Karl Michael S.

Paler
09/24/15
1:00 - 2:30 pm TTh
The Limited Filipinos
But the appropriation to this term was not the end of this historic struggle for
national identity. While the Rizals time was a signal victory, in was truth in limited
victory for us. For the users of the term were themselves limited Filipinos based on
education and property. Since this term was applied to those who spoke in the name
of the people but were not really of the people, the next stage for this governing
concept should be the recognition of the masses as the real nation and their
transformation into real filipinos. However, the Filipino of today must undergo a
process of decolonization before one can become a true Filipino. The decolonized
Filipino is the real goal for our time just as the Hispanized Filipino was once the goal
of the reformists.
Though Rizal was able to win for his countrymen the name Filipino, in was stil
as illustrado that he conceived of this term as illustrado he was speaking in behalf
of all the indios though he was separated by culture and even by property from the
masses. His illustrado orientation manifests itself in his novels. Though they are
supposed to represent 19 century Philippines society in microcosm, all the principal
characters belonged to the principalia. But there are only hazy descriptions of
characters who belonged to the masses. His class position, his upbringing, and his
foreign education were profound influences which constituted a limitation on his
understanding of his countrymen.
Rizal had ideas for patriotism, all for his country, yet his repudiation of the
Revolution was an act against the people. There seems to be a contradiction
between the two acts; there is actually none. Both acts were in character; Rizal was
acting from patriotic motives in both instances.
He condemned the Revolution because as an illustrado he instinctively
underestimated the power and the talents of the people. He believed in freedom not
so much as a national right but as something to be deserved, like a medal for good
behaviour. Moreover, he did not equate liberty with independence. Since his idea of
liberty was essentially the demand for those rights which the elite needed in order
to proper economically, Rizal did not consider political independence as a
prerequisite to freedom. He did not want us to fight for our independence. Rather,
he wanted us to wait for the time when Spain, acting in her own best interests,
would abandon us. He expressed himself clealy on these points in the following
passages from a letter which he wrote in his cell on December 12, 1896 for the use
of his defense.
Yet the people revered him because, though he was not with them, he died for
certain principle which they believed in, he was their martyr, they recognized his
labours although they knew that he was already behind them in their forward
march.

In line with their avowed policy of preparing for us eventual self-government,

the Americans projected Rizal as the model of the educated citizen. His name was
invoked whenever the incapacity of the masses for self-government was pointed out
as a justification for American tutelage. Rizals preoccupation with education served
to further the impression that the majority of the Filipino were unlettered and
therefore needed tutelage before they could be ready for independence. In the end,
our admiration for Rizal may be used to buile us into accepting reactionary beliefs,
the products of colonial mentality.
A people have every right to be free. Tutelage in the art of government as an
excuse for colonialism is discredited alibi. People lean and educate themselves in
the process of struggling for freedom and liberty. They attain their highest potential
only when they are masters of their own destiny. Colonialism is the only agency still
trying to sell the idea that freedom is a diploma to be granted by a superior people
to an inferior one after years of apprenticeship.