Suchergebnisse

Excerpt Kathleen Weekley (KW): On the boycott debate between the Executive Committee of the Central Committee and the Executive Committee-Manila-Rizal during the 1978 elections, you said that the boycott was a mistake and had a divisive effect on the Party. Did you mean that the Central Committee should not have intervened? Jose Maria Sison (JMS): In a society like the Philippines, the issue does not have to be divided between electoral boycott and participation all the time. The boycott position will always win within the Party, but you have to watch out whether the issue as defined inside the Party will be similarly defined and understood outside the Party. Within the party, if you say boycott and the pro-participation side accepts the term 'boycott, the pro-participation side will always lose in formal terms because, in the first place, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) is not allowed to participate in the electoral process! So, there should be no debate about that. In a party like the CPP, it would be enough to say that the elections held by the class enemy are farcical.

This article argues that twentieth century modernist nationalism can no longer be a political strategy for the Filipino left because it rests on the obliteration of differences. Rethinking old-style anti-imperialism will force the left to recognise the state as a key site of political struggle and also to understand that ethnic, class and other social cleavages are not transcended via a 'national' imaginary except through the use of violence. Moreover, in the 1990s as states band together in regional blocs, critics of contemporary capitalism in the Asia-Pacific would do well to pursue a radical democratic rather than nationalist agenda. I argue that the Philippine state's relative historical lack of success in hegemonic nation-building, along with a recently reinvigorated democratic impulse, offer the Filipino left a unique opportunity to lead a popular campaign for a new regional identity—one committed to democratic principles rather than exclusivist notions of 'national belonging.' Such popular interpretations are necessary to subvert other putative transnational discourses such as 'Asian values.'

"This title was first published in 2002.Presenting a fresh understanding of the construction of Post-Colonial national identity in the new context of globalization, this text looks at the dilemmas of the requirement to compete in the global economy and the political demands of human rights and cultural differences. The authors are concerned with the ways in which a modern state attempts to mould the identities of its citizens and the ways in which the myriad of identities in a multiethnic, multicultural and multi-religious population give rise to intense contradictions. This important research will have implications beyond the Filipino case and will be of great interest to a wider audience as a reference for courses on Asian studies, political science and history."--Provided by publisher.

Millions of people around the Asia-Pacific region are suffering from the twin effects of globalization and exclusionary nationality laws. Some are migrant workers without rights in host countries; some are indigenous peoples who are not accorded their full rights in their own countries. Yet others are refugees escaping from regimes that have no respect for human rights. This collection of essays discusses the ways in which citizenship laws in the region might be made consistent with human dignity. It considers the connectedness of national belonging and citizenship in East and Southeast Asian and Pacific states including Australia; the impact of mass migration, cultural homogenization and other effects of globalization on notions of citizenship; and possibilities of commitment to a transnational democratic citizenship that respects cultural difference