Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,

Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
The Philippines1

Ramon Guillermo

Capital as a Symbol

A well-researched history of the Soviet aligned Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of the

Philippines [Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas; PKP], founded 1930, tells the following story:

In the Bulacan-Pampanga border region, a KPMP (Kalipunang Pangbansa ng mga

Magbubukid sa Pilipinas [National Federation of Philippine Peasants]) leader named
Lope de la Rosa became what officialdom called a “communist bandit.” First turning
fugitive to avoid prosecution for robbery and sedition in 1932, he evaded capture for
almost four years, periodically joined by a small group of followers and relatives that
included his wife Flora, eldest son Sisenando, and youngest son Lenin. “They talked
about building a new society,” one contemporary recalled, “but they were mostly semi-
literate men... They had one copy of Marx's Capital but none of them could read it, so
they had buried it.”2

This was actually a more detailed retelling of a story picked up from the PKP guerrilla leader
Luis Taruc’s (1913-2005) biography.3 In one of his early essays, the founder of the Maoist
Communist Party of the Philippines [CPP] founded in 1968, Jose Maria Sison (1939- …),
unsympathetically read Taruc’s telegraphic version of the above story as a belittling of the role
of Marxist theory and satirization of illiterate peasants and workers.4 Sison asserted that Taruc’s
story of metaphorically “burying Marxism” deliberately misses out on the important role of any
Communist Party which is to “translate Marxism into the language of the masses.”5 The historian
Jim Richardson’s (1947 - …) more poignant rewriting of the incident involving illiterate
peasants unable to read a book which they felt was somehow closely bound up with their own
struggle is closer in spirit to the tragic. One could ask how it happened in the first place that there
were no Party cadres with Lope De la Rosa’s small band who could do the important work of
making Capital intelligible to these peasant revolutionaries? And what circumstances drove the
small guerrilla band to finally bury it in the end?
The writer Manuel Arguilla’s (1911-1944) short story, “The Socialists” (1937), gave
Capital an important role which shed some insight on the symbolic function of the book itself
among the adherents and sympathizers of the broader communist movement in the Philippines.
The setting of the story was a Popular Front [Frente Popular] solidarity activity which had
evidently been organized by the PKP sometime in the late 1930s at the foot of Mount Arayat in
Central Luzon. The majority of those in attendance were peasants from the area, speaking mostly

1
Jose Ma. Sison and Jim Richardson graciously provided the author with invaluable information and insights in the
writing of this article.
2
Jim Richardson, Komunista: The Genesis of the Philippine Communist Party 1902-1935 (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 2011), 232.
3
Luis Taruc, Born of the people (New York: International Publishers, 1953), 28.
4
Jose Ma. Sison, Pomeroy’s Portrait: Revisionist Renegade. Revolutionary School of Mao Tse Tung Thought (n.p.:
Communist Party of the Philippines, 1972).
5
Sison, Pomeroy’s Portrait, n.p.

1
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
in the local Tagalog, Kapampangan, and Pangasinan languages. It is said that a Comrade Lirios
attended the event along with some other members of an elite “Socialist Club of Manila.”6 The
following passages are from Arguilla’s story:

Held against his chest and under his left arm, [Comrade Lirios] carried a thick red book
the title of which in bold black letters could plainly be seen: DAS KAPITAL by Karl
Marx… Comrade Lirios, the well-dressed young man, caught his wife’s eye, and he
raised the book, “Das Kapital,” to her. She smiled affectionately, dimpling the right
cheek… [Stifling an urge to laugh at a pugnacious peasant delivering an impassioned
speech…] he opened “Das Kapital” and ransacked its pages feverishly. The sun’s rays
striking the smooth white paper threw a glare upon his eyes… His temples began to throb
with a dull ache from the heat of the sun. He raised “Das Kapital” and shaded his head
with it… Comrade Lirios adjusted the straw hat carefully on the nape of his neck. His
back felt smoking hot. His head was bursting. He unbuttoned his coat and, holding the
lapels, tried to cool himself by waving the sides of the garment back and forth. But he
only began to sweat more profusely from the effort. Besides the book “Das Kapital,” kept
slipping and it was a job holding under his armpit… He caught his wife’s eye and waved
“Das Kapital” at her. She smiled and he thought he could see the dimple in her cheek.

By the time Arguilla had written this story, the educational system which was originally
established by the Americans to serve as a tool of pacification and counter-insurgency had
already produced a new generation of elite “brown Americans,” who preferred to communicate
among themselves in English and knew more about US history and culture than that of their own
country.7 Arguilla’s satirical depiction was a jab at the attitude of Americanized Filipino
intellectuals to Marx’s book. The imposing physical size of Capital evidently gave it a
formidable and difficult reputation, properties which were apparently transferred to those who
were seen carrying it about. The largeness of the type used for the book’s title, in the original
German no less, and its red cover made sure that no one could overlook it. At the end of the
story, struck by the incongruity of his and Capital’s presence in the midst of all these earnest
revolutionary peasants, caught up in a state of mutual incomprehension, Comrade Lirios could
not help but laugh at the absurdity of his own posturing. Arguilla’s story made fun of the
pretentious and intellectual affectations of the Philippine radical intelligentsia. The questions
which he raised do not merely pertain to the problem of translating what the book supposedly
“says” in its pages into something understandable or accessible to the working classes. The story
also posed the question of how books, in general, are regarded in their sheer physicality and
objecthood as signs and trappings used by intellectuals to assert their authority within
institutions, book-centric social movements, or society at large.

A Small Audience of Activists, Unionists, and Academics

The reception of Capital in the Philippines began at the turn of the twentieth century
when the industrial proletariat was minuscule and the entry of liberal ideas, let alone radical

6
Richardson surmises that Arguilla may have been referring here to the Philippine Friends of the Soviet Union
[PFSU] which had an organ named Socialism Today (c. 1936-1938). Jim Richardson, email to the author, February
16, 2017.
7
Renato Constantino, “The Mis-education of the Filipino,” Journal of Contemporary Asia 1, no. 1 (1970): 20-36.

2
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
working-class ideologies, was precluded by heavy censorship of the Spanish colonial regime.
Moreover, the conservative Catholic Church practically controlled and limited all aspects of
intellectual life. It is said that Don Isabelo de los Reyes (1864-1938), a leading Filipino
journalist, vociferous patriot, and founder of the first Philippine labor federation, the Democratic
Workers’ Union [Union Obrera Democratica; UOD] in 1902, had brought with him a veritable
collection of communist and anarchist works upon his return from Spanish imprisonment and
exile. It is almost certain that he had brought home a copy of a Spanish translation of Capital
which became a part of the idiosyncratic library of radical works which he made available to
their first receptive readers in the Philippines.8
De los Reyes (better known as Don Belong), was one of few prominent Filipino
nationalists who stubbornly continued to protest the US annexation of the Philippines even after
the defeat of the Filipino revolutionary forces following the Philippine-America War (1899-
1902). Don Belong and others who kept the flame of independence alive were subjected to the
harsh repressive measures of the US colonial regime which banned all expressions of national
sentiment.9 The US invasion, deeply influenced by vulgar jingoism and racist prejudices,
imposed severe restrictions on basic freedoms and civil liberties and was characterized by
countless massacres, looting, burning of villages, rape, and torture resulting in the death of
hundreds of thousands of Filipinos. The use of waterboarding and other exquisite tortures on
Filipino soldiers and civilians were common. Strategic hamletting, or the resettlement at
gunpoint of whole populations, in the form of so-called “reconcentration camps” caused untold
misery to the broader population.10
The earliest effort to systematically render the idiom of Capital and other communist and
anarchist books into working class Tagalog was the writer Lope K. Santos’ (1879-1963) novel
Banaag at Sikat: nobelang Tagalog [Glimmer and Radiance: A Tagalog Novel], published in
1906. This long work is a kind of introduction to some of the basic themes and ideas of political
economy as it will be absorbed by the early radical labor movement and arguably invented what
would become the language of Tagalog working-class radicalism. It was perhaps the first of its
kind in Asia. It is interesting that in this work Santos cited Capital lumped together with the
major works of French and Russian anarchism, all in Spanish translations, thus giving the
impression that all these belong to a single ideological world. In the relevant passage in Banaag
at Sikat, the young anarchist named Felipe listed some book titles in his mind:

Before his mind’s eye paraded one by one the difficult books he had read which
discussed these ideas by Kropotkin, chief among them The Conquest of Bread; as well as
Jean Grave’s The Future Society and The Moribund Society, Sebastían Fauré’s The

8
See for example, William H. Scott, The Union Obrera Democratica: First Filipino Labor Union (Quezon City:
New Day Publishers, 1992), 21; Benedict Anderson, Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anticolonial
Imagination (London: Verso, 2005), 225-226. Much has been made of the fact that before De los Reyes’ presumed
familiarity with Marx’s work, the Filipino painter Juan Luna (1857-1899), mentioned Marx’s name in a letter to the
novelist and patriot Jose Rizal (1861-1896) dated May 13, 1891. However, the sources on Rizal’s possible
acquaintance with Marx seem to stop there. (Jose Rizal, Epistolario Rizalino [Rizal’s Correspondence] (Manila:
Bureau of Printing, 1933), 3: 198.)
9
William H. Scott, “A Minority Reaction to American Imperialism: Isabelo de los Reyes,” Philippine Quarterly of
Culture and Society 10, no. 1/2 (1982), pp. 1- 11.
10
Renato Constantino, The Philippines: A Past Revisited (Quezon City: n.p., 1975), 246-252. See also: Paul Kramer,
The Blood of Government: Race, Empire, the United States & the Philippines (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 2006).

3
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
Universal Pain, J. Proudhon’s Property is Theft [sic], Karl Marx’s The Capital, Eliseo
Reclus’ Evolution and Revolution, Bakunin in his God and the State, Tolstoy in
Resurrection and other anarchists who wrote books about the rottenness of today’s
Society… In those times, more than any other, he was able to profit from and remember
what he had read from the above-mentioned books, which he had acquired with great
difficulty because of his small income.11

Hermenegildo Cruz (1880 - 1943), a prominent working-class leader, a student of Don

Belong, and close collaborator of Santos, likewise cited Friedrich Engels’ El origen de la
familia, la propiedad privada y el Estado [The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the
State] in a literary study of 1906.12 It seems that radical books and materials found their first avid
readers in the labor unions rather than among intellectuals or academics. An estimate of the size
of this audience can be gleaned from Richardson, who cited official figures for union
membership in Manila in 1921 to be 43,298, or about a fourth of the estimated total number of
workers.13
During the period of the Comintern (1919-1943) more copies of Capital in the English
translation entered the Philippines through the Communist Party of the United States of America
(CPUSA) which undertook the preparatory work for the founding of the PKP. Filipino members
of the CPUSA who came home to the Philippines from periods of study in the USA in the 1920s
and the 1930s probably brought home with them copies of Capital. It was also around this time
that the working-class founder of the PKP, Crisanto Evangelista (1888-1942), wrote a guide to
Marxist political economy entitled Ang A-B-K ng Anakpawis [The Proletarian ABCs], which
cited among its sources Marx’s Capital and Wage Labor and Capital. James S. Allen (Sol
Auerbach) (1906-1986), claimed that he had imported into the Philippines “practically the entire
Marxist list” of the International Publishing House in August 1938.14 These volumes were made
available to the public and sold rather briskly through the “People’s Book Store.”15 However, in
spite of this initially promising sign, several factors stood in the way of a broader reception of
these works during the American colonial regime. Aside from the fact that the Philippine
industrial proletariat was still quite small, the presence of a substantial American educational and
cultural influence gave rise to a predominantly conservative and conformist Filipino intellectual
elite alienated from the great majority by their language and political aspirations. The American
colonial regime was also successful in implanting notions of “labor and capital harmony” and
narrow economism among the unions. However, one could also mention scattered exceptions
such as Artemio Luna Ortega (1921 - ?), a Filipino engineer and member of the Communist
Party of the USA (CPUSA) who fought in Spain with the International Brigade on the

11
Santos, Banaag at Sikat, 179.
12
Cruz cites an edition printed by Sempere y Ca. in Valencia. Hermenegildo Cruz, Kun sino ang kumatha ng
“Florante”: Kasaysayan ng buhay ni Francisco Baltazar at pag-uulat nang kanyang karununga't kadakilaan [The
writer of the “Florante”: Life history of Francisco Baltazar and report of his wisdom and greatness] (Manila:
“Libreria Manila Filatelico,” 1906), 197.
13
Richardson, Komunista, 44.
14
James S. Allen, The Philippine Left on the eve of World War II. Foreword by William Pomeroy (Minnesota: MEP
Publications, 1993), 68.
15
Allen, The Philippine Left on the eve of World War II, 78-79.

4
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
Republican side in 1937. In his application to join the Communist Party of Spain, he indicated
that he had read both the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.16
Information on the reception of Capital during and immediately after World War II is
17
sparse. Evangelista, the ideological leader of the PKP, was captured and executed by the
Japanese on January 25, 1942. In response to the Japanese Occupation, the PKP established an
armed wing called the People’s Army Against the Japanese [Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon;
HUKBALAHAP] which waged an effective guerrilla war of resistance against the Japanese
regime. In the period between the end of the war and the “granting” of independence by the
United States to the Philippines on July 4, 1946, its name was changed to People’s Liberation
Army [Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan; HMB]. Led by the PKP, the HMB would attempt to
seize power from the Philippine state in the period 1946 to 1954 but was decisively defeated by a
ruthless counter-insurgency campaign by the US-backed Philippine army. The study of the
Marxist classics could have been constrained during this period due to the difficult wartime
conditions and the exigencies of undertaking a full-scale guerrilla uprising. Aside from this, the
political scientist Francisco Nemenzo, Jr. (1935 - ...) and former member of the PKP also
observed a powerful and enduring tradition of “anti-intellectualism” in the PKP.18
In 1962, Sison, then a young instructor at the University of the Philippines (UP), was able
to bring into the Philippines at least thirty copies of Capital in English translation from
Indonesia. A few years later, Sison founded the breakaway Maoist CPP. Capital, therefore, took
its place among the readings of a new generation of young Filipino activists during the
revolutionary tide of the late fifties and sixties.19 However, party intellectuals and cadres were
perhaps too immersed in clandestine underground work to devote a significant amount of time to
Marx’s work during the period of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos’ (1917-1989) iron-fisted rule
from 1972 to 1986. The immediate period around the collapse of that US-backed regime in 1986
occasioned a more visible and direct academic reception of Marx’s principal economic works
which notably included even some economists from the UP, a firm bastion of neoclassical
economics.20
The context for the increased importance of Capital as a reference was a heated debate on
the “semi-feudal” character of the mode of production in the Philippines which was provoked by
the popularity in the 1980s [BA1]of the so-called “dependency” mode of analysis.21 There were

16
Ramon Guillermo, “Siempre he encontrado en dicho camarada un verdadero espiritu revolucionario”: Tala
hinggil sa ilang bagong tuklas na dokumento sa Arkibo ng COMINTERN hinggil sa mga mandirigmang Pilipino sa
Espanya na kaanib sa Brigada Internacional (1936–1939)” [I have always found in the said comrade a true
revolutionary spirit: Note on some newly discovered documents from the COMINTERN archive pertaining to
Filipino combatants in Spain who fought with the International Brigade (1936-1939)], Social Science Diliman 12,
no. 1 (2016): 78-107.
17
Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas [Communist Party of the Philippines], Communism in the Philippines: The PKP,
Book 1 (Metro Manila: Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas-1930, 1996).
18
Francisco Nemenzo, Jr., “The Millenarian - Populist Aspects of Fiipino Marxism,” in Marxism in the Philippines,
ed. Third World Studies Center (Quezon City: Third World Studies Center – University of the Philippines, 1987),
10.
19
Jose Ma. Sison, email to the author dated February 12, 2017. Cf. Jose Maria Sison, “Marxism-Leninism-Mao
Zedong Thought as Guide to the Philippine Revolution.” Contribution to the International Seminar on Mao Zedong
Thought, November 6-7, 1993.
20
Ma. Cynthia Rose Bautista, “The Social Sciences in the Philippines: Reflections on Trends and Developments,”
Philippine Review of Economics 38, no. 2 (2001): 102-187.
21
Jose Maria Sison and Julieta de Lima, Philippine economy and politics (Quezon City: Aklat ng Bayan, 1998);
Jonathan Fast and Jim Richardson, Roots of dependency: political and economic revolution in 19th century
Philippines (Quezon City: Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1979).

5
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
some notable interventions in this debate which made direct and creative uses of Capital. A
remarkable contribution to the discussion was by the journalist Rigoberto Tiglao (1952 - ...) who
came up [BA2]with a study of the Philippine coconut industry (1980) which evinced a comfortable
grasp of Marx’s main work and its categories.22 The economist Ricardo Ferrer (1941 - ...) also
introduced some strikingly original contributions to that debate of a more theoretical nature. His
interpretations of Capital, which were probably influenced in its style by analytical Marxism,
still need to be assessed as a whole. However, he was unique among mainstream Filipino
economists in the depth and seriousness of his theoretical commitment to Marxist economic
theory.23 Nevertheless, the fact that the main participants in that debate mostly spoke past each
other, hardly cited each other’s works and neglected to systematically and thoroughly dissect
each other’s positions, guaranteed that this developing autonomous discourse on Marx’s most
important economic works would not be sustained. Moreover, no distinctly philosophical
receptions of Capital have developed in the Philippines. Eventually, the overwhelming
dominance of the conservative neoclassical paradigm in economics, and the uncritical
postmodernist vogue in the social sciences and humanities led yet again to the academic
marginalization of Marx’s writings which were once again declared passé.
Outside academia, the leader of the Federation of Filipino Workers [Bukluran ng
Manggagawang Pilipino; BMP], Filemon Lagman (1953-2001) wrote a pamphlet [BA3][B4]in the
1990s on political economy in a popular style entitled Puhunan at Paggawa [Capital and Labor].
This was evidently infused with a reading of Capital from beginning to end without mentioning
Capital or Marx. In 2005, Edberto M. Villegas (1940-…), a professor at UP, published the first
Philippine guide to the reading of Capital in the Filipino language, Gabay sa Pag-aaral ng Das
Kapital ni Karl Marx [Guide to the Study of Karl Marx’s Das Kapital].24 The CPP includes the
reading and discussion of Capital in its advanced party course but no information is available on
actual participation in terms of numbers.25 A strong distinction should, therefore, be made
between the broad dissemination and influence of the ideas of Marxist political economy in a
general sense and the direct reception, interpretation, and discussion of Capital itself as a text.
One could safely surmise that Philippine radical movements absorbed the ideas of Marxist
political economy mainly from the writings of Vladimir Lenin (1870 – 1924), Mao Zedong
(1893 – 1976), and the various available popular manuals of political economy rather than
directly from Capital.

A Future Readership?

In the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis, the political scientist and former
president of the UP, Francisco Nemenzo, exhorted Filipino activists to learn Marxism straight

22
Rigoberto Tiglao, The political economy of the Philippine coconut industry (Quezon City: Third World Studies,
College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines, 1980).
23
Ricardo D. Ferrer, “On the Mode of Production in the Philippines: Some Old-Fashioned Questions on Marxism,”
in Marxism in the Philippines, ed. Third World Studies Center (Quezon City: Third World Studies Center –
University of the Philippines, 1987), 189-242; Ricardo D. Ferrer, “Theoretic and Programmatic Framework for the
Development of Underdeveloped Countries,” The New Progressive Review 3, no. 2 (1987): 2-25.
24
Edberto Villegas, Gabay sa Pag-aaral ng Das Kapital ni Karl Marx [Guide to the Study of Karl Marx’s Das
Kapital] (n.p.: Palimbagang Sentral, Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, 2005).
25
Communist Party of the Philippines, “Complete the Victory of the Second Great Rectification Movement,
Resolutely Carry Out Our Two Important Tasks in the Cities! Five-Year Assessment of the SGRM and Our Tasks
4.” Rebolusyon 4 (2000): 3-59.

6
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
from Marx and to take up the reading and study of Capital.26 Since then, however, there have
been no positive signs of change. This lack of vitality may have something to do with the history
of literacy and the cultures of the book in the Philippines. But the more specific causes of the
failure to develop an independent reception and autonomous discourse on Capital in the
Philippines may include the following: (1) lack of translations into Philippine languages which
has seriously hampered its broader dissemination and dampened the potential vigor and
originality of its intellectual absorption; (2) the absence of any sustained Capital study groups
among students and activists even during favorable conjunctures ; (3) scarcity of locally
developed introductory and pedagogical materials on Capital.
The reason why Capital was not translated into any major Philippine language in the last
century despite the rich working-class revolutionary tradition of the Philippines, is perhaps
mainly because the local intelligentsia has, for the most part, depended on English translations,
and have thought these sufficient to acquaint themselves with Marx’s writings. There are no
available records of any previous complete or partial translations of Capital in other major
languages such as Cebuano, Hiligaynon, or Ilokano. A good sign is that a partial Filipino
translation entitled Ang Kapital: Kritika ng Ekonomiyang Pampulitika (Unang Bahagi: Kalakal
at Salapi) [Capital: Critique of Political Economy [Part One: Commodity and Money]] covering
the first three chapters, known as the theoretical core of the work, began circulation as an ebook
in early 2017. It was translated from the fourth German edition of 1890 with the intention of
eventually translating the whole of the first volume of Capital in order to make it more
accessible to a broad readership of student activists and organized workers and farmers.

This translational initiative will hopefully lead to more sustained future collective project
to translate the other volumes of Capital as well as Marx’s other major works such as the
Grundrisse and the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. These efforts should
eventually serve as a basis for a more creative and autonomous Philippine reception of Marx’s
legacy.

Bibliography

Partial Editions of Capital

Volume I

Marx, Karl. Ang Kapital: Kritika ng Ekonomiyang Pampulitika (Unang Bahagi: Kalakal at
Salapi). Translated by Ramon Guillermo. Quezon City: n.p., 2017. (free ebook)

Secondary Literature on Capital

Arguilla, Manuel E. “The Socialists.” Philippine Magazine, April 1937.

Evangelista, Crisanto. Ang A-B-K ng Anakpawis. n.p.: n.p., n.d.
Fast, Jonathan and Jim Richardson. Roots of dependency: political and economic revolution in
19th century Philippines. Quezon City: Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1979.

26
Francisco Nemenzo, “Preparing for the Storm,” unpublished speech delivered on December 4, 2012.

7
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
Ferrer, Ricardo D. “On the Mode of Production in the Philippines: Some Old-Fashioned
Questions on Marxism.” In Marxism in the Philippines, ed. Third World Studies Center,
189-242. Quezon City: Third World Studies Center – University of the Philippines, 1987.
———. “Theoretic and Programmatic Framework for the Development of Underdeveloped
Countries.” The New Progressive Review 3, no. 2 (1987): 2-25.
Lagman, Filemon. Puhunan at Paggawa. Pambungad na Aralin ng Bukluran ng Manggagawang
Pilipino (BMP). m.p.: n.p., n.d.
Santos, Lope K. Banaag at sikat: nobelang tagalog. Manila: Manlapaz Publishers, 1959.
Sison, Jose Maria and Julieta de Lima. Philippine economy and politics. Quezon City: Aklat ng
Bayan, 1998.
Tiglao, Rigoberto. The political economy of the Philippine coconut industry. Quezon City: Third
World Studies, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines, 1980.
Villegas, Edberto. Gabay sa Pag-aaral ng Das Kapital ni Karl Marx. n.p.: Palimbagang Sentral,
Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, 2005.

Other References

Allen, James S. The Philippine Left on the eve of World War II. Foreword by William Pomeroy.
Minnesota: MEP Publications, 1993.
Anderson, Benedict. Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anticolonial Imagination. London:
Verso, 2005.
Bautista, Ma. Cynthia Rose. “The Social Sciences in the Philippines: Reflections on Trends and
Developments.” Philippine Review of Economics 38, no. 2 (2001): 92-120.
Communist Party of the Philippines. “Complete the Victory of the Second Great Rectification
Movement, Resolutely Carry Out Our Two Important Tasks in the Cities! Five-Year
Assessment of the SGRM and Our Tasks 4.” Rebolusyon 4 (2000): 3-59.
Constantino, Renato. “The Mis-education of the Filipino.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 1, no.
1 (1970): 20-36.
Constantino, Renato. The Philippines: A Past Revisited. Quezon City: n.p., 1975.
Cruz, Hermenegildo. Kun sino ang kumatha ng “Florante” : Kasaysayan ng buhay ni Francisco
Baltazar at pag-uulat nang kanyang karununga't kadakilaan. Manila: “Libreria Manila
Filatelico,” 1906.
Guillermo, Ramon. “Siempre he encontrado en dicho camarada un verdadero espiritu
revolucionario: Tala hinggil sa ilang bagong tuklas na dokumento sa Arkibo ng
COMINTERN hinggil sa mga mandirigmang Pilipino sa Espanya na kaanib sa Brigada
Internacional (1936–1939).” Social Science Diliman 12, no. 1 (2016): 78-107.
Kramer, Paul. The Blood of Government: Race, Empire, the United States & the Philippines/
Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2006.
Nemenzo, Jr., Francisco. “The Millenarian - Populist Aspects of Fiipino Marxism.” In Marxism
in the Philippines, edited by the Third World Studies Center, 1-40 (Quezon City: Third
World Studies Center – University of the Philippines, 1987.
———. “Preparing for the Storm.” December 4, 2012.
Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas [Communist Party of the Philippines]. Communism in the
Philippines: The PKP, Book 1. Metro Manila: Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas-1930,
1996.

8
Routledge Handbook of Marx’s Capital : A Global History of Translation, Dissemination and Reception, Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon-on-Thames, coll. Routledge International Handbooks, 31-3-2018, 512 pages, ISBN : 978-1-13-810647-5. Sous la
direction de Marcello Musto et Babak Amini.
Richardson, Jim. Komunista: the genesis of the Philippine Communist Party, 1902-1935. Quezon
City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2011.
Rizal, Jose. Epistolario Rizalino. Vol. 3. Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1933.
Scott, William H. “A Minority Reaction to American Imperialism: Isabelo de los Reyes.”
Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 10, no. 1/2 (1982), pp. 1-11.
———. The Union Obrera Democratica: First Filipino Labor Union. Quezon City: New Day
Publishers, 1992.
Sison, Jose Maria. Pomeroy’s Portrait: Revisionist Renegade. Revolutionary School of Mao Tse
Tung Thought. n.p.: Communist Party of the Philippines, 1972.
———. “Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought as Guide to the Philippine Revolution.”
Contribution to the International Seminar on Mao Zedong Thought, November 6-7, 1993.
Taruc, Luis. Born of the people. New York: International Publishers, 1953.