High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
QUEZON,
AN
OPPORTUNISTIC
NATIONALIST
?
This paper seeks to examine the origins of Quezon's nationalism,which can be re-evaluated in the light of his archives in the Philippine National Library. Quezon was a politician driven by ambition. Adept at a double language, this "opportunist nationalist" appeared to usethe issue of independence to further his career. But his nationalismwas not reducible to the call for independence. Quezon was aware of his role in the construction of a new nation, which he defined in thebroadest possible sense. Quezon came from the growing middle classand considered himself to be the link between ordinary people and theilustrados (upper class). In his mind, the Philippine nation should havehad neither social nor religious boundaries. In this regard, Quezonwas unlike the generation of the revolution and also different from theWestern nationalists. As head of state, Quezon had a peculiar relationship with his countrymen: he was at once familiar and distant,not unlike the pre-colonial datus. All things considered, Quezon'sbrand of nationalism more closely resembles the German conceptionof the nation (which emphasises the right of blood) than the Americanor the French conception (based on the right of soil).
Introduction
Manuel
Quezon,
the
first
president
of
the
Philippine
Commonwealth
(1935
‐
1944),
remains
in
the
collective
memory
a
nationalist
hero
whose
name
is
often
associated
with
independence.
The
concept
of
a
ʺ
nation
ʺ
,
understood
in
the
Western
sense,
includes
independence
and
the
existence
of
a
nation
‐
state.
Since
the
pioneering
work
of
Benedict
Anderson
in
1983,
1
academics
have
questioned
the
idea
of
the
nation,
which
is
an
ʺ
imagined
community
ʺ
,
a
mental
representation.
It
is
a
human
grouping,
linked
by
a
common
vision,
as
well
as
outward
signs
such
as
language,
religion
and
other
cultural
practices,
that
expresses
the
*
William
Guéraiche
is
an
historian.
After
defending
his
doctorate,
he
taught
colonial
history
at
the
Sorbonne
and
Geopolitics
at
the
University
of
Marne
la
Vallée.
He
spent
three
years
in
Manila
where
he
worked
on
Manuel
Quezon
ʹ
s
archives
and
published
Manuel
Quezon.
Les
Philippines
de
la
décolonisation
à
la
démocratisation
(Paris:
Maisonneuve
et
Larose)
in
2004.
He
also
edited
Les
structures
politiques
traditionnelles
à
l’épreuve
de
la
démocratie
en
Asie
du
Sud
‐
est
,
a
special
issue
of
Péninsule
(Paris:
Olizane)
in
2004.
1
ANDERSON,
Benedict.
1983.
Imagined
Communities:
Reflections
on
the
Origin
and
Spread
of
Nationalism
.
London:
Verso.
Pilipinas #42 March 2004
Pilipinas #42 March 2004
47
desire
to
live
together
in
a
common
territory.
If
Quezon
emerged
as
a
major
nationalist
leader
in
the
same
manner
as
Mahatma
Gandhi
or
Sukarno,
it
was
because
he
not
only
advocated
independence
for
his
country
but
also
participated
in
the
elaboration
of
the
Philippine
nation.
The
revolution
of
1896
is
taken
as
evidence
of
the
existence
of
a
Philippine
nation
before
the
arrival
of
the
Americans.
While
it
is
clear
that
the
awareness
of
some
kind
of
identity
had
spread
among
the
ilustrados
during
the
century,
it
remains
to
be
seen
whether
the
rest
of
the
population,
notably
the
lowest
classes,
shared
their
vision.
In
the
1970S,
historians
such
as
John
Schumacher
examined
the
roots
of
nationalism
among
the
Philippine
elite
2
.
The
next
generation
gave
more
emphasis
to
history
ʺ
from
below
ʺ
:
Reynaldo
Ileto
attempted
to
interpret
the
revolution
as
popular
movement,
3
but
his
conclusions
are
far
from
definitive.
Glenn
Anthony
May,
for
instance,
has
questioned
the
essence
of
this
nationalism
and
proposed
that
the
ʺ
revolt
of
the
masses
ʺ
consisted
of
little
more
than
peasants
fighting
on
behalf
of
their
landlords
within
the
framework
of
patron/client
ties.
According
to
May,
it
is
questionable
whether
the
masses
indeed
ʺ
had
a
common
commitment
to
independence
and
a
shared
sense
of
a
Filipino
nation….
ʺ
4
The
celebration
of
the
revolution
(and
the
controversy
between
May
and
Ileto
about
Bonifacio)
5
showed
that
Philippine
nationalism
is
still
a
point
at
issue.
Taking
May
ʹ
s
position
as
a
starting
point,
it
is
clear
that
the
Philippine
nation
was
still
under
construction
during
American
colonisation.
This
assertion
is
based
on
Anderson
ʹ
s
studies
as
well
as
on
European
historians
ʹ
work.
6
It
is
now
agreed,
for
example
that
the
French
nation
appeared
at
the
end
of
the
nineteenth
century,
even
if
an
independent
state
existed
for
many
centuries
before
then.
Quezon
ʹ
s
style
of
nationalism
cannot
be
reduced
to
the
call
for
immediate
independence,
and
an
analysis
of
his
position
on
the
independence
process
is
not
sufficient.
What
kind
of
nation
did
he
want
to
build
within
the
framework
of
the
Philippine
state
?
2
See
his
thesis:
S
CHUMACHER
,
John
N.
1973.
The
Propaganda
Movement,
1880
‐
1895:
The
Creators
of
a
Filipino
Consciousness,
the
Makers
of
Revolution
.
Manila:
Solidaridad
Pub.
House.
(revised
edition
1997.
The
Propaganda
Movement,
1880
‐
1895.
Quezon
City:
ADMU
Press)
and
his
essays:
1991.
The
Making
of
a
Nation.
Essay
on
the
Nineteenth
‐
Century
Filipino
Nationalism
.
Quezon
City:
ADMU
Press.
3
I
LETO
,
Reynaldo
C.
1979.
Pasyon
and
Revolution.
Popular
Movements
in
the
Philippines,
1840
‐
1910
.
Quezon
City:
Ateneo
de
Manila
University
Press.
4
M
AY
,
Glenn
Anthony.
1987.
A
Past
Recovered.
Quezon
City:
New
Day
Publisher,
p.
19
and
p.
145
on
patron/clients
ties
during
the
revolution.
5
See
M
AY
,
Glenn
Anthony.
1996.
Inventing
a
Hero.
The
Posthumous
Re
‐
creation
of
A.
Bonifacio
.
Madison:
University
of
Wisconsin;
I
LETO
,
Reynaldo
C.
1998.
Filipinos
and
Their
Revolution.
Event,
Discourse,
and
Historiography
.
Quezon
City:
Ateneo
de
Manila
University
Press,
pp.
203
‐
237;
and
C
HURCHILL
,
Benardita
Reyes
(ed).
1997.
Determining
the
Truth.
The
Story
of
Andres
Bonifacio
,
Manila:
Manila
Studies
Association,
National
Commission
for
Culture
and
the
Arts,
Philippine
National
Historical
Society.
6
For
a
general
introduction
to
the
question,
cf.
the
synthesis
of
CABANEL,
Patrick.
1996.
La
question
nationale
au
XI
s
.
Paris:
La
Découverte.
Quezon, an Opportunistic Nationalist ?
Pilipinas #42 March 2004
48
Nationalist
or
opportunist
?
Quezon
was
a
politician
with
considerable
ambition.
It
is
not
unlikely
that
he
saw
himself
at
the
head
of
the
state
apparatus
as
soon
as
he
entered
politics.
As
a
politician,
he
was
adept
at
double
language.
In
public
he
maintained
that
his
only
wish
was
American
withdrawal,
but
behind
the
scenes
he
never
acted
to
hasten
the
independence
process
when
he
did
not
personally
benefit.
His
mandate
as
resident
commissioner
illustrates
the
discrepancy
between
discourse
and
reality.
From
the
time
that
Quezon
arrived
in
Washington
in
1909,
the
31
‐
year
old
appeared
to
be
riding
a
hard
anti
‐
imperialist
line.
Quezon
was
unyielding
on
what
he
called
ʺ
the
sacred
cause
ʺ
.
The
denunciation
of
American
colonial
policy
had
its
intellectual
roots
in
the
anti
‐
imperialist
ideology.
When
he
arrived
in
Washington,
Quezon
sought
the
support
of
the
Anti
‐
Imperialist
League,
created
at
the
time
of
annexation
of
the
Spanish
colonies
in
1898.
7
The
young
Commissioner
had
maintained
a
correspondence
with
Erving
Winslow,
its
Secretary
General.
Winslow,
a
retired
businessman,
gave
complete
support
to
the
Philippine
cause,
to
the
extent
that
his
young
protégé
ran
for
the
nacionalista
party,
in
favour
of
immediate
independence
for
the
archipelago.
In
a
letter
dated
25
March
1911,
Winslow
offered
Quezon
his
help
in
drafting
his
speeches.
8
In
the
first
years
of
their
collaboration
it
would
appear
as
though
the
positions
of
the
two
men
were
completely
interchangeable.
His
speeches
leave
no
doubt
that
Quezon
was
unyielding
on
the
issue
of
independence.
But
from
the
beginning
there
were
inconsistencies
between
Quezon
ʹ
s
discourse
and
his
political
decisions.
On
6
February
1910,
the
progresistas
addressed
a
petition
to
president
William
Taft
asking
for
a
declaration
according
to
which
the
United
States
would
agree
to
grant
Philippine
independence.
Quezon
believed
that
autonomy,
through
the
institution
of
a
Philippine
senate,
would
have
been
a
compromise
acceptable
to
the
Republican
administration,
and
he
wrote
to
the
President
in
this
spirit
on
29
March
1910.
9
But
Benito
Legarda,
the
second
Resident
Commissioner,
refused
to
support
his
colleague
in
this
undertaking.
Quezon
decided
to
align
himself
with
the
independent
‐
ist
stance
in
the
following
month.
In
his
first
speech
to
Congress,
he
added
a
proposition
on
the
neutralisation
of
the
archipelago.
Through
the
correspondence
that
he
maintained
with
Winslow,
it
is
apparent
that
Quezon
ʹ
s
public
position
regarding
immediate
independence
was
more
nuanced
in
private.
In
the
early
part
of
1911,
Quezon
let
it
be
known
in
Congress
that
a
status
of
autonomy
for
the
colony
was
a
solution
that
might
be
entertained.
Winslow,
worried
about
these
rumours,
wrote
Quezon
about
them
on
28
February,
10
but
did
not
receive
a
reply.
He
wrote
again
on
4
March,
asking
7
TOMPKINS,
E.
Berkeley.
1970.
Anti
‐
imperialism
in
the
United
States:
The
Great
Debate
1890
‐
1920
.
Philadelphia:
University
of
Pennsylvania.
8
The
National
Library
of
Manila
(N.L.),
Quezon
presidential
papers
(Q.P.),
Anti
‐
Imperialist
League,
Box
(B.)
5.
9
Cited
by
GRIPALDO,
Rolando
M.
1994
–
The
Quezon
‐
Winslow
Correspondence
and
Other
Essays
,
Manila
:
De
La
Salle
University,
p.
9.
Gripaldo
has
compiled
a
selection
from
general
correspondence
and
presidential
archives.
10
These letters are in the presidential archives (N.L.), in the series on General Correspondenceordered chronologically.
Quezon, an Opportunistic Nationalist ?
Add a Comment