• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
THE MYTHS WE LIVE BY - Senator Lorenzo Tanada(1898-1992)
THE FOLKLORE OF COLONIALISM
 
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 scroll down to the bottom of the post and click on "Comments.")
 
"No people can be both ignorant and free." - Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
 
“The true Filipino is a decolonized Filipino.” – Prof. Renato Constantino (1919-1999)
 
“Nations, whose NATIONALISM is destroyed, are subject to ruin.” -
Muammar al_Qaddafi 
 
"There is not a nationalistic movement here that has not received its share of witch-hunting diatribes. The danger is that if these attempts to regain full independence are equated withcommunism and branded as subversive, the right of protest and dissent essential to thismovement may be imperiled or curtailed.- Lorenzo Tanada
 
*********************
[The following excerpts came from a Commencement Address delivered by the late Senator Lorenzo Tanada at the Lyceum of the Philippines on May 7, 1965. Senator Tanada is a sincerenationalist whose battles, before and after the death of the great Sen. Claro M. Recto, show hisuncompromising patriotism. He fought on the floor of the Senate and outside of it to preserve thesanctity of the Constitution and the patrimony of the people which some Filipinos with a bent mind wanted sold for a few pieces of silver to foreigners - Teodoro A. Agoncillo] 
The Myths We Live By
 We have been living by illusions for such a long time that we seem not to havenoticed the changing realities of our time. We belong to neither the advancedcapitalist countries nor socialist camps. Our thinking and behavior, however,belie our real status - that we are a developing nation. Our habit of self-delusionhas been a principal cause of our miseries. Many countries like our own haveheroically resisted the excursions of metropolitan powers. Some havesucceeded, while others are still fighting the pernicious hold of foreign interests.This determined struggle on their part has earned for them the respect of thenations of the world.Because we have refused to recognize our real status, we have not only resisted,we have even abetted foreign economic domination. We have been deluded intothinking that this is the correct road, because we are so anxious to establishaffinity with an advanced power and because we believe any other road isunwise. We have been on this road for such a long time, yet we have notprogressed. from this mistaken orientation have sprung all the myths thatimprison us. We have lived on rhetoric and ignored reality.
We pride ourselves
 
so much on being the most westernized country in Asia that we actuallysometimes tend to look down upon our fellow Asians.
We have professed tohave some links with our brother Asians but we tend to look condescendingly onthem because they do not speak English the way we do and have not adoptedwestern ways. This is the first of the myths we live by.The Myth of the "Free World." We like to believe that we belong to the free world and we find it difficult to acceptthat the political life of a nation can be different from ours and still not be evil: thata people's economic, political and cultural life is determined by its own needs andthat one cannot just impose a particular way of life upon a nation, for each nationhas its own peculiarities. a nation that does not have the same form of government and philosophy as ours is not necessarily undemocratic. Democracyadmits a diversity of forms, it can be diverse as the number of nation-states.We have relinquished the sovereign initiative that belongs to an independentstate
by following America too closely.
We rely almost entirely on western,especially American experts for opinion and judgment and we have notdeveloped our own powers of assessment.
We are enamored of enchantingphrases like "free world," "free enterprise," etc. and we are easily swayedby stirring calls to the defense and protection of "freedom and democracy."
 Do we read the news and comments of other countries, even those which aregenerally considered as part of the free world but which think independently of the United States? Very few of us do. Instead we are content to allow only theexperts of American news agencies to fill the columns of our papers with their own not disinterested view of world events; we are satisfied to see our youngpeople get their intellectual nourishment almost exclusively from Americancomics and magazines, American TV programs and movies from Hollywood.
Wehave not been discriminating at all in our choice of intellectual fare
.Consequently, we have not learned to be original.The Myth of Identity of Interests. In the field of foreign relations,
we have always proceeded on the assumptionthat America's interests are automatically ours and vice-versa
. We havefollowed her foreign policy closely and sometimes we have even outdone her. InAsia, our stock is low because we are regarded by our neighbors as America'sobedient satellite.
We are thus viewed with suspicion by fellow Asians.
Ininternational conferences, we have always identified with the American position.We have not recognized the communist countries not because we have studiedthis question ourselves and decided it would be bad for us but because,
webelieved that by recognition we would be hurting America's cause, even if America itself has diplomatic, economic and cultural relations with most of them
. Thus we find our diplomatic maneuverability severely limited. We cannot
 
trade with these countries, while many of the developing nations of Asia andAfrica have found it profitable to do so.Ever since the restoration of our independence, we have ignored the existence of the Soviet Union. The policy of non-recognition has grown out of a suspicion of communist intentions, out of a desire to please America and not out of anyserious analysis of the objective situation. Hence, we have failed to develop our own experts on Soviet Union. We have refused to seriously consider the positionof the Soviet Union in world events, even after her amazing accomplishments inthe realm of science and space.From the inception of our independent life, Liberal and Nacionalistaadministrations have been
guided by the myth of identity of interests intoactions and policies that later proved detrimental to our country.
We havesubordinated even domestic policy to the demands of foreign policy based onthis myth that our interests are identical to those of the United States. But acardinal principle of independent existence is that the foreign policy of a stateshould merely be a reflection of its domestic policy.
Domestic policy isparamount and foreign policy is subordinate
, or ought to be, to that policy.domestic policy is based on our own needs and aspirations, not the needs, letalone aspirations, of our allies.
Foreign policy must hence be a distinctlyFilipino response to the world as we see it
and not as others with their ownbiases and interests see it. Because it is only under an atmosphere of reducedtensions that we can carry on the building of our nation, the national interestwould seem to require a foreign policy based on peaceful coexistence with allnations. But our foreign policy has in fact been just a bit more warlike than that aswitness the proposal to send combat engineers to Vietnam.The Myth of American Benevolence 
This is the myth of special relations.
For so many years we have been actingas if we were special favorites of America. we feel especially privileged becausewe have "special relations" with America and America has a special place for usin her heart. Yet, this is not so; I even wonder if it has been so. let us remindourselves of the bitter start of the American intrusion into our shores. Even thenof course,
words of great emotional appeal were used to disguise the truth
.America had a "manifest destiny" to "civilize" us and teach us the ways of freedom and democracy. Later developments suggest that this was not so, thatAmerica had ambitions to, in Asia, still has them, and that the Philippines wasconquered by her to serve her own interests, certainly not those of our country.Similarly, America's attitude towards Philippine independence followed thedictates of her own self-interest. her recognition of our independence becamepossible only as a result of the confluence of forces in America and theseincluded the dairy industries, the sugar interests, American labor, etc., whichwanted to deprive us of our preferred position in the American market becausewe were competing with their own interests. Self-interest beyond everything also
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...