FORMOSO, Patrick John L.

MENDOZA, Ruschelle Joyce C.

BSN 1- D

THE ANATOMY OF BETRAYAL

Seneca’s Letters to Lucilius repeatedly reminds its readers that “It’s a vice to trust all,
and equally a vice to trust none.” This sentiment from the great Roman first-century
statesman and philosopher, in other words, tells us that trust always involves a gamble.

This is the price of engaging in consequential relationships at close or at a distance,

hence, faithfulness and loyalty – undeniably, are two characteristics that most people lack.
Although people who have built a strong connection often treat one another in a positive
and considerate manner, negative interactions are nearly inevitable in such that betrayal is
an end-result of a variety of causes including but not limited to differences in preferences,
personal ambitions, promise of wealth and power, discrimination coming from his
fellowmen and opposing vision.

Reminiscing the past and connecting it to the present, it is seen that trust is an
important issue in organizations since it has been observed to be connected with many
positive processes and outcomes. The establishment of anti-colonialism organizations such
as KKK and unified relationship between and among the members, at the start of the
revolution, made possible to champion or if not, at the very least, contain the colonizers’
far-reaching drive. But as the war progressed, many have lost faith in the Philippines and
have decided to save themselves from further damage and, thus, became an enigma in
reaching for the people’s long-waited sovereignty. During the time of war and confusion,
people have come against each other up to a point where violation of relationship became a
relevant norm and there is no way to stop it. Once realization hits and after analysing the
previous, one can undermine that, yes, Filipinos became the enemies of Filipinos. What
General Antonio Luna said in the film ‘Heneral Luna’ is as truthful as it could get, “Mas
madali pang pagkasunduin ang langit at lupa kaysa dalawang Pilipino tungkol sa kahit na
anong bagay." – the reason why Filipinos who fought for the country until their deaths are
highly commended. Wounds are gained not just from their real enemies but even from
their friends and relatives. Pedro Becbec, Miguel Vicos, Teodoro Patino, Pio del Pilar,
Artemio Ricarte, Pedro Paterno, the Macabebe, Makabayang Katipunan ng Ligang Pilipino
(MAKAPILI), SAKDALISTA and all the other traitors in Philippine history have a
commonality – inner conflicts and contradictions. It must be emphasized that the nature of
traitorousness is not as profound, but was discernably driven by personal, and ultimately,
elite, interests and inner conflicts within the self.
 With traitorousness being imbued so much in Philippine History, it cannot be helped
to wonder what could have been the alternate history if these key figures remained loyal to
their nation and countrymen.

Some of these figures betrayed their country for war profiteering and playing both
sides like Pedro Paterno, many through personal gain and/or anger like Miguel Vicos,
Pedro Becbec, Teodoro Patino, Pio del Pilar, Cecilio Segismundo, and the Macabebes. In
addition, many Filipinos continued their fight against colonialism through skewed
perspective like the collaboration of Artemio Ricarte and the MAKAPILIs with the Japanese
Imperial Army with the belief that the latter is helping the Filipinos gain their
independence.

First, if Diego Silang was not betrayed, then the revolution of the 18th century
became more effective and prevalent with the help of the British forces. As Silang’s revolt
led to the establishment of an independent Ilocano state, revolutionary efforts could have
been more effective under his command.

Second, if Teodoro Patino did not reveal the existence of Katipunan to the Spanish
authorities, then many innocent arrests, exiles, and executions could have been prevented,
also the Filipino revolutionaries will have more time in gathering their resources and
become more prepared for the start of the revolutionary fight. Less bloodshed for Filipinos
and more successful missions could had happened with preparedness and the element of
surprise.

Third, if Pio del Pilar did not persuade Emilio Aguinaldo, then the Bonifacio brothers
could had just been exiled without demoralizing many revolutionaries in their efforts. A
unified and moralized Philippine Republic could have been created without neglecting the
importance of the working-class masses and without emphasizing the superiority of the
elites.

Fourth, if Cecilo Segismundo was not captured and gave the letters in exchange for
the well being of his son (which accompanies him during that time) and that if the
Macabebes did not fought for the Americans, then Emilio Aguinaldo would not have been
captured more easily and the fight could have been continued. And if it became successful
then the Philippines could have not been under foreign control for another half century.

Finally, if Artemio Ricarte, SAKDALISTA, and MAKAPILIs did not collaborated with
the Japanese during the Second World War, then Japanese Imperial Army advancement
could have been slowed, lesser Filipino people could have been killed, and that many war
crimes like the use of comfort women or sex slaves could have been prevented