are reminiscent of a "dark chapter in our history, glorifying an era that brought suffering to countless citizens."

 “The ‘Bagong Lipunan’ of the Marcos dictatorship in the ’70s was a period marked by severe human rights violations, suppression of dissent and economic hardship for many Filipinos,” CONTEND said, citing the “New Society” period whose “progress and development” was meant to hide the inconveniences of human rights violations and rampant poverty. The song “Bagong Lipunan” is one example of the propaganda presented by Marcos Sr’s “New Society”.

 “We challenge all educators to resist this unconstitutional move by Marcos Jr. and instead underscore historical truth and the principles of nationalism and democracy in our classrooms and research,” CONTEND added.

Like ACT, CONTEND urges the government to address instead socioeconomic problems that made “bagong Pilipinas” more of an empty rhetoric. 

  "The focus should be on practical solutions such as increasing wages for workers, reducing the cost of essential goods, supporting drivers and operators to prevent loss of livelihood under the anti-people jeepney phaseout, and creating quality and regular jobs in the country," CONTEND stressed. 

 Awful, uninspiring 

 Other than teachers groups, artists find the “Bagong Pilipinas” hymn as far from being catchy and inspiring. As one activist-musician criticized the "Bagong Pilipinas" hymn from a strictly creative perspective, calling the melody "awful," the lyrics "forgettable," and the vocals "ill-blending." 

 According to Edgie Francis Uyanguren, national coordinator for Concerned Artists of the Philippines (CAP), "that song is cheap (and) unplanned" and may not make it past the first rounds of a songwriting contest. 

 “It wasn’t really thought out. It’s very clear in the lyrics.” Uyanguren said.  

“not a singable song” for big gatherings to begin with. If you’re going to require it to be sung by students and teachers, the voices will really be different.” Uyanguren added. 

 Another artist, Choi Padilla, a music producer and jingle writer, described the song "Bagong Pilipinas" as more of a campaign jingle supporting the current Marcos regime than a pledge of allegiance to the country. 

 “If this is how you wrote the song and you want it for [government employees and students] to sing it, it’s one-sided. And the title itself, ‘Bagong Pilipinas,’ (sounds) as if you are already gearing towards something like an agenda.” Padilla said. 

 “Like, what’s ‘new’ at all? Is there something new? For it to be a hymn, it’s weird,” he added. 

 “A hymn is supposed to show your love and allegiance to the country or that you are proud of it, and it should not show a facade that could divide the country.” Padilla stressed. 

Why defend in the face of criticism?

Nonetheless, proponents of the hymn and the pledge maintain that they are justified in doing so because "Bagong Pilipinas" highlights the government's commitment to implementing policy changes while aiming to bring about a significant social transformation. 

 Senator Jinggoy Estrada even downplay its singing as any other hymn since it is "neither illegal nor irregular" but instead urging everyone to heed its message. 

“It’s important to note that Memorandum Circular No. 52 is neither illegal nor irregular; rather, it aims to foster a culture of good governance and progressive leadership across all government levels,” Estrada said.

 “This is no different from the singing of the Senate, school and university hymns which is a way to remind us of the patriotism and unity of us Filipinos,” Estrada emphasized. 

Even during his January 28 speech that Marcos Jr. himself insist that "Bagong Pilipinas" is a set of ideals to instil of, and there was neither hymn nor pledge imposed yet that time.

 "Bagong Pilipinas is not a new partisan coalition in disguise. It is a set of ideals that all us Filipinos, regardless of political creed or religion or wealth, can coalesce around," Marcos Jr. said. 

 "Bagong Pilipinas transcends this administration. To those whose overheated imagination has been poisoned by toxic politics, Bagong Pilipinas is no Trojan Horse. It conceals no agenda," Marcos Jr. added.

But the question is, what kind of "ideals" does that "Bagong Pilipinas" have? Especially in a time that the administration itself is riddled with political scandals and serious socioeconomic matters meant to be resolved not with some hymn nor pledge? Why not promote good and transparent governance, social justice, and honest to goodness patriotism to the people as a statement of fact? 

For now there's no law yet to begin with justifying requiring every walk of life to sing that hymn or swear on that oath promoting those "ideals" "Bagong Pilipinas" have (if there is)- as the current flag law only requires government agencies and schools to play only the National Anthem and the pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

"Celebrating independence by asserting genuine independence"

"Celebrating independence by asserting genuine independence"

(Or "nationalism in the time of multinational occidentosis")

By Kat Ulrike

At first, this note bid greetings to the Filipino folk in celebrating the 126th Independence Day of this country, which signifies the liberation of the Philippines from Spanish rule. 

While the Filipino people celebrate their independence, the country is dealing with issues that are making their fight for true sovereignty more intense. As international conflict and tension between nations like China, which has targeted the Philippines in disputes over territorial claims of the West Philippine Sea, and the United States, which has increased its military presence and activities in the nation, these manifested to advance its own geopolitical interests and economic stronghold in Southeast Asia, current threats to Philippine sovereignty evolved. 

And it is not surprising that in the face of these events that the Philippines continues to remain stuck in its continuing past, a vassal between two big countries jousting for dominance in the asia-pacific region. China's aggressive claim over the country's territories has resulted in massive violations of people's rights in order to satisfy its agenda of becoming an imperialist power. These violations range from claiming the country's waters by arguing that the nine-dash line is a legitimate basis for ownership to infiltrating socio-economic activities and infringement on national policies. Meanwhile, the United States' persistent threat to a country's sovereignty through the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), and significant economic infiltration increases the likelihood that the nation will be used as a battlefield and continues to victimize people in support of its neoliberal agenda. 

These situations would say that the country needs to reignite its patriotic sentiment that's more than the promotion of "all things Filipino" as that of Barong Tagalog and promoting personalities like Manny Pacquiao. The Nationalism that's forged by the heroes and martyrs of this continuing past cannot just be stunted by the sugarcoated promises of an order that clings to interests whilst pretending to be patriotic or nationalist. Despite being independent since 1946, the nation remained tied to its former coloniser what more its aggressive neighbour through unequal agreements, promising "development" one after the other despite obvious facts of debt traps and repression. And it is not surprising that both United States and China have made a multinational occidentosis that's downplaying the nation's right to self-determination and the will to develop its future according to its own direction. 

Thus, this made the concerned ask, if this multinational westoxification on the pretense of "development" and "security" really benefited the nation? For sure the common Filipino have learned its history, as imperialism heightens the Filipino people’s marginalization and disenfranchisement which diminishes their ability to claim rights and dignity. The nation has benefited the blessings of western ideals, of development as that to freedom and democracy, and yet the presence of both imperialists hampers true national development and disbars from realizing a truly just and equitable society.  

On other hand, this note find nothing wrong in admiring and adopting Western models and criteria in education, the arts, and culture; even heroes like Jose Rizal or Andres Bonifacio were influenced by the ideals from the west, that the Philippines was "western" in its foundations despite oriental in its ground; but, by depriving the nation its own quest for self-determination and instead remain as a passive market for Western goods and as pawn in Western geopolitics, of what is admiring the west? Does it mean that by enjoying modernity means depriving its own worth? That again, isn't it that westoxification? Or Occidentosis?  

For sure there are those who disagree on this thought especially those who simply equate westernisation to reform and modernisation. Again true that the west brought developments to the developing east, but again does it mean the developing east should remain dependent on the developed west all despite generations of understanding how the west became "progressive"? Japan understood the ways of the west and had to apply it just "to make a rich nation and a strong army" to "beat the barbarians" using their perspective, but does it mean Japan had to be contented to the promises and plans of the west with its expanding markets? China and Vietnam had to learn and adopt the ways of the west in order to "self strengthen" only to be realised by breaking the shackles imposed by the old order- that the developed west benefited from these two countries and its weaknesses. Who wants a country to remain poor, impotent, an importer and consumer despite learning and seeing what the west has shown?  

This is not some kind of an individual matter but a national one. Ordinary people may call it as "colonial mentality" that fondness for things foreign, what more western all at the expense of local talent and knowledge- simply because of a status quo that prefers to keep a country backward and agricultural "for the sake of international commerce, trade, and finance". "Critics" of the national system may blame oligarchs or "leftists" for the "backwardness" the country has to endure with "protectionist policies". And yet with the willingness to have unbridled neoliberal capitalism of the multinaitonal banksters to exploit and call it "reform" or even "modernisation" isn't it that occidentosis of a multinational/transnational variant? The banksters, the multinational conglomerates are also in connivance with the local exploiters who also benefited from neoliberal exploitation.  

But does it also mean foreign investments be disregarded? This note also agrees with foreign investment so long as it is in accordance with just regulations (labour, environmental protection, etc.) to ensure real contributions to national development as opposed to the mainline view of promoting foreign investment-centric regimes, which expand enormously the rights of the foreign investor, and correspondingly diminish the controls that the host state may exercise on the investor.  

This note serves as a reminder of the historical injustices that the Filipino people have faced, and it also strengthens the case for true national sovereignty—a state in which the interests of the people come first and no imperialist stands in the way of the nation's progress. This is not to say that the nation should return to an idealized, romanticized past; rather, to see a nation that should use tools, knowledge, and expertise to actually elevate the country, enhance its culture, and boost its economy—all while fostering a community that is a nation in the making.