REVIEW OF BENEDICT ANDERSON’S “UNDER THREE FLAGS”

2010

Introduction

Benedict Anderson’s “Under Three Flags” provides an extensive historical research on world politics in the aspects of anti-colonialism and international anarchism. Although there is a flag of Philippines’ on the cover page of the book and the content of it can be thought as it is about anti-colonialism in Philippines mainly, in my opinion it is clear that the writer’s intention is to show the links between several anti-colonist and patriotic leaders or thinkers from all around the world. Anderson’s choice of showing links between these people actually creates a complex perspective which sometimes makes reader impatient about the main theme for anarchism and anti-colonial arguments. But in my opinion, his main argument is not to give a lecture about the independence history of the Philippines but to show the complicated intercontinental networks that identify the age of early globalization (Anderson 2005, p. 233).

Throughout this paper, you will first find a brief summary of the mentioned book as it is predictably significant to understand the main points of the writer’s arguments after being aware of what is going on between the lines. After the summary I will set a critical discussion about the related intercontinental links between several important political thinkers from all around the globe and their simultaneous actions for revolution. “Under Three Flags” tells the story of complex intellectual interactions of young Filipinos with the European experimentalists of Paris, militant anarchists of Spain, France, Italy and the Americas, armed protestants of Cuba and anti-imperialist volunteers of China and Japan. Anderson presents a book to be carefully read as it gives reader a much broader and complex written history of the 19th century Philippines than a conventional historical knowledge of ours.

Summary of the Book and the Related Period

The visible theme of the “Under Three Flags” is the study of Filipino national hero Jose Rizal in the sense of his popular novel named “El Filibusterismo” and his international connections. More than that, there is a surrounding theme of linkages between Filipino, Cuban and European anarchists and anti-colonialists and the remarkable intertwining of art, literature and politics which I will be exploring in the upcoming paragraphs. But before that, it would be better to mention about the main Filipino characters in the book that are Jose Rizal, Isabelo de los Reyes and Mariano Ponce. Following, there will be a brief summary of Rizal’s life and his influence on the anti-colonial atmosphere of Philippines. Lastly in this section you can find a summary of the ongoing events through the chapters of the book.

Isabelo de los Reyes, lived between 1864 and 1938, a polemical journalist and pioneering folklorist of Filipino identity, shows a different character compared to Rizal with 27 children whereas Rizal had none. Of course the number of children one has does not show anything scientific, but the way he looks at life reflects his energetic and anarchist-inflected character where he shows a greater desire for action than Jose Rizal who displays a comparatively modest nature. Before going to Europe in 1897 and experiencing the chains and tortures in Montjuich prison in Barcelona due to his involvement in anti-colonial action against Spain, Reyes was an active journalist in his mainland and he was receiving letters, magazines and texts from European academics and folklorists where he was developing his nationalistic perception (Anderson 2005, p. 27). Another substantial points in his life are his foundation of “El Ilocano” in 1889, the first vernacular newspaper in Philippines and his broad researches on Philippines history and culture.

Mariano Ponce, lived between 1863 and 1918, is a coordinating organizer of the anti-colonial movement in Philippines. He was among the founders and contributors of La Solidaridad, an organization to advocate the Filipino cause in the Spain and a newspaper to influence the Filipinos at the same time. He was one of the prominent emissaries during and after the Philippines revolution (Anderson 2005, p. 207) as he was appointed as a diplomatic representative of the revolutionary government to Japan to earn their support. Ponce had a great calmness and modesty which are significant abilities to stand for his nation against other countries.

Jose Rizal, lived between 1861 and 1896, is one of the greatest novelists of the Philippines literature and also a central figure for the Filipino revolution of his country against the colonial power of Spain. In my opinion, his perception on the politics cannot be described fairly without giving credit to his two popular books, “Noli me Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo”. Still, before discussing his books, it is worth having a look at his life, particularly the time he lived in Europe.

European way of life and European novelists, thinkers and activists play a huge role in Rizal’s perspective. He left his country for Europe in 1882 and stayed in Spain, France, Germany, England and Belgium for nearly ten years. He made European friends among political thinkers and journalists and thus witnessed the emerging new ideas of the continent which led him to write his controversial novels to become a famous Filipino (Anderson 2005, p. 28). In his stay in Europe, there were three angles to influence his way of thinking which were firstly the political system of Europe dominated by German Chancellor Bismarck, secondly the ongoing assassinations and anarchism in the continent and thirdly the colonial power of the time, Spain. What is important here is the change of Rizal into a patriot, a “filibustero”, after reading Antonio de Morga and his historical research on Spain and its colonial past. Rizal’s second book, El filibusterismo, clearly shows the rise in his determination to help his country earn his independence (Anderson 2005, p. 96).

To start with, it should be remembered that Rizal’s two novels are both serious critiques of colonialism although there is a more than tiny difference between the two. While almost all events in “Noli me Tangere” occur within Philippines, “El filibusterismo” takes place in many countries like Cuba, Germany, Egypt, Russia, France, China and Japan. As Anderson describes the latter one as “probably the first incendiary anti-colonial novel written by a colonial subject outside Europe” (Anderson 2005, p. 6), he also adds that “if Noli me Tangere was targeted at multiple audiences in Europe and the Philippines, El filibusterismo was meant only for the latter” (Anderson 2005, p. 103). This coincides with the condition that Rizal was feeling more patriotic for Philippines while writing El filibusterismo due to his accumulated knowledge about anti-colonialism and nationalism in his long stay in Europe. Though, his grievance was not only for the colonist Spain but also for the corrupted clergy in his homeland.

Along with Reyes, Ponce and Rizal; Anderson touches many thinkers, activists, journalists in “Under Three Flags” and shows a good example of the early globalization effect of this particular time in the anti-colonization and anarchism aspects. After a brief prologue, the second chapter is mainly about a contrast of Isabelo Reyes to Jose Rizal and Rizal’s library which is to be traced for El filibusterismo. In the third chapter Anderson puts a framework of the spaces Rizal had been in Europe like the powerful Germany, the atmosphere of anarchism and the colonial Spain. He again shows evidences of influence like his collaboration with journalist Marcelo de Pilar and “La Solidaridad” that is highly effective in Rizal’s writings.

In the fourth chapter, Anderson takes readers to the last four years of Rizal in his homeland and his execution, which is basically after the publication of El filibusterismo in 1891. His transitions from Hong Kong to Borneo, from Manila to Dapitan, from Manila again to Barcelona and lastly to Manila where he is imprisoned and executed by the colonial Spanish officers which actually, as a whole, displays a depiction of struggle for the purpose of Filipino independence. One way or another Rizal served his country even after his death when his execution made a national martyr in Philippines which made it convenient for revolutionary movement to be broader and more effective (Anderson 2005, p. 164).

In the last chapter, main discussion is about several events sometime after Rizal’s death, such as the radicalization of Europe, assassination of Spanish Prime Minister Canovas and the end of colonial power of Spain, anti-colonial efforts in Philippines and rise of revolutionary ideas in Japan and China. Other than those, Anderson highlights particularly three people in this part which are firstly Mariano Ponce as he is the leading actor of revolutionary Filipinos in creating a network of public opinion internationally. Second one is Isabelo del Reyes whose prison experience and return back to Spain as a politician takes some part in the last chapter. The last one is Rizal's Japanese friend Suehiro Tettyo, who has a novel about Rizal's experiences.

Critical Discussion

The main argument of Benedict Anderson, in my opinion, is to show readers that ideas and events happening around the same time can have an impact on other people and countries due to the international travel and communication opportunities. Anderson himself accepts his work as a political astronomy where he describes it as “an attempt to map the gravitational force of anarchism between militant nationalisms on opposite sides of the planet.” (Anderson 2005, p. 2) While he is studying the second novel of Rizal, “El filibusterismo”, he expects the patience of the readers as understanding the infrastructure of the novel brings a complicated interconnection between Spain, France, Italy, Russia, the Caribbean, the United States and the Philippines (Anderson 2005, p. 56).

The complicated interconnection of different thinkers, journalists and activists from different nationalities around the world already makes a dazzling story. This brings us to accumulation and transition of anarchist and nationalistic approach between different colonized and oppressed countries which is the main subject for the book. But also there is a thing that I doubt about as if it is a coincidence of the universe or a result of the interconnections in the long period: “El filibusterismo was printed in 1891 in Ghent, only forty miles from Ostend where, in 1888, James Ensor had finished his anarchist-revolutionary painting ‘Christ’s Entry into Brussels’.” (Anderson 2005, p. 45) In a time when anarchism was getting popular newly, it may be both a nice coincidence and a solid proof for the transition of knowledge among people.

One way or another, new technologies such as the invention of the telegram, developing postal systems and railway networks made this “early globalization” possible. The simultaneous revolutionary actions in Philippines and Cuba proves this as Cuba, the last nationalist movement in the New World, and the Philippines, the first in Asia, had connections in individual level and to some extent had coordinated interactions and so they experienced the taste of independence in a very similar time (Anderson 2005, p. 2). They, the Filipinos, also found allies in European countries to exchange the ideas and gain public support. This, in some way, was a way to learn how to revolt and stand against colonial powers. What is not surprising is Rizal’s or Reyes’ choice of using a foreign language in their books or journals other than their native one to create a public opinion and recognition outside their country.

In “Under Three Flags”, it is not discussed in details very much but Anderson makes a comparison between Philippines’ national hero Jose Rizal and Cuba’s national hero Jose Marti. He states the comparison as “illuminating” (Anderson 2005, p. 131) and sets their similarities and differences in a couple of paragraphs. What is most visible is the common language they use, Spanish. Perhaps it is a success for Rizal to write in Spanish, not in his native language as he thus had the chance to create a common sphere for both countries that were colonized by Spain.

Actually, the final chapter of the book can be the most extensive among others in the aspect of showing intercontinental links before and after the uprisings. Anderson touches a lot of thinker, journalist or politician to emphasize the role of connections among individuals and its consequences. Fernando Tarrida, Georges Clemenceau, Louise Michel, Ramon Betances, Emile Zola, Michelle Angiolillo and Suehiro Tettyo are some of the names that are mentioned while highlighting presence of knowledge transition globally.

Conclusion

“Under Three Flags” can be seen as a research book about the independence history of 19th century Philippines or as a book of anarchism and its brief history in the aspect of Filipinos. These are not wrong assumptions but they are lacking in depth. Anderson gives readers a more than just the history of Philippines and their national heroes. Reading about the the national Filipino hero, Jose Rizal, is very exciting but it is not exciting because of the number of days he stayed in prison or his escape from one city to another. It is exciting because the writer shows the readers that Jose Rizal would not be “Jose Rizal” unless he lived in the challenging atmosphere of Europe in the right time and unless he met with right persons that made him think and write about the anti-colonial, anti-imperialist and nationalistic thoughts.

It is the power of intercontinental links between individuals of journalists, activists, thinkers, leaders etc. With the help of developing technologies of transportation and communication, many thinkers of that time experienced the early globalization of the world with the purpose of independence and anti-colonialism. In my opinion, the mentioned world of multiple and overlapping events and transitions creates a complex philosophy that makes it difficult for the reader to categorize the figures as a nationalist or a anarchist or a anti-colonist. What is important in this book is the impressing linkages and coincidences between thinkers from different parts of the world that help revolutionary movements come to life.

Bibliography

Anderson, Benedict. Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anti-Colonial Imagination. 2005. Pasig City: Anvil, 2006.

ALIENATION OF A CUBAN ELITE IN THE WAKE OF REVOLUTION

2009

Most of the people see Havana as an attractive and exotic tourism center of Cuba, a center for prostitution, a backyard for honeymoons or a playground for vacations, where you can find yourself getting carried away with illicit pleasures and risky amusements. (Perez Jr, p.468) Cuba and its capital city, Havana, are more than that of course. It would be a great mistake and disrespectfulness to refer Havana as an amusement park as it was once a shocking case for the entire political world with its brave strife against U.S. hegemony. In this paper, I will first give a short summary of independence of Cuba starting in early 1900s than analyze the Cuban movie named “Memories of Underdevelopment” in the perspective of development – underdevelopment challenge of Cuban people.

To begin with, Cuba, an export oriented country with a tropical economy, lies in the south of the United States of America. Before coffee and tobacco, the most important export product of Cuba is sugar cane which Cuban economy vulnerably leans its back against. Along with the geographical importance of the island, this economic dependence on one product caused sovereignty issues several times in Cuban history, especially in the relations with U.S. and U.S.S.R.

After the Spanish-American war in the late 1800s, with the defeat of Spanish troops, Cuba declared its independency, which was ensured by the Platt Amendment signed between the U.S. and Cuba. Platt Amendment made U.S. have legal involvement in Cuban affairs in both foreign and domestic policies of the island. (Skidmore and Smith, p.261) Until 1933, the start of Batista regime, we see a number of U.S-free independency efforts in the island with some democratic try outs. With the help of United States, Fulgencio Batista ruled the country as a dictator until 1959 revolution and during this time he made the island a casino and prostitution based tourism center. During this period an economic pyramid of a large rural proletariat, a tiny middle class and a rich foreign landlords group was shaped. Beside this most of the people were suffering because of poverty and they were fed up with the Batista regime.

In 1959, under the command of Fidel Castro, a middle class member of the society with a socialist background, the revolution against the U.S. involvement in Cuba occurred. This meant the removal of U.S. forces from the island and the real independency of Cuban people over their territory. This also meant a difficult task for Castro and his friends as they took the lead of an underdeveloped and corrupt society with an economy of mainly underlying an unequally distributed possession of goods. While facing the embargo of U.S, they got close to Soviet Russia which is the cold war opposition of Americans. With the help of U.S.S.R, Cuba tried to maintain its sovereignty and get rid of underdevelopment in economic, social and political spheres through adopting communism, centralizing economy, nationalizing private institutions and building a national and independent identity.

It is not surprising that Cuba was unintentionally underpinning the tension between Cold War actors because of the island’s strategic closeness to U.S. When Cuba got close to Soviets economically and politically, it severely damaged the ongoing U.S tradition of protectionist policy which started with the Monroe Doctrine in 1823. According to this doctrine, any interventionist European power in the North and South Americas would be accepted as aggressive and let several harsh measures to be taken. Soviet relationship of Cuba meant Monroe Doctrine to be spoiled unavoidably and this indicated as a national security and integrity problem for the U.S. side. (Perez Jr, p.470) The peak of this Cuba-related Cold War tension was in 1962 when Soviet nuclear missiles were installed in the Cuban island to threaten the Americans and avoid them interfere the integrity of the island. Moreover, there is the Bay of Pigs incident in 1961, in which the unofficial U.S. troops tried to invade the island and overthrow the Cuban government of Fidel Castro but failed. (Castaneda, p.199) These were times that Americans seemed to be obsessed with the Cuba issue and they were repeatedly overcome by Castro and his friends.

Memories of Underdevelopment, which takes place in the year 1961, is the story of a Cuban elite named Sergio who unlike many other Europeanized Cuban elites decides to stay in Cuba and not to leave his revolutionized country. In several scenes, we see that nicely dressed elite people leaving the country for the hope of a better place, better than a communist land. They probably think that Havana, the Paris of Caribbean, will now leave its European atmosphere and be a less developed, bald city. In contrast, Sergio is eager to find out what will happen next in the island. He chooses not to participate in politics but to be an obscener like a political scientist. In one scene, Elena, a 16 year old uneducated girl he seduces, states his neutral standing as being nothing: “You are neither a revolutionary
nor a counter-revolutionary. You are nothing” she says. Maybe he escapes from the possible trouble in getting into the complicated politics in Cuba, maybe he prefers to be outside and just observe or maybe he believes that he doesn’t have the power to change things but the point is that although he seems impartial, throughout the movie he questions the underdevelopment issue of his country and in a materialized and minimal way he tries to change the women he meets to be more developed.

During the movie, Sergio, the elite macho that seduces women and classifies them as developed or underdeveloped, is usually contemptuous over underdeveloped people, especially women. Feeling alienated and alone in the new political era of the island and still not leaving the country, he tries to change things in his own way. We meet with four women in his life: first one is his ex-wife who leaves him for not being as she prefers him to be; second one is his housekeeper whom he sexually dreams of; third one is Elena which is mentioned above and the last one is Hanna which he likes and misses most as she projects a more developed woman. Early in the movie one can feel that Sergio is shaping and determining his life over women and sexuality. But throughout the movie it is understood that it is the way of him reasoning development-underdevelopment challenge in his mind. He asks himself repeatedly: “How do you get rid of underdevelopment?” The point is: does he ask this question as an elite writer of the society or an elite playboy who enjoys being with women? How and where are the women situated here for him? What do they mean to him? A materialized and symbolized way of the country or a sexuality object?

The most detailed relationship that is shown in the movie is the one with Elena, the uneducated slum girl who dreams of being an artist. As Sergio loses his sexual interest of her, he starts questioning about her level of development in his standards. "She doesn't relate to things," he tells himself. "It's one of the signs of underdevelopment. Elena, like other Cuban women", he says, “has an "inability to relate to things, to accumulate experience, to develop." At that point, it is obvious that he symbolizes Cuba and the society’s underdevelopment in Elena’s prospect. He takes her to art galleries and the museum of famous writer Ernst Hemingway but cannot make her interested in these. At one point he reflects, "I discovered Elena didn't think as much as I did. I try to live as a European and she makes me feel the underdevelopment at every step." While the movie shows this dissatisfaction in many scenes, it doesn’t mention how to get rid of underdevelopment or how elites should behave to level up the underdeveloped population. Is being more involved in arts be sufficient to be more developed? Is an art gallery the place where you are developed?

In brief, Memories of Underdevelopment is the story of a frustrated Cuban elite that is stuck between his intellectual convictions and the reality of Cuban life in the wake of the revolution. His alienation from the underdeveloped society and desire to observe the newly revolution’s effects is the core of the film while the director gives us an idea about the current issues in these times using documentary cuts about Bay of Pigs invasion and missile crises. This is an admirable effort by the director who makes the audience feel the same way Sergio feels and question the society as he does. The last question in my mind about the film and Sergio is: Does his inability to keep his interest in underdeveloped women or incapacity to change them in the way he wants make him believe that he is not that powerful alone to change the country in a more developed understanding? Isn’t it possible that this parallelism make him confused and alienated?