The Legacy of José Rizal: A Story of Idealism and Principle

The story of José Rizal goes far beyond his death on December 30, 1896. On that late December morning, a man approached his execution who did not believe in violence but was willing to die for his convictions. Yet what Rizal left behind was more than just a tragic end – it was a legacy that would transform the Philippine independence movement.

The Path to Decision: Reform Instead of Revolution

José Rizal could have escaped. Months before his execution, the Katipunan offered to free him from exile in Dapitan. Even Andres Bonifacio invited him to lead the revolutionary movement. But Rizal declined – not out of cowardice, but out of conviction. He was pragmatic: his people were not ready for an armed uprising, he warned, and the result would only be pointless bloodshed.

Rizal and the Katipunan pursued different paths to the same goal. While the revolutionary movement sought independence through uprising, Rizal sought liberation through social reforms within the system. This difference even led him to sharply condemn the revolution on December 15, 1896, and he wrote: “I condemn this uprising – which dishonors us Filipinos and discredits those who could represent our cause. I despise its criminal methods and reject any involvement."

The Power of Propaganda: A National Consciousness Emerges

But here lies the irony of history: although Rizal publicly condemned the revolution, the propaganda movement of the Ilustrados – the educated elite to which Rizal himself belonged – laid the groundwork for a national consciousness. Historian Renato Constantino later observed: “Instead of bringing Filipinos closer to Spain, the propaganda planted roots for separation. The drive for Hispanization was transformed into the development of a strong national consciousness."

Rizal’s conflict was visible throughout his life. He admired European culture, art, and liberal ideas – but repeated experiences with discrimination and injustice gradually eroded his belief in possible assimilation with Spain. After confronting the Calamba land dispute, in which Dominican friars expropriated his family, Rizal finally admitted: “The Filipino longed for Hispanization, but they were wrong to pursue it.”

The Man Behind the Myth

Constantino described Rizal as an “awareness without movement” – a man who recognized injustice but took no action. But this categorization neglects Rizal’s actual role. As a social commentator, he was extraordinarily effective. His literary works contributed to the growing protest tradition that directly led to revolution. What began as a goal of Hispanization completely transformed into its opposite: a call for independence.

The question of whether the revolution would have happened without Rizal cannot be answered definitively. Probably yes – but more fractured, less coherent, without moral clarity. His execution intensified the desire for separation, united fragmented movements, and gave the uprising a greater purpose.

A Conscious Decision

Historian Ambeth Ocampo described Rizal’s remarkable calm before execution in “Rizal Without the Overcoat”: His pulse was normal before he died. Ocampo calls him a “conscious hero” – someone who made his decisions thoughtfully and fully understood their consequences.

Rizal himself explained in 1892 in a letter why he did not escape: “Moreover, I want to show those who deny us patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our convictions. What does death matter if one dies for what one loves, for one’s country and for those one loves?”

The Rizal Legacy Today: More Human, Less Saint

Today’s veneration of Rizal was partly shaped by American colonial historiography. As Theodore Friend documented in “Between Two Empires,” Rizal was favored because “Aguinaldo was too militant, Bonifacio too radical, Mabini incorrigible” – in short: Rizal posed no threat to the new American rule.

But Rizal needs no official canonization. His legacy speaks for itself. The real question is: How can the story of José Rizal still teach us today?

Constantino wrote in “Our Task: To Make Rizal Obsolete” that Rizal’s true goal was always to achieve the best for his country. When he called for making Rizal “obsolete,” he meant: As long as corruption and injustice persist, Rizal’s example remains relevant. Only when these ideals are fully realized will his legacy fulfill its purpose.

The Philippines is still far from that. Just as Rizal refused to betray his ideals, Filipinos today are called to stand firm against corruption and injustice. That may be the deepest lesson from the story of José Rizal – not how he died, but why he refused to flee.

Adapted from Rappler.com