Tuesday, August 30, 2005

The Meaning of Illiteracy and Our Cultural Illiteracy (And Its Demise is an Imperative in our Homeland)

"Television is altering the meaning of "being informed" by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation... Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information - misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information - information that creates the illusion of knowing something, but which in fact leads one away from knowing."- Neil Postman

“On the EDUCATION of the people of this country the fate of the country depends.” - Benjamin Disraeli, 1804-1881, British Statesman, Prime Minister

*****************************************


Hi All,

The post-martial law generations of native Filipinos are now showing the adverse effects of WB/IMF/WTO tinkering of the Philippine educational system which efficiently discouraged or de-emphasized the study of the social sciences, i.e. Humanities/History. 

Add the negative effects of the dominant pop/American culture facilitated and reinforced via globalized media and the internet. In the long run, all these machinations to subtly and continually destroy/negate Filipino nationalism to attain the intended purpose of total covert domination of our homeland and unwary, uninformed and miseducated native people.  

See also :http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/deterioration-of-public-school-system.html

- Bert


UPDATE 5/05/2014:  My recent 3-month sojourn in our homeland reconfirms/validates my feelings and thoughts about our homeland and fellow native Filipinos. 

My stay at Pangil, Laguna the birth town of my parents and siblings gave me an ambivalent feeling of happiness and sadness: the joy at seeing close relatives, lifelong friends and meeting a few new ones; and the sorrowful anger, at the much deteriorated and still constantly worsening/regressing state-of-life for those "left behind."

Our fellow native majority who are caught in the vicious circle or cage of: poverty-ignorance/illiteracy-medieval religion-patronage politics-untimely economic globalization/privatization-overpowering foreign influence-exploitation-ad nauseam.

All these in "living color" witnessed from that small, rural municipality rated as economic Class 5 of 6, a microcosm of our national society. To live in such a milieu is to fall into and reinforce obscurantism, impoverishment/hunger, and inability to obtain or practice real political democracy as such depends on economic democracy and literate minds. 

-Bert


************************************************
NOTES: Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated). To share, use allsocial media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr,Twitter,Facebook, etc. THANKS!!

Read on Scribd mobile apps: iPhone, iPad and Android.

Free download as PDF, TXT or read online for free from Scribd, point-click to open-->SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind

Click to checkout: Primary Blog Posts/Readings for my fellow, Native (Malay/Indio) Filipinos-in-the-Philippines


*************************************************

THE MEANING OF ILLITERACY

-Paul Harrison is a freelance writer and consultant on population, environment and development, based in London. He holds masters degrees from Cambridge University (in European literature languages) and from the London School of Economics (in sociology), and a Ph.D. in environmental science from Cambridge University.

******************************************

NOTE: Usually for literacy to equal a better job, it has to be fluent literacy, accompanied by well-developed writing skills, mathematics, and general knowledge far beyond what is normally acquired in a basic adult literacy class. Secondly, literacy does not necessarily equate wealth.

What literacy can mean for both the individual and society at large is betterment of people's lives—enhanced self-esteem, ability to read instructions on medications and civic documents, ability to learn new things which will help them to expand their knowledge, ability to cope with the majority society, etc.

Literacy provides people with the option of becoming members of a self-confident and informed populace that can understand issues, represent themselves, take responsibility for self-improvement and family health, and better participate in civic affairs. These are among the more priceless payoffs of literacy. - SIL International



**************************************************************


Illiteracy is not only a disqualification from better-paid employment in offices or factories. It is not only cultural deprivation, an exclusion from national life. It is also a political fact, a handicap for disadvantaged individuals and groups in the Third World.

To be illiterate is to be helpless in a modern state run by way of complex laws and regulations. The man who can not read or write is at the mercy of those who can. He is totally dependent on the sometimes questionable honesty and competence of lawyers and officials. He can not read signs or official announcements.

If he wants a job, he can't look at the classified ads, he has to go round on foot and hope he will stumble across something. If he is a farmer he has to rely on other people to tell him new seeds are available. He knows little of his rights, and even less so about how to assert them. He is a sitting duck for exploitation and fraud. He may be able to count his small change --but he can be cheated out of his inheritance.

Illiteracy is a personal tragedy, and a powerful force in preserving inequalities and oppressions. Its extent in the modern world is one measure of the ground Third World education still has to cover. Illiteracy, like other forms of educational disadvantage, weighs heaviest on the groups who are already disadvantaged in other ways.

In all this, illiteracy is simply the most acute expression of a more general deprivation: the lack of education among the poor, either of an academic kind that would give them equal opportunities in the employment race, or of a practical kind that would enable them to improve their land or workshops. 


Education is not only the key to personal enrichment. In the Third World context, it should be the central mechanism by which entire villages, towns and urban communities learn to develop themselves, their productive potential and their resources.



“According to this conception, the sole function of EDUCATION was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's EDUCATION, must serve that end exclusively.” - Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German-born American Physicist



*****************************

Cultural Illiteracy
- Timothy R. Montes, SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY

During the first week of classes, I decided to give a General Knowledge Test to three sections of my English 25 classes (The Research Paper). Although the test was not designed to be an empirical research to determine the students’ level of cultural literacy, I had been prompted to administer it when I read an article by a college teacher who, after years of teaching, suddenly realized when he gave such a test that he was culturally alienated from his students. He had reasons to be frustrated by his students’ diminishing grasp of classical ideas. 

Although I was earnest in giving the 80-item test, I ended up more amused than frustrated with my students’ answers. Given certain cultural artifacts, each students was asked to “say a few words” about them. Here are some of their answers.

PEOPLE. Adolf Hitler is a brave man in Russia. Crisostomo Ibarra was the husband of Gabriela Silang. David Hibbard donated Hibbard Hall. The Palanca Awards is a reward given for best actors or actresses in U.S. Claro M. Recto is the husband of Vilma Santos. Barbara Streisand wrote hundreds of novels. Albert Einstein discovered the lightning rod. Abu Sayyaf is a communist. Karl Marx was the leader in China. Jose Ma. Sison is the host in Kapag May Katarungan, Ipaglaban Mo. Michelangelo is one of the Ninja Turtles. Charles Darwin contributed some theories in Chemistry. Nick Joaquin is a foreign actor. Vincent van Gogh was a musician during classical times. Isaac Newton was the first man who say atom is round and spherical. Manoling Morato is an actor. Mozart is a scientist who studies Chemistry. Sigmund Freud, on the other hand, was a great composer. Edilberto Tiempo is the owner of Tiempo (Tempo?) Magazine. Margarita Go Sinco-Holmes is the wife of Rolito Go.

GEOGRAPHY. The Philippines is composed of 750 islands. Mayon Volcano can be found in the National Capital Region. About half of the students thought that Basilan island is in Luzon. The capital of Malaysia is Myanmar. Palawan is the biggest island in the Philippines. Nile River is in China; Leningrad is in Germany; Bogota is in Belgium; Rome is in Greece; and Paris is in England.And so on and so forth. The list of quiz bowl errors is rather long. I don’t know how to transform the result into a statistical index showing the deterioration of student knowledge

But even if one considers the thread that links history to abstract concepts like “values”and “civics” which the youth ought to possess, I have reason to be disturbed by the fact that more than half of the students didn’t know what year the Philippine Revolution was. (In this regard, the Centennial Commission has a lot of educating to do before the majority of the country’s population, the “hope of the Fatherland,” will be able to fully understand what patriotism in the Philippine context is.

In the realm of civic consciousness and Philippine sociology, students may actually have a hard time discerning the implications of the conflict between Cardinal Sin and Juan Flavier because most students don’t know the population size of the country. Their answers range from 1.5 million (no qualms about begetting more children) to 600 million (Help! I’ve got no place to stand on!) Only a few hit the 65-70 million range.

It is true that ignorance of culture is not criminally liable nor is awareness of it necessary for survival despite the usual reasons often cited for its necessity, shibboleths like “technological competitiveness” and “globalization of culture.” I am usually suspicious of those cliché and trite ideas.

However, the university setting, just for the sake of knowledge, I still insist that students in college should at least have a broad grasp of vital ideas involved in the different academic disciplines. University education is supposed to be an experience of students being exposed to a forum of ideas, and in the intellectual marketplace the currency we use for this exchange are cultural artifacts. How can teacher be able to engage in critical exchange ideas when student lack the intellectual vocabulary for such a discussion? 

In many cases, teachers don’t even have a pretense towards intellectualism and reduce classroom discussion to chismis. Much has been said about inadequate training in high school resulting in a generation of students unprepared for the intellectual demands of college. (Often, the substantive element of education is overshadowed by mere socialization.) But the students who took the test were mostly in the sophomore and junior years and had presumably been exposed to the general education program of the university. 

The blame-high-school argument cannot be invoked here. How can I possibly expect the average student, who leaves half of the test items unanswered, to go into research, that nitty-gritty compiling of details in order to push the frontier of knowledge, when he or she does not even possess the basic knowledge in the different academic disciplines? (In this connection, I’d like to ask: whatever happened to that proposed revision of the general education program of the university?)

I believe that classes to whom I gave the cultural literacy test are representative classes of this university, and the complaints I now express are also the usual complaints of the most teachers regarding that deterioration of education. I am, therefore, positing some recommendations which, when implemented, may stop us from glibly talking about “quality education” and “academic excellence."

First, it is high time for the university to be selective in the recruitment and retention of students. If Silliman has to retain its status as a “center of excellence,” it has to insist on high intellectual standards from its students. Grade inflation, satisfaction with mediocrity, and lackluster teaching have aggravated the situation of the school getting more than its usual share of rotten apples. 

Prophetically, I can see a slide from “cultural illiteracy” to“functional illiteracy” in the college level if this trend continues. (A student, for example, correctly indentified Raul Roco and Enrile as a senetor while another hit it right by saying Michelangelo was a paintor. How did they get past the spelling quiz in English 11? Beats me.)

Second, teachers, to avoid feeling like dinosaurs caged in a Jurassic Park, should be aware that the X generation’s culture has already shifted to a postmodern one, and that there are attendant challenges that go with negotiating the two cultures. The classical/modern culture most teachers stand on, if it has to be understood and appreciated by the students, should be bridged by the teacher who also has the responsibility of understanding the students’ culture. 

Many teachers act like hated dorm managers who consider the “generation gap” as an excuse for the hostility with young residents. How will you teach Mozart’s or Bach’s music when the only music he knows is that of Eraserheads’? The answer is challenge. (Incidentally, students were consistent in getting the right answers to pop questions. Everyone knew Eraserheads, as well as the new husband of Sharon Cuneta, Kiko Pangilinan.) Why not teach Film Appreciation (a medium young students are more familiar with) instead of exclusively confining ourselves to High Literature? (Who reads Shakespeare? Instead of Homer, Marlowe, and Matthew Arnold, why not Scorsese, Copolla, Spielberg, and Bernal?)

Thirdwe teachers should not presume that students know the systems of ideas and paradigms we swim in academically. The ordinary student pretends he or she knows until caught ignorant in an A,B,C test.There is no finger-pointing involved here as to where the fault or deficiency lies. Bad teachers make bad students. However, according to my teacher in poetry, even a brilliant teacher “can’t make hair grow on a billiard ball.”

"The media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly."- Noam Chomsky

“...the sole function of EDUCATION was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's EDUCATION, must serve that end exclusively.” - Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German-born American Physicist

“The aim of EDUCATION should be to teach us rather how to think, than what to think -- rather to improve our minds, so as to enable us to think for ourselves, than to load the memory with the thoughts of other men.” - John Dewey, 1859-1952, American Philosopher, Educator 


“EDUCATION is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.” - Edward Everett, 1794-1865, American Statesman, Scholar

"EDUCATION... has produced a vast population able to read but unable to distinguish what is worth reading, an easy prey to sensations and cheap appeals." - G. M. Trevelyan, 1876-1962, British Historian 


******************END OF POST***************

Monday, August 29, 2005

Educate For What? - Fr. Ben J. Villote

The question is, 'educate for what'
First posted 07:50am (Mla time) May 29, 2005
By Fr. Ruben J. Villote


THE FOLLOWING excerpt was written as the school year opened some time during the Marcos regime. As you will notice, the letter begins to sound less anti-Marcos and more anti-colonial ("an education-of-the-intellect-for-profit-making") as it went on. It is quite old but still very relevant today.

You might want to guess whether the author of this Letter to the Editor, as published by the Weekly Graphic during the Marcos reign, could hope for a change in the values education of the Filipino, at least within the Marcos years. Well, Marcos has been dead for 16 years now, while GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) will be around for some more years.

Meanwhile, the sinking state of the Filipino's education seems to be at its worst. It's about time the Filipino Youth of this generation and the next, move on from the past, face the Arroyo years, and start giving birth to the next generation of "truly educated Filipinos."

(Read the Weekly Graphic letter again.)
“According to this conception, the sole function of EDUCATION was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's EDUCATION, must serve that end exclusively.” - Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German-born American Physicist 

***************************************************************************
Evolving our own kind of education
(Letter to the Editor published in the Weekly Graphic in the early '70s)

Everybody who goes to school, we presume, wants an education. And the education everybody wants, we also presume, is a "money-making" education. This may sound insulting to our "scholars" and "educators," but let us be honest.

Ask any parent who sends a son or daughter to school, or any student who struggles for a diploma. They all have a secret dream. They want to go abroad, if they can, either to study further or work, or both. But their ultimate dream is "to earn a fast buck," and have enough to put up a business, and be as rich as that family who owns a chain of restaurants, apartment houses, cars, racehorses, yachts, diamonds and every imaginable thing money can buy. And so everybody wants to be "intelligent" by going to school. The school-we are made to believe-will educate our intellect, and will make us intelligent, shrewd and smart enough to outsmart and outrace everybody else to the top.

And so, we tell our children to take up economics or business administration or medicine or hotel management-"because there is money in it if you make good." And so, "money" has become the be-all and end-all objective of Western education, and this colonial brand of education seems to be the only "education" we know. It is an "education-of-the-intellect-for-profit-making."

Why don't we Filipinos evolve our own definition of education for a change? Why can't we liberate ourselves from this colonial concept of "profit-making" and "power-grabbing" type of education which for centuries has only been used by the West to exploit and oppress those whom they have "educated"? Why don't we start educating ourselves instead by first educating not only our intellects but also our hearts? This may sound romantic and naive to many of us but it is only because we have long been imprisoned by the culture and value judgments of the West which has taught us that the only education there is, is the education-of-the-intellect-for-profit-making.

We have never gotten used to the concept of education-of-the-heart-for-sharing. Colonial education, for example, has taught us that man is like a machine with parts like the eyes, ears, nose and so on, which operate like cogs: the eyes see, the ears hear, the nose smells, and so on. We were never taught, for example, that we can listen not only with our ears but also with our mind and our heart, and that our mind can also see and touch, and our heart can also hear and see.

This is very Oriental but Orientals have been civilized long, long before the Europeans and the Americans. It is only when we allowed ourselves to be "developed" and "educated" by the West that we, Filipinos, became as robotized and dehumanized as the West. All we think about now is "how can I get the most out of you, how can I and my family get rich quick, how can I grab that wealth from your family, how can I gimmick you into giving me 1/3 of your life so that I can use and exploit it to grab more money and power?"

Thousands of American youths are leaving their families to become monks or hermits precisely because they are sick and tired of their own brand of education. They are called "drop-outs" and "freaks" by their parents. But these youths are reaching for something much more meaningful than power and money, and they cannot find it in their parents. And here we are, Filipinos, worshipping the West for its "education." Is it not about time that we re-think and re-create our own, and share it with the West?


Source: Inquirer News Service Editor's Note: Published on page Q4 of the May 29, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer 



“EDUCATION is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.” - Edward Everett, 1794-1865, American Statesman, Scholar



“On the EDUCATION of the people of this country the fate of the country depends.” - Benjamin Disraeli, 1804-1881, British Statesman, Prime Minister


Saturday, August 27, 2005

CFW/OFW workers' remittances, not a long-term boon


"The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain" - Thomas Jefferson, 1809


***********************************************************
PLEASE DONATE CORE/FUNDAMENTAL SUBJECT BOOKS TO OUR HOMELAND (i.e. your hometown public schools, Alma Mater, etc.). Those books that you and/or your children do not need or want; or buy books from your local library during its cheap Book Sales. Also, cargo/door-to-door shipment is best.  It is a small sacrifice.  [clean up your closets or garage - donate books.THANKS!]
***********************************************************

I consider these earleir posts and the RECTO READER as essential in knowing and understanding our homeland and ourselves, native, Malay Filipinos; and are therefore always presented in each new post. Click each to open/read.
  1. WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW:
  2. WHAT IS NATIONALISM [Filipino Nationalism]?
  3. Our Colonial Mentality and Its Roots 
  4. The Miseducation of the Filipino (Formation of our Americanized Mind)
  5. Jose Rizal - Reformist or Revolutionary?
  6. The Purpose of Our Past, Why Study (Our) History?
  7. Studying and Rethinking Our Philippine History
  8. Globalization (Neoliberalism) – The Road to Perdition in Our Homeland
  9. Resisting Globalization (WTO Agreements)
  10. Virtues of De-Globalization
  11. Our Filipino Kind of Religion
  12. Our Filipino Christianity and Our God-concept
  13. When Our Religion Becomes Evil
THE RECTO READER is presented in several postings. Click each to open/read:

NOTE: Recto's cited cases, examples or issues were of his time, of course; but realities in our homeland in the present and the foreseeable future are/expectedly much, much worse. Though I am tempted to update them with current issues, it's best to leave them as they are since Recto's paradigms about our much deepened national predicament still ring relevant, valid and true. In short, Recto saw the forest and never got lost in the trees.- Bert

Hi All,

News media reports that about 2500+ Filipinos leave the homeland each day to work mostly in menial jobs abroad; with about 10% (8 million) of the total population having left. [see also Key Statistics data from Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (Central Bank of the Philippines)

Lest we simply see statistical numbers, any concerned Filipino realizes that the diaspora has severe repercussions in the family of each Overseas Contract Worker (OCW)/Overseas Foreign Workers (OFW) and on society in general. The family being the mainstay of society.

The so-called leaders of our homeland, in business and government, do not care about the impact on the immediate families and society. In addition, the church hierarchy is afraid of necessary social transformation, thus sickeningly continue to preach piety, a promise of heavenly reward for temporal suffering and false hope, while they themselves enjoy their comfortable pews.

The attention is limited to the fact that the export of labor promotes the minimal economic and political stability in the homeland. This "stability," i.e., for continued business profitability by foreigners and their local partners; and for government coffers to be continually robbed by politicians and the military, can easily be destroyed should OCWs be forced to return home by economic or political conditions abroad.

The social volcano is relieved only by the remittances of our OCW/OFWs. Where the remittances are spent or used are not clear.

Below article from Malaysia is so relevant and true, especially the current and long-term downside costs or negative impacts --not easily appreciated by many-- of OCWs/OFWs on labor-exporting countries such as ours.

- Bert

UPDATED 1/13/2013:

As reported by Manila Bulletin 1/7/2013: The country gets an average of more than $1.7 billion in remittances from overseas Filipinos each month, helping to support the peso, balance of payments and foreign reserves.

[See other data on officially accounted remittances and foreign debts:(covers 2003-2012)

http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/efs_ext3.asp




**************************************************************************

Workers’ remittances not a long-term boon
- PHAR KIM BENG, THE STAR, March 01, 2005, Malaysia


DESPITE the hype about globalization  the international labour movement remains tightly controlled. It is widely considered free trade’s last frontier. No country or multilateral organisation can bring the barriers down, a problem which lends itself to illegal migration.

Still, there are more than a dozen countries that dream of a totally liberalized international labour sector. The goal, not least, is to send their workers abroad by the hundreds of thousands; as is the practice of Indonesia and the Philippines.

This is not a bad plan, except for one vital detail that is clearly missing: These countries have no blue print with which they can bail themselves out over the long term. Once their economies are hooked to the remittances that they received from the workers abroad, they need them perpetually. 


The statistics on remittances on the economy are galling. To this day, the 12 countries that had begun exporting their workers abroad in 1970, continue to do so without much improvement to their structural economies.


Major countries receiving workers remittances include Mexico, Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, India, Morocco, Pakistan, Bangladesh, El Salvador, Jordan and Yemen.

According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the remittances have made up over a fifth of the gross domestic product (GDP) of Cape Verde, Eritrea, Mali, Jordan and Yemen, too.
Yet, these remittances have not made any positive structural impact for the countries to be more competitive. If anything else, they perpetuate the uneven economic ownership already prevalent in the country.

Filipina domestic helpers queuing up at the Philippines National Bank remittance center in Hong Kong. - In the case of the Philippines, its foreign workers are spread throughout the world, bringing in a total of US$41.6 billion over the last decade alone. This is nearly one third of the total remittances in the world, estimated by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) at US$115 bil in 2003.

To be sure, the Philippines’ share of the remittances could be higher. The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have both reported that the remittances in the Philippines are much higher than the recorded amount as workers have the means to repatriate money informally, too.

In 2003, the central bank of the Philippines reported a total remittance intake of US$7.6 bil. Together, these income remittances accounted for roughly 16% of the country’s total current account receipts and 10% of GDP. If the informal remittances were included, however, their share in the GDP would be significantly higher. In the words of one former Philippine senator: “The remittances are the only thing that kept the peso from turning into Mickey Mouse money.”

Today, the Philippines is the largest organised exporter of labour in the world, with 7 million nationals working overseas in more than 100 countries. They work as seafarers, nurses, domestic workers, teachers and factory hands, among others.

The money is handy, as most foreign workers send up to 45% of their salaries back home; sometimes eight to ten times a year, according to the IMF.

Research on the use of remittances shows that a large part of these funds are used for daily expenses such as food, clothing and healthcare. Funds are also spent on building or improving housing, buying land or cattle and buying durable consumer goods. Nevertheless, research has also shown that countries that rely on remittances cannot move up the value-chain.

This is because only a small percentage of remittances is used for savings and productive investments. In other words, remittances have little multiplier effect on income and employment creation.

In Bangladesh, for instance, a small proportion of remittances is used for investments in businesses (4.8%). An even smaller amount is used for savings (3.1%) and the repayment of loans (3.5%). Child education accounts for 2.8% of the invested remittances only. These numbers point to one solid fact: Exporting workers to developed countries do not qualitatively improve the economy of the sending countries.

Since most of the work is menial and labour-intensive, the growth rate in the total remittances is bound to be small. This is due to low labour mobility, where promotions or large pay increments are almost non-existent.

Again, in the case of the Philippines, a country that has by far excelled in sending its workers abroad, the annual growth rates of the income remittances, on a good year, is 0.3% only. As such, the net contribution of foreign remittances from middle class and professional workers to the macro-economic picture of a country is bleak in the long term.

For what it is worth, good economic policy begins at home; not in sending workers abroad, no matter how green the proverbial grass may be on the other side.

Although remittances received from abroad have been seen as the next best alternative to countries that are permanently looking for hand-outs or foreign aid, research has shown that once a country is “addicted” to remittances, it becomes a habit that is hard to wean.







  1. THE FILIPINO MIND blog contains 532 published postings you can view, as of December 12, 2012. 
  2. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of  ignorance, apathy, complacency and hopefully lead to active citizenship.
  3. All comments are welcomed for posting at the bottom window. Comments sent by email will also be posted verbatim. However, ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE IGNORED.
  4. Visit my other website, click --> SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind, or the SCRIB FEED at the sidebar, or type it on GOOGLE Search to read or download ebooks and PDFs of essays I have uploaded.  Statistics for my associated website:SCRIBD/theFilipinoMind : ALL FREE AND DOWNLOADABLE: 123 documents, 207,458 reads
  5. Some postings and other relevant events are now featured in Google+BMD_FacebookBMD_Twitter and BMD_Google Buzz and Google+.
  6. Translate to your own language. Go to the sidebar and Click on GOOGLE TRANSLATOR (56 languages - copy and paste sentences, paragraphs and whole articles, Google translates a whole posting in seconds, including to Filipino!!).
  7. Forwarding the posts to relatives and friends, ESPECIALLY in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. Use emails, Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. THANK YOU !!!
  8. Songs on Filipino nationalism: please reflect on the lyrics (messages) as well as the beautiful renditions. Other Filipino Music links at blog sidebar.  Click each to play.:




"Upang maitindig natin ang bantayog ng ating lipunan, kailangang radikal nating baguhin hindi lamang ang ating mga institusyon kundi maging ang ating pag-iisip at pamumuhay. Kailangan ang rebolusyon, hindi lamang sa panlabas, kundi lalo na sa panloob!" --Apolinario Mabini La Revolucion Filipina (1898)





"You show me a capitalist, I'll show you a bloodsucker" - Malcolm X, 1965


"Capitalism and altruism are incompatible; they are philosophical opposites; they cannot coexist in the same man or in the same society" - Ayn Rand, 1961


"The chief business of America is business" - President Calvin Coolidge, 1925


"The glory of the United States is business" - Wendell L. Willkie, 1936


"What else do bankers do -- walk-in and turn-off the lights in the country." - William Slee, 1978

Friday, August 26, 2005

Jose Rizal and Filipino Nationhood

"REDEMPTION"
- Prof. Jean Quintero Hall, Filipino American Journal, February 1999 Issue


"I have given proofs as one who most wants
liberties for our country and I continue
wanting them. But I put as a premise the
education of the people so that through
education and work, they might have a
personality of their own and make
themselves worthy of liberties. In my writings
I have recommended study and civic virtues,
without which redemption is impossible.

-- Dr. Jose Rizal, Manifesto
December 15, 1896


The above quote was Rizal's response to the question about why he felt Filipinos are not ready for independence. The wisdom expressed in this quote was based on his life-long study of history, other cultures, nations and the Filipino people. No other Filipino better understood the Filipino psyche.


As we approach the new millennium and take stock of who we Filipinos really are, we might ask ourselves, "What might Rizal say about us now?" But why should we care what Rizal might say about us?

Why? Because Rizal gave us so much. His life's work was devoted to the emancipation (read "redemption") of the Filipino people. His appraisal of Filipinos' ill-preparedness for independence was based on his intimate knowledge of who we were then. In his time, we didn't view the Philippines as a nation; we were merely a province of Spain. We didn't have a language, we had many languages. When the Spaniards told the Kapampangans that the Cavitenos are bandits and not to be trusted, we believed it, not knowing they were telling the Cavitenos the same things about the Kapampangans. We believed all the Spanish lies about ourselves. Sadly, some of those lies continue to influence us to this day.

Why? Because Rizal knew how brainwashed we were. He said no, we are one nation, one race regardless of whether we are Bikolanos, Chinese, Igorote or Negritos, rich or poor, educated or non-educated, haves or have-nots. We are Filipinos. He was the first to call us by the name, "Filipino" when the Spaniards were calling us "Indios." He said, "my lips have forgotten the names of the native races in the Philippines in order not to say more than Filipinos."

Why? Because he wrote our first Tagalog grammar book. He said, "...to what purpose is teaching Spanish but to add another to the 40 or so we already have." Back then he didn't know there were actually 75 languages or so spoken.

Why? Because he spoke for us. He knew the Spaniards made us feel inferior because we were passive, afraid for our lives, lacked assertiveness and placed a high premium on silence and soft-speaking. He tried to bolster our ego by giving us an identity -- by teaching us about our tradition and our history. In his studies he discovered that before the Spaniards came we had technology, trade, businesses, arts and we were inventors. We knew how to govern ourselves. Rizal knew all about our inherent, latent and inherited talents. Knowing that intelligence does not equate with color, he concluded that opportunity is what we lack.

Why? Because he gave us himself as a model. "I want to give an example to my people," he said, "that I write not for myself, nor for glory, but for my country." More than even this, he gave his life's blood for his loved Filipinos. He said, "We die only once ... and if one has to die, at least one must die in his own country, by his country and for his country."

Why? Because Rizal's writings are replete with suggestions for our future that not only reflect the acuity of his mind, but also summon our attention. He left us his precious wisdom as tools to help us toward a successful future.

So where are we today, and where are we going? In reviewing our attainments over the past 103 years since Rizal's execution, there is much to reflect upon. As a nation, we've roller-coasted our way, sometimes floundering, sometimes confidently striding forward, dependent upon the abilities of our presidents and political leaders. Overall, I believe we've done well. We've progressed in jumps and starts without causing any major wars, and we've survived our calamities.


As a people, here and abroad, the list of accomplished Filipinos is long. Did you know that the person who designed the land rover left on the moon was a Filipino engineer? We are definitely accomplishing and there are many amongst us we can be proud of.

But let's not get too cocky. There are some trends occurring in our communities today that are worrisome, especially those concerning our youth. As an educator at a public comprehensive university in the Southwest of 2,500 students, I find only 3 Filipino American students. Three! For a people who pride themselves on the value of education, this seems to be an anomaly. We seem to be losing our value in education. As the largest Asian American group we also have one of the largest percentages of professionals. But not for long if this alarming trend continues.

"The school is the basis of society," said one of Rizal's characters in Noli Me Tangere. "Show me the school of a people, and I will show you what the people are like." A high-paying job can never take the place of a well-rounded education in the humanities, arts and sciences -- which Rizal mastered -- in the development of human potential and greatness. We must be unified in our efforts to help our youth realize their highest potential as they are our future who can continue to make us proud as a people.

Yes, we've accomplished much in the past century, but there is still a long road ahead and we must be patient. As Rizal himself believed, greatness happens over the long haul. He said, "European nations are rich ... but they needed centuries of struggle, wise combinations, liberty, laws, thinkers who bequeathed to them riches." When he said this, he was envisioning our beginning.

On this path to the future we must forget about all our differences because we have one common ground to work from: Rizal and his humanity. Our love for Rizal is evident by the streets and parks we name after him, and the more than two dozen books written about him. And it's no wonder: one foreign biographer called him a rare comet that only comes every so many centuries. Other nations also recognize his rarity. Recently, the Malaysian government officially raised his stature to hero of the Malay race. And many other countries have put up statues, plaques and have staged events to honor his martyrdom.

Some have even called him a "global" hero and rightly so. He is a global hero because he is a champion of human rights, a lover of humanity, and a symbol of human dignity that goes beyond geographical boundaries, cultural differences, language barriers, religious as well as political structures. Schools, media and history have honored other individuals like Rizal as heros and reformers of the world, such as Jesus Christ, Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius, Gandhi, or Martin Luther King. Like Rizal, these men encountered oppression and tyranny, set out to emancipate their people, and confronted their enemies peacefully to seek change.

To end this tribute to the greatest Filipino that ever lived, I'd like to leave you with these thoughts: For whatever meaning we attach to Rizal, we must acknowledge that our lives have been blessed by his love which should sustain us to become a proud and accomplished race as he had wanted us to be; we should be confident as we tread our way to future paths; and we should love ourselves and one another as he loved us.



Published in the author's continuing monthly column of the Filipino American Journal, Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.A. In these articles, the author addresses and expands upon Dr. Jose Rizal's quest for the true nature of Filipino identity. She can be reached at lysander@lascruces.com. For information about the Filipino American Journal, you may contact the publishers, Leo or Melanie Aromin, at LMAROMIN@AOL.COM.



http://www.univie.ac.at/Voelkerkunde/apsis/aufi/rizal/hall1.htm


“EDUCATION is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.” - Edward Everett, 1794-1865, American Statesman, Scholar



“According to this conception, the sole function of EDUCATION was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's EDUCATION, must serve that end exclusively.” - Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German-born American Physicist



“On the EDUCATION of the people of this country the fate of the country depends.” - Benjamin Disraeli, 1804-1881, British Statesman, Prime Minister



"The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain" - Thomas Jefferson, 1809

Ugly Balikbayans and Heroic OCWs (OFWs)

Ugly Balikbayans and Heroic OCWs
by Vicente L. Rafael

*************************************************************************
WHAT CONCERNED FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: T
he sole purpose of democratic government is to be "by the people, for the people and of the people", that is, to serve the people, to provide for the "common good". For the 60+ years that we had our own so-called independence, our government has greatly failed to work for the common good.
[see http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/07/common-good-developed-by-manuel.html]

Our diaspora, temporary or permanent, is a necessity for us who have to respond to basic human needs/familial responsibilities and even for some, to self-fulfillment, etc. It is unfortunate and sad that while we contribute to the host foreign countries, we deprive our homeland in the long run.

We do not know for how long our diaspora can help pay for the odious debts the Marcos Dictatorship and subsequent regimes have continually incurred. For we do not know when other similarly poor/Third World countries can effectively compete with ours (granting they wish to leave their homelands as easily as we do). When that time comes, when the doors are shut closed for us, the social volcano that is our homeland will erupt.
[see http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/08/what-are-odious-debts-what-we.html]

The ruling elite in cahoots with foreign interests (mainly American, Japanese, Chinese) who in our case controls the government and has mainly caused the national predicament, has not lived its professed christianity; and instead has continually ignored the needed, fundamental reforms. Thus, the higher probability that socioeconomic and political changes for the common good will be brought about only by radical, even violent, means. [see http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/when-our-religion-becomes-evil-our.html]

Hereunder a good piece on the Filipino diaspora, its psychological and political impacts to our society.

****************************************************************************
Ugly Balikbayans and Heroic OCWs
by Vicente L. Rafael
(Excerpted from "Your Grief Is Our Gossip: Overseas Filipinos and Other Spectral Presences")

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times described overseas Filipinos as follows:

Distinctive among the huddled masses of global economic migration, overseas Filipinos represent the elite, high end of the labor market. They are generally well-educated and usually accomplished speakers of English. But like other itinerant workers, they lack opportunities in the dysfunctional Philippine economy. So women with college degrees serve as maids in Tokyo and Hongkong... Semi-skilled laborers toil in Kuwait while Filipino seamen ply the oceans on the world's ships.

Filipino business graduates dominate the mid-level management ranks of many multinational corporations in Southeast Asia, earning wages they couldn't dream of at home.1 Filipinos abroad simultaneously signify the failure of the nation-state to contain its excess population and the success of global capitalism in absorbing and accommodating this failure. They can best be regarded as both the product and producers of surplus: sheer labor power immediately translatable into the universally understood form of value-- money.

Though they have left the Philippines, they can now return in an abstract form that is exterior to it. As Filipino-American newspaper publisher, Alex Esclamado put it, "Remittances by overseas Filipinos [estimated in 1995 to be about $6 billion annually] to their families are now considered direct foreign aid... that can have a radical effect on people's lives-- building houses in depressed rural villages, paying off medical bills, sending little brothers and sister and cousins to school."2

As "foreign" sources of "aid," overseas Filipinos come to occupy ambiguous positions. Neither inside nor wholly outside the nation-state, they hover on the edges of its consciousness. They take on the semblance of spectral presence whose labor takes place somewhere else but whose effects command, through money, a place in the nation-state. While Filipinos have had a long history of migration, it was only in the last twenty-five years that massive movement of workers became part of the nation's everyday life.3

There are two terms for designating these workers in the Philippines: balikbayan, or immigrant Filipinos primarily from North America who periodically visit the motherland, and OCW, overseas contract workers who are employed on a contractual basis in such places as the Middle East, Europe, East and Southeast Asia.

Nationalism Deferred
It was the Marcos regime in the mid-1970s that coined the term balikbayan by joining the Tagalog words balik, to return, with bayan, meaning town and nation. A balikbayan's relationship to the Philippines is construed in terms of his sentimental attachments to his hometown and extended family rather than his loyalty to the nation-state. At the same time, being a balikbayan depends on one's permanent residence abroad. It means that one lives somewhere else and that one's appearance in the Philippines is temporary and intermittent, as if one were a tourist.

Indeed, the Marcos regime's interest in overseas Filipinos was part of its plan to spur the tourist industry both as a generator of foreign exchange and a showcase for its putative accomplishments. Offering a combination of bargain airfares, tax breaks and other incentives, the Philippine government encouraged dollar-earning Filipinos, especially from North America, to visit the country and see for themselves the frruits of Martial Law. Living in close proximity to sources of capital, balikbayans were treated like tourists in their land of origin. As consumers, balikbayans, like other foreign visitors, were accorded deference and generously accommodated by local officials.

That the state succeeded in domesticating balikbayans into tourists can in part be seen in Filipino nationalist unease about them. Nationalist writers often distinguish those who return from working temporary jobs in the Middle East and Asia from those who visit from the U.S. Whereas overseas contract workers are seen to return from conditions of near abjection, balikbayans are often viewed to be steeped in their own sense of superiority, serving only to fill others with a sense of envy.

The well known journalist Conrado de Quiros, for example, writes of th[ose] balikbayans from America, who force us each year to make an apologia for the indolence of the Filipinos.
They're the ones who sally forth to bedazzle the natives. They queue up in East or West Coast airports with tons and tons of baggage, many of them containing groceries for relatives who can't wait to have a taste of America...4

They bring us stories about how much life in America has proved what the Reader's Digest says it is. They also bring us homilies, delivered with the proselytizing zeal of Thomasites, which are forceful for their use of contrasts. It's too hot in the Philippines. It's nice to snuggle by the hearth in America. There's grime and smog in our streets. You can't drive without anti-pollutants in the States. Filipino drivers are maniacs. American drivers follow traffic rules... You defer too much to authority here. You can talk man-to-man even with the president of the United States.5

Quiros compares the balikbayans to the Thomasites, the first group of American school teachers who arrived in the Philippines at the beginning of this century and who figure in nationalist narratives not as benevolent instructors but as purveyors of the "mis-education" of the Filipinos. Thanks to them, Filipinos started to think of themselves as Americans.6 Balikbayans as Thomasites are thus positioned as neo-colonizers whose ambitions lie in setting themselves apart from the rest of the "natives" rather than affiliating with them. In that sense, balikbayans emerge as figures to be envied.

Their easy association with Western consumer products and their access to a powerful North American state apparatus mark them as different: they represent the fulfillment of Filipino desires realizable only outside of the Philippines. However, what adds to their difference is this: that they are unable to respond to the envy of others with a show of empathy. While they seem to possess everything, they in fact lack a sense of humility as shown by their inability to defer to those who lack what they have. Indeed, they do nothing else but point out what the Philippines lacks, thereby appearing shameless and arrogant.

Yet, that shamelessness, or what in Tagalog is commonly referred to as walang hiya,7 is less a "cultural trait" as it is part of a historical legacy. Quiros continues: And then you realize that the physical fact of Filipinos migrating abroad is really just the tip of the iceberg... Most of us are expatriates right here in our own land. America is our heartland whether we get to go there or not. Nothing demonstrates this better than that the balikbayan does succeed in bedazzling the natives. If he flaunts his wares, it's simply because he knows the audience will lap it up...

It's the lack of any sense of nationhood, of being Filipino, among us that makes expatriation the most preferred option of all... But surely there's a tragedy in seeing the fundamental question of one's life as nothing more than which country can provide a better living? Surely there must be more to life than this? The shamelessness of the balikbayan turns out to be the "tragedy" that is shared by the majority of Filipinos still caught up in colonial delusions.

Balikbayans are disconcerting not only because they seem to corroborate the terms of colonial hegemony; they also mirror the "failure" of nationalism to retain and control the excess known as overseas Filipinos. For the nationalist writer, balikbayans seem to escape rather than confirm the hope that Filipinos would choose to "belong to this particular earth, this particular time"; that rather than leave this "benighted life," they would instead "do something about our benightedness." Not only are balikbayans akin to American colonizers; even more dismaying is their similarity to the collaborators of the past. Their departure amounts to a kind of betrayal of national particularity.

Yet, the fact that they are merely enacting a historical role laid out before them makes them far more intimate with the people who they leave behind. Proof of this is the fact that balikbayans are envied. They are recognized for what they are. It isn't the case then that their interests diverge from the people, but rather they, rather than nationalist intellectuals, set the terms for the articulation of those interests. It is this negative insight that haunts Quiros' essay.

The "New Heroes
"By the early 1980s, changes in the global economy increased the demand for skilled and semi-skilled Filipino workers in many parts of the Middle East, Asia and Western Europe. Unlike the earlier groups of Filipino-Americans, this later group of workers were bound by temporary contracts to foreign employers in international locales. They came to be known in the Philippines by a particular name: OCW's or overseas contract workers.

Unlike Filipinos in the U.S. who generally tended to assimilate either as professional middle class suburbanites or, as in the case of second generation Filipino-Americans as ethnicized, hyphenated Americans,8 OCW's rarely ever expect to remain permanently in their host country. Forever consigned to positions of relative subservience and marginality by the terms of their contract and by virtue of their exclusion from the linguistic and religious communities of their employers, OCW's could only exist as sheer labor power, supplementary formations to the imagined communities of their bosses.

Rather than ask for the rights of citizenship, as Filipino immigrants in North America are wont to do, OCW's tend instead to seek good earnings within maximally safe and minimally abusive environments. They are thus less interested in influencing legislation or the terms of political representation within the country of their employ-- they leave that up to the activist NGO's and Church organizations to which they have occasional recourse-- as they are with securing the material and symbolic means with which to maintain ties of reciprocity and obligatory exchanges with their extended kin groups at home.9

It is perhaps for this reason that OCW's often refer to their travels as a kind of "adventure," or in Tagalog as pakikipagsapalaran and pagbabakasakali.10 To go abroad is to find one's fortune (palad), as well as to take risks (magbakasakali). One seeks to convert the products of one's labor into "gifts" with which to endow one's kin at home and thereby gain their respect and recognition. At the same time, one also risks uncertain conditions and the prospect of becoming alienated abroad and at home.

Subject to the daily pressures and exploitative demands of an alien working environment and taxed by their efforts to negotiate with or, more commonly, evade the apparatus of a state hostile or indifferent to their situation, OCW's often relate lives of loneliness, deprivation and abuse. It isn't surprising then that they should be accorded a status distinct from that of balikbayans. Rather than regarded as tourists for whom the Philippines can only exist as a set of commodified objects or as failed versions of nationalist aspirations, OCW's are recognized as "national heroes." It was in fact President Cory Aquino, whose administration was major beneficiary of dollar remittances by OCW's, who first referred to these overseas Filipinos as heroes in a speech she gave in 1988 to a group of domestic helpers in Hongkong, telling them that, "Kayo po ang mga bagong bayani." (You are the new heroes).11

To understand how it is that OCW's rather than Filipino immigrants to North America came to be considered "heroes," it is necessary to ask about the ways by which heroism has historically been construed in the Philippines. As with all modern nation-states, the Philippines traces its official genealogy to a line of male founders, beginning with the "first Filipino," the Chinese-mestizo Jose Rizal. As the historian Reynaldo Ileto has convincingly demonstrated, much of the history of Filipino nationalism in the twentieth century has been articulated with reference as much to the purported life of Rizal as to his suffering and death at the hands of Spanish colonial rulers. Invested with a messianic aura, Rizal proved to be far more potent in his death than he was when alive. Numerous revolutionary groups-- from Andres Bonifacio's Katipunan to the peasant armies and rebel churches in the Southern Tagalog regions-- rallied around his name.12

Rizal's potency rested on his ability to evoke populist visions of Utopic communities held together by an ethos of mutual caring, the sharing of obligations (damayan) and the exchange of pity (awa). These notions were reminiscent of the great themes set by the widely popular narrative of Jesus Christ's passion translated into various vernaculars (collectively known as Pasyon) since the eighteenth century. Recognizing the power of Rizal's memory, Americans and the Filipino elite collaborated in monumentalizing his absence-- e.g., the erection in 1912 of the Rizal monument at the place of his execution-- as they sought to regulate both the sites and occasions of its commemoration.

It was this image of Rizal in conjunction with the suffering Christ-figures at once pathetic and prophetic- that was mobilized to explain the events that began with the assassination of Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino in 1983 and ended with the "People Power" revolt in 1986 that ousted the Marcoses from power. Ninoy and Rizal seemed to merge into a single narrative frame that harked back to the themes of the Pasyon: of innocent lives forced to undergo humiliation at the hands of alien forces; of unjustified deaths both shocking and public; of massive responses of pity and prayer that would, in mobilizing alternative communities of resistance, finally drive away the forces of oppression and pave the way for some kind of liberation.

In place of the class-based militancy of the National Democratic Front and the Communist Party of the Philippines, this particular narrative drew on cross-class religiosity, positing a sacred hierarchy within which all other hierarchies would be subsumed and reordered.

Predicated on the logic of suffering and sacrifice, the political culture of "People Power" and the subsequent regime of Cory Aquino thrived on the notion of pity rather than equal rights to legitimize its claims to power and moral certainty. Where the Marcoses depicted themselves as secular modernists presiding over expansive and monumental national projects, Cory Aquino came across as the stoic widow given to prayer, repeatedly turning to her dead husband and her Savior in the midst of right-wing coup attempts and the rampages of anti-Communist death squads. On bended knees she asked only to be an instrument of a Higher will. Her obedience was the basis of her power. It was precisely during this moment in Philippine history that OCW's, increasingly made up by the mid-1980s of women going abroad as domestic helpers, "mail order" brides and sex workers came to be known as "the new heroes."

The Economy of Pity
By encoding OCW's as "national heroes," Aquino and her successor, Fidel Ramos, have sought to contain the anxieties attendant upon the flow of migrant labor, including the emotional distress over the separation of families and the everyday exploitation of migrants by job contractors, travel agents and foreign employers. Such conditions point to the inability of the state to provide for its people. Repeatedly, Philippine embassies abroad have come under criticism from OCW advocates, especially women's groups such as GABRIELA for their failure to safeguard the security of Filipinos abroad. Rather than become a source of national pride, embassies have become national embarrassments.

Such embarrassment (in Tagalog, hiya) periodically surfaces in the Philippine press which exists primarily to record the voices of the Filipino middle class and national elite. Anecdotes are retailed about the Europeans equating the word "Filipino" with domestic helpers, or Filipino tourists being asked by OCW's in Singapore shopping malls or Madrid parks if they, too, were on their day off. In these stories, Filipino elite as well as nationalists feel themselves incapable of maintaining the boundaries of class differences as they are associated with an ethnically marked group of service workers. Embarrassment arises from their inability to keep social lines from blurring (thereby rendering problematic their position as privileged representatives of the nation) and maintaining a distinction between "Filipino" as the name of a sovereign people and "Filipino" as the generic term for designating a subservient class dependent on foreign economies.

Endnotes:
Karl Schoenberger, "Living Off Expatriate Labor,"Los Angeles Times, August 1, 1994, 1.
Quoted in Schoenberger, ibid., p.A16.

See Jonathan Okamura, "The Filipino American Diaspora: Sites of Space, Time and Ethnicity," in Gary Y. Okihiro, ed., Privileging Sites: Positions in Asian American Studies, Pullman, WA: Washington State University Press, forthcoming; Su Cheng Chan, Asian Americans: An Interpretive History, Boston: Twayne Publishing, 1991; and Yen Le Espiritu, "The Intersection of Race, Ethnicity, and Class: The Multiple Identities of Second-Generation Filipinos," Identities, v.1, no. 2, 1-25, and Filipino-American Lives, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995. See also the brilliant essay by Neferti X. Tadiar, "The Alimentary Struggle of Dogeaters," forthcoming in positions

Among the "tons and tons of baggage" that Quiros refers to are large boxes commonly known as "balikbayan boxes" which have been staple features of balikbayan identity for the last twenty five years. Supplanting the discarded boxes of computer equipment, canned goods and Pampers diapers that were used in the 1970s and early 1980s to pack gifts (pasalubongs) that visiting immigrants felt obliged to bring back to their relatives in the Philippines, standardized cardboard boxes marked "balikbayan box" began to be manufactured by enterprising Filipino-American entrepreneurs in the mid-1980s. As with the found boxes used in an earlier period, balikbayan boxes conform to airline regulations on the maximum allowable size of checked-in baggage. Large enough to contain the quantities and variety of pasalubongs, balikbayan boxes are also cheap and disposable alternatives to more costly suitcases.

Such boxes are the material evidence of immigrant success as much as they are symbolic of the promise of immigration itself. Thus do they constitute the materialization of a desire realizable only outside of the nation, yet recognizable only within its borders. The balikbayan box is thus a kind of social hieroglyph indexing a Filipino-American immigrant social formation predicated on the improvisation and subsequent standardization of a hybrid "type": a subject at once neo-colonial and national. I thank Rudy and Cecile Martija, Bayani Rafael and Rosemary Rafael for shedding light on the matter of balikbayan boxes.

Conrado de Quiros, "Bracing for Balikbayans," in Flowers from the Rubble, Pasig, Metro Manila: Anvil Publishing, Inc., 1990, 139-141. All references to this text will appear in the main body of the essay.

See Constantino for classic formulation of this, Mis-Education of the Filipino, Manila: 1966.

For discussions of the historical importance of walang hiya see Reynaldo Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution: Popular Uprisings in the Philippines, 1840-1940, Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila Press, 1980; Vicente L. Rafael, Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule, Durham: Duke University Pres, 1993.

See Yen Espiritu, "the Intersection of Race, Ethnicity, and Class: The Multiple Identities of Second-Generation Filipinos," in Identities, v.1, no.2, 1994, 1-25 for a lucid account of the cultural transformations of "Filipino-ness" in late twentieth century U.S.

See for example the riveting accounts of OCW's in Japan in Rey Ventura, Underground in Japan, London: Jonathan Cape, 1992 and Maria Rosario P. Ballescas, Filipino Entertainers in Japan: An Introduction, Quezon City: The Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1992. Also instructive are the collected letters from OCW's in Justino Dormiendo, Nagmamahal, Flor: Mga Liham Mula sa Mga OCW, Pasig: Anvil Publishing, 1995.

See also The Labor Trade: Filipino Migrant Workers Around the World, London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1987; and Jane Margold, "Narratives of Masculinity and Transnational Migration: Filipino Workers in the Middle East," in Bewitching Women, Pious Men: Gender and Body Politics in Southeast Asia, ed. by Aihwa Ong and Michael Peletz, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995, 274-298.

See for example the letters of OCW's in Justino Dormiendo, Nagmamahal, Flor: Mga Sulat Mula sa OCW, Manila: Anvil Publishing, Inc., 1995.

Jo-Ann Maglipon, "DH in HK," in Primed: Selected Stories, 1972-1992, Pasig, Metro Manila: Anvil Publishing, 1993, 45-53.

See Reynaldo Ileto, "Rizal and the Underside of Philippine History," in David Wyatt and Alexander Woodside, editors, Moral Order and The Question of Change: Essays on Southeast Asian Thought, New Haven: Yale Southeast Asia Program Series, 1982, 274-337; "Tagalog Poetry and the Perception of the Past in the War Against Spain," in Perceptions of the Past in Southeast Asia, ed. by David Marr and Anthony Reid, Singapore: Heineman, 1979, 374-400; "The Unfinished Revolution in Philippine Political Discourse," in Tonan Ajia Kenkyu, (Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto), v.31, n.1, June 1993, 62-82; "The Past in the Present Crisis," in The Philippines After Marcos, ed. by Ron May and Francisco Nemenzo, London: Croom Helm, 1985, 7-16; "Orators and the Crowd: Philippine Independence Politics, 1910-1941," in Reappraising an Empire, ed. by Peter Stanley, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1984, 85-114; and his book Pasyon and Revolution.

Click
here to download the full article "Your Grief Is Our Gossip: Overseas Filipinos and Other Spectral Presences" by Vicente L. Rafael which appeared in Public Culture, 9: 2 (Spring 1997).
Rafael teaches at the Department of Communication, University of California at San Diego. He has recently edited Discrepant Histories: Translocal Essays on Filipino Cultures, (Philadelphia, 1995) and is the author of Contracting Colonialism (Durham, 1993) as well as several other essays on Philippine political culture.

To cite:Rafael, Vicente L. "Ugly Balikbayans and Heroic OCWs" in Hector Santos, ed., Philippine History and Culture Series; at http://www.bibingka.com/phg/balikbayan/. US, 19 June 1997.


"We shall be better and braver and less helpless if we think that we ought to enquire, than we should have been if we indulged in the idle fancy that there was no knowing and no use in seeking to know what we do not know..." - SOCRATES


"Upang maitindig natin ang bantayog ng ating lipunan, kailangang radikal nating baguhin hindi lamang ang ating mga institusyon kundi maging ang ating pag-iisip at pamumuhay. Kailangan ang rebolusyon, hindi lamang sa panlabas, kundi lalo na sa panloob!" --Apolinario Mabini La Revolucion Filipina (1898)