Claro M. Recto - Biographies from the Internet

WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: Note: Bold and/or Underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked postings/articles. Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends, especially in the homeland, is greatly appreciated.

To write or read a comment, please go to http://www.thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/ and scroll down to the bottom of the current post (or another post you read and may want to respond) and click on "Comments."

Claro M. Recto (1890-1960) was a Philippine nationalist leader and president of the 1934 constitutional convention. He was one of the most vocal advocates of Philippine political and social autonomy.

Claro M. Recto was born in Tiaong, Tayabas, on Feb. 8, 1890. He worked for a bachelor of arts at the Ateneo de Manila and finished a master of laws degree at the University of Santo Tomas in 1914. From 1916 to 1919 he served as legal adviser to the Philippine Senate. In 1919 he was elected as representative of the third district of Batangas and served as House minority floor leader. He was reelected in 1922 and 1925.

Framing of the [1935] Constitution

In 1924 Recto went to the United States as a member of a parliamentary independence mission. In the same year he was admitted to the U.S. bar by the Supreme Court. In 1934 a constitutional convention was held in accordance with the provisions of the Tydings-McDuffie Act, which required the drafting of a constitution as part of the steps leading to Philippine independence. Recto was elected president of the convention. It was due mainly to Recto's sagacity and intellectual acumen that the convention succeeded in framing and approving on Feb. 8, 1935, a constitution which would truly reflect the Filipinos' capacity to frame laws and principles that would govern their lives as free, responsible citizens in a democracy.

In 1931 Recto was elected to the Senate on the platform of the Democrata party. He acted as minority floor leader for 3 years. In 1934 he became majority floor leader and president pro tempore of the Senate. He subsequently resigned his Senate seat when President Franklin Roosevelt appointed him as associate justice of the Supreme Court. Recto left the Supreme Court in 1941 and was elected anew as senator. In 1949 he was reelected on the Nacionalista party ticket. In 1957 he ran for president but was defeated.

Apart from his numerous legal treatises and literary works in Spanish, Recto is noted for his staunch nationalist stand on questions regarding political sovereignty and economic independence.

World War II and Rehabilitation

Recto served in the wartime Cabinet of José Laurel during the Japanese occupation and was subsequently arrested and tried for collaboration. He wrote a defense and explanation of his position in Three Years of Enemy Occupation (1946), which convincingly presented the case of the "patriotic" conduct of the Filipino elite during World War II. Recto fought his legal battle in court and was acquitted.

On April 9, 1949, Recto opened his attack against the unfair impositions of the U.S. government as expressed in the Military Bases Agreement of March 14, 1947, and later in the Mutual Defense Treaty of Aug. 30, 1951, and especially the Tydings Rehabilitation Act, which required the enactment of the controversial parity-rights amendment to the constitution.

A Radical Gadfly

Recto's wit, irony, and sharp analytic powers exposed the duplicity of the diplomatic agreements with the United States and revealed the subservience of Filipino opportunists to the dictates of American policy makers. Recto opposed President Ramon Magsaysay on a number of fundamental issues, among them the Philippine relations with the Chiang Kai-shek regime in Taiwan, the Ohno-Garcia reparations deal, the grant of more bases to the United States, the American claim of ownership over these bases, the question of expanded parity rights for Americans under the Laurel-Langley Agreement, and the premature recognition of Ngo Dinh Diem's South Vietnam government. In all those issues, Recto's consistent stand in favor of Philippine sovereignty and security was proved right by the turn of events.

In perspective, Recto revived the tradition of the radical dissenter fighting against feudal backwardness, clericofascist authoritarianism, and neocolonial mentality and imperialism. He strove to reawaken the consciousness of the Filipinos to the greatness of their revolutionary heritage and emphasized the need to transform the character of the national life by reaffirming their solidarity as a sovereign, free people.

Recto was preparing to launch his Filipinist crusade in the tradition of the Propaganda Movement of the 1880s when he died of a heart ailment in Rome, Italy, on Oct. 2, 1960.

Further Reading

For Recto's ideas and attitudes see his own books, Three Years of Enemy Occupation: The Issue of Political Collaboration in the Philippines (1946); My Crusade (1955); and Recto Reader, edited by Renato Constantino (1965). The best biographical account from a nationalistic sociocultural point of view is Constantino's The Making of a Filipino: Story of Philippine Colonial Politics (1969). For other information about Recto's career consult Hernando J. Abaya, The Untold Philippine Story (1967). For a thoughtful appraisal of Recto's progressive tendencies by a young intellectual see José Maria Sison, Recto and the National Democratic Struggle (1969).

Additional Sources

Arcellana, Emerenciana Yuvienco, Recto, nationalist, Philippines: Claro M. Recto Memorial Foundation, 1988.

Arcellana, Emerenciana Yuvienco, The social and political thought of Claro Mayo Recto, Manila: National Research Council of the Philippines, 1981.

Claro M. Recto, 1890-1990: a centenary tribute of the Civil Liberties Union, Quezon City: Karrel, 1990?

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

Claro Mayo Recto (February 8, 1890 Tiáong, Tayabas - October 2, 1960 Rome, Italy) was a Filipino politician, jurist, poet and one of the foremost statesmen of his generation. He is remembered mainly for his nationalism, for "the impact of his patriotic convictions on modern political thought".^[1]

He was born in Tiáong, Tayabas (now known as Quezon province) of educated, upper middle-class parents, namely Claro Recto [Sr.] of Rosario, Batangas, and Marcela Mayo of Lipa, Batangas. He studied Latin at the Instituto de Rizal in Lipa, Batangas from 1900 to 1901. Further schooling was at the Colegio del Sagrado Corazón of Don Sebastián Virrey. He moved to Manila to study at the Ateneo de Manila where he consistently obtained outstanding scholastic grades, graduating with a Bachelor of Arts degree maxima cum laude. He received a Masters of Laws degree from the University of Santo Tomás.

Contents [hide] 1 Politician 2 Poet, playwright, essayist 3 The 'finest mind of his generation' 4 Criticism 5 Death 6 Speeches and writings 7 Further reading 8 Footnotes 9 External links

Politician

Claro M. Recto launched his political career as a legal adviser to the first Philippine Senate in 1916. In 1919, he was elected representative from the second district of Batangas. He served as minority floor leader for several years until 1925. His grasp of parliamentary procedures won him the accolades of friends and adversaries alike.

He traveled to the United States as a member of the Independence Mission, and was admitted to the American Bar in 1924. Upon his return he founded the Partido Democrata. In 1928, he temporarily retired from active politics and dedicated himself to the practice and teaching of law.

Recto found the world of academia restrictive and soporific. Although he still engaged in the practice of law, he resigned from his teaching job in 1931 and reentered politics when he ran and won a senate seat and was subsequently elected its majority floor leader in 1934.

He was appointed Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in 1935 by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. As a jurist he held his own in famous debates even against the U.S. Attorney General with whom he waged a war of words on the question of ownership of military bases in the Philippines.

He presided over the assembly that drafted the Philippine Constitution in 1934-35, which was in accordance with the provisions of the Tydings-McDuffie Act and a preliminary step to independence and self-governance after a 10-year transitional period. The Tydings-McDuffie Act was created in response to the Hare-Hawes-Cutting Act which, through the urging of Quezon, was rejected by the Philippine Senate. The original bill would have allowed the indefinite retention of U.S. military and naval bases in the Philippines and the American imposition of high tariff and quotas on Philippine exports such as sugar and coconut oil. A few minor changes were made and the Tydings-McDuffie bill was passed and signed into law by President Roosevelt.

Together with then-Senate President Manuel L. Quezon (who eventually was elected first president of the commonwealth), Recto personally presented the Commonwealth Constitution to U.S. President Roosevelt. The consensus among many political scholars of today judges the 1935 Constitution as the best-written Philippine charter ever. Its author was mainly Claro M. Recto.

In the 1953 and 1955 elections, Recto denounced the influence and coercion of the Church on voters' decisions—the Philippines having a 90% Catholic majority at the time. In a 1958 article in "The Lawyer's Journal" he suggested that a constitutional amendment be passed to make the article on Separation of Church and State clearer and more definitive. He also rallied against the teaching of religion in public schools.

He served as Commissioner of Education (1942-43), Minister of Foreign Affairs (1943-44), and Cultural Envoy with the rank of Ambassador on a cultural mission to Europe and Latin America (1960). In 1941 he ran and reaped the highest number of votes among the 24 elected senators. He was re-elected in 1949 as a Nacionalista Party candidate and again in 1955 as a guest candidate of the Liberal Party.

Claro M. Recto is considered light-years ahead of his time. He foresaw the demands of a fast-moving global economy which his nation is incapable to meet even to this day. In a memorable speech on the eve of the 1957 presidential election where he raced against then Vice President Carlos Garcia, he petitioned all sectors of society, and like Rizal, implored the youth:

In his speech "Our Mendicant Foreign Policy", delivered before the 1951 graduates at the University of the Philippines, he implored an end to what he called the panhandling atittude of the Philippine government and emphasized the drive to self reliance. A mendicant policy, he declared, promotes "a dole-out mentality. A dependent nation cannot expect respect from other nations."

Recto was dubbed by the media as the "Radical Gadfly" and the "Great Dissenter". He was considered the nemesis of President Magsaysay's government, disputing him on a number of fundamental issues, including the Philippine relations with the Chiang Kai-shek government, the grant of more bases to the U.S., the American claim of ownership over these bases, and the expanded rights for Americans under the Laurel-Langley Agreement. He was President Garcia's harshest critic, vigorously opposing him on the Ohno-García (Japanese) reparations deal and the Philippine recognition of the American-supported regime of Ngo Dinh Diem.

During the Formosa crisis, the Philippine Congress, controlled by Magsaysay's party men, issued a resolution pledging support to the U.S. defense of Formosa upon threat of a communist invasion. Congress and the Old Guards of the Nationalista Party supported Magsaysay, and Magsaysay prevailed. Recto severely criticized Magsaysay's pro-American stance and forewarned that involvement in U.S. military intervention exposes the Philippines to imminent danger. Recto's consistent stand was proven right by history's turn of events.

Without his steerage of the Partida Democrata, the party experienced its eventual demise; he founded a second, the Nationalist Citizens Party which espoused neutrality in foreign relations and advocated economic independence from American interests. In that same 1957 election speech, he further said:^[2]

“

I call upon my countrymen to remember that we have not always been so low and so ignoble, that our nationalist revolution of 1896 was indeed the first blow struck against an imperialist power and that the words and deeds of Rizal, Bonifacio, Del Pilar and Mabini once stirred the hearts of liberty-loving men all over Asia. Our national salvation lies first in reasserting the ideals of our heroes in their fight for emancipation, and second in changing the course of our economic efforts by giving emphasis to nationalist industrialization.

”

Recto sponsored the Rizal bill together with fellow senator Jose Laurel. The bill would require all high schools and colleges to include in their curricula a course in the study of Rizal's literary works, mainly the Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, to provide an in-depth study of nationalism and the shaping of national character invoked in these two novels. Although it met strong opposition from a contingent of Catholic groups because of the books' virulent attack on the Church and their perceived anti-clericalism, the bill was passed and approved on December 6, 1956 and became R.A. 1425 known as Rizal Law.^[3] Today there are many, especially among college and university students, who are calling for a repeal or revision of this law, questioning its essentiality to a high school and college diploma and its relevance to modern-day Filipino life.

Poet, playwright, essayist

The Spanish language was where he was reared and schooled. Alongside Tagalog, it was Recto's mother tongue, although he was equally adept in English. His initial fame was as a poet while a student at the University of Santo Tomás when he published a book Bajos Los Cocoteros (Under the Coconut Trees, 1911), a collection of his poems in Spanish. A staff writer of El Ideal, and later La Vanguardia, he wrote a daily column, Primares Cuartillas (First Sheets), under the nom de plume Aristeo Hilario. They were prose and numerous poems of satirical pieces. Some of his work still grace the classic poetry anthologies of the Hispanic world.

Among the plays that he authored were La Ruta de Damasco (The Route to Damascus, 1918), and Solo entre las Sombras (Alone among the Shadows, 1917), which were lauded not only in the Philippines, but also in Spain and Latin America. Both were produced and staged in Manila to critical acclaim in the mid 1950s.

In 1929, his article Monroismo Asiático (Asiatic Monroism) was published, validating his repute as a political satirist. In what was claimed as a commendable study in polemics, he proferred his arguments and defenses in a debate with Dean Máximo Kálaw of the University of the Philippines where Kálaw championed a version of the Monroe Doctrine with its application to the Asian continent, while Recto took the opposing side. The original Monroe doctrine (1823) was U.S. President Monroe's foreign policy of keeping the Americas off-limits to the influence of the Old World, and states that the United States, Mexico, and countries in South and Central America were no longer open to European colonization. Recto was passionately against its implementation in Asia, wary of Japan's preeminence and its aggressive stance towards its neighbors. In his deliberation he wrote about foreseeing the danger Japan posed to the Philippines and other Asian countries. His words proved prophetic when Japan invaded and colonized the region, including the Philippines from 1942-45.

His eloquence and facility with the Spanish language were recognized throughout the Hispanic world. The Enciclopedia Universal says of him: Recto, more than a politician and lawyer, is a Spanish writer, and that among those of his race (he is pure Tagalog on both sides), there is not and there has been no one who has surpassed him in the mastery of the language of his country's former sovereign.^[4]

The 'finest mind of his generation'

Claro M. Recto is considered the "finest mind of his generation".^[5] Through his speeches and writings, he was able to mold the mind of his Filipino contemporaries and succeeding generations, a skill "only excelled by Rizal's".^[5]

He left a mark on the patriotic climate of his time and a lasting legacy to those who succeeded him. Such icons of nationalism as Lorenzo Tanada, Jose Diokno, Renato Constantino, Jovito Salonga, refer to him as a mentor and forerunner.

Teodoro M. Locsín of the Philippines Free Press, defines Recto's genius, thus:^[5]

"Recto is not a good speaker, no. He will arouse no mob. But heaven help the one whose pretensions he chooses to demolish. His sentences march like ordered battalions against the inmost citadel of the man's arguments, and reduce them to rubble; meanwhile his reservations stand like armed sentries against the most silent approach and every attempt at encirclement by the adversary. The reduction to absurdity of Nacionalista senator Zulueta's conception of sound foreign policy was a shattering experience, the skill that goes into the cutting of a diamond went into the work of demolition. There was no slip of the hand, no flaw in the tool. All was delicately, perfectly done... Recto cannot defend the indefensible, but what can be defended, he will see to it that it will not be taken."

Criticism

His critics claim that Recto's brilliance is overshadowed by his inability to capture nationwide acceptance. He could have been an exceptional leader, perhaps a great president, but his appeal was limited to the intellectual elite and the nationalist minority of his time.

In the same article, political editorialist, Manuel L. Quezon III, laments this fact:

"Recto's leadership was the curious kind that only finds fulfillment from being at the periphery of power, and not from being its fulcrum. It was the best occupation suited to the satirist that he was. His success at the polls would be limited, his ability to mold the minds of his contemporaries was only excelled by Rizal's...But he was admired for his intellect and his dogged determination to never let the opposition be bereft of a champion, still his opposition was flawed. For it was one that never bothered to transform itself into an opposition capable of taking power."^[5]

However, one possible explanation as to why Recto was never able to capture full national acceptance was because he dared strongly oppose the national security interests of the United States in the Philippines, as when he campaigned against the US military bases in his country. During the 1957 presidential campaign, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) conducted black propaganda operations to ensure his defeat, including the distribution of condoms with holes in them and marked with `Courtesy of Claro M. Recto' on the labels.^{[6] [7]}

Death

Claro M. Recto died of a heart attack in Rome, Italy, on October 2, 1960, while on a cultural mission, and en route to Spain, where he was to fulfill a series of speaking engagements.

The US Central Intelligence Agency is suspected of involvement in his death. Recto, who had no known heart disease, met with two mysterious "Caucasians" wearing business suits before he died. US government documents later showed that a plan to murder Recto with a vial of poison was discussed by CIA Chief of Station Ralph Lovett and the US Ambassador to the Philippines Admiral Raymond Spruance years earlier.^[8][9]

Recto was married to Doña Aurora Reyes, with whom he had two sons. He had four children in his first marriage with Doña Angeles Silos.

Speeches and writings

• A realistic economic policy for the Philippines. Speech delivered at the Philippine Columbian Association, Sept. 26, 1956. ISBN B0007KCFEM
• On the Formosa Question, 1955 ISBN B0007JI5DI
• United States-Philippine Relations, 1935-1960. Alicia Benitez, ed. University of Hawaii, 1964.
• Three years of enemy occupation: The issue of political collaboration in the Philippines. Filipiniana series, 1985 Filipiana reprint. ISBN B0007K1JRG
• Our trade relations with the United States, 1954 ISBN B0007K8LS6
• The evil of religious test in a democracy, 1960 ISBN B0007K4Y8W
• Solo entre las sombres: Drama en un acto y en prosa, 1917; reprinted 1999 ISBN 971-555-306-0
• Asiatic monroeism and other essays: Articles of debate, 1930 ISBN B0008A5354
• The law of belligerent occupation and the effect of the change of sovereignty on the commonwealth treason law: With particular reference to the Japanese occupation of the Philippines, 1946
• Our lingering colonial complex, a speech before the Baguio Press Association, 1951

• The Quirino junket: an Objective Appraisal, 1949 ISBN B0007K4A7W
• The Philippine survival: Nationalist essays by Claro M. Recto, 1982
• Claro Recto on our Constitution, Constitutional Amendments and the Constitutional Convention of 1991
• Our mendicant foreign policy, a speech at the commencement exercises, University of the Philippines, 1951
• The Recto Valedictory, a collection of 10 never-delivered speeches, with English translations by Nick Joaquin, 1985
• ^{[1] [2]} Vintage Recto: Memorable speeches and writings, edited by Renato Constantino, 1986
• Recto Reader: Excerpts from the Speeches of Claro M. Recto. edited by Renato Constantino, 1965 ISBN B0006E72Z6
  
  
  

Further reading

• The relevant Recto, by Renato Constantino, 1986
• Dissent on Philippine Society; the Filipino elite; Recto's Second Demise, by Renato Constantino, 1972
• The Relevance of Recto Today: A review of Philippine-American and other relations, by Emerenciana Avellana
• Recto and the National Democratic Struggle: a re-appraisal, by Jose Sison, 1969
• Claro M. Recto, 1890-1990: A Centenary tribute of the Civil Liberties Union, 1990
• The Crisis of a Republic by Teodoro Agoncillo, University of the Philippines Press, Quezon City.
• White Love, Surveillance and Nationalist Resistance in the United States Colonization of the Philippines by Vince Rafael
• The Star-Entangled Banner: One Hundred Years of America in the Philippines by Sharon Delmondo, 2004
• Nationalism: a summons to greatness by Lorenzo M. Tañada; edited by Ileana Maramag, 1965
• Cory Aquino: Person of the Century by Manuel L. Quezon III, Philippines Free Press, December 30, 1999.
  
  
  

Footnotes

1. ^ The Manila Times Internet Edition (2006-02-10). Remembering Claro M. Recto. Press release. http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2006/feb/10/yehey/opinion/20060210opi5.html. Retrieved on 2007-08-29.
   
2. ^ Luzadas, Jose. "THE UNEXPLAINED: OKR's Failure to Support Recto and Laurel in Rizal Bill". Order of the Knights of Rizal. http://www.RizalCanada.org/Pages/PermanentPages/ArticleRizalBill.html. Retrieved on 2007-08-29
   
3. ^ ^{a b c d} Quezon, eManuel III (1999-12-30). "Cory Aquino: Person of the Century". Archives: Articles/Columns. Quezon.ph. http://www.quezon.ph/thecolumn.php?which=9. Retrieved on 2007-08-29.
4. ^ The Worst Book of 2002. Review of The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power, by Max Boot. 2003 Retrieved March 17, 2009, from http://www.main.nc.us/books/books.cgi?theworstbookof2002.
5. ^ Simbulan, Roland. Covert Operations and the CIA's Hidden History in the Philippines. 18 Aug. 2000. Retrieved March 17, 2009, from http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/filipinas/doc/cia.html.
6. ^ The Worst Book of 2002. Review of The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power, by Max Boot. 2003. Retrieved on March 17, 2009, from http://www.main.nc.us/books/books.cgi?theworstbookof2002.
7. ^ Simbulan, Roland. Covert Operations and the CIA's Hidden History in the Philippines. 18 August 2000. Retrieved on March 17, 2009, from http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/filipinas/doc/cia.html.
   
   
   

External links

• http://www.quezon.ph/thecolumn.php?which=9
• http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=29698
• http://www.bookrags.com/biography/claro-m-recto/
• http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2006/feb/10/yehey/opinion/20060210opi5.html
• http://www.senate.gov.ph/senators/former_senators//claro_recto.htm
• http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2006/03/14/OPED2006031458608.html
• http://www.RizalCanada.org/Pages/PermanentPages/ArticleRizalBill.html
• http://www.los-indios-bravos.com/english/eng_proj_10.html A note on Recto's play by Nick Joaquin
• http://www.magandamagazine.org/06/institutional5.html the institutional invisibility of American imperialism, the Philippines and Filipino Americans

Source: http://www.answers.com/topic/claro-m-recto

"COLONIAL MENTALITY, " " DAMAGED CULTURE," IMSCF SYNDROME OF NATIVE FILIPINOS AND THEIR ROOTS

" Fear history, for it respects no secrets" - Gregoria de Jesus (widow of Andres Bonifacio)

"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)

"To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful." - Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965)

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

NOTES TO READERS:  
1. 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 all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc. THANKS!!
2. Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:
Primary Blog Posts/Readings for my fellow, Native (Malay/Indio) Filipinos-in-the-Philippines
3. Instantly translate to any of 71 foreign languages. Go to the sidebar on the right to choose your preferred language.
*************************

LET US NOT KEEP OUR HEADS IN THE SAND

Hi All,

Then and now, an American seems to reside in the heart and mind of each native Filipino of every generation since the US conquest and its 48-year occupation of the Philippines.

We native Malay Filipinos grew up and are still growing up knowing only about American innocence. Like many American themselves, thanks to excessive TV-viewing for one, etc., are ignorant of the totality of American histories, such as its distorted narration of The Philippine-American War (the First Vietnam), usually glossed over under the Spanish-American War aka Splendid Little War, its mock Battle of Manila Bay, Monroe Doctrine, Manifest Destiny, complete Roosevelt Corollary, and the current, if not perpetual drive, for American hegemony in the 21st century.

Consequently, the native Filipino has been effectively and efficiently Americanized: conditioned to knowingly or unknowingly think and analyze economic and political issues in his own homeland (and abroad) from the American point of view. 

In the long-run, his alienated heart and mind brought to the Filipino and the homeland only ever-deepening poverty, and its consequent illiteracy, hunger, and damaged culture.

To change this way of thinking, the American drilled into and residing in the Filipino mind need to be removed; for the Filipino to be educated so as to arouse the "Filipinism" in his heart and mind in matters of national interests (economic and political); for each Filipino to ultimately and most importantly, demand from his national leadership honest concern and action for the impoverished native Filipino majority (Christian, Muslim, and the forgotten ethnic minorities), the native common good.

This nationalistic outlook is most important and necessary when dealing with all foreigners, such as the American, Australian, Japanese, Korean, Chinese businessmen, their governments and their transnational corporations (TNCs) as they work and exploit our people and homeland indirectly via the IMF and WB and the WTO in the Philippines among many others (all rationalized for us by our native technocrats).

The primary task for us native Filipinos, despite numerous impediments, is to raise our nationalist consciousness, through self-education or by formal/informal education, beginning with a recognition and appreciation of our colonial mentality and exerting a conscious effort to discard it.

Our task in terms of the national economy in our homeland should be to think FILIPINO FIRST, as other nations rightly do think of and for themselves in their own homelands. But of course, our "Filipinism" has to be different from the selfish individualism (lacking in honest, social concern) of the native businessmen/entrepreneurs of the past who used nationalism to advance solely their own private interests. 

This latter danger can be prevented by nationalistic mass education; since knowledge should not be an exclusive domain of the middle class and socio-economic/political elite.

It is only with a nationalistic consciousness in his mind and heart will the native Filipino be able to fight, deal and work with utmost determination for his own betterment, those of his children and grandchildren; and consequently of his homeland.

Below is one of the many excellent articles written during the early 1980s by Leticia Constantino, wife of the great Filipino nationalist of recent history - the late Prof. Renato Constantino. A collection of these concise essays, in several slim pamphlets/volumes, to help understand important national issues and developments was published, as a teacher's aid to developing a nationalist education, under the title "Issues Without Tears."

The series of pamphlets are extremely useful to those who have no time nor patience to read books or scholarly treatises, as Mrs. Constantino explained. Hopefully, the books are still available in Philippine bookstores. I highly recommend buying them. I attempt in this blog to fulfill a few of these apparently out-of-print pamphlets/articles.

In the Foreword to her book from which I extracted the below article, Mrs. Constantino wrote that while her husband's tasks were to analyze Philippine Education Today and other impediments to realizing Filipino Nationalism, her task was to answer the question "What Is To Be Done?"

ADDENDUM: All her thoughts before journalist James Fallows visited and wrote his popular piece about our "damaged culture," i.e. absence of Filipino nationalism, in 1987. Fallows must have read this essay by Mrs. Constantino. Again, we Filipinos due to our colonial mentality would tend to appreciate and pay attention to what foreigners, i.e. mostly Americans like Fallows, say. In contrast, we Filipinos would tend to ignore, belittle and argue vehemently against what our own nationalist intellectuals already knew and understood, said, or wrote about (in certain issues our Americanized minds, consciously or unconsciously, make us more American than Americans -repeatedly demonstrating to the world our mendicant/servile attitude).

- Bert

Please click and read also:  IMSCF Syndrome as Part of Our Colonial Mentality

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

ROOTS OF OUR COLONIAL MENTALITY
from "Issues without Tears", 1984

We often hear Filipinos complain that as a nation we are afflicted with a colonial mentality. By this, they usually mean that we are excessively subservient to foreigners and unduly impressed by foreign goods. But an even more harmful aspect of colonial mentality and one that is less recognized is our failure to pinpoint our real national interests apart from and distinct from those of our foreign colonizers.

Despite 35 years of independence, this trait has not been eradicated. The colonial mentality has deep roots in our history: first, in the level of social and economic development we attained before colonization; second, in the nature of Spanish colonization; third, in the impact of American rule; fourth, in the way we obtained our independence and fifth, in the neo-colonial policies of the United States up to the present time.

Unlike India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia, we did not confront our Spanish conquerors as a people with a highly developed culture and social structure. Our forebears lived in small, scattered communities based on kinship ties and relied mainly on primitive agriculture which provided barely enough for their needs.

We were not a nation since these communities were separate, autonomous barangays. Trade among barangays and with the people from neighboring countries was occasional and by barter. Religion was likewise primitive with no organized body of beliefs or priestly hierarchy. All these made physical conquest and cultural domination quite easy for the Spanish colonizers.

Unlike the Cambodians with their Angkor Vat and the Indonesians with their Borobudur, we had no monuments which could remind our people of ancient glory. When nations with advanced social structures and a firmly established culture are colonized, their past achievements constitute the source of their separate identity which enables the conquered to confront their colonizers with dignity and sometimes even a feeling of superiority. They do not easily lose their sense of racial worth. Unfortunately for us, we were colonized before our own society could develop sufficiently.

Having but few cultural defenses against our conquerors, we soon accepted their superiority and began to acquire what we now call a colonial mentality. Other Western powers initially instituted a system of indirect rule in their Asian colonies by exploiting the people through their chiefs, leaving native social and cultural institutions largely intact. In the Philippines however, our two colonizers consolidated their rule by working on the native consciousness, thus effecting great changes in Filipino values and customs

The Spaniards forcibly resettled the scattered barangays into larger communities where the people could more easily be Christianized and where every aspect of their lives, their customs, and ideas could be scrutinized and shaped in the desired colonial mode. In most communities, the Spanish friars represented both the power of the cross and the power of the sword.
As pillars of the colonial establishment, most priests sought to develop in their flock the virtues of obedience, humility, and resignation. Spanish superiority was maintained and the "Indio" was kept in his inferior position by denying him education (there was no system of national education until 1863). The people were trained to follow and were discouraged from thinking for themselves.

A thirst for knowledge was considered a dangerous and subversive trait that often brought actual misfortune or the threat of hell. The "Indio" acquired the habit of allowing his economic and social superiors to do the thinking for him, and this attitude persists among us today, seriously undermining any movement for greater democracy. Under the Spaniards, the inferiority complex evolved into a national trait of Filipinos.

Ironically enough, by satisfying the Filipinos' desire for education and self-government, the American colonizers developed a new and are some ways, a more pernicious form of colonial mentality.

For while the Spanish arrogance and bred anger and rebellion, American education transformed the United States in the eyes of the Filipinos from an aggressor who had robbed them of their independence to a generous benefactor. 

The school system began Americanizing the Filipino consciousness by misrepresenting US expansionism and US economic policies as American altruism toward the Filipinos; by denying young Filipinos of any knowledge of Filipino resistance to American occupation and the atrocities committed the American military; by filling young minds with stories that glorify the American way of life, American heroes and American institutions.

Americanization was greatly facilitated by the imposition of English as the sole medium of instruction. This made possible the use of American textbooks. Education taught the Filipino youth to regard American culture as superior to their own and American society as the best model for Philippine society. Of course, our americanization has been profitable to the Americans because it kept on producing new generations of avid consumers of American goods. All these were ingredients of a new type of colonial mentality.

Our so-called tutelage in self-government at the end of which we received our independence from our "generous teacher and guardian" is partly responsible for our persistent failure to recognize that our real national interests are distinct from and, more often than not, contrary to those of the United States.

American colonial policy gave the Filipinos their first experience in self-government in the legislative field. Since executive power remained in the hands of the American governor-general and real, overall power resided in Washington, Filipino leaders learned the art of adapting to American economic requirements while catering to their Filipino constituents' desire for independence.

Periodic elections focused public attention on "politics", a superficial democratic exercise during which most politicians pledged to secure "immediate, absolute, complete independence" without explaining that the economic dependence of the Philippines on the US market would make such independence an empty one.

The Philippine elite, landowners who grew rich on agricultural exports to the US, largely controlled Philippine politics, so most politicians in fact supported this economic dependence. Politicians, therefore, concentrated on the issue of political independence and the people received little enlightenment on economic issues except radical labor and peasant groups in the 1930s.

The Filipino dream of independence remained limited to political sovereignty. The fact that we obtained independence as a "grant' and not as a result of a victorious, anti-colonial revolution has obscured the real contradictions between our interests and those of the US [we had no such blinders toward either Spain or Japan; we recognized the conflict of interests between them and us.] But all the foregoing are part of the past. The Philippine Republic is now 35 years old.


Why have we not outgrown our colonial mentality? 
Of course, we now have an appreciation of our national identity, a feeling of cultural nationalism. We have discovered ethnic culture and take pride in local art and music. In fact, US global policies can tolerate and even encourage such expressions of a separate identity especially when they can be used to mask continuing economic domination.

Economic control is now exercised in more subtle forms - through transnational corporations (TNCs) whose requirements are incorporated in Philippine laws and policies, through various forms of aid from countries like the US and Japan which help to shape economic priorities and consumption patterns in ways favorable to the aid givers, through TNC advertising and Western mass media which create new needs and tastes and mold our view of world events and, above all, through loans from our World Bank and other international institutions which require as a prior condition our acceptance of a national development program which ensures a superficial stabilization of our economy.

Theoretically, the laws and policies we adopt to attract TNCs, whether we accept aid or not, whether we borrow from the World Bank or not, are decisions freely arrived at by our own government. Rarely do we learn of the pressures exerted, the demands made, the strings attached by these foreign entities.

Instead, our leaders deepen our misconception of the role and power of these external forces by presenting foreign-designed programs that will further reinforce our dependence as examples of self-reliance and independence.

We must examine carefully from a nationalist perspective all aid offered, all loans granted, all programs suggested by foreign governments and institutions. Only then can we begin to rid ourselves of our unfortunate inability to see the contradiction between our interests and theirs, a feeling which is today the most serious aspect of our colonial mentality.

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

See also:  IMSCF Syndrome as Part of Our Colonial Mentality

NOTE: The Edward Said YouTube videos on "Orientalism a Tool of Colonialism" (Parts 1-4) are more about the Arab World, but analytically and conceptually apply to our "colonial mentality" in the Filipino setting. Access Parts 2-4 when you watch Part 1 above.


“Colonies do not cease to be colonies because they are independent” – Benjamin Disraeli, British Prime Minister (1804-1881)

One of the major errors in the whole discussion of economic development has been the tendency to look at the United States or Canada and say that this has worked here, and therefore it must work in the poor countries.” – John Kenneth Galbraith (1908-2006)

"Certain marks of colonization are still manifested by the people. I have arbitrarily identified these marks as dependence, subservience, and compromise." (I add compromise of our homeland and at our peoples' expense)

Only the strong, unrelenting efforts of Filipino people can erase the blemishes to our culture and remove the negative label attached to it. Fortunately, there are concerned Filipinos who, with all their might, attack 'these cultural damages' with the pen and with the tongue. They are unrelenting."
– Dr. Pura Santillan-Castrence (1905-2007)

The true Filipino is a decolonized Filipino.” – Prof. Renato Constantino (1919-1999)

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

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!]

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

Thank you for reading and sharing with others, especially those in our homeland.

- Bert

PLEASE POINT & CLICK THIS LINK:  

http://www.thefilipinomind.com/2013/08/primary-postsreadings-for-my-fellow.html

“The HISTORY of an oppressed people is hidden in the lies and the agreed myth of its conquerors.” – Meridel Le Sueur, American writer, 1900-1996 

"Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual; the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country." - Karl Kraus, 1874-1936.

"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

“In the long-run, every Government is the exact symbol of its People, with their WISDOM and UNWISDOM; we have to say, Like People like Government. “ - Thomas Carlyle, 1795-1881, Scottish Philosopher, Author