Manifesto to

Certain Filipinos
GROUP 2
Key Takeaways
Hero
Liberty and Independence
Reform and Revolution
Good and Right
Hero
is someone who has the fortitude or talent to do
something bold and admirable.
may be defined as someone who is willing to sacrifice their
personal needs and safety for the greater good of their
country and fellow citizens and who is willing to stand up
for what is right.
has the ability to inspire and motivate others to follow in
their footsteps and strive towards a better future.
 Liberty and Independence
Liberty Independence
a state in which one can act in
the state of not being under accordance with their own
control or restraint. desires free from An individual
can do something without
depending on other people.

Liberty Independence
allowed to do something an individual can do
something without
depending on other people.
 Reform and Revolution
Reform Revolution
refers to having an
improvement by modifying refers to overthrowing the
the existing conditions such government by force to
as laws, practices, policies, create a new system.
et cetera for stability.

Reform Revolution
positive negative
 Good and Right
Good Right
refers to something refers to something that’s
that is beneficial or morally correct/acceptable
desirable

subjective objective

What were the charges against Jose Rizal?

Dr. Jose Rizal was charged with rebellion,

which is an act of resisting the established
government of Spain. Second is sedition or
the crime of utilizing something that would
encourage people to disobey their
government; and the third is the illegal
association, which is forming an organization
to commit a felony against the Spanish
colonial government in the Philippines on
December 6, 1896.
Why was Jose Rizal accused of these crimes?
First, he was charged with rebellion because the authorities
assumed that he was one of the perpetrators and thought
that he was one of the people who led and planned the
revolution and resistance against the Spanish government.
In addition, some people used his name as a password and a
rallying cry, which surprised and grieved him because his
name could be used in good and bad faith
Second, the rulers thought that Rizal was guilty of sedition
because of his poems, essays, novels, articles, and many
more, which they believed encouraged the Filipinos to rebel,
especially his novels titled Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusteriemo.
Why was Jose Rizal accused of these crimes?

Lastly, he was also accused of organizing a secret

organization like La Liga Filipina, which they thought aimed
to oppose the law or illegal associations. Because Rizal
founded the said organization, the authorities thought that
he was the one who established the Katipunan, even though
it was really the former members of La Liga Filipina who
banded together to do so.
 How did Jose Rizal defend himself?
While awaiting his trial, Rizal defended himself by penning the
Manifesto a Algunos Filipinos, which included five points, and
attempted to persuade Filipinos to halt the revolt and claim
that he was innocent. It consists of arguments that declare
that he was never a part of such a revolution, advise about the
abandonment of planned revolution, the idea of eradicating
the rebellion by offering Rizal’s services to the people,
condemning the revolution as barbarous and ridiculous as it
dishonor and discredit Filipinos, and acknowledging that the
amelioration should start from the higher authorities. Rizal
oppose the concept of the revolution his fellowmen is
pursuing and rejected many of these things in line with
rebellion.
If Jose Rizal was innocent, was he a hero?
Even if Rizal was faultless, he cannot be hailed as
a hero. He resembles a sorcerer who has given
up on their cauldron of brewing. Nick Joaquin
described Rizal as a sorcerer who was
attempting to conjure an incident in the book A
Question of Heroes, particularly in the chapter
on Andres Bonifacio. It appears that he is
cooking up some plan or scenario for Filipinos to
proclaim revolution. Still, as a sorcerer, it is
impossible to avoid being skeptical because he
thinks something is missing or, should I say, the
revolution is too early.
If Jose Rizal was innocent, was he a hero?
The people covered by the movement are not yet
ready to manifest liberty into reality. Rizal courted
extremist thoughts of revolution in El Filibusterismo.
He was acknowledged as the revolution's honorary
leader. Rizal, meanwhile, was on his route to Cuba to
serve in the Spanish army when the 1896 revolution
officially began. Our Rizal was traveling to Cuba to
serve the Spaniards during those hard times when
our intellectuals were suffering in jail, when people
were agitating for their rights and independence, and
when people were dying in the revolution. Rizal
wasn't there for them. That is why he is the greatest
anti-hero.
If Jose Rizal was right, was the Katipunan
wrong?
In reading the essay of Rizal entitled Manifesto to Certain
Filipinos, we can see that the actions of Jose Rizal in his
document disavowed any involvement with the Philippine
Revolution and condemned the violent methods used by some
of its leaders. He urged his countrymen to use peaceful means
to achieve their goals and to work toward unity and
reconciliation. It is observable how both the Katipunan and
Rizal have the same objective which was to fight for their
people's and country's rights and freedom. However, their
methods of doing to achieve their goals oppose each other.
One of them preferred reform since it is more positive and
peaceful, while the other preferred revolution since it includes
drastic changes by being extreme which is negative.
If Jose Rizal was right, was the Katipunan
wrong?
Rizal’s way is more like a reform as he only wants to have minimal changes on how
the authorities lead or rule their country in terms of their laws and policies,
without doing anything barbarous or ridiculous like disrupting the government
since he said that he was never against the Spanish rulers. On the other hand, the
Katipunan’s method is revolutionary which is the reason why Rizal objected to
them. They wanted to completely change their government by eradicating the
prevailing authorities. If we look at the meaning of right, we can come up with the
answer that for an action to be right it should be objective or morally acceptable.
With this I can say that his action is right because it’s morally acceptable. Rizal
believed that the key to gaining freedom for his countrymen was to pursue
reforms through peaceful means, such as education, dialogue, and petitioning the
Spanish authorities.
 If Jose Rizal was right, was the Katipunan
wrong?
On the other hand, by saying that Rizal is right it doesn’t mean that Katipunan is
wrong. The action of Katipunan is not right rather than it is good because their action
is satisfying the idea of being good which is it refers to something beneficial or
desirable. It is subjective and can vary from person to person, depending on their
beliefs and values. The Katipunans sought independence from Spanish colonial rule
and sought to gain freedom for their countrymen through armed rebellion and
revolution. The Katipunan believed that armed rebellion was necessary because
peaceful means of achieving independence is such a waste of time. They argued that
Spanish colonial rule had become increasingly oppressive and exploitative, and that
the Filipino people had no choice but to fight for their freedom. Overall, whether or not
the actions of the Katipunan were good is a matter of interpretation and perspective.
While some may view their actions as a necessary and heroic struggle for
independence, others may view them as violent and unjustifiable.
Thank You !!
CAMANGIAN, FATHIMA ANGEL
CANTILLON, ASHLEY SHANNLE
CAS, JAMES GABRIEL
CASTROVERDE, ERIKA
CECILIO, JOSE LANELLO
CHEN, CHIA-CHI