Dr. Jose Rizal, an ‘American-Sponsored’ Hero?
/
This year, on the 30th of December, I will join the Filipino nation in commemorating the 126th anniversary of Dr. Jose Rizal's martyrdom at Bagumbayan.
Every year, as we commemorate the anniversary of Rizal’s heroism, the issue of his being an American-sponsored hero is thrust into the limelight. It has generated a lot of discussion among Filipino scholars and students of history since Renato Constantino, a prominent historian, published a pamphlet about the American role in elevating Rizal to the status of a national hero.
In his pamphlet, Veneration Without Understanding (1969), Constantino claims that it was the American colonizers who elevated Rizal to the status of National Hero of the Philippines by implementing certain laws accordingly. Among the significant measures that brought him to preeminent status above other heroes were: Act No. 123, which created a political-military district known as the province of Rizal, and Act No. 124, which authorized a public description of the erection of Rizal monument at Luneta.
Why did the American colonizers sponsor someone like Rizal to be our national hero? Is it right to say that it was not their business to do that, simply because they were Americans? There was only one simple reason for this. They saw Rizal as a hero they could use for their colonial design. They picked him over other famous heroes because he was the best candidate with the values they wanted to promote, mainly pacifism and assimilationism.
The American colonial officials were aware that they would face an uphill battle in winning the hearts and minds of the Filipinos during the early years of their occupation of the Philippines. So, they decided on a policy of attraction that could diminish the anti-American sentiments among the natives (History and Policy, Burns, Adam, 2011), including giving the Filipinos a national hero. As one historian said, "it was a master stroke!" All this was part of the US imperial design to win over more Filipinos to its side by making Rizal the symbol of the fight against Spanish oppression.
When the Philippine Commission sponsored Rizal, it knew that more Filipinos would unleash their anger and resentment at the Spanish colonizers who had executed him as a traitor to Spain. It also believed that the Filipinos would praise the American colonial administration for its gesture in giving them a great Filipino hero in the person of Rizal.
How about other heroes like Andres Bonifacio, Marcelo del Pilar, Emilio Aguinaldo, or Apolinario Mabini? History cannot deny that they are also qualified to become national heroes of the Philippines, with their unquestionable patriotism and courage.
According to Theodore Friend, in his 1956 book Between Two Empires, the American colonial officials rejected other heroes for different reasons. They claimed that Aguinaldo was too militant, that Bonifacio was too radical, and that Mabini was unregenerate.
Rizal was a pacifist who advocated political evolution rather than revolution. (The Pacifist Perspective of Jose Rizal Towards Independence, Besin, Nastadia V.) He never advocated for independence by means of armed struggle. History shows that Rizal vehemently repudiated Andres Bonifacio’s bloody revolution. Rizal founded the Liga Filipina in 1892 to openly campaign for the assimilation of the Philippines as a province of Spain. He believed that once the Philippines had become a part of Spain, the natives would have equal rights with the Spanish.
In other words, the Taft Commission found Rizal's campaign for reforms consistent with American colonial policy in the Philippines. They perceived him as a perfect "fit" for their project of strengthening American rule. Making Rizal a national hero would greatly convince the Filipino people about the United States’ good intentions and, of course, encourage a few resistance groups still fighting for independence to give up their armed struggle.
I think the choice of Rizal is not a big deal for many Filipinos. Definitely, they still continue acknowledging Rizal as a national hero, regardless of whether he was a result of American sponsorship or not. For them, he was already a great hero to the Filipinos even before the American colonizers came to the Philippines.
However, for some patriotic Filipinos mesmerized by the ideas of revolution and independence, the American role in the selection of Jose Rizal as a national hero needs reevaluation given the equally inspiring contributions of other historical figures, among them being Andrés Bonifacio. They argue that Bonifacio, the founding father of the Katipunan, is more deserving than Dr. Rizal because he fought for separation from Spain, the exact condition for nationhood, in stark contrast to the latter’s campaign for assimilation.
I share the view of Ambeth Ocampo, a Filipino historian and author, that heroism is not defined by legislation or any act of sponsorship. You cannot make someone a hero with the power of the law. It is actually Rizal’s ultimate act of sacrificing his own life for the country that makes him a hero. All people who sacrifice their lives in defence of the liberty of their compatriots should be regarded as heroes. No exception. Some are giants in history, and some are unsung heroes whose identities are consigned to the shadow of history due to unlucky circumstances. But all deserve an equal place in the Pantheon of Heroes. For me, Dr. Jose Rizal should be regarded as the first among their equals for pioneering the concept of nationhood when he, for the first time, called the natives "Filipinos." Mainly, this was the reason why a prominent historian, Leon Ma. Guerrero, once called him in his book The First Filipino (1961).
Jacob Apostol is a former lecturer at the Foundation Academy in Amsterdam and a human rights activist. He is one of the founders of the FILMIS Association, an organization for undocumented migrant workers in the Netherlands.
