Feature article posted to the Philippine News Agency (Dec 15):
PHL history replete with instances of
factionalism
[Might be of interest to those who often wonder why there are so many different groups/factions in the Philippines]
Philippine history is replete with instances of factionalism where groups are
polarized into pros vs. antis.
Name it. And you can find divisions within a group, be it politics, religion,
sports, showbiz, whatever.
The break-up of the Katipunan into the Magdalo and Magdiwang factions was one
of the factors that led to the failure of the Philippine revolution in 1896.
Andres Bonifacio left the group and formed the Magdiwang faction after his
election as Director of Interior was questioned by Daniel Tirona.
The latter claimed the position for which Bonifacio was elected should go to
a lawyer.
Tirona was an ally of Emilio Aguinaldo who was earlier elected as President.
The schism between the revolutionaries worsened when Bonifacio was killed by
the Magdalo group.
This event would be debated later by historians -- that Aguinaldo was
responsible for the death of Bonifacio.
The same allegation against Aguinaldo would be repeated later with the
killing of Gen. Antonio Luna in Cabanatuan, Nueva Ecija.
Luna did not conform with many of the policies of Aguinaldo.
To address what was perceived as recalcitrance of Luna, a meeting was
arranged between him and emissaries of Aguinaldo, according to historical
papers.
Alone, the Ilocano general -- Luna was from Badoc, Ilocos Norte -- went to
the agreed on rendezvous where he was repeatedly stabbed and shot dead,
according to some historical accounts.
Political parties in the Philippines started in 1907 when the Partido
Nacionalista dominated the Philippine Assembly.
Stalwarts of the party who became presidents of the country were Manuel L.
Quezon and Sergio Osmeña.
Manuel Roxas, originally a Nacionalista, was elected head of state under the
Partido Liberal which he founded in 1945 after the war.
The two opposing parties had differences in ideologies.
The Nacionalistas were associated with conservatism and the Liberalistas,
liberalism. But leaders of the two parties had one thing in common.
Aside from being well-schooled, they all came from wealthy families.
Student activism in the Philippines flourished in the mid-60s when Ferdinand
E. Marcos, a former Liberal who turned Nacionalista, was President.
Activists then branded politicians as "naghaharing uri" (the ruling class).
In 1964, Jose Ma. Sison, a faculty member of the University of the
Philippines organized the Kabataang Makabayan.
An ally of KM, the Samahan ng Demokratikong Kabataan, would emerge later.
Sison had been a member of the Provisional Central Committee of the Communist
Party of the Philippines under Jesus Lava and Pedro Taruc.
Sison resigned from the CPP, but Lava claimed that Joma was expelled from the
party.
The KM-SDK both embraced the teachings of Mao Tse Tung -- e.g. “political
power grows out of the barrel of the gun!”
Meaning, reform in the government can only be achieved through armed
struggle.
Another leftist with Marxist-Leninist orientation, the Malayang Pagkakaisa ng
Kabataang Pilipino, was also active during the early 70s.
But the KM-SDK shunned this group for being a “Soviet revisionist.”
Meanwhile, the alliance of student groups like National Union of Students of
the Philippines which opposed the so-called “national democracy” of the KM-SDK
were branded as rightists, anti-revolutionary, reactionaries,
pseudo-nationalists, and lackeys of the government.
In 1969, Nur Misuari, another UP instructor, organized the Moro National
Liberation Front which sought to establish a separate Islamic state in Mindanao.
A Samal-Tausug, Misuari formed this group with other Filipino Muslims from
other cultural communities in Mindanao, among them Hashim Salamat, a
Maguindanaoan.
But despite their commonality in faith, the MNLF was split.
Misuari expelled Salamat in 1977 after he refused to accept the signing of
the Tripoli Agreement by the MNLF and the Philippine government.
In 1984, Salamat organized the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.
Flashback to 1898. Bernardino Nozaleda, the last Spanish Archbishop of
Manila, asked Filipino Catholic priest Gregorio Aglipay to talk with the leaders
of the revolutionaries and offer them a level of autonomy for the Philippines.
But Aglipay, who set up his Sandataan guerrilla headquarters in Pinili,
Ilocos Norte at the turn of the 20th century, was overtaken by the
Philippine-American war.
He joined the revolution and was appointed Military Vicar General of the
revolutionaries.
In this capacity, Aglipay sent a letter to various clergy enjoining them to
ask the Pope to appoint Filipino priests in all local church positions.
Because of this, Nozaleda excommunicated Aglipay. This would lead to the
establishment of the Philippine Independent Church in 1902.
More than a decade later, Felix Y. Manalo founded the Iglesia ni Cristo on
July 27, 1914.
During this period, too, the Americans had introduced to the natives the
Protestant religion.
In the early 80s, few observers perceived that many Catholics dissociated
themselves from the Church and turned born-again Christians because of the
meddling of then Manila Archbishop Cardinal Jaime Sin in government affairs.
To oppose one another in terms of ethnicity, religion and political beliefs
are not a monopoly of Filipinos.
There is, for instance, the decades-old feud between the Protestants and
Catholics in Ireland; the war in the Middle East between and among members of
the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly Conference); the sporadic
fighting between South and North Korea; and the intransigence of Taiwan towards
Mainland China.
The Filipino, according to anthropologist Eric Casiño, has a multi-layered
identity.
From being a plain tao, a Filipino is first identified through his place of
origin.
Hence, he is a Visayan, Ilokano, Kampampangan, Tagalog, Bicolano, etc. The
archipelagic configuration of the Philippines made this so.
This is also the reason why Filipinos are clannish and regionalistic; and
could be the reason Filipinos were easily subjugated by foreigners.
They easily fell prey to the so-called “divide and conquer rule.”
Next to ethnicity, a Filipino has a religious identity which makes him a
Catholic, Muslim, Iglesia ni Cristo, a Baptist, Adventist, or a born-again
Christian.
A Filipino is further categorized through his ideological orientation or
inclination, hence, the leftist and rightist tags.
In Malacañang today, there is a so-called Samar group composed of people
identified with Vice President Jejomar Binay and the Balay Group identified with
Secretary Mar Roxas.
There is also a division from the ranks of workers, farmers and transport
groups, e.g. the Kilusang Mayo Uno vs the Trade Union Congress of the
Philippines, the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas vs National Farmers Supreme
Union, and the PISTON vs the Pasang Masda, respectively.
Just recently, the two militant party-lists representing the “underprivileged
and underrepresented” sought each other’s delisting from the roster of the
Comelec.
In showbiz during the 60s, movie fans were either a Susan Roces diehard or an
Amalia Fuentes fanatic; in the 70s, it was Vilmanians vs Noranians.
In sports, well-known rivalries in basketball are the Blue Eagles vs Green
Archers; Crispa vs Toyota, etc.
Other identities may be based upon a person’s affiliation.
A joke is oft repeated, with a boy asking his mother: “Mama, how do lions
make love?”
After a brief pause, she answered: “I don’t know, son, your father is a
Rotarian.”
To achieve national unity, Dr. Casiño said, Filipinos have to transcend their
individual, ethnic, religious and other identities and think as a Filipino.
He did not elaborate.
http://www.pna.gov.ph/index.php?idn=10&sid=&nid=10&rid=480101
