Professor Fernandez started today’s discussion with a thought-provoking question, a question that every student should consider when one is about to enter college. Should education be geared towards getting a high-paying job or should it also be geared towards learning an individual’s nobility? Beneath this profound question is an inquiry as to what an individual should focus on. Should one be concerned with enriching oneself financially but pay the steep price for one’s own ignorance of the social factors one chooses to turn a blind side to? Or should a student also immerse oneself with the learning of nobility and respect? Such is a dilemma every student would have to contend and eventually learn with the brevity of their tertiary education. If indeed a person chooses to ignore these truths that will inevitably lead to the realization of the existence of the bases of power and the tool of class analysis. An individual will consequently question all his cherished beliefs. One will then ask who is powerful and who is in charge in their society. Paramount was the disgust and reproach of Rizal toward his fellow compatriots in Europe who instead of enriching themselves with academic wisdom, chose to frolic in the luxuries found in the foreign shores. They were in the position to make a difference in the lives of the millions of Filipinos living in misery under the abusive Spanish colony. These illustrados had the means to make the necessary reforms for the betterment of their homeland, but they chose to retard their having getting an education and, in the process, waste away their opportunity to change the enslaving ideology at the time.
Class, as defined by Marxism-Leninism thought, is the ensemble of similar characteristics in relation to the existing mode of production. A person living in a Capitalist society is either an owner of the factors of production or not; one is either the oppressive bourgeoisie or is the oppressed proletariat. With ownership, there is power such that ownership of these factors enables an individual can translate their power over the rest of the disempowered society.
With the twenty-fifth anniversary of the EDSA Revolution coming nearer and nearer, the need for evaluating the said historical event becomes ever so clear. Was the EDSA revolution the gift of the Filipino nation to the rest of the world? Who orchestrated this uprising – was it the lower class, the middle or is it the master plan of the big businesses that were losing out because of Marcos’ policies? Wasn’t Marcos’ declaration of Martial Law the right of the State for it to maintain the existing democracy? And wasn’t it supposed to address the existing imbalance of the wealth distribution in the country? Moreover, who were not benefiting from the current system – wasn’t it not these big business Marcos shot down? But really, if one looks closer to the pages of history, one would see that President Marcos was really on the Filipinos’ side. His policies, though unpopular, were crafted to lessen the foreign dominance in most of the local industries. Another more interesting question, why did the Catholic Church supported the EDSA revolution? In order for the Catholic Church to maintain their influence over their constituents and ultimately, their grasp for power, it was necessary for this institution to embrace the system that was the most destructive – imperialism. Come to think of it, it was a Machiavellian decision for the Church to give their support to a revolution that would undo Marcos’ truly nationalistic policies back to the deplorable state where the richer becomes even richer while the poor rots away in their misery. Their end truly justified their veiled means. As the country prepares to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of EDSA, shouldn’t we, as a sovereign people, face the hard truth and answer these tough questions we have so far neglected for a quarter of a century? Now that’s the truth we all have to face. (02/22/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment