BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
90
M A R K E T E C O N O M Y A N D T H E P R O C E S S O F C U L T U R A L R E D E F I N I T I O N I N M A N G Y A N S O C I E T Y
Fr. Edwin A. Gariguez ABSTRACT:
This paper is a presentation and evaluation of the impact of market economy
in relation to the over-all socio-cultural milieu of the Mangyan indigenous
communities. Using Karl Polanyi’s concept of “embeddedness” and “great
transformation”, the paper situates the discussion in the context of Mangyan
indigenous communities—how are they affected by the intrusion of the market
system? How is the market economy slowly transforming their traditional
society, which was then predominantly characterized by subsistence economy,
socially-oriented transactions, non-commodified values, and ecological
integrity? The last part of the paper articulates the process of on-going socio-
cultural redefinition in the collective consciousness of the Mangyan indigenous
peoples vis-à-vis the encroaching forces of market-dominated economy,
namely: a) adaptation of profit-motivated form of transactions, b) emerging
social differentiation, and c) ecological alienation.
Keywords: Karl Polanyi, Market economy, Cultural Redefinition, Mangyan
indigenous peoples
Defining Framework
Market economy that came with the current of industrial revolution had a
tremendous impact in prevailing economic arrangement of that period. It
affected even the cultural structures, the accepted social paradigm, and the
political landscape and institutions. The revolutionary character of market
liberalism was best described in Karl Polanyi’s (1944) book, The Great
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
91
Transformation, highlighted how modern market economy had determined the
various changes in structures, social relationship and even in consciousness of
societies beginning from the period of industrialization.
Polanyi (1944, p. 68) defines market economy as: “an economic system
controlled, regulated, and directed by market alone . . . An economy of this
kind derives from the expectation that human beings behave in such a way as
to achieve maximum money gains . . . It assumes the presence of money, which
functions as purchasing power in the hands of its owners. Production will then
be controlled by prices, for the profits of those who direct production will
depend upon them . . .”
Polanyi asserts that economy is not an autonomous and independent system
but it is necessarily related (or even subordinated) to politics, religion and social
relations. This interlocking interrelationship of economy with other social
structures is Polanyi’s concept of “embeddedness” (Block 2000).
Admittedly, market economy is determined by socio-cultural
structures, but the interrelationship can also be a mutual engagement, with
market economy influencing the social relations and cultural patterns, not in a
deterministic fashion prescribed by Karl Marx, but as a matter of cultural
import and redefinition of the collective consciousness.
The economic system that we have today is primarily controlled by
market liberalism, and it is getting even more pronounced in this period of
advancing process of globalization. This kind of laissez-faire market economy
is predicted to be destructive for it “requires that human beings and the natural
environment be turned into pure commodities and this assures the destruction
of both society and natural environment” (Block 2000, p. 8). The present
situation of underdevelopment and dismal poverty reflect the curse and
inevitable outcome of the pervasive pattern of market-dominated economy.
This paper will try to situate the discussion in the context of Mangyan
indigenous communities—how are they affected by the intrusion of the market
system? How is market economy slowly transforming their traditional society,
which was then predominantly characterized by subsistence economy, socially-
oriented transactions, non-commodified values, and ecological integrity?
The Mangyan indigenous communities in Mindoro are no longer
spared from the prevailing market system, which is governed by monetized
transactions with profit-seeking motive for its primary end, with the
agricultural production being oriented not only for subsistence but more and
more to cash crop economy.
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
92
Considering the embeddedness of the economy to the other socio-
cultural structures, the focus of this present inquiry is to describe and evaluate
the impact of change in economic systems in relation to the over-all socio-
cultural milieu of the Mangyan indigenous communities.
As the market-oriented economy is infringing on the life and cultural
systems of the indigenous peoples, forcefully or in a subtle way, the Mangyans
are undeniably undergoing a paradigm shift in their world views, orientation,
mind-sets, or in social and ecological relationship. Social theories ascribed
change as part of the social process and it can be categorized in many ways, like
assimilation, acculturation, accommodation and other types (Palispis 2003, pp.
208-215).
However, socio-cultural changes among the Mangyans, occasioned by
the emergence of market economy, escapes the above-given typology for the
change process is neither total nor already consummated, it is not yet clearly
defined or fully articulated. For simplicity, the changes referred to may be
better termed as a process of cultural redefinition, which underlines the on-
going process of socio-cultural change and undefined integration process, often
characterized by arbitrariness, as unwelcome intrusion, as a necessary
compromise, as conscious acceptance or sometimes not.
With the emergence of market economy, it is necessary to examine
how the Mangyan indigenous communities redefine their life-perspective as
reflected in their social relationships and cultural expressions. How is the
traditional consciousness being modified to accommodate the framework of
the market economy? What are the consequences and implications in terms of
concrete social behavior and relationship in the community?
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF MANGYAN SOCIETY
As it is used today, Mangyan is a collective term to designate the ethnic tribes
occupying the interior of Mindoro. But scholarly researches point out to the
distinction and differentiation of this tribal entity, grouping them into seven
major groups based on linguistic classification, territorial location or racial
types or origin. Geographically, tribes belonging to the middle, northern part of
the island are: the Iraya, Alangan and Tadyawan. Those tribes occupying the
southern part are: the Hanunuo, Batangan, Ratagnon, and Buhid. Among the
tribes, the Hanunuo-Mangyan and the Buhid have, for their cultural heritage,
their own original system of writing dating back to the pre-colonial era
(Gariguez 1992).
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
93
Historically, the Mangyans were the original settlers and inhabitants of
Mindoro. They were believed to have come from the Indonesian archipelago
in Southeast Asia. They settled on the fertile coastal plain. Their flourishing
settlements had engaged in trade with Chinese and Arab traders. In the course
of time, the Mangyans were believed to have been evicted from their original
coastal dwelling and were forced to retreat into the interior. The migrant
“indios,” coming from the island of Luzon occupied the northern and eastern
coast of Mindoro. Bornean settlers too were believed to have made their way
into the island. It was to these people who retreated into and stayed in the
forest that the collective term “Mangyan” was first used (Gariguez 1992).
Generally, the Mangyans have subsistence agricultural economy with
kaingin as their basic resource for food production. For primary crops, they
have rice and corn, but they also plant other crops such as bananas, fruit trees,
root crops, among others. During the pre-colonial period, their products,
particularly honey and beeswax, were bartered for lowlanders’ bolos, salt and
other goods. But this lowland contact is limited to occasional trading (Schult
1991, p. 75; Lamberte 1983, pp. 61-62).
In a much later part of history, colonial trade defined the direction of
agricultural economy. It was for this reason that the cultivation of export crops
affected even the remote island of Mindoro. The commercialization of
agriculture resulted to the demand for more and more land to cultivate to meet
the increased market demand for agricultural export production, then the
search for idle lands had led to increasing migration of settlers from Visayas
and Luzon to less populated island of Mindoro (Helbling and Schult 1997).
The unmitigated migration occasioned by the need to expand the base
for production and cultivation reached its culmination when the free trade
between the Philippines and the United States was established resulting to “a
large and stable market for export crop.” It was in 1910 that export economy
in Mindoro flourished with the founding of the most modern and largest sugar
hacienda in the Philippines established in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro. The
surge of migration to Mindoro increased at an astonishing rate. And it was only
during this time that the lowland population to Mindoro exceeded that of the
Mangyans, eventually reducing the latter into the status of being a minority.
This pattern of massive influx of migration to Mindoro exacerbated, resulting
to further deprivation of the Mangyans and their being pushed further into the
mountainous interior (Helbling and Schult 1997, pp. 393-394; pp. 396-397).
It was during this time that outright and large-scale land-grabbing
became prevalent, depriving the Mangyans of their land, sometimes, even their
lives! (Lamberte 1983). Moreover, the export-led industrialization which took
place from the 1950s among the underdeveloped countries signaled the
encroachment of the transnational business corporations into the territories
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
94
and ancestral lands of the indigenous peoples in their venture for logging,
mining and other extractive industries (Gaspar 1977). And the Mangyans were
not spared from these pressures of resource competition, for which they were
always at a disadvantaged position.
Although, the Mangyans were able to maintain relative degree of
isolation, they have been forced by the circumstances to confront the incursion
of lowland influences and to wrestle with the socio-political and economic
changes that the so-called “civilization” had subjected them to.
The isolation of the Mangyan communities and their reclusiveness as
highlighted by Conklin’s (1955, p. 10) description of the Mangyans as “forest-
dwelling non-Christian groups who live in small scattered settlements . . . have
little contact with each other or with the coastal Christians, and are loosely
organized politically” does not hold true anymore.
In a more recent research, the seemingly complete seclusion of the
Mangyan indigenous population from the rest of lowland society is refuted.
Lopez-Gonzaga’s (2002, pp. 10-11) research, reveals that since then, “the
Mangyans have increasingly adopted the life of permanent settlements, each of
which is connected to the town or regional centers of Mindoro. The Mangyans
also maintain diverse forms of exchanges not only among the different interior
groups, but also with the traders.”
Infringing Features of Social Change and Market Economy
From the foregoing, it has been shown that the economic demand for
lands and resources led to the lowland encroachment on the land and life of
the indigenous peoples. The ensuing social and economic changes were not
always voluntarily accepted through the process of assimilation, but more
often, they were imposed through force and motivated by the greed of the
powerful players of the elite in mainstream society, and even by the
transnational capitalists powers. This observation is articulated by Lamberte
(1983, p. 140) in her integrative studies of researches on the Mangyans: “It is
clear from these observations that changes do occur. However, it must be
considered that changes were apparently consequences of outside pressures
rather than voluntary assimilation.”
The policy of American colonial government on the indigenous
peoples was illustrative of this pressure. Then U.S. President Mckinley made
clear their policy approach towards the indigenous population: “to prevent
barbarous practices and introduced civilized customs.” This entailed Mangyans’
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
95
integration into the lowland structures and the indigenous communities
necessarily had to give up their cultural identity (Schult 1997, p. 479).
While it is true that adaptation to the emerging lowland influences is,
in some situations, necessary, but the price that the Mangyans have to pay must
not cost the annihilation of their cherished cultural values and priorities. The
result is damaging because the unequal terms of relationship threaten to
swallow the Mangyans’ cultural tradition and their identity as a people. As one
missionary admits, the Mangyans’ “association with the lowlanders initiated a
‘partial integration,’ but as a whole, the Mangyans have much more to lose than
to gain” (Javier 1987, p. 51).
In the course of history, Mangyans had no real alternative but to
succumb to the integrative forces of the lowland culture. The Mangyans had
been forced by circumstances to grapple with the infringing outside forces, not
only in cultural sphere but in terms of economic arrangements as well.
Foremost among the negative results of the Mangyans encounter with
the lowland market economy is the imposed redefinition of the concept of land
ownership. Traditionally, the Mangyan indigenous peoples believe in an
integrated cosmology, wherein the Creator, linked to other deities and spirits, is
considered the source of land and life. It is for this reason that land is
considered sacred and cannot be sold, owned or leased. The land is
communally owned, and an individual cannot claim absolute ownership. They,
as community, are stewards of the gift of creation. As such, land and nature’s
richness is meant for community’s use and sustenance (Gariguez 2001).
With the coming of the colonizers, this customary concept of
ownership was subverted and replaced with the Regalian doctrine claim
asserting that all conquered lands belong to the Spanish sovereign. The
American colonial government pursued this policy, reinforcing the State’s
control over the public domain (Gaspar 1977). The dominant legal system on
ownership was imposed for the resource exploitation of the lands of the
indigenous peoples. The aftermath of this market economic orientation was a
pattern of resource exploitation which Polanyi (1944, p. 179) appropriately
termed as commercialization of the soil, a conversion of the land from traditional
subsistence towards mobilization of the feudal revenue for surplus production.
The change in concept of land-ownership did not only facilitate the
exploitative ventures of the lowland capitalist elites. Consequently, among the
Mangyan indigenous communities, the traditional pattern of agricultural
subsistence was modified in relation to the emerging framework of market-
oriented economy. In a recent ethnographic research among the Mangyans,
Lopez-Gonzaga (2002, p. 153 and p. 189) noted how the Buhids have been
drawn into heavier work loads in the farm not only to produce subsistence
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
96
crops but for more intensive exploitation of resources around them to generate
cash: “As land was individually parceled out, and household got to work in
well-delineated boundaries of cultivation, there seem to have been a greater
impetus at producing more perennial tree crops that bring in good cash.”
The transformation caused by adapting indigenous economic pattern
to the lowland market economy is further described in a research conducted by
De La Salle Integrated Research Center (1984, p. 7): The consequences of the
invading lowland population have radically transformed the environment. It is
the Mangyans who must adapt their traditional land use system that relies now
and into a distant future on a finite land area, restores the environment and
meets their basic needs through a combination of subsistence farming and cash
agricultural production.
Contemporary researchers in other areas of indigenous peoples in the
country have noted the seeming conflict of orientation between the traditional
subsistence-oriented economy and the commercial market-dominated
economy. Duhaylungsod (1996, p. 94) underlines the problems associated with
the conflict in economic paradigm between the lowlanders and the indigenous
peoples: “There are qualitative differences and conflicts between the system of
resource management of non-capitalist indigenous peoples and the market-
dominated monetized system.”
Market-dominated economy necessarily brings in the monetary form
of exchange and inevitably influences the mode of social interaction in the
community. Moreover, monetized economy somehow redefines the cultural
patterns and priorities of the communities engaging in market transactions.
Again, Polanyi (1944, p. 41), in his critique of the market liberalism,
cautions that the change from subsistence economy to cash substitution has a
corresponding implications in terms of economic arrangements and motives:
“The transformation implies a change in the motive of action on the part of
the members of society: for the motive of subsistence that of gain must be
substituted. All transactions are turned into money transactions . . . All incomes
must derive from the sale of something or other . . .”
Redefinition of Mangyans’ Socio-Cultural Paradigm
As earlier noted, there exists a form of economic transactions among
the Mangyan indigenous peoples and the outside society. There was even a
time in pre-colonial past that they were engaged in barter trade with the
neighboring Asian countries. Economic activity had always been part of
community life, a way of sustaining their needs, and as medium for exchange.
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
97
As Polanyi (1944, p. 43) aptly affirms: “No society could, naturally, live for any
length of time unless it possessed an economy of some sort…”
What creates a conflict with the emerging economic system is that in
market-dominated economy, particularly characterized by monetized
transactions and capital accumulation, the traditional values and perspective are
somehow contradicted by the market principles and orientation. With the
framework of market-dominated economy, the Mangyan indigenous peoples
have come to redefine their socio-cultural paradigm vis-à-vis the infringing
features of the market forces.
The process of redefinition concomitant with the principle of
monetized economy is explained by Dejillas (2001):
We can also advance that with the introduction of money a new set of
values and attitudes emerged which found their way into the social, economic,
political, and even religious lives and systems of the people . . . Money forces
not only economic exchanges, but also human behavior and relationships to
quantitative measures . . . With the introduction of money, exchange and
relationships among the people drastically shifted towards something formal,
impersonal, individualistic, economistic, exploitative as well as secular and
almost atheistic.
The subsequent discussion will try to articulate this process of on-
going socio-cultural redefinition in the collective consciousness of the Mangyan
indigenous peoples vis-à-vis the encroaching forces of market-dominated
economy:
1. Adoption of Profit-Motivated Form of Transactions
In a more traditional Mangyan society, what is generally practiced is
the subsistence agricultural economy, wherein households produce only for
what they need for their day-to-day food consumption. Describing the
characteristic typology of the indigenous peoples, which include the Mangyan
group, Jocano (1998, p. 81), points out that as such, “the concept of surplus is
an emergent economic aspiration but not a pervasively dominant ideology . . .
These are often used to enhance social prestige, increase influence, and support
leadership role.”
However, the dominant economic orientation of the past is slowly
being modified or redefined in the light of the market economy, which the
Mangyan indigenous communities have to continually grapple with. A very
valid observation is noted by Lamberte (1983, p. 99) in her consolidated
research on the Mangyans:
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
98
As a consequence of various socio-economic pressures and changes
taking place among some of the Mangyan communities, cash economy
and profit-oriented economy is slowly being introduced and some
being adopted by the Mangyans particularly those in the core
reservation and lowland areas. Those living farther up the
mountainous interiors, still stick to the barter system.
This particular economic pattern is exactly a case of how a traditional
society with subsistence orientation is being integrated into the mainstream
society, adapting to the structure of a capitalist economy, which is wider and
more complex than their customary simple economic transaction.
Referring specifically to the Buhid indigenous communities, Lopez-
Gonzaga (2002, pp. 12; 152-153) observes: “Buhid linkage with the market
economy of the town centers provided opportunities for investment of surplus
in non-traditional ways…” Further, the agricultural production of slash and
burn continued but “has been oriented beyond the fulfillment of basic
domestic requirements to the meeting of market demands. Thus, household
produce not only subsistence crops, but also cash goods which generate cash
for their purchase of basic needs not meet by their basic production.”
This pattern of market integration to the lowland economy is
becoming a trend even among other Mangyan tribes and communities, in
response to the need to adapt to the so-called “modern” way of life (Gariguez,
2001).
The introduction of cash economy is, in a way, part of the necessary
change process in the Mangyans conscious decision to be integrated into the
mainstream Filipino society. To some development practitioners, creation of
surplus may even spell a good indicator for the desired development. However,
the danger is that arbitrary adoption of the market system could jeopardize the
very integrity of their socio-cultural values, which defines the very soul of their
society.
In Lopez-Gonzaga’s (2002, pp. 190, 176-77 and 179) research, market
economy, in many instances, has come to dictate the form and manner of
social relationship, determined by monetized arrangement and not by the time-
honored pattern of social relationship. Examples include cases such as a Buhid
“entrepreneur” buying out land from fellow Mangyans who are unable to pay
their debts, more influential and well-endowed Buhids embarking on a money-
lending activity charging high interest rates, profiteering entrepreneurship,
employment of hired labor of fellow Mangyans to work in big landholdings of
the better-off members of the community, and the like.
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
99
The primacy of social relationship which in the past had determined
the economic processes has now been redefined. Non-monetary values of
helping one another, communal ownership, solidarity, strong kinship ties, are
now slowly being set aside, to give way to the market pressures emphasizing
greater profit, impersonal transactions, return of investment and individual
prosperity!
For the traditional society, “acquisition of wealth is not a value in
itself, on the other hand, generosity, living together, and being harmonious
with the neighbors are . . . Traditional societies which stressed stability were
structured to help members to attain proper and fulfilling relationships with
their fellowmen and environment” (Salleh 1981, pp. 61-62). But in the
emerging socio-cultural system defined by market priorities, such idealized
consciousness is slowly fading into the background.
2. Emerging Social Differentiation As described by Polanyi (1944, p. 46), in traditional societies, “man’s
economy as a rule, is submerged in his social relationships. He does not act so
as to safeguard his individual interest in the possession of material goods; he
acts to safeguard his social standing, his social claims, his social assets.” In this
framework, he points out that economy is being run on non-economic
motives, like social ties, following primarily the behavioral principles of
reciprocity and redistribution.
The reciprocal character is what comes very close to the features of
Mangyan traditional society. In such a community, trade is operative but no
profit is involved. Members of society are all producers of their respective
goods and services, which they share with other members. But when
monetized economy is introduced, “. . . social considerations, in particular, the
concepts of reciprocity and the primitive redistribution system propounded by
Polanyi, no longer became the primary consideration of the market economy”
(Dejillas 2001). Instead, what predominates in the market system is no longer
the social character of production and exchange but the individualistic craving
for accumulation, irrespective of the wider consideration for the over-all
welfare and support of the community.
This pattern of engagement leads to neglect of the social character of
the economic pursuit in order to promote personal interest, given the market
framework for production process and resource exploitation for profit. Profit
when realized becomes a surplus, which can in turn be invested for further
generation of monetary gain or for expanding land ownership. This economic
system is inherently competitive in its operation, with the more enterprising or
powerful groups gaining access to more resources or cornering the profit from
market transactions.
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
100
As a consequence of this market-dominated economic system, the
social structure is also being redefined with the concurrent changes in status
and establishment of new powerful economic players. The once dominantly
egalitarian society has to admit the emergence of social differentiation.
Admittedly, among the Buhids, the adoption and accommodation of
the lowland capitalist market economy leads to the incipient form of social
differentiation, with a few members of the community possessing
entrepreneurial skills emerging as the local elite gaining control over
production process of the economy. This group of entrepreneuring elite makes
use of their profit in acquiring more landholdings, thereby making the
differentiation even more pronounced (Lopez-Gonzaga 2002, pp. 190 and177).
The redefinition of socio-cultural values has enshrined the consumerist
and highly-individualistic paradigm of the market economy into the pattern of
interaction among the Mangyan indigenous peoples. The gap in economic
inequality which is almost non-existent in the traditional Mangyan society is
slowly being introduced into the social structure of the community. The shift in
economic orientation brings with it the corresponding and inevitable change in
social relations.
Acknowledging the political dimension of monetary economy, Dejillas
(2001) affirms that “money influences the balance of power not only between
nations, but also between and among classes in society.”
But in the experience of the Mangyan-Buhid communities, the economic
transformation and ensuing cultural redefinition underlines the capacity of
monetized economy not only to influence the balance of power but to create
imbalances and disparities both in economic and socio-political status of
erstwhile communitarian, and predominantly undifferentiated society.
3. Ecological Alienation The Mangyans believe in the existence of one Supreme Being who
created them and the world and is continually sustaining them in their
existence. For this Supreme Being, each tribe ascribes him a name (Apo Iraya,
Ambuwao, Amangtam, Afu Daga, Mahal-Makakaako). The presence of the
divine is experienced in terms of his omnipotence, pervading their everyday
life, and manifesting Himself in physically observable phenomena such as
deliverance from calamity or sicknesses, blessing of the harvest, other forms.
The Mangyans are also considered animist, in the sense that sacrality is
experienced in the all-pervading presence of the omnipotent power personified
in streams, tress, hills, rocks and in almost every corner of the natural universe
(Gariguez 1992).
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
101
Mangyans share the conviction of the Indian Chief Seattle (1981, p.
63), declaring his belief in the sacredness of the earth in unequivocal terms:
“Every part of the earth is sacred to my people . . . We are part of the earth and
it is part of us . . . For this land is sacred to us . . . the earth is our mother.
Whatever befalls the earth befalls the son of the earth . . . This we know: The
earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth.”
This unadulterated consciousness regarding the earth as intrinsically
part of human community is slowly being shattered with the advent of
industrialism and colonialism, which are but offshoots of the liberalism of the
market economy.
Beginning from the period of industrialization, “natural resources”
came to be regarded as “those parts of nature which were required as inputs
for industrial production and colonial trade . . . resources are now merely
material or conditions existing in nature which may be capable of economic
exploitation” (Shiva 1999, pp. 25-26). In this sense, the relationship and affinity
of human and nature changes from respect to enmity: “Man is no longer a
friend to his natural environment. He is the arrogant conqueror who destroys .
. . mostly as a result of greed rather than a struggle for survival” (Salleh 1981, p.
60).
The Mangyans have not completely turned their backs to their
traditional belief in the ecological integrity of a living and sacred relationship
with the natural universe. But a gradual disorientation is slowly taking place in
the process of redefining relationship with nature in the context of the market
economy’s concept of resource utilization and the pursuit of maximum profit.
Among the Buhids, for example, the accommodation of lowland
market demand in their agricultural production results to acquisition of surplus
income from the sale of alternate crop. More significant consequence is the
“development of private landholding and the concept of permanent land
ownership and finally, the view that land is a commodity to be bought and sold
by cash irrespective of ethnic status of the parties involved” (Lopez-Gonzaga
2002, p. 137, underlining mine). This kind of valuing in a process of
commodification is slowly being translated into the mind-set and priorities of
the Mangyan indigenous people.
For Polanyi (1944, p. 178), this pre-occupation with market value or
the commercialization of the land is utterly condemnable: “What we call land is
an element of nature inextricably interwoven with man’s institutions. To isolate
it and form a market out of it was perhaps the weirdest of all undertakings of
our ancestors.”
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
102
The protestation is very much called for, but sadly, the perspective of
market mentality has undeniably influenced, to a considerable degree, the
Mangyans’ redefinition of the once sacred relationship they had with mother
earth.
REFERENCES:
Block, Fred. 2000. Introduction to the Great Transformation by Karl Polanyi. Available
from:
<http://sociology.berkeley.edu/faculty/evans/polanyi_intro.pdf.>
(Accessed December 2003).
Chief Seattle, 1981. “Man Belongs to the Earth.” IN: de Leon, F. ed. On Art,
Man and Nature. Manila, University of the Philippines.
Conklin, Harold. 1955. The Relation of Hanunuo Culture to the Plant World.
Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Yale University.
Dejillas, Leopoldo. 2001. “Alternative Paradigm for Viewing the Monetary
System.” IN: Dejillas, L. ed. In the Service of Culture, Spirituality and
Development: A Festschrift for Dr. Mina M. Ramirez. Manila, Asian Social
Institute [Multi-media CD-ROM].
Duhaylungsod, Levita. 1996. “Higaonons and Bukidnon Forest Incorporated:
‘Will the Twain Ever Meet.’” Aghamtao 8, pp. 83-97.
Gariguez, Edwin. 1992. The Presence of Grace Among Non-Christians in the Writings
of Karl Rahner and Its Implication to the Mangyan Mission Apostolate.
Unpublished M.A. thesis, Ateneo de Manila University.
_____________. 2001. Panaghoy ng Lupa: Isang Natatanging Dokumentaryo Tungkol
sa Katutubong Mangyan. Calapan City, Mangyan Mission & CEDC
[Multi-media CD-ROM].
Gaspar, Carlos. 1977. “Globalization and the Indigenous Peoples: Focus on
Malaysis, the Philippines and Mexico.” Kasarinlan 12 (4) – 13 (1), pp.
65-112.
Helbling, Jurg and Schult, Volker. 1997. “Demographic Development in
Mindoro.” Philippine Studies 45, pp. 385-406.
Integrated Research Center (IRC). 1984. Mangyan Appropriate School: A
Participatory Community Development Experiment. Manila, DLSU.
BAYBAYIN vol. I, no. 1 (August 2015) http://www.baybayin.com.ph
ISSN 1908-4697
103
Javier, Edgar. 1987. The Mangyans: Progress Through Christian Community Building.
Manila, Divine Word Publications.
Jocano, F. Landa. 1998. Filipino Indigenous Ethnic Communities: Patterns, Variations
and Typologies. Quezon City, Punlad Research House.
Lamberte, Exaltacion. 1983. Mangyan Realities: An Integrative Study of Contemporary
Mangyan Researches (1960-1981). A Report Submitted to the
Participatory Upland Management Program. Manila, De La Salle
Integrated Research Center.
Latham, A. J. Karl Polanyi: Some Observations. Reference used in class in Mediated
Economy.
Lopez-Gonzaga, Violeta. 2002. Peasants in the Hills. Quezon City, UP Press.
Palispis, Epitacio. 2003. Introduction to Sociology and Anthropology. Quezon City,
Rex Printing Company.
Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The Great Transformation. New York, Rinehard & Company.
Salleh, Muhammad Haji. 1981. “Cultural Justice.” IN: de Leon, F. ed. On Art,
Man and Nature. Manila, University of the Philippines.
Schult, Volker. 1991. Mindoro: A Social History of a Philippine Island in the 20th
Century. Manila, Divine Word Publications.
___________. 1997. “Mindoro and North Luzon Under American Colonial
Rule.” Philippine Studies 45, pp. 477-499.
Shiva, Vandana. 1999. “Diversity and Democracy: Resisting the Global
Economy.” Global Dialogue 1 (1), pp. 19-30.
Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (NASSA, Philippines)