CHAPTER 1

Introduction

The conflict in Mindanao has been a perennial problem. It is a tragedy of countless lives

both civilians and military lost during the battles, of dreams shattered and never-ending search

for possible solutions.

The contemporary armed conflict on the Moro front is the sharpest expression of the

Bangsamoro problem. This problem is rooted in the historical and systematic marginalization of

the Islamized ethno linguistic groups, collectively called Moros, in their homeland in Mindanao

islands, first by colonial powers Spain from the 16 th to the 19th centuries, then by the U.S. during

the first half of the 20th century, and since formal independence in 1946, by successor Philippine

governments, dominated by an elite with a Christian-Western orientation.

Other factors which triggered the Moros to rebel are the Jabidah massacre in 1968, the

intensifying electoral competitions between 1967-71, combined with proliferating land disputes

and armed militias, and the imposition of Martial Law in September, 1972. With the intercession

of the, Organization of Islamic Conference, led by Libya, a ceasefire agreement between the

MNLF and GRP in Tripoli in 1976 came to the fore. But, the disputes over Tripoli’s

implementation have continued to draw the conflict out.1

Like the 1976 Tripoli Agreement, the succeeding negotiated settlement between the

MNLF and the GRP like the Republic Act 6734 of Aquino administration, the Jakarta accord in

1996 and finally the Tripoli agreement between the MILF and the GRP in 2001 did not solve the

conflict. Though there is now only a low-level of military activity, but the problem still persists.

Unlike its parent organization the MNLF who succumb to the offer of autonomy in 1996 Peace

1

Agreement by rejecting its original demand for independence, the MILF continues to affirm their

faith in their struggle for national liberation. The MILF’s maximum objective then which is

establishing an independent Islamic state in Mindanao is incompatible with the government’s

paramount consideration on national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, national

security, and constitutional process. Conflict then ensued (and still ensues) between them.2

This incompatibility of wants and interests is a matter of power against power, where

each party tries to overpower the other in the struggle. This study uses Nietzsche’s concept of

will to power in analyzing the competition that grows out from this conflict. As will to power is

the underlying nominal reality of the universe, this study will try to find out if there are indeed

manifestations of will to power in the conflict, and how in various ways this will to power

manifests itself. Born out of competing wills, conflict connotes disagreements, clash of interests

and struggles over power. The questions now of who gets power, which laws get made and

whose ideas prevail perhaps can be answered by the one who exerts more power over the other.

2

Statement of the Problem:

1. Are there manifestations of will to power in the GRP-MNLF conflicts?

2. How is will to power manifested to the conflict?

Objective of the Study:

1. To determine whether there are manifestations of will to power in the conflict.

2. To find out how will to power manifests in the conflicts.

Assumptions:

1. That both parties impose their will on each other in accordance with the Nietzchean concept of

will power.

2. That the one who exerts more power in the conflict will emerge as victor.

3. That will to power is a continuous affirmations of both parties in the conflict.

Scope and Limitations of the Study:

This study is an attempt to analyze the struggle of the GRP and the MNLF over

sovereignty of the Mindanao lands using Nietzsche’s concept of will to power. The researcher is

also neutral in dealing with the issues involving the conflict between the Government of the

Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MNLF). If one or

both sides perceive a distortion on their image in one way or another, the researcher does not

intend it. This is just the outcome of interpreting data in the light of Nietzschean philosophy.

3

Significance of the Study:

The researcher envisions that this study will give significant insights and a better grasp of

the exiting conflict between the MILF and the GRP. This paper hoped also to provide the

groundwork for coming up the real solution to the problem of this liberationist struggle.

INTERPRETIVE FRAME

The desire to be the best, the struggle to pursue one’s interests, and the striving to gain

the upper hand is naturally embedded among humans. Pursuing one’s interests however, maybe

incompatible of inconsistent with the goals of others, causing conflict. This is especially true

with the existing social and political conditions in the Philippines. The liberationist movement of

the MILF is in conflict with the integration policy of the government which intends to integrate

the Moros into the mainstream of the Philippine national life, socially, culturally, politically and

economically. Both parties are determined in their respective goals: the Philippine government is

determined to preserve the nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity while the MILF is

adamant in their desire to preserve their Islamic identity. Hence, an independent Islamic state is

the only suitable option for them.

This study makes use of Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of will to power to explain the

struggle of both parties towards their respective goals. Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of will to

power describes and explains the elevation of the human species through the development of

oneself and the striving for excellence. The law that directs all activities of life is the law of

4

power, the urge to excel all others in strength. In line with this, will the government attain its

goal in integrating the Moros into the mainstream of Philippine society? Or will the MILF

achieve its aims and desired ends from their many years of insurgency? Caught between the two

opposing poles of liberation and integration, the proper thing to do therefore is to test the

strength of the contending powers and whosoever has the higher will to power will emerge as

victor.

Definition of Terms:

Conflict

The term is used to signify a struggle and claims to scare status, power and resources. Between

the MILF and the GRP, the conflict is also viewed as frustration-rooted protest against lack of

opportunities for development and recognition for identity. (Cunningham, 1998).3 But, in this

study, the term is mainly used to refer to incompatibility of interests where the differing

perspectives (liberation vs. integration) try to prevail over the other.

GRP- (Government of the Republic of the Philippines).

In this study however, GRP is deemed as an organization that directly conflicts with the MILF’s

struggle for establishing an independent Islamic state in Mindanao. Though GRP carries the

aspirations of the country’s people, it is rigidly considered as an organization who advocates

territorial integrity and sovereignty solely for its own ends.

5

MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front)

- An Islamic liberation movement based in the Bangsamoro region in Mindanao and the

neighboring islands who advocate for the self-determination and for the establishment of an

independent Islamic state in the said regions.4

Moro Problems

- The age-old struggle of the Muslims in the Southern Philippines for self-determination as well

as for national liberation. It is also totality of conditions that led the Moros to resort to armed

rebellion against the Philippine government.5

Moros

- The generis name for the thirteen ethno linguistic Muslim tribes in the Philippines which

constitute a quarter of the population in Mindanao in the Southern Philippines. They share a

distinct culture, speak different dialects, and are varied in their social formation but share a

common belief in Islam.6

War

- The term is used to describe a conflict involving the organized use of weapons and physical

force by states or large-scale groups. It is usually a series of military campaigns between two

opposing sides involving a dispute over sovereignty, territory, religion or ideology.7 In the

conflict between the MILF and the GRP, the above definitions hold true. However, in this study,

the term is mainly used to refer to a violent way of settling the disputes (using all might)

between the two contending powers in relation to the gaining of their respective goals

(Liberation vs. Integration).

6

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. THEORIES OF HUMAN NATURE

Throughout history, one of the dominating factors of the development of political thought

has been the study of human nature. Human nature maybe defined as the essence of human

species and consists of all the traits and behaviors that are inherent in human beings. Different

approaches, pessimistic and optimistic can be taken in deciding whether humans are inherently

evil or good and whether or not human beings are equal to one another.8

Aristotle propounds the idea that man has not a single nature, but a three-fold nature;

animal, vegetative, and rational. The physical body represents the vegetative aspect. Man’s

emotional, sensual and sensuous nature is shared with the animal kingdom; however, his high

rational nature is not only supernal, but limited to him alone. Since the moral task of man is to

actualize or realize his nature and inasmuch his nature is three-fold, all three must be cultivated.

But these three sources of happiness do not issue the same equality of happiness; its highest,

richest, and supernal form stems from the cultivation of man’s highest nature, the rational.

Therefore, the life according to reason more than anything else is man. This life is also the

happiest.9

Like Aristotle, Plato also believes that human nature is composed of three principal parts:

the rational whose is composed of three principal parts: the rational whose excellence fructifies

into the virtue of wisdom, the spirited whose constitution is predisposed to the virtue of courage

7

and the concupiscent-controlled composed of those possessing excellent self-control moderation

of appetite. The rational nature of man is his supernal, to which the rest of his nature must

conform if order and justice are to prevail within an individual and throughout the state at large.

Hence, the one ruling principle in man state is reason.10

John Locke, an enlightenment philosopher based his theory on the belief that everyone

was born equal. In a state of nature, Locke believed people would elect who should be leader and

influence democratic government, in which everyone has political and social equality. He also

believed that people would come together and form certain rights. These rights are known as the

natural rights of, life, liberty and property.11

Jean-Jacque Rousseau, a political philosopher saw a fundamental divide between

society and human nature man’s highest nature. Rousseau contended that man was good by

nature, a “noble savage” when in the state of nature (he state of all the other animals and the

condition human kind was in before the creation of civilization and society) but is corrupted by

society. He viewed society as artificial and held that the development of society, specially the

growth of social independence, has been inimical to the well-being of human beings.

In the “Discourse on Arts and Sciences” Rousseau argued that the arts and sciences had

not been beneficial to human kind, because they were advanced not in response to human needs

but as the result of pride and vanity. His subsequent discourse on inequality tracked the progress

and degeneration of mankind from a primitive state of nature to modern society. He suggested

that the earliest human beings were isolated semi-apes who were differentiated from animals by

their capacity to free will and their perfectibility. He also argued that these primitive humans

were possessed of a basic drive to care for themselves and a natural disposition to compassion or

8

pity. As humans were forced to associate together more closely, by the pressure of the population

growth, they underwent a psychological transformation and came to value the good opinion of

others as an essential component of their own well-being.12

John Scotus Eriugena’s allegorical explanation of the biblical account of the six days of

creation, which he explains in terms of his own philosophy, brings him to his doctrine of man.

According to him man can be said to be an animal and at the same time not an animal since

while he shares with the animal the function of nutrition etc., also has the faculty of reason which

is peculiar to him and which elevates him all above the animals.

John Scotus emphasizes the fact that man is the microcosm of creation, since he sums up

in himself the material world and the spiritual world sharing with the plants the powers growth

and nutrition, with the animals the powers of sensation and emotional reaction, and with the

angels the powers of understanding. He is in fact the link between the material and the spiritual,

the visible and invisible creation. From this point of view one can say that every genus of animal

is in man rather than that man is in the genus animal.13

St. Thomas Aquinas, a medieval thinker, describes man as a rational anima”, a single

undivided being that is at once animal (material) and rational (intellectual soul). Drawing from

Aristotelian hylomorphism, the soul is seen as the substantial form of the body (matter). The

soul, as the substantial form, is what is universal or common to all humanity, and therefore is

indicative of human nature.15

The ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius believed that everyman is inherently good.

“No man is devoid of a heart sensitive to the sufferings of others”. According to suffer by falling

into a well will feel compassion. He goes on to further that whoever does not have the hearth of

9

compassion is not human, thus he makes it clear a defining characteristic that to be a human, one

must have a hearth of compassion.

According to Mencius’ beliefs, every person is good to begin with but he can become

bad. But, this is not something due to innate factors. Mencius believes that there are people who

fail to make the best of their native endowment that is why people vary in their goodness. People

have to cultivate their heart of compassion such that they can become better human beings.15

Epictetus, the foremost proponent of classical Stoicism acknowledges the presence of

emotions in human nature but does not advocate their place in search for a good life. He argues

that because humans cannot control the situations that affect their emotions, they should detach

them from the world. He claims that human nature desires what is good and the way to obtain

this desire is to change the judgment of what is good. He explains that what upset people is not

the things themselves but their judgment about things, not a thing’s inherent value of good or

bad. By adjusting the perceptions of what is good, a person can control a thing’s effect on their

emotions.16

The 17th century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes known for his masterwork

“Leviathan” based his political theory on his concept of the nature of man whom he depicts as a

corrupt and untrustworthy being by natural constitution. He believes that in the state of nature,

all men are equal and equally have the right to whatever they consider necessary for their

survival. The driving force in man is the will to survive. In the state of nature all men are

relentlessly pursuing whatever acts they think will secure them safety. This state of nature is of

men moving against each other, the anarchic condition Hobbes called “the war of all against

all.”17

10

Ayn Rand, a Russian-born American novelist and philosopher best known for creating a

philosophy she named “Objectivism,” believed that human nature is fixed. According to her

what separates men from animals is their rationality. Although man is a physical entity, his mind

cannot be reduced entirely to his brain or body. Her theory of human nature is based on the idea

that the human mind enjoys complete sovereignty over the body and the will. “Everything we do

and are proceeds from the mind,” she once declared. “Our mind can be made to control

everything.” Man, is given his body, his mind, and the “mechanics of consciousness.” The rest is

up to him “he must create himself.”18

Herbert Spencer,

adapts overtime to the conditions of social existence. His idea of human nature involves the

adaptation of men’s faculties to their organic, social, and psychological needs. His progressive

adaptation involves an increasing adjustment of an inner subjective relation to outer objective

relations. In his theory of human nature, Spencer states:

“Individual organisms, species, political systems and entire societies are alike in that all tend to

evolve from relatively simple and homogenous entities into complex and heterogynous ones;

only the fittest survive and perpetuate their kind; concept of organic evolution al nature moves

from the simple to the complex fundamental law seen in the geological formation of the earth

and in the origin of the development of plant and animal species, natural selections; if they are

sufficiently complete to live, they do live and it is well they should live, if they are not

sufficiently complete to live, they die and it is best they should die… man is what he is because

his universe, his environment makes certain consistent demand upon him, man as a part is a stage

of evolution.”19

11

Indeed, inquiries into the nature of human beings have occupied philosophers for such a

long time and considerable found out that self-interest and altruistic concerns coexist in human

nature. As a matter of fact, an experience of benefit or injury is frequently attributed to the nature

of humans. Speaking of injury, the plight of the Moros in respect to their economic and political

conditions is such a good example. This is because the opportunity and the capability to satisfy

their needs essential to their wellbeing are deprived to them. The article below provides us the

bird’s eye view of the Moro grievances seen to be the cause believe to be inevitable among

humans

B. THE BASIC MORO PROBLEMS

Aside from their forcible incorporation into the mainstream of the Philippine society,

there are other problems besting the Moros. Dr. Macapado Abaton Muslim identifies the six

theories of contemporary Moro grievances which led the Moros to take up arms against the

Philippine government. The first is their economic marginalization and destitution. In the

hierarchy of poverty, the Bangsamor belongs to the poorest of the poor with majority of them

learning a living as peasant farmers and fisher folk. The Moro communities continue to be mired

in a grinding poverty which is due to their continuing exclusion from the economic progress of

Mindanao. Until now, the great majorities of the Moro neither participate in the key sectors of

the economy Mindanao, nor benefit significantly there from.20

Their stagnant economic situation is based also on their having been driven out of the

better parts of Mindanao as a result of the aggressive wars launched against them by the

Spaniards and the Americans. Also, a great number of Moros were disposed of their lands as a

12

result of the implementation of several land laws and the establishment of numerous land

settlement projects in their areas before and after Philippine independence. Many Moros also lost

their lands to rich and well-connected land grabbers who took part in the profitable plantation of

agriculture on Mindanao.21

Their political domination and inferiorization result from being deprived of substantive

participation in the governance of their affairs. Since Philippine independence in 1946 Christian

Filipinos have been in control of public governance in their homeland. The 1971 elections were

said to be significant because they formalized the shift of political power form Muslims to

Christians in parts of Moroland.22

It is a fact that the Moros did really constitute a nationality which is very much different

from Christian Filipinos. And they want to preserve the Islamic identity which they discerned as

under threat of extermination. The Martial-Law related, Ilaga-military atrocities in Mindanao in

the early seventies which were given religious color to provoke the Moros to give a big fight to

the Marcos administration exacerbated Moro resentment over the insults against their religion,

that they saw in some government policies, in some text books, in the press, and in their

interaction with some Christian Filipinos who continue to harbor prejudices against them. Part of

this is the Moros desire to live Islam to the maximum extent possible. As Muslims for example,

the Moros wanted Shariah or Islamic law to govern their relations instead of the Philippine legal

system that contains many unislamic elements. The estyablishment of Shariah court does not

satisfy this needs because the jurisdiction of these courts is limited to persons, family and

property relations. Also, the Shariah Courts do not enjoy autonomy, since they are under the

control of the Supreme Court.

13

The non-recognition of their significant historical contributions to the country is another

aspect which concerns them. For more than three centuries of fierce resistance to the colonizers

remain suppressed in Philippine history books. Their efforts were never valued despite the fact

that they were never totally conquered by the Spaniards.23

The general feeling of physical insecurity which may be attributed to the Ilaga and

military atrocities in Muslim Mindanao in the 70’s is the fourth theme of the Moro grievances.

The mass killing of Muslim civilians, the barbarism that accompanied the killings, the burning of

their home, crops, mosques and madrasahs were largely responsible for the development of this

feeling among the Moro people. The brutalities and abuses that had accompanied some over-kill

and search and destroy military operations have also contributed to the loss of faith in AFP

among the great majority of the Moros today.24

The Moros’ perception that the government is responsible or the party to be blamed for

much of their sufferings and insecurities and the Moros’ perception of the hopelessness of their

condition under the existing political and economic order in Mindanao corresponds to the fifth

and sixth theme of the Moro grievances. This may be attributed to the Moros’ expectation of the

government to protect their interests, like their prior rights to some of Mindanao lands and the

failure of the government to play that role. Also, they perceived some agencies of government

which have been neglecting and discriminatory against them.25

It is true that many Muslims in the Philippines do not identify themselves with the

Philippine government. This is shared not only by the rebels but by the Moro masses in general.

Ti is perhaps by looking into the roots of the problem can a lasting solution to the conflict will

ever be attained.

14

CHAPTER III

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE’S THE WILL TO POWER

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was born on October 15, 1844, in the small town of

Rocken, near Leipzing, in the then province of Saxony. He is named after King Frederick

William IV of Prussia, who celebrated his 49th birthday on the day of Nietzsche’s birth.

Nietzsche’s father, a Lutheran pastor, died in 1894, and he was brought up at Naumburg in the

feminine and pious society of his mother, his sister, a grandmother and two maiden aunts.26

Nietzsche’s will to power contrasted to Schopenhauer’s Concept of will

No doubt, Nietzsche was greatly influenced by Schopenhauer’s concept of will. But,

Schopenhauer’s will does not have concern with power, but instead constitutes an unintelligent

blind striving. This will for Schopenhauer never reaches satisfaction; it takes the forms of

desires, cravings, aspirations in human beings, but its insatiable nature means that it makes a

burden out of one’s existence. Once one’s desire is satisfied, it merely gives rise to another and

so on. Because of this, Schopenhauer regarded the “will” as the source of all the evil and

suffering in this world. These ideas led him to adopt a life-denying view of the world, since if

contains nothing but suffering and the burden of satisfying unrelenting desires.

In direct contrast to this, Nietzsche’s doctrine of the will to power asserts a very life

affirming view, in that creatures affirm their instincts to acquire power and dominance, and

sufferings not seen as evil, but as a necessary part of existence which is to be embraced. Lasting

15

pleasure and satisfaction come about as a result of being able to live according to one’s instincts-

the ability to exert one’s will to power.27

The will to power is the will to overpower!

For Nietzsche, there is one thing that does characterize all human beings. This drive to

dominate the environment and is so central to human nature is the will to power. This will to

power is more than simply the will to survive. It is rather than inner drive to express a vigorous

affirmation of all man’s powers. As Nietzsche says,” the strongest will to life does not find

expression in a miserable struggle for existence, but in a will to life does not find expression in a

miserable struggle for existence, but in a will to war. A will to power, a will to overpower!28

Nietzsche holds that the instinct for the acquisition of power is the prime factor that motivates all

the activities of life… we observe that everything in this world has the tendency to overcome

others, to gain superiority over everyone else, to vanquish the whole world of beings. The law

that directs all activities of life is the law of power, the urge to excel all others in strength. It is a

psychological presupposition of Nietzsche that humans are always attempting to impose their

wills upon others. Every action toward another stems from a inner desire to bring that person

under one’s power in one way or another. Whether a person is giving gifts, claiming to be in love

with someone, giving someone praise, lying, and domination on the other, the psychological

motive is the same: to exert one’s will over others.

Will to power is the basic driving force of nature

The will to power, however, is not limited to the psychology of human beings. Rather, it

is the underlying noemenal reality of the universe, which manifests itself in various ways in

everything and everyone. According to Nietzsche, the will to power is the basic means, through

16

which living things interpret or interact with the world, even more fundamental than the act of

self-preservation.29 In Beyond Good and evil he states:

Physiologist should think before putting down the instinct of self-preservation as the

cardinal instinct of an organic being. A living thing seeks above all to discharge its

strength-life itself is will to power; self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most

frequent results.30

For Nietzsche, all life is product of will to power, which is the will to rule, to control and

force one’s will upon others. In the Genealogy of Morals, he says the will is the striving to find

or establish the surrounding that will most enhance the creative abilities of the individual. In the

Will of Power, he asserts:

My idea is that every specific body strives to become masters over all space and to extend

its force and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But, it continually encounters

similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement (union)

with those of them that are sufficiently related to it; thus, they conspire together for

power. And the process goes on.31

Will to power as manifested in affirmative ways

Nietzsche however says that simply using violent force to bring another under one’s

power, though it is the most natural and most instinctive method is not always the most

successful. Bringing other individuals under one’s power is not the same thing as causing them

physical harm. It takes much more than that:

17

Every living thing reaches out as far from itself with its force as it can, and overwhelms what is

weaker: thus it takes pleasure in itself. The increasing humanizing of this tendency consists in

this, that there is an ever subtler sense of how hard it is really to incorporate another: while a

hard it is really to incorporate another: while a crude injury done him certainly demonstrates our

power over him, it at the same time estranges his will from us even more-thus it makes him less

easy to subjugate.32

The individual also has this “subtler sense” that physical violence alone most likely

makes others resentful and indignant towards us, and may actually drive them farther away from

being truly under our power. This checking of the individual’s more violent instincts through the

state and the “subtler sense”, does not keep one’s will to power in check as a whole. Rather, the

ego learns to find other ways to exert its will to power than through the violent or forceful

domination of others. No matter what type of situation individuals find themselves in, their will

to power comes through in some way or another. Nietzsche calls these different ways the

disguised form of the will to power, meaning that they appear to stem form something else, such

as altruism and sympathy, when they really originate in one’s instinct to bring someone under

one’s power. But, there is more to the will to power than meets the eye. It also includes a will to

freedom, or freedom of the spirits. Nietzsche also understands the expression “aristocracy” as the

rule of the best. Thus, aristocracy is not only a social category but even more the nobility of mid

and great deeds. For him, the nobleman willfully binds himself to something higher and

demonstrates his reverence and passions. The nobility of the higher ranks reveals itself in an

instinctive reverence for excellence. Its positive character manifests itself in a triumphant

development of oneself and in an infinite acceptance of opposites.33

18

No universal Moral standards: Master-morality vs. Slave morality

Nietzsche rejected the notion that there is a universal and absolute system of morality that

everyone must equally obey. Whenever someone proposes a universal moral rule, he invariably

seeks really to deny the fullest expression of man’s elemental energies. In this respect,

Christianity along with Judaism is the worst offender, for the Judeo-Christian ethics is so

contrary to man’s basic nature that its anti-natural morality debilitates man and produces only

“botched and bungled lives”.34 In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche says that he has discovered

two primary types of morality. The distinctions of moral values have either originated in a ruling

caste, or among the ruled, the slaves, and dependent of all sorts. In master-morality:

The noble type of man regards himself as the determiner of values; he does not require to

be approved of; he passes the judgment. ‘What is injurious to me is injurious to itself; he

knows that he himself confers honor on things; he is a creator of values. He honors

whatever he recognizes in himself; such morality is self-glorification. In the foreground

there is the feeling of the plenitude of power which seeks to overflow…the nobleman

also helps the unfortunate, but not-or scarcely –out of pity, but rather from an impulse

generated by the super-abundance of power. The nobleman honors in himself, who

knows how to speak and keep silence, who takes pleasure in subjecting himself to

severity and hardness, and has reverence for all that is sever and hard.35

The slave-morality, by contrast, originates with the lowest elements of the society, the

absurd, the oppressed, the slaves, and those who are uncertain of themselves. The slave:

has an unfavorable eye for the virtues of the powerful; he has a skepticism and distrust,

refinement of distrust, of everything ‘good’ that is there honored- he would fain persuade

19

himself that the very happiness there is not genuine. On the other hand, those qualities

which serve to alleviate the existence of sufferers are brought into prominence and

flooded with light; it is here that sympathy, the kind, helping-hand, the warm heart,

patience, diligence, humility and friendliness attain to honor; for here these are the most

useful qualities, and almost the means of supporting the burden of existence. Slave-

morality is essentially the morality of utility.36

According to slave-morality, therefore the ‘evil’ man arouses fear; according to master-

morality, it is precisely the ‘good’ man who arouses fear and seeks to arouse it, while the band

man is regarded as the despicable being.

Nietzsche further explains that:

Within the narrow sphere of the so-called moral values, no greater antithesis could be

found than that of master-morality and the morality of Christian valuations: the latter

having grown-out of a thoroughly morbid soil. The master-morality, on the other hand,

being the symbolic speech of well- constitutedness, of ascending life, and or the will to

power as a vital principle. Master morality affirms just as Christian morality denies. The

first reflects its plenitude upon things-it transfigures, it embellishes, it rationalizes the

world-the latter impoverishes, bleaches, mars the value of things, it suppresses the

world.37

Slave morality as a reactionary morality: its triumph in revolt in moral

Nietzsche makes use of the concept of resentment. The higher type of man creates his

own values out of the abundance of his life and strength. The meek and powerless fear the strong

20

and powerful, and they attempt to curb and tame them by asserting as absolute, the values of the

herd.

He proves:

The revolt of the slaves in morals begins in the very principle of resentment becoming

creative and giving birth to values- a resentment experienced by creatures, who deprived

as they are of the proper outlet of action, are forced to find their compensation in an

imaginary revenge. While every aristocratic morality springs from a triumphant

affirmation of its own demand, the slave morality says “no” from the very outset to what

it “outside itself” “different from itself” and “not itself”: and this “no” is its creative

deed.38

Slave morality begins in negation: a resentment of excellence, achievement, individuality

and power. All these “power virtues” are regarded as good. The slave morality is thus a

reactionary morality, since the categories of good and evil are not created form within the

individual, but are created as a reaction to the values of the powerful.39

Nietzsche explains:

The slave morality requires the condition of its existence an external and objective world,

it requires objective stimuli to be capable of reaction at all-its action is fundamentally a

reaction. The contrary is the case when we come to the aristocrats’ system of values: it

acts and grows spontaneously, it merely seeks its anti-thesis in order to pronounce a more

grateful and exultant yes to its own self: its negative conception, “low”, “vulgar”, “bad”

is merely a pale late born foil in comparison with its positive and fundamental conception

of” we aristocrats, we good ones, we beautiful ones, we happy ones.”40

21

The challenge to the master-morality resulted from a deep-seated resentment on the part

of the slaves. This revenge took the form of translating the virtues of the noble aristocrats into

evils. Nietzsche argues that in his own time, the strong and the noble were losing the battle for

survival against the weak, who manifests another, more sinister, and opposite will… the will to

nothingness. Through a revaluation of noble values, the weak (specially the socialists-the

inheritors and proponents of the Christian slave morality) have created a world in which the

strong and noble are seen to be evil, whereas, from Nietzsche’s perspectives these “evil”

qualities are valuable in themselves, in that they serve the “enhancement” of the species as a

whole.41 It is a fact that:

men with a still natural nature, barbarians in every terrible sense of the word, men of

prey, still in possession of unbroken strength of will and the desire for power, threw

themselves upon the weaker, more peaceful races… . At the commencement, the noble

caste was always the barbarian caste: their superiority did not consist first of all in their

physical, but in their psychical power-they were more complete men… .42

But, the power of the master race was broken by the undermining of its psychic strength.

Against the natural impulse to exert aggressive strength, the weak races had erected elaborate

psychic defenses. New values, new ideals, such as peace and equality were put forward under the

guise of “the fundamental principle of society.” Nietzsche contends:

to refrain mutually from injury, form violence, from exploitation, and put one’s will on a

par with that of others: this may result in a certain rough sense in a good conduct among

individuals when the necessary conditions are given (namely, the actual similarity of the

individuals in amount of force and degree of worth, and their co-relation within one

22

organization). As soon, however as one take principle of society, it would immediately

disclose what it really is-namely, a will to the denial of life, a principle of dissolution and

decay.43

Hardness-the key to resist all sentimental weakness

But, a skillful psychological analysis of the herd’s resentment and its desire to exact

revenge against the strong will show, says Nietzsche what must to be done:

One must think profoundly to the very basis and resists all sentimental weakness: life

itself is essentially appropriation, injury, conquest of the strange and the weak,

suppression, severity, obtrusion of peculiar forms, incorporation and at least putting it

mildest, exploitation.44

He adds:

even the organization within which as was previously supposed, the individuals, treat

each other as equal… must itself, if it be a living and not a dying organization, do all that

towards other bodies, which the individuals within it refrain from doing to each

other; it will have to be the incarnated will to power, it will endeavor to grow, to gain

ground, attract to itself and acquire ascendancy- not owing of any morality or immorality,

but because it lives, and because life is precisely will to power… . Exploitation does not

belong to a depraved or imperfect and primitive society: it belongs to the nature of the

living being as a primary organic function; it is a consequence of will to power, which is

precisely the will to life.45

23

Nietzsche understands corruption in the sense of decadence. What he maintains is that all

the values upon which mankind builds its highest hopes and desires are decadent values.

I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt when it loses its instincts, when it selects

and prefers that which is detrimental to it… . Life itself to my mind is nothing more or

less than the instinct of growth of permanence, of accumulating forces of power: where

the will to power is lacking, degeneration sets in.46

Nietzsche also claims that the effect of sympathy with the suffering of others is baneful.

He writes:

Pity stands in antithesis to the tonic emotions which enhance the energy of the feeling of

life: it has a depressive effect-one loses force when one pities… . This depressive and

contagious instinct thwarts off those instincts bent on preserving and enhancing the value

of life… . Nothing in our unhealthy modernity is more unhealthy than Christian pity.47

The Death of God and the Eternal Recurrence

While others saw in nineteenth-century Europe the symbols of power and security,

Nietzsche grasped with prophetic insight the imminent collapse of the traditional supports of the

values to which the modern men had committed themselves. The greatest fact for him was

neither the military power of Germany nor the unfolding advances of science but rather the

incontrovertible fact that the belief in the Christian God had drastically declined to the point

where he could say the “God is dead.”

The decay of belief in God opens the way for man’s creative energies to develop fully;

the Christian God with his commands and prohibitions no longer stands in the path; and man’s

24

eyes are no longer turned towards an unreal supernatural realm, towards the other world rather

than towards this world.48 In the Joyful Wisdom, Nietzsche states:

The most important of more recent events—that “God is dead”, that the belief in the

Christian God has become unworthy of belief-already begins to cast its first shadows

over Europe. To the few at least whose eyes, whose suspecting glance is strong enough

and subtle enough for this drama, some suns seems to have set, some old, profound

confidence seems to have changed into doubt: out old world must seem to them daily

more darksome, distrustful, strange and old…we philosophers, and free spirits feel

ourselves irradiated by a new dawn by the report that “old God is dead”, our hearts

overflow with gratitude, astonishment, presentiment and expectation. At last, the horizon,

seems open once more, granting even that it is not bright; our ships can at last put out to

sea in face of every danger; hazard is again permitted to the discerner; the sea, our sea,

again lies open before us; perhaps never before did such an “open sea” exist.49

Through the report that God is dead opens up vast horizons to free spirits, most people

are not yet ready to positively accept and understand the magnitude of the “great event”. This

exposes them to the danger of nihilism. The fact that God is dead indicates that there are no

values that prevail for eternity. Without God, there can be no provider of absolute and eternal

values. The result then, is that human beings live in a world without intrinsic decadence: it offers

no idols through which one invests value in life; instead, one perceives the meaninglessness of

everything, the absurdity of every choice, and thus experiences ambivalence toward any potential

course of action.

25

The European man has been brought up to recognize certain moral values which have

been associated with Christian belief and in certain sense depend on it. If the European man loses

his faith in this value, he loses faith in all values, for he knows only morality, the morality which

was canonized by Christianity…The breakdown of belied in the Christian moral values exposes

man to the danger of nihilism, not because there are other possible values, but because men in

the west know the others.50

Nietzsche contends that in infinite time there are periodic cycles in which all that has

been is repeated over again. While nihilism in his challenge to philosophical claims on

metaphysics and ethics, he presented an alternative in the eternal recurrence. According to

Nietzsche, it would require a sincere Amor Fati (love of fate), not simply to endure, but to wish

for the eternal recurrence of all events exactly as they occurred- all of the pain and joy, the

embarrassment and glory. The wish for the eternal return of all events would mark the ultimate

affirmation of life.51

Apollonian Nature vs. Dionysian Nature

The Greeks, according to Nietzsche in the Birth of Tragedy, knew very will that life is

terrible, inexplicable, and dangerous. But though they were alive to the real character of the

world and of human life, they did not surrender to pessimism by turning their backs on life. What

they did was to transmute the world and human life through the medium of art. And they were

then able to say ‘yes’ to the world as an aesthetic phenomenon. According to him there were two

ways of doing this, corresponding respectively to the Dionysian and Apollonian attitudes or

mentalities. Dionysus was for Nietzsche the symbol of the stream of life itself, breaking down all

barriers and ignoring all restraints. It presents a kind of “raw energy” from which everything has

26

its origins. It embodies overwhelming emotions such as terror and ecstasy, in which, the intensity

of the experience temporarily obscures the separation between the individual and the feeling

itself. Therefore, in its pure state, the Dionysian is powerful, yet equally destructive without a

means by which to control or focus it. Apollo on the other hand, was the symbol of the “principle

of individuation”, that power that controls and restrains the dynamic processes of life in order to

create a formed work of art or a controlled personal character.52 The Apollonian impulse is a

natural counter needed to make sense of the Dionysian by creating a structure through which it

can be objectified. Therefore, Dionysus represents existential reality and Apollo gives man the

means to live this reality without being swallowed up by it by providing the impulse to beauty

necessary to free him from self-destructive forces of his base instincts.

For Nietzsche, the supreme achievement of human nature occurred in Greek culture were

the Dionysian and Apollonian elements were brought together. To deny that the Dionysian

element had a rightful place in life was to postpone to some later date the investable explosion of

vital forces, which cannot be permanently denied expression. The Dionysian way is triumphantly

affirming and embracing existence in all its darkness and horror.53 In The Will to Power,

Nietzsche explicates:

The kind of experimental philosophy which I am living, even anticipates the possibility

of the most fundament nihilism on principle: but by this I not mean that it remains standing

negation. It would rather attain to the very reverse to a Dionysian affirmation of the world, as it

is without subtraction, exception or choice- it would have eternal circular motion; the same

things the same reasoning and the same illogical concatenation. The highest state to which a

philosopher can attain: the maintain a Dionysian attitude to life my formula for this is amor

fati… Thus I divined to what extent a stronger a kind of man must necessarily imagine-the

27

elevation of man in another direction: higher creatures beyond good and evil, beyond those

values which bear the stamp of their origin in the sphere of suffering, of the herd, and of greater

number…54

Revaluation of values and the Overman-Going Beyond Good and Evil

Again, Nietzsche maintains that the concept of a uniform, universal and absolute moral

system is to be rejected, for it is the fruit of resentment and represents inferior life, descending

life, and degeneracy, whereas the aristocratic morality represents the movement of ascending

life. For Nietzsche, the essential thing in good and healthy aristocracy is that it should not regard

itself to be a function of the monarchy or the commonwealth, but as their meaning and supreme

justification-that it therefore accepts with a good conscience the sacrifice of innumerable men

who for its sake have to be suppressed and reduced to imperfect men, to slaves and instruments.

Its fundamental faith must be that society should not exist for the sake of society but only as a

foundation and scaffolding upon which a select species of being is able to raise itself to its higher

task and in general, to its higher existence. According to him, men are differentiated into ranks,

and it is “quanta of power”, and nothing else, which determine and distinguish ranks. For this

reason, such ideals as equality among men are nonsensical. There can be no equality where there

are in fact different quanta of power. Equality can only mean the leveling downward of everyone

to the mediocrity of the herd. To be sure, a higher culture will always require as its basis a

strongly consolidated mediocre herd, but only to make possible the development and emergence

of the higher type of man.55

For Nietzsche, if the slave morality originated in resentment and revenge, there must

again occur a revaluation of all values. Nietzsche did not intend the creation of a new table of

28

values. He meant rather to declare war upon the presently accepted values. Since traditional

morality is a perversion of original natural morality, revaluation must consist in rejecting

traditional morality in the name of honesty and accuracy. It is not necessary to legislate new

values but only to reverse the values once again. Just as Christianity was a revaluation of all the

values of “antiquity,” so today, the dominant morality must be rejected in favor of man’s original

and deepest nature.56 Nietzsche focused upon the internal power within man, which is capable of

shaping and creating events, a power which uses and exploits the environment. Nietzsche’s

grand hypothesis was the everywhere and in everything the will to power is seeking to express

itself. “This world, he says, is the will to power and nothing else.” Life itself is a plurality of

forces, a lasting form of processes of assertion of force…”57

Nietzsche further asserts that even after the revaluation of values, the herd will not be

intellectually capable of reaching the heights of the “free spirits.” The overman is the person who

can overcome the herd instinct, that is, create his or her own values without the influence of

one’s social norms. He discovers that it is in his best interest to reject any outside notions about

values, trusting rather what he finds within himself. He creates his own good and evil, based on

that which helps him to succeed or fail. In this way, good is something which helps one to realize

his potential and evil is whatever hampers or stands in the way of this effort. For Nietzsche,

history is moving not toward some abstract developed humanity but toward the emergence of

some exceptional men. Only when superior individuals have the courage to revalue all values

and respond to their internal will to power can the next stage be reached.58

For Nietzsche, the will to power can achieve its purpose only by striving and an

inevitable loss on the part of the weak. Life is meaningful only on the account of struggle. War is

29

good; peace is stagnation which is not worth desiring. War strengthens the race, peace weakens

them.59 In Antichrist, Nietzsche affirms:

What is good? All that enhances the feeling of power in man, the will to power and

power itself. What is bad? All that proceeds from weakness. What is happiness? The

feeling that power is increasing, that resistance has been overcome. Not contentment but

more power; not peace but war; not virtue but efficiency. The weak and the botched shall

perish; first principle of humanity. And they ought even to be helped to perish. What is

more harmful than any vise?- practical with the botched and weak- Chrisitanity.60

For Nietzsche, life is struggle for existence at its highest. The test of a man is energy and

ability.

30

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This analysis attempts to analyze and explain the struggle of the two conflicting parties

(the GRP and the MILF) by using Nietzsche’s concept of will to power which describes and

explains the elevation of the human species through the development of oneself and the striving

for excellence. The law that directs al activities of life is the law of power, the urge to excel all

others in strength.

In keeping with Nietzsche’s philosophy, the researcher would argue that the conflict itself

between the MILF and the GRP is a product of the underlying forces which are prominent on

human nature- the will to power. Following Nietzsche’s assertion that this inner reality could be

understood by its multiplicity of manifestations, the researcher would argue further that in the

said conflict there are indeed manifestations of will to power. As Nietzsche states, the instinct for

the acquisition of power is the prime factor that motivates all the activities of life.

Independent Islamic government as the goal-opposed to Philippine system

The MILF’s struggle for self-determination springs forth from the fact that the Moros

seek above all their survival as a Muslim people. They believe that their survival demand

freedom from the domination of the neocolonial forms of authority in those matters which most

clash against on their identity and selfhood as Muslims. These include such things as education,

family life, community organization, religious activities, and to some extent jurisdiction over

land economic resources. Having a different culture and religion of its own, they want to

31

establish a system of life and governance suitable and acceptable to the Bangsamoro people.

Their vision of establishing an independent Islamic government in the Bangsamoro homeland is

reflective of Nietszche’s thought that “the will is the striving to find or establish the surroundings

that will most enhance the creative abilities of the individual.”61 For the Moros, Islam is their

way of life which gives them meaning to live, and for life itself is will to power, and to preserve

that Islamic identity is only one of the most frequent results.

With its different constitutional paradigms, the Moro Islamic system opposed to the

western liberal democratic system of the government makes the Philippine system not suitable

and acceptable on the part of the Moros. In this kind of government, the Moros cannot be said to

“grow”, that is, practicing in utmost possible the teachings of Islam because the Philippine

system hinders them to grow into their full nation statehood. They want to unfetter themselves

from this domination which they believe is the cause of “social decay” among the Bangsamoro

people. They are looking forward to establish a government that shall embody their ideals which

will in their own way would open to them not only material, but also intellectual, cultural, and

spiritual progress which would further encourage all forms of excellence. This is because

according to Nietzsche “every living organization must endeavor to grow, gain ground and

acquire ascendancy.”

Incompatibility of interests creates conflict

Nietzsche mentioned “every specific body strives to become masters over all space, to

extend its force, its will to power and thrusts back all that resists its extension.62 The MILF’s

struggle for national liberation however brings them to a vertical conflict with the Philippine

government which is rigid in preserving the country’s interests particularly the country’s

32

sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Philippine government will not let the MILF stand in

the way of the former’s integration policy seeking to integrate all the minorities including the

Moros into the mainstream of the Philippine national life, socially, culturally, politically and

economically. Its political stand is that any solution to the Bangsamoro problem is within the

mandates of the constitution and laws of the land. Form this incompatibility of interests born the

strife of two worthy rivals, each striving to gain the upper hand.

Will to power- its destructive aspect

According to Nietzsche, humans are always attempting impose their superiority and will

upon each other, in one way or another. It would also be appropriate for the researcher to say that

the way to power can be constructive or destructive since according to him, a living thing seeks

to discharge its strength not only to survive but to power which sometimes results in violent

behavior intrinsic to the nature of men.63

With the desire of the government to capture al the fixed camps of the MILF (this was the

time when one of the core issues is the acknowledgement of the MILF camps), since the former

Estrada administration was alarmed that the identified MILF camps were straddling significant

portions of many municipalities, it has decided not only to reverse on the ground the

acknowledgements of seven MILF major camps already made in 1999 but to change the reality

of all 46 identified MILF fixed camps on the ground. This eventually took the form of the

military offensives or the “all-out war” policy in the year 2000 which culminated in the AFP

capture of the MILF Main camp Abubakr.64 This strategy of the government was to degrade the

military capability of the Moro rebels and weaken its negotiating position, to impose on the

Moro rebels a peace settlement which is of course under the parameters of the Philippine

33

constitution. Its all out-war policy made the impression that the government has the ability to

pulverize the enemy as shown by its massive and brutal military operations against the MILF.

This was in turn superseded by the call of Jihad of former MILF chairman Hashim

Salamat who believed that the call of Jihad has been a successful one because the organization

has shown its strengths and capacity that allowed them to withstand the weapons of the enemy,

vowing to fight until victory is achieved. He said that the organization experienced many

positive results and developments; this was perhaps due to fewer casualties on their side (as what

they claim) and a way of displaying their strengths to the enemy, since Jihad has been a way of

regaining their usurped freedom, wherein freedom for Nietzsche means sovereignty at the top of

the heap.

The two worthy opponents are indeed, heroes in the eyes of Nietzsche because they are

both capable of requital. That is, they have the power of returning what the enemy can do to

them. They are both “good.”

Nietzsche maintains” life is a plurality of forces, a lasting form of processes of assertions

of force. The all-out war policy however did not end in the government’s assault and the capture

of the MILF’s main camp during the Estrada regime, it still continues up to the present

administration. The AFP’s “Buliok offensive” in the year 2003 which targeted the MILF was

another government’s way of regaining the MILF camps since the latter’s camps had sovereignty

and territorial implications for both sides even if to a lesser degree.65 For the MILF, establishing

control of certain municipalities, then asking GRP’s recognition of these areas as its territories,

will mean more territories. Moreover, the MILF has also strengthened its military capability and

also renewed the call for Jihad and still unanimously demands for independence. The continuous

34

affirmation of both sides on obtaining their end is the lasting assertions of forces that Nietzsche

mentioned in his “will to power.”

The series of violent clashes, bloody skirmishes between the two powers, however reveal

the terrifying aspect of human nature. These manifest the human’s horrific side of existence, that

terrifying element to our existence that ought to be remained concealed but not suppressed. The

giving more of emphasis by both sides on the intensive use of military might on the struggle

marks the preponderance of the Dionysian impulse in man.

Will to power- Its constructive aspect

Nietzsche claims that simply using violent force to bring another under one’s power,

though it is the most natural and most instinctive method, is not always the most successful. 66

Surely, the Philippine government wasn’t that much able to subjugate the MILF as the latter is

very adamant in their continued commitment to independence as they staked most of their

strengths during the battles. Physical strengths would of course show much the capacity of a

living organization to “grow”, “gain ground”, and “acquire ascendancy.” So, Nietzsche proved

that the ego learns to find other ways to exert its will to power that through the violent or forceful

domination of others. In the conflict, even rightly after its fierce battles, the government has been

strategically hinting about its plans of pouring over of development projects especially in the

conflict-affected areas. It did present its plans of pursuing socio-economic, rehabilitation and

development programs in Muslim areas to develop and uplift the living conditions of the people,

and other rehabilitation and development programs which would gradually; if not immediately

improve the lives of the people. So, what would this be at the bottom for Nietzsche is that

pouring over of development projects especially within the MILF camps or controlled areas is to

35

lure away the rebels from demanding self-rule. Also, it would also be used to strengthen

International political front in order to discourage the Islamic countries to support the MILF

cause.

According to Nietzsche, “no matter what type of situations individuals find themselves

in, their will to power comes through in one way or another. In the case of the GRP-MILF

conflict, the existence of the peace talks as a way of committing the parties to end the violent

conflicts have also become means or battlefield for competing wills. Persuasions and arguments

have become an artistic way of overwhelming the other party instead of having it on the arena of

arms and battles. For Nietzsche, if there is an aspect of our nature that is terrifying, there is also

however, an aspect of our nature that consists of the veiling of the former aspect, leading to an

overcoming of our nature and allowing creative agency. Diverting the energy of primitive

impulses into a socially more acceptable activity in the conflict takes the form of peace

negotiations which involve reasons and order. These also demonstrate the wits of the two parties

trying to prevail over the other through presenting cogent arguments favorable to their side. The

emphasis of both sides on argumentation as way of acquiring dominance indicates the hegemony

of the Apollonian principle.

Plebiscite- A matter of dispute, a way to impose ones’s will over the other

The aforementioned peace talks which started few decades ago remain to be the

comprehensive solution to the conflict. The ARMM of The Autonomous Region for Muslim

Mindanao which was intended to meet the demands of the Muslims in Southern Philippines

became also a matter of dispute because its failure as a mechanism for peaceful political

competition, good governance and quality leadership selection has been used as an argument

36

against the Moro self-determination and self-rule. On the government side, such failure arises

mainly from the timidity and incapacity of the leaders of the ARMM to use its vast power to

promote the common good. But, for the MILF it is precisely the structure as a part of the national

political structure which limits the fulfillment of certain Bangsomor aspirations and that national

political structure is embedded int ehconstitution.67 Going into the peace negotiations, the MILF

showing its readiness to talk about political settlements, particularly negotiated political

settlements, it is its proposal during the formal talks to have a single talking-point, and that is, to

solve the Bangsamoro problem is finding a political and lasting solution to the problem with the

end in view of establishing a system suitable and acceptable to the Bangsamoro peole.68 And that

in defining the final status of the Bangsamoro peoples, the MILF is stern in its stand to have an

iterative process through the plebiscitary consent of the Moros and indigenous people without

the “veto power” of settlers and migrants. This means that a plebiscite will be called but only

among the Bangsamoro people because it involves their status as people and indigenous people

may choose or not to choose to be or not to be part of the Moro area of governance. 69 The

Bangsamoro homeland of course had become settler dominated, and it is logical to say that

conducting a plebiscite on the areas where the Muslims were predominant would only have for

the settlers and migrants the “veto power.” In the minds of the MILF, it is indeed an appealing

argument to subject the Tripoli Agreement to a popular vote because as a democratic decision,

the voice of the majority is guaranteed and shall be unquestionably in effect. The plebiscite

usually goes unopposed since it is what the majority wants.70 Subjecting therefore the Tripoli

Agreement to a plebiscite is a unilateral advantage for the government to guarantee itself that the

resolution of the conflict is still within the context of the Philippine constitution.

37

As of this time, the conflict is still extant. The ways the two partied maneuver the peace

process and the aforementioned battles still point out to their own interest, to exert their will.

They therefore qualify themselves as opponents worth to waged war with. A grater possibility is

that in the coming battles, and peace talks, it is inevitable that the two powers will still exert their

will because according to Nietzsche, “the will to power is always seeking to express itself.

Lasting pleasure and satisfaction come about as a result of being able to live according to one’s

instincts- the ability to exert ones’s will to power.”71

CHAPTER V.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIN AND RECOMMENDATIONS

38

In this study, it is evident that there are indeed manifestations of will to power in the

GRP-MILF conflict as there is the desire of both parties to excel over the other not only in terms

of physical strength but psychical strength as well.

As a conflict is a competition between two parties trying to get something they both

cannot have due of course to inconsistent goals, both side exerted their power to excel over the

other in a number of ways. This actually corresponds to the principle of elevation that Nietzsche

professes. Thus, the use of intensive military might by both sides like in the All-out war policy of

the government and the declaration of Jihad on the part of the MILF and other series of violent

clashes between them as well as the presence of the negotiation process, peace talks, signed

peace agreements and other carrot approaches between the conflicting parties demonstrate the

ability of both sides to exert one’s will. In the conflict, the imposing of will by both sides to gain

the upper hand is a sign of an instinctive reverence for excellence because to raise oneself to a

higher level is a manifestation of will to power expressing itself. Both sides possess the strength

and the desire for power. That is, they are more “complete men.”

It is true that as of this time, the conflict still exists. The said peace processes between the

MILF and the GRP which are undertaken to solve the conflict did not actually end the problem.

The existence of the peace talks (though here is always an impasse) until this time which started

many years ago demonstrates its being ineffective in resolving the problem.

Peace talk: Slave Morality

Although domination of both parties are apparent during peace talks as manifested in

their earnest desires to assert their wants and interests, parallel of course with their respective

goals, the researcher however, would argue that peace talks are in some way a manifested slave

39

morality- indeed, a product of slave morality. These are not the values upon which the noble and

the strong like the contending parties have created themselves, rather these are the values

imposed by the masses on them.

It can be recalled that the GRP and the MILF have proven much of their strengths when

they both declared an equally affirming yet terrifying declarations of bloody war that almost

unveiled the stronger party. These acts of the contending powers are indeed noble as they create

these values “in itself.” They create these values from one’s own inwardness, and from super-

abundance of power. Nietzsche proves that the slave morality requires the condition of its

existence an external and objective world, it requires objective stimuli to be capable of reaction

at all- its action is fundamentally a reaction. Nietzsche adds that the power of the master race was

broken by undermining of its psychic strength, against the natural impulses to exert aggressive

strength; the weak races had erected elaborate psychic defenses.72 These psychic defenses take

the form of translating noble values into evils. This values-creating master morality of both

parties, however, which came in the form of hostilities and military actions are deemed as “evil”

by the masses,-evil because these acts cause sufferings and miseries to the people. They therefore

arouse fear. But, “according to master morality, it is precisely the ‘good’ man who arouses fear

and seeks to arouse it.”73

It is a fact that the fierce fighting between the MILF and the government troops made the

lives of the people increasingly more difficult as they were forced to flee from their homes

during the battles, squeezing themselves in the evacuation centers with less food and sometimes

nothing to eat. Feeling unsafe as the fighting of both parties disturb their peaceful living as they

experienced countless lives lost during battles, they, the masses resent over the power of the two

parties at the same time fear these values of the powerful. Nietzsche says that “the revolt of the

40

slave in morals begins in the very principle of resentment becoming creative and giving birth to

values an experienced by creatures, who deprived as they are of the proper outlet of action, are

forced to find their compensation in an imaginary revenge.” Since the masses are impotent

enough not to contend with the conflicting parties, out of resentment and sufferings, they create

values as a reaction to the values of the powerful through committing the two parties to peace

talks would pacify both parties which would successfully end the violent conflicts. This is

reflective in Nietzsche’s assertions that “the meek and powerless fear the strong and powerful

and they attempt to curb and tame them by asserting as absolute the values of the herd.74

With the call of the civil society, the priests and the masses in general for the GRP and

the MILF to sit in the negotiating table and talk about the peace process since for the masses the

violent fighting of the two powers are demoralizing and indeed “evil” on the perspective of the

sufferers, the two contending parties somehow succumb to these values as they were almost

conscience-stricken that their values (the values of the powerful) are deemed as “evil.” The

qualities of the two parties are deemed by the masses as contemptible which nearly cause the

former to be weak and indecisive.

New values and new ideals were now put forward under the guise of the fundamental

principle of the society.” As Nietzsche states, those qualities which serve to alleviate the

existence of the sufferers are brought into prominence and flooded with light.”75 These peace

talks are the ‘new values’ created by the “weaker and more peaceful races” to be utilized as

means to alleviate their sufferings. Committing both parties to peace talks to end the violent

conflicts would of course provide relief to the people as cessation of any kind of military

activities usually follows from it.

41

The masses’ cry for peace, however made the two powers to restrain themselves from

making hostile or provocative acts which can mar or spoil the negotiation process, wherein for

Nietzsche, “to refrain mutually from injury, from violence, from exploitation and taking this

principle of society, discloses what it really is- a will to dissolution and decay.76 This is actually

degenerating on the part of the GRP and the MILF because peace talks are just restrictions of the

weak on the strong, to prevent the latter from completely fulfilling their natural ends-to exert

their will to power, to elevate themselves. This, however, eventually caused stagnation on the

part of the two powers as they are confined to the morality of the masses, where they could not

exercise so much their power, to assert their will, their own demand.” These values of the masses

act as a constraint to the two power’ exertion and affirmation of their own value-their natural

values.

According to Nietzsche, the stronger type of men must resist this sentimental weakness,

for life itself is appropriation, injury, conquest of the strange and the weak, suppression, severity,

exploitation.77 This means that both parties must the will to affirm themselves in action and the

willingness to fight for their way of life and thought because to affirm oneself is to cultivate the

characteristics which springs from “itself” and not “outside itself” as for Nietzsche, the most

fundamental laws of preservation and growth demand precisely that each should discover his

own virtue, his own categorical imperative.78 To resist this sentimental weakness is to live life

beyond good and evil conceived by the masses. “Good” as those qualities which serve to

alleviate the existence of the sufferers, “evil” as those “fear inducing” values of the powerful or

the things that cause their own unsatisfactory conditions. To go beyond good and evil is to

revalue the prevailing values, that is replacing the decadent and degenerated values with more

noble, grand and healthy values. According to Nietzsche, it is not necessary to legislate new

42

values but only to reverse the values once again. The dominant morality must be rejected in

favor of man’s original and deepest nature.79 So, just as peace talks and peace negotiations are

the prevailing values and a reactionary morality of the masses to the morality of the powerful,

the peace talks between the MILF and the GRP must be replaced with their original values. And

these natural values are the violent fighting and skirmishes, the values of the masters which have

been almost disposed of by the morality of the common men.

In the conflict between the Philippine government and the MILF, there are of course

these different perspectives or opposing constitutional paradigms. And these opposing

constitutional paradigms. And these opposing constitutional paradigms cannot both co-exist in

one country, so, one must prevail over the other, or only one of them must remain on top. But,

the GRP and the MILF somehow can be said to be equals. Indeed, there is no such strife or

competition of unequal. Moreover, the “actual similarity of both parties in amount of force and

degree of worth” discloses decadence. According to Nietzsche, equality can only mean the

leveling downward of everyone to the mediocrity of the herd. This equality must be broken in

order for a more powerful, more valuable and the more secure guarantee of the future will

emerge. Though both parties are worthy opponents whom each of them should respect, it is also

that one whom one must overcome. To know therefore who has the higher ability of staking

one’s strength and fighting skill, the researcher concludes that war, a violent war must be utilized

to determine which of the two parties is stronger.

Beastly qualities of the strong, however is not alien to us, for these are naturally

embedded in human beings. “War seems to be ingrained in human nature,” according to Kant.

He further argues that war should even be regarded as noble.80 This is perhaps due to the fact that

war brings out man’s finest qualities as indicated by his creativity, independence, and hardness.

43

In his famous book “The Prince,” Niccolo Machiavelki emphasizes that a prince ought

to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and

discipline; for this is the sole art that belongs to him who rules, and it is of such force that it not

only upholds those who are born princes, but it often enables men to rise from a private station ot

the rank.81

Hegel also argued that warfare had positive benefits for individual because according to

him, war serves to eliminate various forms of corruption which can develop in a stale, “safe”

society. While many seem to regard war as a moral disaster, Hegel actually argues that the lack

of war would be the disaster. It’s disastrous because it prevents people from developing to their

fullest extent. It is therefore his emphatic assertion that “man must accept war or stagnate.”82

To prove also that warlike behaviors are not estranged from us, the researcher quotes

Thomas Hobbes saying that “man is belligerent by nature” though this side of our nature is

controlled by reason and with the vent of powerful authority who would keep them all in awe,

Nietzsche believes that “the wild best has not been slain at all, it lives, it flourishes, it has only

been transfigured.83 This only shows that wars and battles simply cannot be ignored because

these are inevitable and deeply rooted in our very own nature as human beings.

Nietzsche claimed that “war is good and strengthens the race.” This is because through

war, the strengths of the two contending powers will be unleashed. War therefore serves as

measurements of their strengths. It also strengthens the race of the higher men because it makes

the noble men conscious of their own values which help them develop new values by constantly

creating. On the other hand, peace is stagnation which is not worth desiring because it makes the

44

noble men fall asleep, sinking into material life rather than staking one’s strength, to express

one’s will to power.

Nietzsche then defines happiness as “the feeling that the power is increasing, that

resistance has been overcome. This is because growth is indicated by surpassing every mighty

opponent they met. One’s power increases when one is able to surpass every mighty opponent’s

strength.

This war however, will have no conformity to any rules or standards, as these standards

might be detrimental to higher men. War will determine the victor since war itself will forge the

standards and limits in such a way that one can wage war as long as one still has the capability to

resist the opponent in the same measure of the latter’s strength.

Surely, in war some men will perish away as the call of the first principle of humanity

states, but it is necessary for the emergence of some exceptional men. As Nietzsche asserts, one

must accept with a good conscience the sacrifice of innumerable men who for its sake must be

suppressed so that a select species of beings is able to raise itself into a higher existence. It is true

of course that warfare involves civilians, and civilian casualties are foreseeable though they may

not be the target as they are not worthy opponents for the conflicting parties to wage war with.

The contending powers should not be afflicted with the thoughts of pity for “pity stands in

antithesis to the tonic emotions which enhance the energy of the feeling of life-it suppresses

productive passions and has depressive effect on the strength of both parties.”84

The researcher does not say that this violent war she suggests is a fixed paradigm or the

ultimate solution to the problem. As Nietzsche’s will to power is nothing but a becoming, these

45

prevailing values will also need valuations in response to the demands of time. It is therefore

recommended in this study that:

1. A violent war could be utilized as an excellent solution to any related problem of liberationist

and secessionist struggle.

2. There must be long-scale gradations of ranks among human beings to avoid mediocrity.

3. Further study in conflict resolutions in relations to war must be conducted in order to come up

a better and a lasting solution to the problem of liberationist and other related struggles.

CHAPTER VI.

POST-WAR INSIGHTS

46

It is indeed strange that while people all over the world are desperately trying to solve the

problem of liberationist struggle through peaceful means, this paper rather takes a back turn and

proposed indeed a violent war as a better alternative solution to this long-time conflict between

the GRP and the Moro rebels. We now turn our eyes on what can be seen on the distance after

the war.

Disastrous is war as one can ever imagine. But, war is necessary for the unveiling of the

stronger type of men who will rule over the people. It is natural for these rare individuals to be

“sovereign and at the top of the heap.” Reality has it that in the struggle between the two

contending powers, the overwhelming force wins. The one who exerts more power rules over the

other. This eventual triumph of one power over the other marks the end of the war (of course

with the consent of the losers). The defeated side will be brought under the dominion of the

stronger military power, and this victorious side will be the one to impose rules. The stronger

power will then compel its opponents to fulfill its will.

Thus, the victorious side may imprison or prosecute the high-ranking officials of the

defeated side, or it could grant amnesty to some of its leaders or members who will surrender.

The winning party may also let the vanquished opponent to award reparations to them, and pay

the damages to the lives and properties destroyed by the conflict. But, there is more to the will to

power. For Nietzsche, the nobleman willfully binds himself to something higher, for one’s

nobility is characterized not only by physical strength but more so in the nobility of mind and

great deeds. It must also be noted however, that power should not be understood only in negative

terms-as that one that merely subjugates. For power is not only the ability to do harm but also the

ability to help. “One must also look on what power does, instead of what power prevents. Only

then will power appear in its truest forms.” Thus, the nobleman excels not only in the art of

47

warfare, but distinguishes himself also in the art of governance and leadership. Thus, the

victorious side is expected to reconstruct not only the Mindanao lands but also those areas

affected by conflict. The reconstruction would be not only in terms of properties destroyed but

will also forge political and economic stability. They must pursue vigorously its socio-economic

and development programs especially on the conflict-affected areas. Rehabilitation and

development programs which include the provision of appropriate services and necessary

material needs to the evacuees and displaced families, their protection against loss of life and

loss and destruction of their properties, health facilities and other similar acts would now be

implemented to enable the people to return to their normal lives. Priority would also be given to

agricultural lands to be brought into production, trade and industry, and other means of

production intended for the growth of economy. Attention would also be given to the art of

instruction, to serve and promote better conditions and the rise of human beings. However, these

acts of the noble men do not spring form pity but rather from an ‘impulse generated by the

superabundance of power.”

In the future, the researcher would not know would not know what would be the higher

men’s course of action and how these noble men would want to live their lives since it depends

on their creativity and independence. But, as the freedom to choose are entirely in their hands,

their creative will must will the future, making this world the will to power and nothing besides.

ENDNOTES :

1 Soliman M. Santos Jr. “Delays in the Peace Negotiations between the Philippine Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front: Cause and Prescriptions: East-

48

West Center Washington Working Papers, 24 September 2014, http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/EWcwwp003.pdf2 Ibid.3 Zainal Kulidtod,” Perceived Strengths and Weaknesses of GRP Peace Initiatives,” (Dissertation, Mindanao State University-Marawi, 2005).4“Moro Islamic Liberation Front, “24 September 2014, http://www.ict.org.il/organizations/orgdet.cfm?orgid=925Macapado Abaton Muslim, “The Moro Problem: Basic Elements,” Mindanao Journal, Vol. XXII (July-December 1996) p. 34.6Guiamel M.Alim, “The Bangsamoro Struggle for Self-Determination,” European Solidarity Conference on the Philippines, 24 September 2014, http://www.seasite.niu.edu/Tagalog/modules/Muslim Mindanao/MindanaoLands.htm7”War,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedian.org/wiki/war8Signe Ziegler, “A Discussion on Human Nature of Marx and Hobbes,” 24 September 2014, http://home.student.uva.nl/willem.frankenhuis9Marbel L. Sahakian and S. Sahakian, Realms of Philosophy (USA: Schenckman Publishing company, Inc. 1970) pp. 88-89.10Ibid.pp. 148-149.11 “State of Nature, “Paper on Lord of the Flies, 24 September 2014, http://shs.wetport.k12.ct.us/portfolio.smith/LOF.htm12 “Nauture vs. Society,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_JacquesRousseau13Frederick Copleston, SJ., History of Philosophy, Vol. 2 (USAL Newman Press, 1962) pp. 143-144.14 “HumanNature,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Nature15 “Mencius’ View of Human Nature and How it is Communicated in His Writings,” 24 September 2014, http://www.standford.edu/~zain/publicpapers/fall2002ihum/paper1.htm16 “Epictetus and Mencius: The Role of Emotions in a Good Life,” 24 September 2014, http://www.geocities.com/peternthomas/Essay/PAPER3.htm17 Mabel L. Sahakian and S. Sahakian, Realms of Philosophy (USA; Schenckman Publishing Company, Inc. 1970) pp. 175-176.18“TheoryofHumanNature,”24September2014.http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/2007/05/shorter_archn_chapter_1.html19Edward W. Younkins, ‘Herbert Spencer on Liberty and Human Progress,” 24 September 2014. http://www.newfoundations.com/GALLERY/Spencer.html20Macapado Abaton Muslim, “The Moro Problem: Basic Elements,” Mindanao Journal, Vol.XXII (July-December 1996) p. 34.21Ibid. p. 3522Ibid. pp. 35-3623Ibid. p. 3624Ibid. p. 3725Ibid. p. 37-382619August 2007, http://enwikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche27Danny Weston, “The Will-to-Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.promethea.org/Misc_Compositions/Antipolitique.html28Samuel E. Stumpf, “Master-Morality vs. Slave-Morality and The Will to Power,” Socrates to Satre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. USA: McGrawHill Book Company, 1982.

49

29Travis J. Denneson, “Society and the Individual in The Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power. 30 “Beyond Good and Evil,” Great Books of the Western World, Vol. 43, 2nd ed. (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1996) p. 470.31 “The Concept of Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/will_to_power32Travis J. Denneson, “Society and the Individual in the Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power33Ibid.34 Samuel E. Stumnf, “Master-Morality vs. Slave-Morality and the Will to Power,” Socrated to Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. (USA: McGraw Hill book Company, 1982).35 “Beyond Good and Evil,” Friedrich Nietzsche with an Introduction by Tom Griffith (London: The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers, 2005) pp. 320-321.36Ibid. pp. 322-323.37 The Philosophy of Nietzsche, edited with an Introduction by Geoffrey Clive (New York: The New American Library, Inc. 1965) p. 286.38Ibid. pp. 410.39 “Master Morality and Slave Morality,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche40 “The Genealogy of Morals,” The Philosophy of Nietzsche, edited with an Introduction by Geoffrey Clive (New York: The New American Library Inc. 1965) p. 410.41Samuel E. Stumf, “Master Morality vs. Slave Morality and The Will to power,” Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. (USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982)42 “Beyond Good and Evil,” Friedrich Nietzsche with an Introduction by Tom Griffith (London: The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers, 2005) pp. 316-317.43Ibid. pp. 31844Ibid.45Ibid. pp. 318-319.46 “The AntiChrist,” The Philosophy of Nietzsche, edited with an Introduction by Geoffrey Clive (New York: The New American Library, Inc. 1965) pp. 427-428.47 “Nietzsche’s Revaluation of Schopenhauer,” 24 September 2014, http://www.bu.edu/wcp?Papers?MPsy/MpsyConw.htm48 Frederick Copleston, SJ. A History of Philosophy, Vol. VII (USA: Newman Press, 1962) p. 403.49 “The Joyful Wisdom,” Reality, Man and Existence: Essential Work of Existentialism, edited with an Introduction by H.J. Blackham (New York: Bantam Books, Inc., 1965) pp. 67-68.50 Frederick Copleston, SJ., A History of Philosophy, Vol. VII (USA: Newman Press, 1962) p. 405.51 “Amor Fati and the Eternal Recurrence,” 24 September 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche52 Fredrick Copleston, S.J. A History of Philosophy, Vol. VII (USA: Newman Press, 1962) p. 397.53 Samuel E. Stumpf, “Apollonian vs. Dionysian,” Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. (USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982)

50

54 “The Will to Power,” Reality, Man and Existence: Essential Works of Existentialism, edited with an Introduction by H.J. Blackham (New York: Bantam Books, Inc. 1965) p. 116.55 Samuel E. Stumf, “Master Morality vs. Slave Morality and the Will to Power,” Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. (USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982).56Ibid.57Ibid.58Ibid.59 “Friedrich Nietzsche,” 24 September 2014, http://www.swami_skrishnand.org/com/com_nioet.html60 “The Antichrist,” The Philosophy of Nietzsche, edited with an Introduction by Geoffrey Clive (New York: The New American Library, Inc. 1965) p. 427.61 “Nietzsche’s Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.froyd.net/philosophy/philo4.html62 “The Concept of Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_to_power63 “Nietzsche’s idea of an Overman and Life from His Point of View,” 24 September 2014, http://www.stanford.edu/~pj97/Nietzsche.htm64 Soliman M. Santos Jr, “Delays in the Peace Negotiations between the Philippine Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front: Causes and Prescriptions: East-West Center Washington Working Papers, 24 September 2014, http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/EWCWwp003.pdf65Ibid.66 Travis J. Denneson, “Society and Individual in Nietzsche’s The Will to Power.” 19 September 2014, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power67 Soliman M. Santos Jr. “Delays in the Peace Negotiations between the Philippine Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front: Causes and Prescriptions: East-West Center Washington Working Papers, 24 September 2014, http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/EWCWwp003.pdf68Ibid.69 Carolyn O. Arguillas, “Dialogue is the Only Option,” Mindanao Leaders Tell GRP, MILF,”24 September2014, http://mindanews.com/index.php?optioncom_conten&task=view&id=1048&itemid=7570 Macapado Abaton Muslim, “The Moro Armed Struggle in the Philippines: The Non-violent Autonomy Alternative (Marawi: The Office of The President and the College of Public Affairs, 1994) p. 14671 Danny Weston, “The Will to Power,” 24 September 2014, http://www.promethea.org/Misc_Compositions/Antipolitique.html72 Samel E. Stumf, Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosoph, 3rd ed. (USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982)73Ibid.74Ibid.75Ibid.76”Beyond Good and Evil, “Friedrich Nietzsche with an Introduction by Tom Griffith (London: The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers, 2005) p. 318.77Ibid.78 “The AntiChrist, “Friedrich Nietzsche with an Introduction by Tom Griffith (London: The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers, 2005) p. 394.

51

79 Samuel E. Stumf, “Revaluation of All Morrals,” Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy, 3rd ed. (USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982).80 “The Philosophy of War,” 24 September 2014, http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/w/war.htm81 24 September 2014, http://www.gosale.com/723510/the_prince82 “Social Values and Universal Spirit,” 24 September 2014, http://atheism.about.com/library/Faqs/phil/blphil_eth_wardef_hegel.htm83 “Beyond Good and Evil,” Friedrich Nietzsche with an Introduction by Tom Griffith (London: The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers, 2005) p. 311.84 “Nietzsche’s Revaluation of Schopenhauer,” 24 September 2014, http://www.bu.edu/wcp?MpsyConw.html

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Blackham, H.J. ed. Reality, Man and Existence: Essential Works of Existentialism. New York: Bantam Books, Inc. 1965Clive, Geoffrey, ed. The Philosophy of Nietzsche. The New American Library, Inc. 1965Copleston, Frederick, S.J. A History of Philosophy. Vol. 2 USA: Newman Press: 1963 Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 43. 2nd ed. Chicago:

Encyclopedia Britannica. Inc. 1990.Muslim, Macapado A. The Moro Armed Struggle in the Philippines: The Non-Violent Autonomy Alternative. Marawi City, Philippines: Office of the President College of Public Affairs, Mindanao State University, 1994. . Friedrich Nietzsche. The Collector’s Library of Essential Thinkers. 2005. Sahakian, Mabel L. and Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy. 3rd ed. USA: Mc Graw Hill Book Company, 1982.

JOURNALS

Lingga, Abhoud Syed M. Salamat Hashim’s Concept of Bangsamoro State and Government.” Mindanao Journal. Vol. 33 (July-December 1996).Muslim, Macapado A. “The Moro Problem. The Basic Elements.” Mindanao Journal. Vol. 33 (July- December 1996).

52

DISSERTATION

Kulidtod, Zainal. “Perceived Strengths and Weaknesses of GRP Peace Initiatives.” Dissertation. MSU-Main. 2005

INTERNET SOURCES

Alim, Guiamel M. “The Bangsamoro Struggle for Self Determination. European Solidarity Conference of the Philippines, 24 September 2014.

http://www.seasite.niu.edu/Tagalog/modules/MuslimeMindanaoLands.htm

Arguillas, Carolyn O. “Dialogue is the Only Option, Mindanao Leaders Tell GRP, MILF,” 24 September 2014.

http://mindanews.com/indexphp?Option=com_content&task=view&id=10487itemid=75

Denneson, Travis J. “Society and the Individual in Nietzsche’s The Will to Power.” 24 September 2014. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis-deneson/power

Santos, Soliman Jr. M. “Delays in the Peace Negotiations between the Philippine Government and The Moro Islamic Liberation front: Causes and Prescriptions.” East- West Center Washington Working Papers, 24 September 2014.

http://www.eastwestcenter.org/stored/pdfs/EWCWwp003.pdf

Weston, Danny. “The Will to Power.” 24 September 2014. http://www.promethea.org/Misc_Composition/Antipolitique.html

Younkins, Edward W. “Herbert Spencer on Liberty and Human Progress.” 24 September 2014.

http://www.newfoundations.com?GALLERY/Spencer.html

53

Ziegler,Signe. “A Discussion on Human Nature of Marx and Hobbes.” 24 September 2014. http://home.student.uve.n1/Willem.frankenhuis

Amor Fati and the Eternal Recurrece.” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

“Epictetus and Mencius: The Role of Emotions in a Good Life.” 24 September 2014.

http://www.geocities.com/peternthomas?ESSAY/PAPER3.htm

“Friedrich Nietzsche.” 24 September 2014. http://www.swami_klrishnanda.org/com/com_niet/html

“Human Nature.” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Nature/html

“ Master Morality and Slave Morality.” 24 September 2014. http://enwikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

“Mencius” View of Human Nature and How it is Communicated in His Writing.” 24 September 2014. http://www.stanford.edu/~zain/publicpapers/fall12002ihum/paper1.htm

“Moro Islamic Liberation Front.” 24 September 2014. http://www.ict.org.il.organization_orgdet.cfm/orgid=92

.“Nature vs. Society.” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Jacques_Rousseau

. “Nietzsche’s idea of an Overman and Life From His Point of View. 24 September 2014. http://www.stanford.Edu/~pj97/Nietzsche.htm

. “Nietzsche’s Revaluation of Schopenhauer.” 24 September 2014. http://www.bu.edu/wp/Papers/MPsyConw.htm

, “Nietzsche’s Will to Power.” 24 September 2014. http://www.froyd.net/philosophy/philo4.htm

. “State of Nature.” Paper on lord of the flies. 24 September 2014. http://shs.westport.k12.ct.us/portfolio/smith/LOF.htm

. “Social Values and Universal Spirit.” 24 September 2014. http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/phil/bphil_eth_wardef_hegel.htm

. “The Concept of Will to Power.” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/will_to_power

54

. Theory of Human Nature.” 24 September 2014. http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/w/war.htm

. “The Philosophy of War.” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War.htm

. “War” 24 September 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War.htm

. http://www.gosale.com/823520/the_prince

55