Of Counter-Hegemonic Narratives and Fragmented Identities

Asia-Pacific Social Science Review 14(1) 2014, pp. 98-101 BOOK REVIEW Of Counter-Hegemonic Narratives and Fragmented Identities Abinales, P.N. (2008). The joys of dislocation: Mindanao, nation and region. Manila, Philippines: Anvil. ISBN: 9789712720239.197pp. Php 260. by Diana Therese M. Veloso De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines The Joys of Dislocation: Mindanao, Nation Mindanao at the center of discussion and analysis, and Region by Patricio Abinales is a collection of Abinales subverted the hegemonic gaze of essays and columns published in the Philippine Manila-centric narratives that frame the island as Daily Inquirer, Newsbreak, Legmanila, Philippine a perilous, peripheral territory and the source of Yearbook, and UP Forum, between 1996 and separatism, warlordism, communism, militarism, 2006. Abinales proffered critical, multilayered and other problematic -isms. He then branched commentaries on historical, social, economic, out to discuss salient social, economic, and and political issues in Mindanao, the Philippines, political developments in the Philippine nation- and Southeast Asia. He analyzed the myriad state and the Southeast Asian region. of conflicts—and dominant narratives and One of the strongest points of the book lies in its representations thereof—in these three zones first chapter, which gives an informative, thought- as “someone…who has always gone in and out provoking account of the history of Mindanao and of them” (p. xi), thereby debunking the insider- persisting social issues in the island. Abinales outsider binaries invoked by other intellectuals, highlighted the strategic role of Mindanao as who presume that only those in the Philippines a vibrant center of trade during the precolonial can write about the affairs of the country. He and Spanish eras, up until the mid-19th century, used his experiences and social position of and the solidarity and resilience of its people in “dislocation”—a label he deemed more preferable the face of repeated encroachment. He voiced to “diaspora,” in reference to the lived realities his misgivings against the marginalization and and identities of overseas Filipinos—as a source exclusion of Muslims and the lumad (indigenous of insight. people) from dominant discourses on national(ist) The 56 essays in this book are organized into history and economic development: “This is quite three chapters, titled “Mindanao,” “Nation,” and peculiar because both populations could be said “Region,” in order of importance. In placing to have occupied larger portions of Mindanao— Copyright © 2014 by De La Salle University Publishing House COUNTER-HEGEMONIC NARRATIVES AND FRAGMENT IDENTITIES VELOSO, D. T.. 99 the lumad since the precolonial era…Very little became more frequent. Abinales asserted that is said about Mindanao’s capacity to feed the for all the attention given to Manila-based rest of the Philippines or its crucial contribution personalities and institutions, Mindanao played a to the formation of the national economy” (pp. crucial role in toppling the Marcos dictatorship. 1-2). Abinales exposed the complexity of motives He also emphasized the impact of Marcosian rule behind the initial resistance of Mindanaoan on the island—extensive militarism, human rights residents against the Spaniards and the Americans. violations, the outrage engendered by the Jabidah In particular, he cited the desire of Muslim datus Massacre of young Moro conscripts, and the and lumad leaders to retain their economic interests secessionist war of the Moro National Liberation in a thriving trading network connecting Southern Front (MNLF) in the 1970s. He asserted the Mindanao to other Southeast Asian territories. need to document this war and its effects on In one essay, Abinales explored the misguided those involved: “If there was a time, a place, and attempts of the U.S. Army to develop a frontier an event that we in Mindanao cannot forget and town called “Little America” in Momungan, cannot forgive the Marcos dictatorship for, it was Lanao del Norte, which initially attracted diverse that war. After that war, Mindanao was never the groups of settlers, but failed after a decade due same” (p. 41; italics supplied). to administrative and agricultural problems. In Abinales made a compelling case about the another essay, he revealed that the same U.S. Army, impact of the ongoing armed conflict in southern in designating Mindanao as separate terrain but Mindanao on displaced families and now-unstable incorporating it into an independent Philippines, communities; although he clarified that the island established the very structures that galvanized will not become another East Timor. While he the separatist cause: “Working on the rationale recognized the root causes of Muslim separatism, that Mindanao’s population was backward and he called attention to the contradictory politics of distinct from Filipinos, army officials built a state the MNLF and its breakaway faction, the Moro different from and autonomous from Manila. Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), in terms of the Muslims—despite the brutality inflicted on them socio-historical contexts behind their claims. by Americans—allied with the army to resist Invoking the work of other Southeast Asian Filipinization. The alliance unraveled because of scholars and historians, he boldly asserted that the internal weaknesses. But the seed of separatism homeland envisioned as part of the Bangsamoro had been planted” (p. 17). Lest one question Republic—Mindanao, the Sulu Archipelago, and what became of the resistance to American Palawan—consists of illusory boundaries grafted imperialism, Abinales illuminated the ambiguous, by colonialism: “There was never any ‘map’ of fragmented responses of Muslims to Filipinization a Bangsamoro in the precolonial era because the in later years. Despite widespread opposition to communities then did not imagine themselves legislation conferring Commonwealth status upon within the frame set by modern cartography… the Philippines, certain Muslim leaders—like their Territory was less their worry. It was only with opportunistic counterparts in the colonial center— colonialism that modern cartography would collaborated with political elites and took on the alter this view of the world…Thus, we have the role of Moro representatives and spokespersons anomaly of a separatist movement premising in the new republic. its politics on a territorial boundary that is Abinales revisited the conditions in postwar colonially constructed” (p. 47). He uncovered Mindanao, specifically the influx of migrants from the fragmentation within the Muslim separatist the north and the rise of “cacique politics” (p. 39) movement due to ethnic and class differences involving new elites. These trends continued and identity politics. He lambasted then-MNLF during the Marcos regime, where land disputes Chairman and Autonomous Region of Muslim between settlers and indigenous communities Mindanao (ARMM) Governor Nur Misuari for 100 ASIA-PACIFIC SOCIAL SCIENCE REVIEW VOL. 14 NO. 1 threatening to wage another war and criticized his earned profits for the former and well-satiated ilk for devolving into a political interest group/ appetites for the latter. Some of the older folks private army since its cooptation by the Ramos think it began as far back as the early American administration and subsequent regimes. He colonial period…It shows that cordial ties did challenged the MILF to articulate its separatist exist between the two groups in the past” (p. 29). ideology using indigenous concepts, not Western Meanwhile, the second chapter of this book frameworks about citizenship, and noted how consists of an eclectic mix of essays on Philippine the group vacillates between separatism and society. Abinales critiqued diverse issues, autonomy; he also posed critical questions ranging from the general public’s abhorrence of about the implications of an Islamic republic Imelda Marcos, to the emergence of multilingual for economic development, socio-cultural Filipinos in an age of “dislocation” from the modernization, ethnic diversity, and democratic homeland, to projections about the “Strong politics in Mindanao. As for the Abu Sayyaf, he Republic” envisioned by then-president Gloria denounced their nonexistent political program Macapagal-Arroyo. The bulk of his essays on and dismissed their rebellion as the activity of the nation focus on Filipino-style communism. a small sect, with limited areas of operation. Abinales looked back on his involvement with Abinales is very clear about his advocacy of the “left” at the height of divisive politics in the economic autonomy in Mindanao, and does not 1970s, and recounted archaic party guidelines discount the possibility of future rebellions on that policed courtship practices and the very the island. Given the different lenses with which institution of marriage. He maintained: “There he analyzed the Muslim separatist rebellion, one is still value in analyzing societies in terms of wonders whether he viewed the Bangsamoro as class, in looking at states as coercive instruments an unwarranted and/or ambitious project: “What of the powerful few, and in watching economic makes this imagined republic all the more surreal processes unfold as part of the logic of capitalism” is the incongruity of means to attain it” (p. 41). (pp. 107-108). Yet he slammed Filipino leftist Whose interests does he represent in making leaders for not adapting to changing realities, such a claim? This merits a different discussion such as shifts in

Load more