Thursday, February 18, 2010

The "Impossibility" of the "Possibility" or the "Possibility of the "Impossibility"- a challenge to the Third World

The "Impossibility" of the "Possibility" or the "Possibility of the "Impossibility"
- a challenge to the Third World

Many years ago, people from all walks of life were blessed by nature's gifts that made themselves contented to it. These people, living in those prosperous lands, felt somewhat a sense that as if being blessed by nature and enjoying its riches.

These enjoyments became short-lived as anything coming from theirs became someone else's property. During the era of colonization, of the growth of imperialism, these countries that became colonized may ought to cultivate things around, but then their produce, which was intended to be possessed by those who cultivate end up in someone else's while a small portion retains. And for sure after reading history books (which we mustly don't like) we may conclude that these same people who once attain enjoyment are now end up in squalor. And although they attain "independence", "autonomy" or " whatsoever regarding "sovereignity," these people remained neglected, of having "possible" things turned out to be "impossible."

And most of us may consider these poor people living in these prosperous but exploited islands to be known as the "third world." And since that they are endowed with rich natural resources, these nations, despite having these kind of things that may likely for them to prosper still remained underdeveloped or developing due to their system's approach to things that seemed contrary to the people's will-especially regarding their actions done on behalf of those who "preserve" the so called "order of things."

Being a part of the third world may consider anything life as "difficult." Marred by the dictatons of the developed countries who kept on exploiting other people's riches, the system tends to accept it in exchange for a kickback or whatsoever just to make that nation weak and helpless, and despite having enough or even more "possibilities" for which a third world can lead to progress, the system, acting on behalf of their former colonizers, made some measures to hinder action, making anything "possible" "impossible".

And somehow according to the books we read about the third world, whether it is the Philippines or Africa, being underdeveloped, or developing, are rather facing extreme measures, of indebtedness and practises that benefits the few while the rest remained in squalor, in suffering like those from the slum areas due to the corrupt practises the system has.

The imperialist countries, like the U.S, Europe, and Japan as well as the social imperialist ones like China took some measures in retaining the weakness of the third world and making it as a trash can full of physical, moral, spiritual and cultural garbages coming from them. Again, making the third world "impossible" to rise up on its own and instead lying hopelessly in a sea of debt and unequal treaties vested upon to them.


Despite all these, the only way is to subvert the rotten system by grabing economic, political and cultural power and re-develop the society as a means to break the "impossibility" of the "possibility" coming from the reactionaries in the third world. Somehow this kind of action meant to say "a need for a revolution", true-for the sentiments of the third world wanted change, and change means social liberation to fulfill the nationalistic aspirations they wanted to achieve-by all means necessary.

And somehow this kind of struggle is also a part of a greater concept of class struggles in the history of humankind-as the proletariats and the peasantry of the third world, alongside the ones in the first world, are trying hard to destroy the capitalist system what imperialism emanates from them, paving way to the dictatorship of the proletariat, all though a series of revolutionary actions in a protracted people's war mode that may affect both countryside and the city in destroying the enemies.

In South East Asia during the early 20th century, Wenceslao Vinsons, also considered to be a foreruner of all the third world unity, sought a need for a Malayan unity that encompasses the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia. And that kind of unity, according to him, was coincidentally racialistic due to his ideas regarding Malayan unity in lands being "artificially" separated by its colonizers like the Dutch, the British and the Americans at that time. But then, that concept somehow can be a part of a greater unity of oppressed peoples with a socialist perspective and a classless society. Since without unity for kindred Malayan peoples, according to Vinsons, lies the impossibility of a classless society and a socialist perspective, which today in lieu of Malayan would be the third world and specifically the working class around the world.

Vinsons somehow tried much to think that "pipe dream" as what Salvador Lopez said so. But his concepts of unity, disregard the racialistic view, is somewhat a need in order to break off the impossibility, of the hindrance to create progress in the third world. And although not a socialist (but he understands much of his concept) the concept of unity, a socialist perspective and a classless society remains in every "utopian" minded individuals with "scientific" basis like those of Mao, Kim and even Ho Chi Minh whose their nationalism also inculcate internationalism and a view wherein mutuality, fraternity, respect, and equality; while in practice involves the dignity of labor and productivity in order to attain needs in every community.

And in lieu of the racialist aspect, and instead of a socio-economic, political view, the concept of Vinsons, along with Mao and other scientific socialists and revolutionaries then and now remains applicable as most countries, whether it belongs to the third world or not wanted to be genuinely united, classless, equal and socialist with Marx said:
"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
In order to fulfill lies a simple reason to call for a revolution. That revolution somehow is not like those being seen on books but also an inspiration to create a new concept to destroy the systems and those who manipulate it. As well as to break of hindrances, "impossibilities" to seek out the "possibilities" to create a prosperous society which includes socialism and eventually communism. And I notice that Vinson's idea is somewhat also aligned with Marx's and Engels's dream, and of Lenin and Mao's action, and since he emphasised on the South East, why not in every corner of the globe? Like the third world that is in need of unity, cohesion and force alongside the oppressed masses of the world to destroy the reaction, paving way to the dictatoship of proletariat towards communism?
That is the "impossibility" of the "possibility", and only unity of the oppressed masses within struggle can make the impossible possible.