|
x
Parents and Activists
Renato Constantino
GRAPHIC, April 28, 1971
ttp://northfort.wordpress.com/2011/05/08/parents-and-activists/
Graduation has been aptly called a commencement. It is on the conventional
sense a commencement of adult responsibility for the young. For their
parents, it is the climax of years of anxious waiting and of sacrifices.
But, if both want to invest it with deeper significance, a commencement
should mark the beginning of understanding and of partnership with the
young in patriotic involvement.
We live in a period of turbulence, of instability and of change. A
decaying society leaves in its wake many dislocations, many confusions and
rising tensions. These dislocations and tensions have been dramatically
projected by the activism of militant youth.
All at once parents are seized with paroxysms of fear; many in an excess
of protectiveness, have sought to isolate their young from activist fever,
while others have reacted with anger and despair. The result is a growing
alienation between parents and activists. In many homes a bitter battle
now rages between the old and the young. The young today are so different,
parents say, bewildered; our parents are so reactionary; they are
fascists, the youth reply.
Difference in outlook
Activists have elaborated at great length on the basic issues of our
society. They recognize the main forces locked in mortal struggle but they
may have overlooked some subsidiary contradictions or they may have not
given sufficient thought to the manner in which these should be resolved.
One such problem is the problem of the generations. It may be useful to
focus some attention on this question during this period of student
ferment.
Activists know that every aspect of life has
a political dimension; even the relation with one’s parents is part of the
overall political struggle. Parents whose children are not activists may
view developments with more detachment but they are still puzzled and
apprehensive. Many of the uncommitted among the young, if they are honest
and patriotic, will eventually join the movement for revolutionary change
because of the flow of history cannot be denied. Consequently, no one can
remain wholly untouched by the problem.
What causes this division between generations? Is it merely the so-called
generation gap? Is it just a passing phase in the process of growing up?
Why is parental reaction one of dismay and antagonism? Is it because of
the irresponsibility of the young?
The growing alienation between parents and activists cannot be dismissed
with the facile explanation that there exists a generation gap. There is
something more basic here than a mere difference in ages or a mere
rebellion against authority as such; there is a fundamental difference in
outlook.
Asocial behaviour
Long years of miseducation, long years of constant subjection to the
blandishments of Western propaganda have made the older generation
unappreciative of the commitment of the young today.
For a number of generations, most adults,
including the parents of today, has been concerned with the day-to-day
struggles of life solely in their personal dimensions. They were therefore
unaware of the contradictions that the operative forces of history were
building up in the society. These quantitative accretions of events have
resulted in a reality qualitatively different from the past.
The old see social changes only in their quantitative aspects – prices are
higher, corruption is more rampant, crimes are more numerous. Their frames
of reference remain the same. Like the young, they see the problems of our
corrupt society but, unlike the young, they offer only the same old
solutions that never worked before or else they retreat into individualism
and asocial behaviour.
The activist outlook is totally different, hence the frequent lack of
communication resulting in bitter tension within families and erosion of
parental control and influence.
To re-establish communication, the older generation must understand the
basic nature of activism today.
Nature of activism
Activism rejects the older generation’s belief in an immutable social
order. Its allegiance is to revolutionary change, not to reformism. It is
disillusioned with the patchwork solutions of the previous generations.
Therefore the young scoff at parental suggestions that they reduce the
dimensions of their protest to specific problems like crime control, the
exposure of corruption in government, or the amelioration of living
conditions in the slums.
They know that these specific problems are
interrelated and will never be solved unless basic changes in society are
instituted. They no longer pin their hopes on the election to office of
good men as previous generations did. They know that mere changes of men
will mean nothing.
If the same system prevails, it will corrupt the men; in fact the system
practically ensures that only the corrupt get elected. As a result,
parents think the young are impractical dreamers, while the young counter
that their parents have no understanding of the real nature of our
society.
We often hear older people explain that protest actions are part of the
idealism of youth. They imply that young people have ideals but will
outgrow them when, as adults, they come face to face with practical
reality. This judgment is both wrong and immoral.
Idealism in the sense of having ideals is
not something that should be outgrown. N the other hand, philosophically
speaking, activism is not idealist; it is materialist because it is based
on social reality. It is these older people with their condescending
conclusions who are idealists – not in the sense of having ideals but
because they have unreal view of reality.
Some parents treat activism as they would an
attack of the measles. They wait for it to subside so the patient can be
normal again, which to them means being career-conscious, materially
ambitious, and moderately civic-minded.
Youthful frivolities
But activism today is more than a passing
phase of youthful restlessness; it is not the same as those frivolous
activities with which many of us were expected to amuse ourselves during
our school days; it is not one of those fads which produce temporary
irritations between parents and children.
Activism is a social phenomenon because it
is an exercise in collectivity, a \rejection of individualist solutions to
purely private problems. Activism is the antithesis of individual action
which is a romantic survival of the days of so-called self-made men; it is
the negation of individual ambition because a new counter-consciousness is
contraposed to the consciousness engendered by private free enterprise, a
legacy of imperialist rule.
It is the rejection of individual ambition
that parents find most difficult to adjust to. The poorer parents,
especially, find this painfully disappointing. All their lives they worked
and sacrificed to give their children an education so that the young ones
might become successful, pore prosperous. Now they find that what they
live for is to be discarded. Instead, their activist sons and daughters
have deliberately chosen a difficult and uncertain way of life which will
bring no money, only hard work and danger, even death.
Nothing can assuage the anguish of such
parents – nothing, that is, except an understanding of their children’s
convictions. If these convictions are firm, appeals to the young person’s
individual self-interest, or pleas that he think of his personal safety
would only alienate him further. Nothing is more revolting to a committed
youth than to be told to let others “do the dirty work” and run the risks.
Such a position is morally indefensible. Young people correctly assess it
as the product of selfish individualism and social irresponsibility.
Neither should parents offer charitable
activities or so-called civic action as substitutes for involvement in the
protest movement. Activists know that do-gooding is ineffectual in the
long run and, as practiced in conventional circles, is nothing more that
conscience pacifier or a publicity gimmick for the socially ambitious.
This does not mean that activists have no sympathy for the sufferings of
their fellowmen; in fact, it is these very sufferings that they want to
eliminate. However, they know that the real solution does not lie in
palliatives but in a change of the system.
Antithesis of the system
The youth of today are not only the products
of the system; they are also the antithesis of that system.
During our period of adjustment to the
imperatives of the times, we of the older generations allowed material and
intellectual influences to transform us into bases and pillars of the
social order. Young activists reject these material and intellectual
influences for they have developed insights in to the evils of the system;
they have seen fit to rebel not primarily against the old generation as
against the very system which the old seem to represent.
Thus many of the older generation are
appalled by the sweeping rejection of the values to which we were all
acculturized. All the verities and the comfortable platitudes under which
we had been nurtured have gone by the board.
We cannot view present militancy in the same
way that our parents regarded our own youthful rebellions. For where
before youthful frivolities were merely interruptions in a long line of
continuity, today activism is definitely a discontinuity which has
accelerated a social process that is well nigh reversible. And thus
discontinuity will represent a leap in the continuity of our social
existence – a leap that will usher in a higher level of human development.
Activism is a product of the great social
upheavals of our times which are mass movements for national liberation
from the oppressions of imperialism. Imperialist rule has progressively
depressed the lives of the peoples in the underdeveloped areas of the
world; it has deepened human alienation, cheapened human life and has been
responsible for the flagrant degeneration of culture. We are now
witnessing in our country the growth of counter-forces created by the
dynamics of imperialism.
With the few individual exceptions, previous
generations allowed and even abetted the imposition of a colonial society
in our land. Now that the young reject imperialism and are trying to
protect the possibility of a better society for all, the old complain and
even questions the motives of the youth. A few become very angry, try to
intimidate and threaten, and even precipitate a severance of relations.
That is why many of these young people have come to believe that parents
are essentially fascistic.
Question of discipline
An important condition for understanding is
the need to credit the young with good intentions and enough patriotic
dedication. They have a right to resent bitterly such false imputations as
that they are being led astray by agitators or used as tools by their
leaders. The old should make a real effort to understand their political
beliefs and instead of condemning them outright.
When the young people question the political
opinions of their parents and insists on participating in the mass actions
of the protests movement, parents should not regard this merely as a
disciplinary problem.
It is true that a desire for independence
from parental authority may have been a factor in the initial stages, but,
once convinced of the correctness of his cause, the young person regards
activism as a patriotic duty. Part of his rebellion is directed
p[precisely against the values of the defenders of the status quo, and the
right to impose strictures solely by virtue of age is one of these values.
Gone is the day when the older people
supposed to do the thinking and the acting and the young were expected to
remain meekly in their classes. The old have made such mess of things that
the young feel they are no longer capable of effecting the changes
demanded by our times.
Discipline for these young people is the
discipline of their commitment. It is a self-imposed discipline, which,
ideally, should be collectively arrived at, and which derives from the
needs of the movement. Discipline in this sense is positive, not negative.
And who is to say that this is not the higher form?
Reversal of roles
There was a time when the old were supposed
to be wise. Today the old must not fall in to the error of claiming wisdom
as a prerogative of age. They may be in for a bog surprise.
A reversal of traditional roles seems to be
occurring. Traditionally the young were expected to be self-centered,
intent on only on pleasure, to a great degree socially irresponsible. The
old saw themselves as the guardians of the society, the people who worked
and sacrificed, the planners and makers of a world they would be proud to
leave to their children. Today, it seems as if it is the old who are more
guilty of social irresponsibility and the young who have taken it upon
themselves to plan and sacrifice for a better world for themselves and for
the future.
The least the parents can do is to listen to
the young, ask questions, read what they read, examine their values.
Since imperialism is the compelling fact of
present society, and since anti-imperialism is what animates the activist
struggle, parents must know more about imperialism. They must learn how
imperialism plunders the poor nations and what techniques it uses to
retain political and economic control of its neo-colonies. They must
become aware of its fraudulent use of aid and its employment of cultural
aggressions. And finally, they must understand how it uses its control,
made more secure by its military might, to force nations to adopt policies
inimical to their own interest but beneficial to the imperialist.
Intensity of discontent
Many of the older generation have known
economic want and oppression in the society but they fail to attribute the
suffering of the workings of the imperialism. Instead they tend to condemn
only the leaders of the country for the evils they see, little knowing
that these men are merely agents of the system or oat most active
collaborators.
Activists have dramatically brought out the
fact that our colonial condition is the root of all problems. Most parents
do not understand this. Many are self-complacent apologists for the
system. That is why the young resent their hypocritical attitudes and
their selfish indifference to their country’s plight.
Of course, the methods of the activists mat shock many of the elders.
There have been certain excuses but these are to a great intent traceable
to the intensity of discontent and to the futility of the forms of the
protest of which we have been accustomed.
It is not my intention to idealize the
protest movement nor the typical activist. I have deliberately described
activism at its best and highest level – what it could be rather than what
it is – in a n attempt to purge parents of their prejudices and
misgivings. After all, a movement’s political and ethical aspirations are
as valid as a yardstick as it presents achievements. Furthermore, I trust
the activists, conscious of the need to be profoundly self-critical, are
aware of their own deficiencies.
Many activists have unnecessarily alienated their parents. They have not
thought of including their elders among those who are in need of
re-education. Thus they must also bear part of the responsibility for the
tension and the alienation which results from the lack of communication.
Discontinuities in continuity
Perhaps activists cannot be blamed
completely for their quick and total rejection of present institutions and
values. The situation is really that desperate. But they must bear in mind
that we are living in a reality which changes because of the
contradictions arising from within. The continuity of society exists
through discontinuity of basic change.
Radical change cannot be wrought overnight.
Revolution is not a moment in the course of history; it is a process that
encompasses broad historical periods. The new comes from the old and
negates it.
New institutions are not imposed from the
outside; rather, these institutions develop in the course of the struggle.
That is why the techniques of struggle must take cognizance of existing
reality, and this reality includes the very institutions and ideas that
continue to control the consciousness of the majority.
Knowledge of local reality
Activists must know their reality and work
within that reality in order to change it. Parents are very much part of
that reality.
They must therefore struggle with their parents, not with an attitude of
total negation or in antagonistic confrontation but with the same spirit
of forbearance that they show to the unpoliticized masses.
Their success in involving their parent – at
least to some degree – will be a test of their ability to rally other
sectors of society.
A thorough understanding of Philippines
reality will insure correct techniques of struggle. To persist in
mastering only foreign models based on the experience of other nations
would result in a doctrinaire and sectarian point of view.
Theory-Practice congealed
The theory that activist study is a
distillation of concrete experiences which have both universal and
particular validity. If this theory is to guide local experience
effectively, it must be applied creatively and this means recognizing its
universal and particular character.
The correct determination of what is
applicable to the local situation will depend on the depth of our
understanding of local reality. Later on, local experience can become the
basis for a further development of theory which will have universal and
particular validity.
Theory is practice congealed. Therefore,
reading and studying theory can be considered a form of practice. This
theory should guide practice, but not blindly. Our duty is to be able to
derive our own theoretical formulations from our own practice in order
that our experiences may also become of practice congealed.
Activists need more thorough grounding in
Philippines history and society. Concomitant with this weakness is the
failure to remember that, to effect revolutionary change, there is need to
rally the most diverse elements of society to form a united front of all
sectors that see the need for change. Or, perhaps the need is recognized
but there is insufficient understanding of how this is to be achieved.
Some activists disdain those who only
partially accept their goals. They may have failed to appreciate the fact
that the struggle must be undertaken on various levels of consciousness
and therefore they must give special regard for allies who may not yet
have the same level of awakening that they have.
Internalization of struggle
The struggle is a protracted one. The power
of the state and the influence of imperialism still cannot be minimized.
That is why the battle must be waged with extreme creativity on all fronts
and the knowledge that a protracted struggle may consume lifetime of
endeavor. What is needed is patience, humility, integrity, dedication, and
patriotism. A resolute struggle must be waged against impatience,
arrogance, intellectual dishonesty, instability and opportunism.
Changing people is a long and difficult
process, for it requires not merely change in political viewpoint but also
change in character. Part of the struggle, then, has to be internalized,
since some activists still carry with them many attitudes of the society
they reject such as dogmatism, opportunism, vindictiveness, vanity,
anti-intellectualism and lack of discipline.
In the struggle with older people and with
the rest of society, a change in attitude, emanating from an internal
change will be more effective than a thousand manifestoes. For in the
behavior of the activists themselves the rest of society expects to see an
aspect of the future society that is being advocated.
There are still many things that have to be learned about present society.
Parents may have much useful concrete in formation. The young need all
available resources. A partnership with parents, aside from reducing
tensions which impair efficiency of activists, can yield valuable facts
about specific areas of society beyond the present experiences of the
young.
Growing up and growing young
The young are growing; the old must grow
young. In situations develop and eventually fossilize and along with them
the thinking of men.
When a man grows old because of inability to appreciate and adjust to
changes, he becomes reactionary even if he still regards himself as
progressive because years ago he was considered as one. To note change, to
work for change, to adjust to changed conditions – that is the mark of
youth. If an individual believes in social change, he will never be an
anachronism in the successive alterations of his social milieu.
If parents of today do not march with the
youth, they will be left behind and will deserve only the censure of
history. If the youth fail to enlist the active participation of other
sectors of society, their movement will suffer from a fatal distortion.
In an intolerable society, the task of
working for revolutionary change is the duty and the privilege of all
patriots, young and old.
|
