A recent anti-corruption rally has sparked an unexpected and heated debate about the very foundations of Philippine nationalism, centering on a controversial comparison between two of the country's greatest heroes.
The Rally Remark That Stirred a Nation
Held on November 30, 2025, which coincided with the birth anniversary of Andres Bonifacio, the gathering was marked by a large and enthusiastic turnout. However, the event took a contentious turn when one of the emcees attempted to exalt Bonifacio, the founder of the Katipunan, by directly contrasting him with Dr. Jose Rizal. The emcee described Rizal's heroism with the Tagalog word "taphaw," which can mean shallow or superficial.
The comment left the audience in an awkward silence, unsure how to react to what was clearly an ill-advised statement. A co-emcee's attempt to recover by saying, "I think they agree," did little to diffuse the tension. This incident, occurring just days before the nation commemorates Rizal Day, has prompted a necessary re-examination of how we view our national heroes.
Beyond the Either-Or: A Complex Historical Reality
The attempt to pit Bonifacio against Rizal presents a false dichotomy. Historical evidence suggests their relationship and ideologies were far more nuanced than a simple rivalry.
Firstly, Bonifacio himself was a great admirer of Rizal. His effort to seek the support and approval of the European-educated ilustrado for the Katipunan's cause is a clear testament to this. Secondly, scholars argue that Rizal did not reject revolution in principle but believed the Filipino people needed more preparation. Both men ultimately shared the same end-goal: freedom and dignity for the Philippines.
Thirdly, the eventual trajectory of the Philippine Revolution offers a sobering perspective. The initial uprising faced severe challenges, which some historians say lends credence to Rizal's caution about readiness. This preparation, however, wasn't solely about weapons; it encompassed the maturity and unity of the people and their leaders to sustain the sacrifice required for true independence.
Readiness for Revolution and Modern Accountability
The core issue Rizal grappled with—readiness—resonates powerfully today. The author draws a parallel to Leninist thought within communist philosophy, where Vladimir Lenin argued that the proletariat needed a vanguard of disciplined, sacrificing leaders to achieve revolutionary consciousness. While not equating Rizal to Lenin, the point is that both understood the necessity of a prepared and principled leadership.
This philosophy is echoed in Rizal's novel, El Filibusterismo, through the character Padre Florentino. The passage questions whether a people unwilling to fight and sacrifice for their rights are truly ready for the responsibilities of independence.
The central question then and now is one of collective readiness. In the past, it was readiness for self-rule. Today, the author posits, it is readiness for the continuous fight for transparency and accountability in governance. The rally itself was a manifestation of this modern struggle. The real challenge is not in tearing down one hero to build up another, but in asking whether Filipinos today possess the same vigor and willingness to sacrifice for their rights that both Rizal and Bonifacio, in their own ways, called for.
Labeling any message that emphasizes prudence, education, and sustained sacrifice as "taphaw" overlooks the profound and enduring depth of such a struggle. The true honor to both heroes lies in understanding the full spectrum of their contributions to the nation's soul.
