NOTE: Because of the length of this extremely relevant essay by the late Prof.

Constantino, I am posting it in three parts. Bold, underlined words are URLs/links to relevant articles and postings. – Bert M. Drona, March 25, 2006 See: Part 2 of 3 and Part 3 of 3 WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: Under the guise of preparing and teaching us in selfgovernment, the American imposition of public education was designed for the Filipinos to be Americanized in their outlook; and this was greatly attained by the use of English as the only medium of instruction (all part of subtle but extremely effective "cultural" imperialism). During their 50-year rule, public education was given the greatest priority and was actually run as part of the US Department of the Army to ensure compliance. Click these URLs to see: http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/06/ang-sistema-ng-edukasyon-sa-pilipinas.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/dont-know-much-about-history-in-order.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/deterioration-of-public-school-system.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/12/malansang-isda-by-rosalinda-n.html Thus years thereafter, America was able to leave peacefully since the educational system has guaranteed and continually produced "little brown brothers" who wittingly and unwittingly thought, loyally worked and ruled for America. America did not need anymore to have American occupational troops in the islands! In addition, the practiced "free trade" during the colonial period and its later postwar imposition via our co-opted ruling elites perpetuated American dominance in all significant business and industries; and embedded our taste for imported goods/culture and thus practically killing any nascent native industrialization, keeping us mainly as a source of supply for agricultural products and strategic minerals, and losing our sense of national history, unity and national identity. Click these URLs to see: http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/09/why-our-homeland-did-not-industrialize.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/12/expansion-continental-and-overseas.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/12/independence-day-that-wasnt-by-alan.html

A critical study of American history will show that the Americans came not to help free the Filipinos from the Spaniards (the revolutionaries have them surrounded until the Americans joined in and fooled them to stay put until their reinforcements arrived). The Americans came because during that moment in time in history, Americans saw their need for a fueling station for their growing navy, recognized the need to expand their sources of supply for raw materials, and new markets for their excess products in Asia, especially the illimitable Chinese market, and saw the Philippines as the gateway for all. Of course, we can not learn these historical truths in Philippine and American schools unless one goes beyond official school textbooks and government publications. – Bert M. Drona “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 Neocolonialism - The dominance of strong nations over weak nations, not by direct political control (as in traditional colonialism), but by economic and cultural influence. “The true Filipino is a decolonized Filipino.” – Renato Constantino ***************************************************************

THE MISEDUCATION OF THE FILIPINO: PART 1 OF 3
Prof. Renato Constantino, Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol.1.,No.1 (1970) Education is a vital weapon of a people striving for economic emancipation, political independence and cultural renaissance. We are such a people. Philippine education therefore must produce Filipinos who are aware of their country's problems, who understand the basic solution to these problems, and who care enough to have courage to work and sacrifice for their country's salvation. Nationalism in Education In recent years, in various sectors of our society, there have been nationalist stirrings which were crystallized and articulated by the late Claro M. Recto, There were jealous demands for the recognition of Philippine sovereignty on the Bases question. There were appeals for the correction of the iniquitous economic relations between the Philippines and the United States. For a time, Filipino businessmen and industrialists rallied around the banner of the FILIPINO FIRST policy, and various scholars and economists proposed economic emancipation as an intermediate goal for the nation. In the field of art, there have been signs of a new appreciation for

our own culture. Indeed, there has been much nationalist activity in many areas of endeavor, but we have yet to hear of a well-organized campaign on the part of our educational leaders for nationalism in education. Although most of our educators are engaged in the lively debate on techniques and tools for the improved instructions, not one major educational leader has come out for a truly nationalist education. Of course some pedagogical experts have written on some aspects of nationalism in education. However, no comprehensive educational programme has been advanced as a corollary to the programmes for political and economic emancipation. This is a tragic situation because the nationalist movement is crippled at the outset by a citizenry that is ignorant of our basic ills and is apathetic to our national welfare. New Perspective Some of our economic and political leaders have gained a new perception of our relations with the United States as a result of their second look at Philippine-American relations since the turn of the century. The reaction which has emerged as economic and political nationalism is an attempt on their part to revise the iniquities of the past and to complete the movement started by our revolutionary leaders of 1896. The majority of our educational leaders, however, still continue to trace their direct lineal descent to the first soldier-teachers of the American invasion army. They seem oblivious to the fact that the educational system and philosophy of which they are proud inheritors were valid only within the framework of American colonialism. The educational system introduced by the Americans had to correspond and was designed to correspond to the economic and political reality of American conquest. Capturing Minds The most effective means of subjugating a people is to capture their minds. Military victory does not necessarily signify conquest. As long as feelings of resistance remain iin the hearts of the vanquished, no conqueror is secure. This is best illustrated by the occupation of the Philippines by the Japanese militarists during the Second World War. Despite the terroristic regime imposed by the Japanese warlords, the Filipinos were never conquered. Hatred for the Japanese was engendered by their oppressive techniques which in turn were intensified by the stubborn resistance of the Filipino people. Japanese propagandists and psychological warfare experts, however, saw the necessity of winning the minds of the people. Had the Japanese stayed longer, Filipino children who were being schooled under the auspices of the new dispensation would have grown into strong pillars of the Greater East Asia

Co-Prosperity Sphere. Their minds would have been conditioned to suit the policies of the Japanese imperialists. The moulding of men's minds is the best means of conquest. Education, therefore, serves a a weapon in wars of colonial conquest. This singular fact was well appreciated by the American military commander in the Philippines during the Filipino-American War. According to the census of 1903: "....General Otis urged and furthered the reopening of schools, himself selecting and ordering the textbooks. many officers, among them chaplains, were detailed as superintendent of schools, and many enlisted men, as teachers..." The American military authorities had a job to do. They had to employ all means to pacify a people whose hopes for independence were being frustrated by the presence of another conqueror. The primary reason for the rapid intorduction, on a large scale, of the American public school system in the Philippines was the conviction of the military leaders that no measure could so quickly promote the pacification of the islands as education. General Arthur McArthur, in recommending a large appropriation for school purposes, said: "...This appropriation is recommended primarily and exclusively as an adjunct to military operations calculated to pacify the people and to procure and expedite the restoration of tranquility throughout the archipelago..." Beginnings of Colonial Education Thus, from its inception, the educational system of the Philippines was a means of pacifying a people who were defending their newly-won freedom from an invader who had posed as an ally. The education of the Filipino under American sovereignty was an instrument of colonial policy. The Filipino has to be educated as a good colonial. Young minds had to be shaped to conform to American ideas. Indigenous Filipino ideals were slowly eroded in order to remove the last vestiges of resistance. Education served to attract the people to the new masters and at the same time to dilute their nationalism which had just succeeded in overthrowing a foreign power. The introduction of the American educational system was a means of defeating a triumphant nationalism. As Charles Burke Elliot said in his book, The Philippines: "...To most Americans it seemed absurd to propose that any other language than English should be used over which their flag floated. But in the schools of India and other British dependencies

and colonies and, generally, in all colonies, it was and still is customary to use the vernacular in the elementary schools, and the immediate adoption of English in the Philippine schools subjected America to the charge of forcing the language of the conquerors upon a defenseless people. Of course, such a system of education as the Americans contemplated could be successful only under the direction of American teachers, as the Filipino teachers who had been trained in Spanish methods were ignorant of the English language... Arrangements were promptly made for enlisting a small army of teachers in the United States. At first they came in companies, but soon in battalions. The transport Thomas was fitted up for their accomodations and in July, 1901, it sailed from San Francisco with six hundred teachers -a second army of occupation- surely the most remarkable cargo ever carried to an Oriental colony.." The American Vice-Governor The importance of education as a colonial tool was never underestimated by the Americans. This may be clearly seen in the provision of the Jones Act which granted the Filipinos more autonomy. Although the government services were Filipinized, although the Filipinos were being prepared for self-government, the Department of Education was never entrusted to any Filipino. Americans always headed this department. This was assured by Article 23 of the Jones Act which provided: "..That there shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, a vice-governor of the Philippine Islands, who shall have all the powers of the governor-general in the case of a vacancy or temporary removal, resignation or disability of the governor-general, or in case of his temporary absence; and the said vicegovernor shall be the head of the executive department known as the department of Public Instruction, which shall include the bureau of education and the bureau of health, and he may be assigned such other executive duties as the Governor-General may designate..." Up to 1935, therefore, the head of this department was an American. And when a Filipino took over under the commonwealth, a new generation of "Filipino-American" had already been produced. There was no longer any need for American overseers in this filed because a captive generation had already come of age, thinking and acting like little Americans.

This does not mean, however, that nothing that was taught was of any value. We became literate in English to a certain extent. We were able to produce more men and women who could read and write. We bacame more conversant with the outside world, especially the American world. A more widespread education such as the Americans would have been a real blessing had their educational programme not been the handmaiden of their colonial policy. Unfortunately for us, the success of education as a colonial weapon was complete and permanent. In exchange for a smattering of English, we yielded our souls. The stories of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln made us forget our own nationalism. The American view of our history turned our heroes into brigands in our own eyes, distorted our vision of our future. The surrender of the Katipuneros was nothing compared to this final surrender, this levelling down of our lst defenses. Dr. Chester Hunt characterizes this surrender in these words: "...The programme of cultural assimilation combined with a fairly rapid yielding of control resulted in the fairly general acceptance of American culture as the goal of Filipino society with the corollary that individual Americans were given a status of respect..." This in a nutshell was (and to a great extent still is) the happy result of early educational policy because, within the framework of American colonialism, whenever there was a conflict between American and Filipino goals and interests, the schools guided us toward thought and action which could forward American interests. Goals of American Education The educational system established by the Americans could not have been for the sole purpose of saving the Filipinos from illiteracy and ignorance. Given the economic and political purposes of American occupation, education had to be consistent with these broad purposes of American colonial policy. The Filipinos had to be trained as citizens of an American colony. The Benevolent Assimilation proclamation of President McKinley on December 21, 1898 at a time when Filipino forces were in control of the country except Manila, betrays the intention of the colonizers. Judge Blount in his book, The American Occupation of the Philippines, properly comments: "..Clearly, from the Filipino point of view, the United States was now determined to 'spare them from the dangers of premature independence,' using such force as might be necessary for the accomplishment of that pious purpose..."

Despite the noble aims announced by the American authorities that the Philippines was theirs to protect and guide, the fact still remained that these people were a conquered nation whose national life had to be woven into the pattern of American dominance. Philippine education was shaped by the overriding factor of preserving and expanding American control. To achieve this, all separatist tendencies were discouraged. Nay, they had to be condemned as subversive. With this as the pervasive factor in the grand design of conqueirng a people, the pattern of education, consciously or unconsciously, fostered and established certain attitudes on the part of the governed. These attitudes conformed to the purposes of American occupation. An Uprooted Race The first and perhaps the master stroke in the plan to use education as an instrument of colonial policy was the decision to use English as the medium of insturction. English became the wedge that separated the Filipinos from their past and later to separate educated Filipinos from the masses of their countrymen. English introduced the Filipinos to a strange, new world. With American textbooks, Filipinos started learning not only a new language but also a new way of life, alien to their traditions and yet a caricature of their model. This was the beginning of their education. At the same time, it was the beginning of their mis-education, for they learned no longer as Filipinos but as colonials. They had to be disoriented form their nationalist goals because they had to become good colonials. The ideal colonial was the carbon copy of his conqueror, the conformist follower of the new dispensation. He had to forget his past and unlearn the nationalist virtues in order to live peacefully, if not comfortably, under the colonial order. The new Filipino generation learned of the lives of American heroes, sang American songs, and dreamt of snow and Santa Claus. The nationalist resistance leaders exemplified by Sakay were regarded as brigands and outlaws. The lives of Philippine heroes were taught but their nationalist teachings were glossed over. Spain was the villain, America was the savior. To this day, our histories still gloss over the atrocities committed by American occupation troops such as the "water cure" and the "reconcentration camps." Truly, a genuinely Filipino education could not have been devised within the new framework, for to draw from the wellsprings of the Filipino ethos would only have lead to a distinct Philippine identity with interests at variuance with that of the ruling power. Thus, the Filipino past which had already been quite obliterated by three centuries of Spanish tyranny did not enjoy a revival under American colonialism. On the contrary, the history of our

ancestors was taken up as if they were stange and foreign peoples who settled in these shores, with whom we had the most tenuous of ties. We read about them as if we were tourists in a foreign land. Economic Attitudes Control of the economic life of a colony is basic to colonial control. Some imperial nations do it harshly but the United States could be cited for the subtlety and uniqueness of its approach. For example, free trade was offered as a generous gift of American altruism. Concomitantly, the educational policy had to support his view and to soften the effects of the slowly tighthening noose around the necks of the Filipinos. The economic motivations of the American in coming to the Philippines were not at all admitted to the Filipinos. As a matter of fact, from the first school-days under the soldier-teachers to the present, Philippine history books have portrayed America as a benevolent nation who came here only to save us from Spain and to spread amongst us the boons of liberty and democracy. The almost complete lack of understanding at present of those economic motivations and of the presence of American interests in the Philippines are the most eloquent testimony to the success of the education for colonials which we have undergone. What economic attitudes were fostered by American education? It is interesting to note that during the times that the school attempts to inculcate an appreciation for things Philippine, the picture that is presented for the child's admiration is an idealized picture of a rural Philippines, as pretty and as unreal as an Amorsolo painting with its carabao, its smiling healthy farmer, the winsome barrio lass in the bright clean patadyong, and the sweet nipa hut. That is the portrait of the Filipino that our education leaves in the minds of the young and it hurst in two ways. First, it strengthens the belief (and we see this in adults) that the Philippines is essentially meant to be an agricultural country and we can not and should not change that. The result is an apathy toward industrialization. It is an idea they have not met in school. There is further, a fear, born out of that early sterotype of this country as an agricultural heaven, that industrialization is not good for us, that our national environment is not suited for an industrial economy, and that it will only bring social evils which will destroy the idyllic farm life. Second, this idealized picture of farm life never emphasizes the poverty, the disease, the cultural vacuum, the sheer boredom, the superstition and ignorance of backward farm communities. Those who pursue higher education think of the farm as quaint places, good for an occasional vacation. Their life is rooted in the big towns and cities and there is no interest in

revamping rural life because there is no understanding of its economic problems. Interest is limited to aretsian wells and handicraft projects. Present efforts to uplift the conditions of the rural masses merely attack the peripheral problems without admitting the urgent need for basic agrarian reform. With American education, the Filipinos were not only learning a new language; they were not only forgetting their own language; they were starting to become a new type of American. American ways were slowly being adopted. Our consumption habits were molded by the influx of cheap American goods that came in duty-free. The pastoral economy was extolled because this conformed with the colonial economy that was being fostered. Our books extolled the western nations as peopled by superior beings because they were capable of manufacturing things that we never thought we were capable of producing. We were pleased by the fact that our raw materials could pay for the American consumption goods that we had to import. Now we are used to these type of goods, and it is a habit we find hard to break, to the detriment of our own economy. We never thought that we too could industrialize because in school we were taught that we were primarily an agricultural country by geographical location and by the innate potentiality of our people. We were one with our fellow Asians in believing that we were not cut out for an industrialized economy. That is why before the war, we looked down upon goods made in Japan despite the fact that Japan was already producing commodities at par with the West. We could never believe Japan, an Asian country, could attain the same superiority as America, Germany or England. And yet, it was "Made in Japan" airplanes, battleships and armamentrs that dislodged the Americans and the British from their positions of dominance during the Second World War. This is the same attitude that has put us out of step with our Asian neighbors who already realize that colonialism has to be extirpated from their lives if they want to be free, prosperous, and happy. .....(to be continued with PART 2 of 3) Click these URLs to see: related documents and/or postings: http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/america-and-philippines-heres-bit-of.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2006/01/philippine-american-history-jones-act.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005_05_01_thefilipinomind_archive.html http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/racial-arguments-against-philippine.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/mission-of-our-race-in-support-of.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/buffalo-soldiers-in-philippine.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2006/03/phil-am-history-recovering-and.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2006/01/philippine-american-history-americas_13.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/11/manifest-destiny-philosophy-that_14.html,

http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/11/mock-battle-of-manila-bay-beginning-of.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/11/we-do-not-want-filipinos.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/12/american-occupation-and-control-of.html, http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/08/mark-twain-and-american-imperialism.html http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/09/why-our-homeland-did-not-industrialize.html , http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/05/what-is-filipino-nationalism-mrs.html http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2006/02/filipino-heroes-macario-sakay.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 Neocolonialism - The dominance of strong nations over weak nations, not by direct political control (as in traditional colonialism), but by economic and cultural influence. “The true Filipino is a decolonized Filipino.” – Renato Constantino

THE MISEDUCATION OF THE FILIPINO: PART 2 OF 3
See Part 1 Transplantation of Political Institutions American education in effect trasplanted American poitical institutions and ideas into the Philippines. Senator Recto, in his last major address at the University of the Philippines, explained the reason for this. Speaking of political parties, Recto said: "...It is to be deplored that our major political parties were born and nurtured before we had attained the status of a free democracy. The result was that they have come to be caricatures of their foreign model with its known characterisitics --patronage, division of spoils, political bossism, partisan treatment of vital national issues. I say caricatures because of their chronic shortsightedness respecting those ultimate objectives the attainment of which was essential to a true and lasting national independence. All throughout the period of American colonization, they allowed themselves to become more and more the tools of colonial rule and less and less the interpreters of the people's will and ideals. Through their complacency, the new colonizer was able to fashion, in exchange for sufferance of oratorical plaints for independence, and for patronage, rank and sinecure, a regime of his own choosing, for his own aims, and in his own self-interest." The Americans were confronted with the dilemma of transplanting their political institutions and yet luring the Filipinos into a state of captivity. It was understandable for American authorities to think that democracy can only mean the American type of democracy, and thus they foisted on the Filipinos the institutions that were valid for their own people. Indigenous institutions which

could have led to the evolution of native democratic ideas and institutions were disregarded. No wonder we too look with hostility upon countries who try to develop their own political institutions according to the needs of their people without being bound by western political procedures. We have been made to believe in certain political doctrines as absolute and the same for all peoples. An example of this is the belief in the freedom of the press. Here, the consensus is that we cannot nationalize the press because it would be depriving the foreigners of the exercise of the freedom of the press. This may be valid for strong countries like the United States where there is no threat of foreign domination, but certainly, this is dangerous for an emergent nation like the Philippines where foreign control has yet to be weakened. Re-examination Demanded The new demands for economic emancipation and the assertion of our political sovereignty leave our educators no other choice but to re-examine their philosophy, their values, and their general approach to the making of the Filipino who will institute, support and preserve the nationalist aims. To persist in the continuance of a system which was born under the exigencies of colonial rule, to be timid in the face of traditional opposition would only result in the evolution of an anomalous educational system which lags behind the urgent economic and political changes that the nation is experiencing. What then are the nationalist tasks for Philippine education? Education must both be seen not as an acquisition of information but as the making of man so that he may function most effectively and and usefully within his own society. Therefore, education can not be divorced from the society of a definite country at a definite time. It is a fallacy to think that educational goals should be the same everywhere and that therefore what goes into the making of a welleducated American is the same as what should go into the making of the well-educated Filipino. This would be true only if the two societies were at the same ploitical, cultural, annd economic level and had the same political, cultural and economic goals. But what happened in this country? Not only do we imitate Western education, we have patterned our education after the most technologically advanced western nations. The gap between the two societies is very large. In fact, they are two entirely different societies with different goals. Adoption of western values

Economically, the US is an industrial nation. It is a fully developed nation, economically speaking. Our country has a colonial economy with a tiny industrial base -in other words , we are backward and underdeveloped. Politically, the U.S. is not only master of its own house; its control and influence extends to many other countries all over the world. The Philippines has only lately emerged from formal colonial status and it still must complete its political and economic independence. Culturally, the U.S. has a vigorously and distinctively American culture. It is a nation whose cultural instituions have developed freely, indigenously without control and direction from foreign sources, whose ties to its cultural past are clear and proudly celebrated because no foreign power has imposed upon its people a wholesale inferiority complex, because no foreign culture has been superimposed upon it destroying, distorting, its own past and alienating the people from their own cultural heritage. What are the characteristics of America today which spring from its economic, political and cultural status? What should be the characteristics of our own education as dictated by our own economic, political and cultural conditions? To contrast both is to realize how inimical to our best interests and progress is our adoption of some of the basic characteristics and values of American education. By virtue of its leadership and its economic interests in many parts of the world, the United States has an internationalist orientation based securely on a well-grounded, long held nationalistic viewpoint. U.S. education has no urgent need to stress the development of American nationalism in its young people. Economically, politically, culturally, the U.S. is the master of its own house. American education, therefore, understandably lays little emphasis on the kind of nationalism we Filipinos need. Instead, it stresses internationalism and underplays nationalism. This sentiment is noble and good, but when it is inculcated in a people who have either forgotten nationalism or never imbibed it, it can cause untold harm. The emphasis is on universal brotherhood, on friendship for other nations, without the firm foundation of nationalism which would give our people the feeling of pride in our own products and vigilance over our natural resources, has had very harmful results. Chief among these is the transformation of our national virtue of hospitality into a stupid vice which hurts us and makes us the willing dupes of predatory foreigners. UnFilipino Filipinos

Thus we complacently allow aliens to gain control of our economy. We are even proud of those who amass wealth in our country, publishing laudatory articles about their financial success. We love to hear foreigners call our country a paradise on earth, and we never stop to think that it is a paradise only for them but not for the millions of our countrymen. When some of our more intellectually emancipated countrymen spearhead moves for nationalism, for nationalization of this or that endeavor, do the majority of Filipinos support such moves? No, there is apathy because there is no nationalism in our hearts which will spur us to protect and help our countrymen first. Worse, some Filipinos will even worry about the sensibilities of foreigners lest they think ill of us for supposedly discriminating against them. And worst of all, many Filipinos will even oppose nationalistic legislation either because they have become the willing servants of foreign interests or because, in their distorted view, we Filipinos can not progress without the help of foreign capital and foreign entrepreneurs. In this part of the world, we are well nigh unique in our generally non-nationalistic outlook. What is the source of this shameful characteristic of ours? One important source is surely the schools. There is little emphasis on nationalism. Patriotism has been taught us, yes, but in general terms of love of country, respect for the flag, appreciation for the beauty of our countryside, and other similarly innocuous manifestations of our nationality. The pathetic results of this failure of Philippine education is a citizen amazingly naive and trusting in its relations with foreigners, devoid of the capacity to feel indignation even in the face of insults to the nation, ready to acquiesce and even to help aliens in the despoliation of our national wealth. Why are the great majority of our people so complaisant about foreign economic control? Much of the blame must be laid at the door of colonial education. Colonial education has not provided us with a realistic attitude toward other nations, especially Spain and the United States. The emphasis in our study of history has been on the great gifts that our conquerors have bestowed upon us. A mask of benevolence was used to hide the cruelties and deceit of early American occupation. The noble sentiments expressed by McKinley were emphasized rather than the ulterior motives of conquest. The myth of fiendship and special relations is even now continually invoked to camouflage the continuing iniquities in our relationship. Nurtured in this kind of education, the Filipino mind has come to regard centuries of colonial status as a grace from above rather than a scourge. Is it any wonder then that having regained our independence we have forgotten how to defend it? Is it any wonder that when leaders like Claro M. Recto try to teach us how to be free,

the great majority of the people find it difficult to grasp those nationalistic principles that are the staple food of other Asian minds? The American architects of our colonial education labored shrewdly and well. The Language Problem The most vital problem that has plagued Philippine education has been the question of language. Today, experiments are still going on to find out whether it would be more effective to use the native language. This is indeed ridiculous since an individual can not be more at home in any other language than his own. In every sovereign country, the use of its own language in education is so natural no one thinks it could be otherwise. But here, so great has been our disorientation caused by our colonial education that the use of our own language is a controversial issue, with more Filipinos against than in favor! Again, as in the economic field Filipinos believe they can not survive without America, so in education we believe no education can be true education unless it is based on proficiency in English. Rizal already foresaw the tragic effects of a colonial education when, speaking through Simon, he said: "...You ask for equal rights, the Hispanization of your customs, and you don't see that what you are begging for is suicide, the destruction of your nationality, the annihilation of your fatherland, the consecration of tyranny! What will you be in the future? A people without character. A nation without liberty -everything you have will be borrowed, even your very defects!...What are you going to do with Castilian, the few of you who will speak it? Kill off your own originality, subordinate your thoughts to other brains, and instead of freeing yourselves, make yourselves slaves indeed! Ninetenths of those of you who pretend to be enlightened are renegades to your country! He among you who talks that language neglects his own in such a way that he neither writes it nor understands it, and how many have I not seen who pretended not to know a single word of it!.." It is indeed unfortunate that teaching in the native language is given up to second grade only, and the question of whether beyond this it should be English or Filipino is still unsettled. Many of our educational experts have written on the language problem, but there is an apparent timidity on the part of these experts to come out openly for the urgent need of discarding the foreign language as the medium of instruction inspite of remarkable results shown by the use of the

native language. Yet, the deleterious effects of using English as the medium of instruction are many and serious. What Rizal said about Spanish has been proven to be equally true for English. Barrier to Democracy Under the system maintained by Spain in the Philippines,educational opportunities were so limited that learning became the possession of a chosen few. This enlightened group was called the ilustrados. They constituted the elite. Most of them came from the wealthy class because this was the only class that could afford to send its sons abroad to pursue higher learning. Learning, therfore, became a badge of privilege. There was a wide gap between the ilustrados and the masses. Of course, many of the ilustrados led the propaganda movement, but they were mostly reformers who wanted reforms within the framework of Spamish colonialism. In a way, they were also captives of Spanish education. Many of them were the first to capitulate to the Americans, and the first leaders of the Filipinos during the early years of the American regime came from this class. Later they were supplanted by the products of American education. One of the ostensible reason for imposing English as the medium of instruction was the fact that English was the language of democracy, that through this tongue the Filipinos would imbibe the American way of life which makes no distinction between rich and poor and which gives equal opportunities. Under this thesis, the existence of an ilustrado class would not long endure because all Filipinos would be enlighthened and educated. There would be no privileged class. In the long run however, English perpetuated the existence of the ilustrados --American ilustrados who, like their counterparts, were strong supporters of the way of life of the new motherland. Now we have a small group of men who can articulate their thoughts in English, a wider group who can read and speak in fairly comprehensible English and a great mass that hardly expresses itself in any language. All of these groups are hardly articulate in their native tongues because of the neglect of our native dialects, if not the deliberate attempts to prevent their growth. The result is a leadership that fails to understand the needs of the masses because it is a leadership that can communicate with the masses only in general and vague terms. This is one reason why political leadership remains in a vacuum. This is the reason why issues are never fully discussed. This is the reason why orators with the best inflections, demagogues who rant and rave, are the ones who flourish in the political arena. English has created a barrier between the monopolists of power and the people. English has become a status symbol, while the native tongues are looked down upon. English has given rise to a bifurcated society of

fairly educated men and the masses who are easily swayed by them. A clear evidence of the failure of English education is the fact that politicians address the masses in their dialects. Lacking mastery of the dialect, the politician merely deals in generalities. Because of their lack of command of English, the masses have gotten used to only halfunderstanding what is said to them in English. They appreciate the sounds without knowing the sense. This is a barrier to democracy. Peole don't even think it is their duty to know, or that they are capable of understanding national problems. Because of the language barrier, therefore, they are content to leave everything to their leaders. This is one of the root causes of their apaathy, their regionalism or parochialism. Thus, English which was supposedly envisoned as the language of democracy is in our country a barrier to the full flowering of democracy. In 1924 the eminent scholar Najib Saleeby wrote on the language of education in the Philippines. he deplored the attempt to impose English as the medium of instruction. Saleeby, who was an expert on the Malayo-Polynesian languages, showed that Tagalog, Visayan, Ilocano, and other Philippine dialects belong to the same linguistic tree. He said: "..The relation the Tagalog holds to the Bisaya or to the Sulu is very much like or closer than that of the Spanish to the Italian. An educated Tagalog from Batangas, and an educated Bisayan from Cebu can learn to understand each other in a short space of time and without much effort. A Cebu student living in Manila can acquire practical use and understanding of Tagalog in less than three months. The relation between Tagalog and Malay is very much the same as that of Spanish and French..." This was said forty-two years ago when Tagalog movies, periodicals and radio programmes had not yet attained popularity theat they enjoy today all over the country. Saleeby further states: "...Empirically neither the Spanish nor the English could be a suitable medium for public instruction in the Philippine Islands. It does not seem possible that either of them can become the common or national language of the Archipelago. Three centuries of Spanish rule and education failed to check use of the vernacular.A very small minority of Filipinos could speak Spanish in 1898, but the great mass of the people could neither use nor understand it. Twenty-five years of intensive English education has produced no radical change. More people at present speak English than spanish, but the great majority hold on to the local dialect. The Spanish policy might be partially justified on colonial and financial ground, but the American policy can not be so defended. It should receive popular free choice, or give good proof of its practicability by showing actual and satisfactory results. The people have as yet had no occasion to declare their free

will, and the present policy must be judged on its own merits and on conclusive evidence...But teaching English broadcast and enforcing its official use is one thing, and its adoption as the basis of education and as the sole medium of public instruction is a completely different matter. This point can not be fully grasped or comprehended without special attention and experience in colonial education and administration. Such policy is exalted and ambitious to an extreme degree.. ..It aims at something unknown before in human affairs. It is attempting to do what ancient Persia, Rome, Alexander the great and napoleon failed to accomplish. It aims at nothing less than the obliteration of the tribal differences of the Filipinos, the substitution of English for the vernacular dialects as a home tongue, and making English the national common language of the Archipelago." That is more true today. very few college sutdents can speak except in mixed English and the dialect. Our congress has compounded their confusion by a completely unwarranted imposition of 24 untis of Spanish. (to be continued...PART 3 of 3 still to be typed!) ****************************

THE MISEDUCATION OF THE FILIPINO: PART 3 OF 3
Prof. Renato Constantino, Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol.1.,No.1 (1970) NOTE: Because of the length of this extremely relevant essay by the late Prof. Constantino, I have posted it in three parts. This is the last part. See Part 1 and Part 2 Impediments to Thought A foreign language is an impediment to instruction. Instead of learning directly through the native tongue, a child has first to master a foreign tongue, memorize its vocabulary, get accustomed to its sounds, intonations, accents, just to discard the language later when he is out of school. This does not mean that foreign language should not be taught. Foreign language should be taught and can be taught more easily after one has mastered his own tongue. Even if the Americans were motivated by the sincere desire of unifying the country through the means of a common tongue, the abject results of instruction in English through the six decades fo

American education should have awakened our educators to the fact that the learning process has been disrupted by the imposition of a foreign language. From 1935, when the Institute of National Language was organized, very feeble attempts have been made to abandon the teaching of English. Our educators seem to constantly avoid the subject of language; inspite of the clear evidence of rampant ignorance among the products of the present educational system. This has resulted in the denial of education to a vast number of children who after the primary grades no longer continue schooling. Inspite of the fact that the national language today is understood all over the country, no one is brave enough to advocate its use as the medium of instruction. There are arguments about the dearth of materials in the national language, but these are feeble arguments that merely disguise the basic opposition of our educational leaders to the use of what is native. Thus the products of the Philippine educational system, barring very few exceptions, are Filipinos who do not have a mastery of English because it is foreign, and who do not have a mastery of their native tongue because of the deliberate neglect of those responsible for the education of the citizens of the nation. A foreign tongue as a medium of instruction constitutes an impediment to learning and to thinking because a student first has to master new sounds, new inflections, and new sentence constructions. His innermost thoughts find difficulty of expression, and lack of expression in turn prevents the further development of thought. Thus we find in our society a deplorable lack of serious thinking among great sections of the population. We half understand books and periodicals written in English. We find it an ordeal to communicate with each other through a foreign medium, and yet we have so neglected our native language that we find ourselves at a loss expressing ourselves in this language. Language is a tool of the thinking process. Through language, thought develops, and the development of thought leads to further development of language. But when a language becomes a barrier of thought, the thinking process is impeded or retarded and we have the resultant cultural stagnation. Creative thinking, analytical thinking, abstract thinking are not fostered because the foreign language makes the student prone to memorization. Because of the mechanical process of learning, he is able to get only a general idea but not a deeper understanding. So, the tendency of students is to study in order to be able to answer correctly and to pass the examinations and thereby earn the required credits. Independent thinking is smothered because the language of learning ceases to be the language of communication outside the classroom. A student is mainly concerned with the acquisition of information. He is seldom able to utilize this information for deepening his understanding of his

society's problems. Our Institute of National Language is practically neglected. It should be one of the main pillars of an independent country. Our educators are wary about proposing the immediate adoption of the national language as the medium of instruction because of what they consider as opposition of other language groups. This is indicative of our colonial mentality. Our educators do not see any opposition to the use of a foreign language but fear opposition to the use of the national language just because it is based on one of the main dialects. The fact that one can be understood in any part of the Philippines through the national language, the fact that periodicals in the national language and local movies have a mass following all over the islands, shows that, given the right support, the national language would take its proper place. Language is the main problem, therefore. Experience has shown that children who are taught in their native tongue learn more easily and better than those taught in English. Records of the Bureau of Public Schools will support this. But mere teaching in the national language is not enough. There are other areas that demand immediate attention. Philippine history must be rewritten from the point of view of the Filipino. Our economic problems must be presented in the light of nationalism and independence. These are only some of the problems that confront the nationalist approach to education. Government leadership and supervision is essential. Our educators need the support of legislators in this regard. In this connection, the private sector has also to be strictly supervised. The Private Sector Before the Second World War, products of the Philippine public school system looked down upon their counterparts in the private schools. It is generally accepted that graduates of the public schools at that time were superior to the products of the private institutions in point of learning. There were exclusive private institutions but these were reserved for the well-to-do. These schools did not necessarily reflect superiority of instruction. But they reflected superiority of social status. Among students of the public schools, there was still some manifestation of concern for national problems. Vestiges of the nationalistic tradition of our revolution remained in the consciousness of those parents who had been caught in the mainstream of the rebellion, and these were passed on to the young. On the other hand, apathy to the national problems was marked among the more affluent private school students whose families had readily accepted American rule.

Today, public schools are looked down upon. Only the poor send their children to these schools. Those who can afford it, or those who have social pretensions, send their children to private institutions. The result has been a boon to private education, a boon that unfortunately has seen the proliferation of diploma mills. There were two concomitant tendencies that went with this trend. First was the commercialization of education. A lowering of standards resulted because of the inadequate facilities of the public schools and the commercialization in the private sector. It is a well known fact that classes in many private schools are packed and teachers are overloaded in order to maximize profits. Second, some private schools which are owned and operated by foreigners and whose social science courses are handled by aliens flourished. While foreigners may not be anti-Filipino, they definitely can not be nationalistic in orientation. They think as foreigners and as private interests. Thus, the proliferation of private schools and the simultaneous deterioration of public schools have resulted not only in lower standards but also in a definitely un-Filipino education. Some years ago, there was a move to grant curricular freedom to certain qualified private institutions as well as wider leeway for self-regulation. This was a retrograde step. It is true that this move was in answer to charges that state supervision would enhance regimentation. But in a country that is just awakening to nationalist endeavors, it is the duty of a nationalist administration to see to it that the moulding of minds is safely channeled along nationalist lines. The autonomy of private institutions may be used to subvert nationalist sentiments especially when ownership of schools and handling of the social sciences are not yet Filipinized. Autonomy of private institutions would only dilute nationalist sentiments either by foreign subversions or by commercialization. Other Educational media While the basic defect in the educational system has been responsible for the lack of nationalist ideals, there are other media and facilities that negate whatever gains are made in some sectors of the educational field. The almost unilateral source of news, films and other cultural materials tends to distort our perspective. american films and comics, American press services, fellowships in America, have all contributed to the almost total Americanization of our attitudes. A distinct Filipino culture can not prevail if an avalanche of western cultural materials suffocates our relatively puny efforts in this direction. Needed: Filipinos The education of the Filipino must be a Filipino education. It must be based on the needs of the

nation and the goals of the nation. The object is not merely to produce men and women who can read and write or who can add and subtract. The primary objectis to produce a citizenry that appreciates and is conscious of its nationhood and has national goals for the betterment of the community, and not an anarchic mass of people who know how to take care of themselves only. Our students hear of Rizal and Bonifacio but are their teachings related to our present problems or do they merely learn of anecdotes and incidents that prove interesting to the child's imagination? We have learned to use American criteria for our problems and we look at our prehistory and our past with the eyes of a visitor. A lot of information is learned but attitudes are not developed. The proper regards for things Philippine, the selfish concern over the national fate --these are not at all imbedded in the consciousness of students. Children and adolescents go to school to get a certificate or diploma. They try to learn facts but the patriotic attitude is not acquired because of too much emphasis on forms. What should be the basic objective of education in the Philippines? Is it merely to produce men and women who can read and write? If this is the only purpose, then education is directionless. Education should first of all assure national survival. No amount of economic and political policy can be successful if the educational programme does not imbue prospective ciizens with the proper attitudes that will ensure the implementation of these goals and policies. Philippine educational policies should be geared to the making of Filipinos. These policies should see to it that schools produce men and women with minds and attitudes that are attuned to the needs of the country. Under previous colonial regimes, education saw to it that the Filipino mind was subservient to that of the master. The foreign overlords were esteemed. We were not taught to view them objectively, seeing their virtues as well as their faults. This led out citizens to form a distorted opinion of the foreign masters and also of themselves. We must now think of ourselves, of our salvation, of our future. And unless we prepare the minds of the young for this endeavor, we shall always be a pathetic peole with no definite goals and no assurance of preservation. END OF PART 3 OF 3.

COMMENTS

At 11:34 AM, Anonymous said...

It is not miseducation of the filipino, IT IS MISAPPLICATION OF EDUCATED FILIPINO MINDS, Politically and economically that's what is is. Unless we brainwashed the new generation of filipinos we will always have these viruses and bacterias within the filipino minds.

There is no solution to our problems if we do not play in the same field, same goal, same love for our country, same of everything to save our country in ruins for the sake of our children that is not even born.

Thanks..... Roberto Coronel

At 7:41 AM, Anonymous said...

I was going to forward the Lessons below from Noah's Ark, in green font, that a slim (that is not short for slimy) lawyer from Chicago sent me more than one year ago. Then I realized that someone has written that all see ever needed to know, she learned from kindergarten, and she sounds simple-minded. Silly lessons from her, or from kindergarten or Noah, are not really apt for good minds. Hence the comments of mine below, written in red, came up.

This is really beautiful. (Let' see.)

Noah's Ark:

Everything I need to know, I learned from Noah's Ark.

ONE: Don't miss the boat. (Or, you may. An airplane is faster.).

TWO: Remember that we are all in the same boat. (The Luisiatana? The Philippine ship of state? Get out.)

THREE: Plan ahead. It wasn't raining when Noah built the Ark. (Yep. Good point.)

FOUR: Stay fit. When you get to be 60 years old like Noah, someone may ask you to do something really big. (Yep, good point.)

FIVE: Don't listen to critics; just get on with the job that needs to be done. (If you were Recto or Constantino, or Mao or Lenin, or Rube Goldberg or Pol Pot, or Cory Aquino, or Gloria Arroyo, or George Bush, or Saddam, or an Ayatollah, do listen to critics.)

SIX: Build your future on high ground. (Good idea. But, for some, it is risky; no place to go but down. For those with athritis, low ground is better.)

SEVEN: For safety's sake, travel in pairs. (Sometimes, in creative thought, walk alone. Or, when changing the world or innovating, walk alone.)

EIGHT: Speed isn't always an advantage. The snails were on board with the cheetahs. (OK, good point. But, they were there because Noah waited.)

NINE: When you're stressed, float awhile. (OK, good point.)

TEN: Remember, the Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic by professionals. (However, also note that amateurs created the Philippine Constitution's Article on economics that has killed, and up to today, 71 years later, still kills Filipinos, and crafted a Filipino nationalism that imprisons Filipinos behind a wall of economic ignorance).

ELEVEN: No matter the storm, when you are with God, there's always a rainbow waiting. (Or a tsunami, or forest fire, or earthquake, or landslide. Would it be nice if Allah loved pork sausages and shared them with us?)

Most people walk in and out of your life......but FRIENDS leave footprints in your heart (Indeed! I can still feel their cruel kicks that left the footprints in my heart. Of course I also do remember shared joys that also left footprints, but lighter ones, there. )

At 7:42 AM, Bert M. Drona said...

Norman,

Sorry, the comment did not upload your Noah's Ark images.

At 9:08 PM, Anonymous said...

In the global jungle, eat lunch, or be lunch.

Renato Constantino never ate lunch, nor offered a recipe for lunch.. He and Recto only had ideas to build walls of protectionism.... i.e. building walls against pigs. Then the Tigers of global technology came and ate them.

Hey Bert, technological Tigers are eating you, too. You use imported computers, imported cell phones, imported electricity (i.e., produced by imported oil and imported generators and imported tractors to build dams), but you don't help to earn dollars in a world of technological Tigers.

So, your imports are bleeding the Central Bank's vaults of dollars, the foreign technological Tiges are ripping your and our hearts out through you and Filipinos buying all those Tiger attractive products.

You've got to ride with Tiger allies to eat other Tigers worldwide. You must help build a Tiger Dell Philippines to eat up American Tiger Dell, or a Tiger Hyundai Philippines to eat up Tiger Hyundai Korea and Tiger Hyundai global, etc.!

That is the crafty method Renato Constantino and you leftist guys are missing. Use Tigers as allies to eat up other Tigers.

Such a Tiger Hong Kong alliance beat up Tiger America. Hong Kong ate Americans for lunch.

Even Filipinos were their lunch, torn up by Tiger claws from Hong Kong consisting of radios, cameras, computer mice made in HK and sold in the Philippines.

Ha, we must ride with Tigers. If we are not doing that, as leftists are not, then they have already fallen off the Tiger, and are being eaten up!

Eat lunch or be lunch!

Norman

At 9:10 PM, Bert M. Drona said...

Norman,

Thanks Norman. pretty amusing.

I suggest that you address your ideas to those in government than to me, they can make them happen; and you'll be well credited.

Rather than attack the dead who can not respond.

At 9:16 PM, Anonymous said...

Your suggestion to get the government going with my proposals is much welcome. I surely must work on that. But, if I did, I'd use only 1% of my time on it.

And while I am at it, could you help? Independently of me, could you work on government? I mean, must I do all the work?

I need your help because you could have a better public relations personality than mine. I am impatient with most officials. I see them as not competent, visionary, speedy. Even if honest and well-meaning, they can slow you down. The problem is that Presidents and officials are giants and minions bound by bureaucracies and politics, and worse, by ignorance and incompetence, and thus are usually unable to soon fix the needs of poor nations.

Of course there are exceptions-- Asian Tiger leaders Lee Kuan Yew. Ramos could have been an exception, too, but did not quite go over the hump completely, and the boulder he had pushed to near the top rolled back down.

So you can imagine why I plan to use only 1% of my time, if that much, exploring ways to work with the government , especially Gloria's. No President from Quirino to Erap has ever had GMA's terrible record: Exports have grown 0.5% annually during Gloria's 2001-2005 tenure instead of 7% to 10% on average per President, with Ramos as the great exception, at 22% annually (Hong Kong's long-term record); Foreign direct investment inflows have grown negatively during Gloria since the 1999-2000 high points during Estrada, despite the strong rise in investment inflows in 2005 from the depressed level during 2004. There has never been negative direct investment inflow growth under any President since global data on direct investment flows started to be published (1970s). I do not criticize Gloria for corruption, since corruption has been a great power for nation-building in the right hands: Deng Xiao Ping, Elizabeth 1, Stanford and the Robber barons of America, the Japanese of the 1950s, Park Chung Hee, Chiang Kai Shek.

Honest or corrupt, GMA has not performed. At bottom, it is performance that counts.

Given my aversion working with this government, but seeing that it could be important to do so, to educate it, to lead it, may I ask you to be in charge of this challenge?

While spending little time thinking of ways to work with this government, I also spend little time siding with its critics or friendlies who are also incompetent. They and the administration never suggest Tiger ideas

for nation-building. Instead, they blabber on every off-tangent subject, such as federalization or moving gov't offices to the provinces, or parliamentarization.

Why don't they focus on the one big thing and do it well: Win large amounts of foreign direct investment inflows so as to have the technology and foreign allies to produce $1 trillion of exports soon, up 24 fold from an estimated $41.5 in 2005? Thus, have jobs more and more Filipinos, until the 10 million unemployed or underemployed Filipinos are virtually fully employed, and they earn big dollars to import productive machines, trucks, computers, technologies? Thus, workers become more productive. The productivity of the other 25 million workers now fully employed soon rises from an output of only $3,500 annually now to the $78,000 output per worker in America, or $70,000 in HK, or $40,000 in SoKor? Thus Filipinos have high incomes, therefore pay big taxes, therefore enrich the government to build more infrastructure and better schools. Thus, the nation gets built? In avoiding engagement with Gloria and her critics, I devote myself to the bigger challenge: what must I, an individual, do, to use my time productively and push things forward?. I think I will reveal to you at some point my answer to the question, the business that I am into that is my answer to the question. I'll do that some time in the future, but not now. [ If I know me, that time in the future will be in 12 to 15 paragraphs, or the next email. :-) ]

Talking only in broad strokes for now, I see you not as a dead flea, but a powerful god or monster, if unleashed. Don't let me state the cliche, please: Prometheus Unbound? ....

No, no, no.... More like, Warren Buffet Jr. rising. Or HSBC Jr. emerging. Or Dracula flying high at midday?

Do you know these names-- Buffet, HSBC? Of course you do. You must Google them. Spend time on their web sites. Warren Buffet, HSBC--along with Sam Walton--may be the greatest, or among the greatest, long-term builders of the world in modern times.

If individuals are that powerful, why not use your literary and political talents to awaken Filipino individuals to their possibilities, instead of turning them into weak complainers like Walden Bello?

Why don't you start with yourself? As a U.P. MBA alum, you must read more on the Japanese economic miracle of the 1950s-70s, and then of the miracles in Tawan, Hong Kong, China, Thailand, Malaysia, S. Korea, Taiwan.

Be familiar with the instructive ups and downs of economic policies in Japan and S. Korea, especially the latest policies that has rescued them from the earlier stupid policies of the 1950s up to the late 1980s (or 90s for SK) that pushed them up high, only to plunge them into trouble from there.

And read how China copied Hong Kong and admired S. Korea but avoided the chaebol-oriented Korean mistakes.

Then go micro by reading much on Warren Buffet and HSBC. Then lead Filipinos, including officials, to the right actions for progress. Don't worry, I'll be there beside you, mano a mano, stouthearted man joined to another.

I have found the suggested readings above more exciting and alive than the dead wails and dirges that I get from reading the complaining Bello, Constantino, Lichauco, Recto, and Jo Ma Sison.

You must stop promoting their internally-defensive wails and whines and moans. Instead, be be a champion inspiring yourself and Filipinos to grow from fleas into monstrous winning beasts of world finance and commerce.

We must be savage Vandals, Teutons, Mongols exploding from our borders into the world, respecting no hunks, no Hulks there, no Knights Templars, no samurais, no kung fu masters.

We must break into rich Western and Asian markets with Western and Asian allies slaughtering the Grendels and Cyclops of commerce and finance there, while carrying away blue-eyed or chinky- eyed fair damsels as prizes. (wow, am I sexist... sorry, Women's Libbers.... I have been marching for Women's Lib forever. Now and then I must take liberties.)

You and we are testosterone, Bert. That means electron. Now let us electrify. Of course you'll ask, How?

My somewhat more specific answer now is this: Found a bank or investment company. Become Warren Buffet and HSBC combined. They were fleas with only 250,000 to 50 million pesos of starting capital. But, they flead well and became gnats of finance and commerce. Then they gnatted well and became gadflies. Then they gadflied well and are now magnificent vampires, monsters of finance and commerce. Now go and grow like them, as I am doing with my money management company in New York. Become a Monstron, a Draculon. You have friends with 50,000 of capital no? And they have friends, no? Get going and pool P20 million to P50 million of capital.

Then buy into or joint venture with a small bank, a savings bank or rural bank. With that bank, look for foreign investors to ally with at exports. Of course, also develop globally-oriented workers and managers. And work with me to find your small American joint venture partners to export with from the Philippines, if you need my help. Small foreign exporter allies at first. With them grow, and grow and grow to find larger foreign allies with whom again to grow and grow. Thus we rise to become monsterlets as attractive globally as starlets. That would mean big-boobed and seductive enough to buy San Miguel and BPI. So, we are a bigger entity and start promoting bigger foreign joint venture alliances. And we grow and grow and grow into a Brad Pitt of finance and commerce. So we we buy Gloria, Angarra, Ping Lacson, Pimentel, Brother Eddie, Honasan and a couple of American or Korean firms. We'd keep growing. So we buy the International Space Station, and settle on Mars and Jupiter to claim them as our frontiers. From there we negotiate with Klingons and Romulens to buy the Tiger nebulae, if it exists. If not, we'll create it. It is a crazy world out there full of possibilities. If we retain our cosmic ambition, good sense, and some silly humor, and if we stop wailing and moaning about how we are miseducated and exploited by imperial Americans, we'll get somewhere.

Best wishes,

Norman Darth Vadron

At 10:04 PM, Bert M. Drona said...

Norman,

Thanks for your entertaining comments though they have traces of validity.

Performance as bottomline. What is good or bad? if good performance, for whom?

I'll go along with you, though I must confess I do not have play money for venture capitalism, especially

with your investment company, haha.

For my own money, I'd rather stick to my self-managed investments. I got some ideas borrowed from your pal Warren, Pete Lynch, Ben Graham and all those economists who keep on writing "how to invest or get rich quick" cookbooks as their sideline.

With your great ideas, you should be able to convince even those creative thieves in government who boundlessly want more money to line their pockets (they might even want to live forever or want golden caskets, I suppose). They may catch on and invest with you.

So devote more than 1% on these guys. You might have better luck. Who knows, you make your money and by chance may even help the country get somewhere..(to where)?

While I rant about our lack of nationalism....as it keeps me going and contented....as you seem to be in your money talk.

Cheers.

At 3:54 PM, Anonymous said...

Bert,

I thought performance was well defined.

Performance means getting to do one specific big thing very well, so as to achieve all our dreams of progress. The one big thing is this:

1) Attract big annual Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows. It would lead to the realization of all the following great things that we Filipinos are ever dreaming of: a) Lots of technology come with the FDI inflows; b) There would be much low-wage employment; c) There would be great export sales complete with big profits for the foreign investors;

d) The big profits attract global attention; e) thus, more foreing direct investment inflows from new, addtional sources of capital; f) so, there are even more Filipino jobs created, and more dollars earned to re-invest; g) The reinvestment means strong imports of factory equipment; h) hence workers attain a higher level of productivity; they become more sophisticated and skilled; h) hence, their wages rise, but not eroding multinational profits; i) thus, profit reinvestment continues and there are even more imported equipment for the country, sustaining the trend of rising wages; j) in parallel, govt revenues from income and Vat tax collections rise; k) thus much road building, and water supply and school construction and environmental clean-up occurs, which is nation-building. l) if there will also be lots of corruption, and environmental degradation, we will have to endure these temporary pimples. m) as workers get rich, they erect better homes. Goodbye Gawad Kaling pig pens. Does the above enumeration of means and beneifts bore you? Sorry, but they need to be listed. I wish you mastered the model. It is all true--the experiences of Malaysia, Thailand, China, in the last 23 years and of India since 1991, and of four little Japans since the 1960s.

Gloria did not achieve the above performance record. It would have benefited all members of the exportoriented Philipine alliance-- the workers, the govt, the foreign investors, the people, the nation. Do you see now what performance means?

It is a bit disappointing that you said:

>> For my own money, I'd rather stick to my self-managed investments. I got some ideas borrowed from your pal Warren, Pete Lynch, Ben Graham and all those economists who keep on writing "how to invest or get rich quick" cookbooks as their sideline.

I wish you understood teamwork and leverage. One person is good, two are better, 88 million Filipinos are best, and 6 billion global citizens are bestest. A few Filipinos must band together to form a new bank or investment company different from existing Filipino financial institutions that have been weakly led. The few Filipinos would gather savings of Filipinos first, and then of the world next, so that there is big capital to invest. The few Filipinos would get going the process above of accelerting foreign investment inflows. How do you think America or Hong Kong got built?. Through banks and investment companies in

America, or in HK collecting local and global money into concentrated bid wads to invest locally.

>> While I rant about our lack of nationalism....It keeps me going and contented....as you seem to be in your money talk.

You really should stop ranting on nationalism that leads nowhere. The right nationalism conquers world markets, with Tiger multinational allies to do it with. Rant on that... and realize your rant.

You should be into what you call my "money talk," an unfortunate phrase, in my view.

Makes me think of the three bricklayers. Asked what they were doing, one said, "laying bricks, the second said, "building a wall," and the third said, "erecting a great cathedral." You make me think I am only laying bricks.

You should be into what I'd call building a cathedral of a nation, with finance at the lead, capital at the lead. In short, get into capitalism.

Don't worry, after capitalism, we will get to socialism, but not now... perhaps in a few... ... paragraphs? No, more like one century or two.

We'll be so productive in one or two centuries, that private property will be meaningless. Want to go to Paris. No problem, Scotty will beam you there. Or, want to go to Tiger Nebulae. No problem, the Starship Enterprise will get you there at Warp 9 speed. Want Cleopatra? No problem, the computer will consult a database, pluck atoms from the air, and manufacture Cleopatra for you to have your way with. Want a Rolls Royce? Ah... you'll be bored... The computer can make it for you from thin air any minute.

I am an anarchist, but also a contradiction. I love the NCAA and teamwork. I adore American, Japanese, Korean, Chinese companies in the abstract, and the teamwork in there. You should see yourself as a potential team leader, an organizer. Every Filipino intellectual appears to only like to stand on a soapbox. You've seen the Wizard of Oz, yes? We'll, no matter who you are now, you can be a bold man, a leader, a nation-builder. Just say so, just fool yourself into believing it... and then keep up with the illusion.... You'll get somewhere... at least that is what I must tell myself each day. Illusions are so powerful and productive, if they are positive illusions.

Your five assignments are these: 1) Get off the soapbox, and run away with my ideas. Use them as if they were your own; 2) Get other leftists to think the same way. 3) You and they organize your own investment

company or bank. 4) With it build a cathedral, er... something larger... er the world? the galaxy? 5) When you succeed, teach me how to be that good.

I won't talk to you for two or three years. Above assignment will require time and concentration. After you succeed, teach me how you did it. You've started well, reading Buffet, Lynch, and Graham Bell... er.. Ben Graham. How did you get stuck with Constantino, too? Don't explain. I understand. You've been an NNN - nattering nabob of negativism.

Good bye for a few years.... or hours... whatever...

Norman

At 3:33 AM, Anonymous said...

Hello! Hello! Im just about to ask wen will u be posting the last part? Can u please post it sooner.. Pls. pls. Pls..

-=>Lyn(^o^)

At 8:37 AM, Anonymous said...

please send me the overview of the "mis-education of the filipino" please send it at danah_roxas@yahoo.com thanks

At 8:39 AM, Anonymous said...

please send me the overview of the "mis-education of the filipino" please send the overview at danah_roxas@yahoo.com thanks

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

See links to this post Why We Filipinos Are Against Filipino Nationalism

Impediments to Filipino Nationalism (Updated) “Nations, whose NATIONALISM is destroyed, are subject to ruin.” - Colonel Muhammar Qaddafi, 1942-, Libyan Political and Military Leader WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: (Note: Bold and/or ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 7:47 AM

Rethinking Our Philippine History (updated)

Rethinking our homeland's history (updated) WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: (Note: Bold and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posting/article. Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends, ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 9:44 PM

The Free Market Has Not, Does Not and Will Not Work for the ...

The Free Market Does Not Work January 2, 2007 -- Interview with Joseph E. Stiglitz WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW:(Note: Bold and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see

the linked posting/article. ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 7:31 AM

Painting the Philippines with an American Brush

Painting the Philippines with an American Brush Visions of Race and National Mission among the Oregon Volunteers in the Philippine Wars of 1898 and 1899 - Sean McEnroe. (This article was the 2003 Joel Palmer Award Winner from the Oregon ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 6:14 AM

Education of our Youth and Militarization

The youth, the military mindset and education in the homeland WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: (Note: Bold/Underlined words are links to other related postings, point and click your cursor on a link to open. Please note that anonymous ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 10:01 PM

Colonial Mentality of Filipinos: Its Roots

Filipino (Our) "Colonial Mentality" (Updated) WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: (Note: Underlined words are links to other related postings, point and click your cursor on a link to open). Then and now, an American seems to reside in the ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 7:09 AM

American Empire - from Killing Hope

The American Empire: 1992 to present from the book, Killing Hope, by William Blum,2004 edition WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW:To those who wonder "why dig the past": We engage in revisiting and

revising our past, ie historical ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 4:46 PM

WTO - Serving the Wealthy, Not the Poor

WTO: Serving The Wealthy, Not The Poor Walden Bello The WTO, say the US and its allies, is essential for the world's poorest countries. In practice, it systematically undermines them. WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: Back in 1995, ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 6:13 PM

Comprador Intellectuals

COMPRADOR INTELLECTUALS Prof. Renato Constantino WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW: In the history of nation-states, almost each nation has gained national identity, unification and sovereignty through battles and wars against a foreign ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 9:29 PM

The Making of Americanized filipino Minds - Part 3 of 3

THE MISEDUCATION OF THE FILIPINO Prof. Renato Constantino, Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol.1.,No.1 (1970) NOTE: Because of the length of this extremely relevant essay by the late Prof. Constantino, I have posted it in three parts. ... posted by Bert M. Drona @ 8:13 AM

At 4:01 AM, Anonymous said...

Many thanks for your emails on Tato Constantino's miseducation of the Filipino(s). Allow me to put in my two-bits thinking at the this point.

As some of us in the FEU group (I was with them occasionally in the campus from 1950-52 until I decided to drop out of college and never came back--for any degree but to teach as I do now) pointed out to Tato in our coffee sessions (regulars were faculty members Ike Joaquin, Salvador Laurel, Benito Reyes,Nick Joaquin, students Dante Calma, Ernesto Banawis, Tony Joaquin, Arsenio Fabros, Isabelo Crisostomo, Jose Abcede, Greg Datuin, Alfonso Policarpio, artist Duldulao and others whose names I can't remember): he was too much negatively affected by his hate for the Americans that he forgot to use the situation to the Filipinos' advantge.

I regard(ed) it like jujitsu: throw the enemy by his own weight and use his own mass against him.

The Americans can be beaten in their own game--in their own language too. I think of Tony Escoda, Tony Arizabal, Al Valencia and myself who had become correspondents and bureau chiefs in the Associated Press and AP-Dow Jones here and abroad. Think of Mike Marabut, Joselito Katigbak and Ernie Mendoza who had been bureau chiefs of Reuters, or Teddy Benigno of Agence France-Presse. Or authors Frankie Sionil-Jose,the Tiempo couple etc. Or Sixto K. Roxas who was vice chair of American Express International, Bobby Romulo of IBM in his younger days. There were also one Victoriano Yamzon who was the most successful correspondent(better than the American reporters) of the old Manila Tribune in 1910 in the judgement of his American editors. A lot more name there are.

My point is our educational system must include a subject on how teach the Filipinos the hard facts of life-of geopolitics and international relations, and international political-economics. Teach them how to work out for themselves in the field of international competition. Learn more of the enemy because without that information we are dead meat even before we start. Work with what is possible and improve on our national lot. Be part of the solution, not the problem.

Cheers Gil

At 4:25 AM, Bert M. Drona said...

Hello Gil,

Thank you for your response.

Though I have read, reread and keep many of his published works, I never came to know him personally and do not know whether he really hated America and/or Americans as a people. As you may know, nationalism is a sentiment and may serve as an ideology too.

Like you I believe in education as a possible solution to the long-term improvement of the Filipino masses; an education that teaches a means to decent livelihood AND a means to understand his and society's realities, to identify the symptoms versus the roots of his daily personal misery and that of his society.

Of course such education will need to touch on the geopolitics of international economics, capitalism in terms of individual persons as investors versus corporate/transnational and institutional investors, etc. In a globalized economy the ordinary, individual investor is really a nonfactor. We seem to forget that, although we hear a lot of talk (propaganda or advertisement) about the "foreign investors", as if we still have much individual foreign investors.

I understand your valid points especially on education. However, the prior questions that we need to address are: how do we implement that kind of education, how and who will finance it? Can we see that happening in present realities where the national leadership have been/are corrupt and have only demonstrated selfish and subservient interests? Can we see that occurring when our educational system is designed to follow the IMF/WB/ADB "recommendations" as preconditions to continuing loans; and we know these supposedly neutral and benevolent international institutions are prophets of economic and cultural globalization (neocolonialism)?

I frankly do not see such an education being realized without a strong motivation from a leadership, supported by a nationalistic populace, that would push for a nationalistic educational program. Here again, the prior issue asks how can we have a nationalist leadership and a nationalistic majority?

Not from the recent, present and foreseeable governments and institutions. But it really has to start

somewhere, somehow. It is discouraging indeed. I feel and think that we Filipinos seem to have significantly lost nationalism among the younger generations since the Marcos Dictatorship, but we just have to continue fighting for nationalism (that's what I try to do in my own little way).

Else, a nation of decolonized Filipinos will not come to reality. And the Filipino will perpetually be having his "damaged culture," continually living his life of selfish individualism inherited from his culture and reinforced by the historical neglect from his government; with no sense of national community beyond his circle of family and friends. A country not his own since it will not be under his control, and therefore not a nation he can call his own.

A bleak future for a country and a people that oftentimes only a thinking Filipino can appreciate and sadly long for especially when he looks at his homeland from afar, in a foreign soil.

At 4:50 AM, Anonymous said...

Hi Bert:

This is not April Fools line. I appreciate your emails. It's good to know you are one of my friends who think of the mother country from the other side of the Pacific.

We as a people are not hopeless. The education of the Filipino we want will certainly not come during our time (since we have only 75 more years to go each, wanna bet?), but it surely will. Because it is evolutionary. See where the Chinese were in the 19th century,and where they are now? This is not to say I am endorsing the Mao-type of governance. Not at all. I surely hope we do not have to go a bloody cleansing phase in our history. That's why our evolution will take longer than the Chinese.

I only hope this present-day frustration over the rotten political setup spreads to the grassroots much faster so the slumbering rural folks finally wake up to the needs of the times.

Gil

At 5:38 AM, Bert M. Drona said...

Hello Gil,

Happy April Fools's Day!

Speaking of the mainland Chinese. Coincidentally, two days ago I watched "55 Days in Peking" movie (Heston) after 30+ years ago when I first saw it. What a difference years make. Then, I love to watch such movies but now, after learning more about history (am an engineer), I see things with a critical if not cynical eye. As you may know, a lot of Hollywood movies then and now have differing, if not questionable, assumptions, intended or unintended.

The movie of course was set or based on the early 20th century (1900) "Boxer" rebellion, when the Chinese people were beginning to be nationalistic (maybe the term was not invented yet). The Chinese resented the foreigners (Europeans and Japanese) who have divided the country into agreed spheres of influences.

Thus the Chinese Boxers started attacking and killing the foreigners; therefore the Europeans with the help of the American government (via John Hay who made arrangements to help them but, as a new imperial power, demanded an "open door" policy) joined together and defeated the native Chinese.

Gil, note that the Chinese had a Sun Yat Sen, Chiang Kai-shek and Mao who were all nationalists (though of course latter was a communist). The Chinese communist party has gradually since Deng Xiao Ping become a mixed economy: State/Party capitalism with private capitaism; but obviously the country is a nation, a united people, proud. They are nationalists wanting to preserve their national identity and sovereignty.

And that as you know is what we Filipinos do not have. I do not believe in evolution since it implies natural inevitability. Nationalism MUST be willed, rekindled and fostered to propel social transformation. With the way we are right now, it may take a generation even if the political conditions would allow it.

I see now with globalization a similar parallelism where our homeland is now being deluged with other foreigners in addition to the Americans, Chinese, Japanese. The only difference is we do not see much foreign troops getting involved (though there are reports that US troops, 4 officially unconfirmed killed, really are participating in attacking MNLF/MILF rebels down south. Thanks to Estrada regime with the signing of the VFA).

With the present regime hastily selling out i.e. 100% foreign ownership and/or operation on mining, etc. and the agenda of foreign interests in the proposed Cha-cha revision, the homeland becomes de facto under an "open door" policy.

As modern history shows, the US will use military force when its business/economic interests are threatened; and it will do so given that it's the only superpower now. That's why it's emboldened to go unilaterally and ignore the rest of the world.

Of course, as you alluded to, the question is how fast we can politicize and mobilize the majority. It may take a generation or longer than the 10-15 years it took to rebuild nationalism prior to the Dictatorship, as many of the nationalist politicians are gone and the educational system is not in that nationalist groove.

Maybe we would not see it in our lifetimes. But still, we the educated should just go on ranting so we ourselves and the ignorant majority become conscious and concerned about our national predicament and its roots and act in correcting it. Regards

If the Americans didn't educated us, I just dont know how we look like today. Perhaps we still believe in primitive witchcraft medicine. Imagine the millions of overseas filipino contract workers if they can find a job in their own country. Their edge is that they speak english. Maybe we are still a colony of Spain or after the colonizer left most people are still illiterate who could not even speak english to compete in the world job market ex Guatemala & Ecuador. It's true that nationalism is less a priority. Why? because our leaders coming from the wealthy and rich class are not nationalist either. During the time of Jose Rizal, Aguinaldo, Mabini, etc who belongs to the middle and upper class of the society had a sense of loyalty and nationalism to their motherland. Now politicians have numerous bank accounts abroad.

Some of the ideas in this article are true but the analysis and opinions I resent because it fails to compare

the old and new attitudes of Filipino leaders. Todays Filipino leaders are corrupt so that is the reason why the country can't move on and people are leaving to migrate to a better land.

We must be thankful that we are educated by the Americans however education whether Americans, British or Spanish if use for personal gains and corruptions then its eco-socio-political system suffers.

Nonoy Ramos

At 10:09 PM, Anonymous said...

Hi Bert: Many thanks for your emails on Tato Constantino's miseducation of the Filipino(s). Allow me to put in my two-bits thinking at the this point.

As some of us in the FEU group (I was with them occasionally in the campus from 1950-52 until I decided to drop out of college and never came back-for any degree but to teach as I do now) pointed out to Tato in our coffee sessions (regulars were faculty members Ike Joaquin, Salvador Laurel, Benito Reyes, Nick Joaquin, students Dante Calma, Ernesto Banawis, Tony Joaquin, Arsenio Fabros, Isabelo Crisostomo, Jose Abcede, Greg Datuin, Alfonso Policarpio, artist Duldulao and others whose names I can't remember): he was too much negatively affected by his hate for the Americans that he forgot to use the situation to the Filipinos' advantge.

I regard(ed) it like jujitsu: throw the enemy by his own weight and use his own mass against him.

The Americans can be beaten in their own game--in their own language too. I think of Tony Escoda, Tony Arizabal, Al Valencia and myself who had become correspondents and bureau chiefs in the Associated Press and AP-Dow Jones here and abroad. Think of Mike Marabut, Joselito Katigbak and Ernie Mendoza who had been bureau chiefs of Reuters, or Teddy Benigno of Agence France-Presse. Or authors Frankie Sionil-Jose, the Tiempo couple etc. Or Sixto K. Roxas who was vice chair of American Express International, Bobby Romulo of IBM in his younger days. There were also one Victoriano Yamzon who was the most successful correspondent (better than the American reporters) of the old Manila Tribune in 1910 in the judgement of his American editors. A lot more name there are.

My point is our educational system must include a subject on how teach the Filipinos the hard facts of life--of geopolitics and international relations, and international political-economics. Teach them how to work out for themselves in the field of international competition. Learn more of the enemy because without that information we are dead meat even before we start. Work with what is possible and improve on our national lot. Be part of the solution, not the problem.

Cheers Gil

At 10:13 PM, Bert M. Drona said...

Hello Gil,

Thank you for your response.

Though I have read, reread and keep many of his published works, I never came to know him personally and do not know whether he really hated America and/or Americans as a people. As you may know, nationalism is a sentiment and may serve as an ideology too.

Like you I believe in education as a possible solution to the long-term improvement of the Filipino masses; an education that teaches a means to decent livelihood AND a means to understand his and society's realities, to identify the symptoms versus the roots of his daily personal misery and that of his society.

Of course such education will need to touch on the geopolitics of international economics, capitalism in terms of individual persons as investors versus corporate/transnational and institutional investors, etc. In a globalized economy the ordinary, individual investor is really a nonfactor. We seem to forget that, although we hear a lot of talk (propaganda or advertisement) about the "foreign investors", as if we still have much individual foreign investors.

I understand your valid points especially on education. However, the prior questions that we need to address are: how do we implement that kind of education, how and who will finance it? Can we see that happening in present realities where the national leadership have been/are corrupt and have only demonstrated selfish and subservient interests? Can we see that occurring when our educational system is designed to follow the IMF/WB/ADB "recommendations" as preconditions to continuing loans; and we know these supposedly neutral and benevolent international institutions are prophets of economic and cultural globalization (neocolonialism)?

Gil, I frankly do not see such an education being realized without a strong motivation from a leadership, supported by a nationalistic populace, that would push for a nationalistic educational program. Here again, the prior issue asks how can we have a nationalist leadership and a nationalistic majority?

Not from the recent, present and foreseeable governments and institutions. But it really has to start somewhere, somehow. It is discouraging indeed. I feel and think that we Filipinos seem to have significantly lost nationalism among the younger generations since the Marcos Dictatorship, but we just have to continue fighting for nationalism (that's what I try to do in my own little way).

Else, a nation of decolonized Filipinos will not come to reality. And the Filipino will perpetually be having his "damaged culture," continually living his life of selfish individualism inherited from his culture and reinforced by the historical neglect from his government; with no sense of national community beyond his circle of family and friends. A country not his own since it will not be under his control, and therefore not a nation he can call his own.

A bleak future for a country and a people that only a thinking Filipino can appreciate and sadly long for especially when he looks at his homeland from afar, in a foreign soil.

Regards,

At 10:52 PM, Bert M. Drona said...

Nonoy,

Thanks for your comments.

You know, there are several recently published books entitled "What If?" That is, speculating on "what ifs" than what was/were. I do not want to waste your time and mine on such.

Frankly, to see Filipino nationalism as anti-American by a fellow Filipino is doubly disappointing and disturbing, I know your feeling and thought may not even be that of a minority.

That only shows how subtle and effective was our Americanized education. If you reread the posting and some others, you may not miss the point.

Seeing Filipino nationalism as anti-American is to misunderstand the causes and content of our nationalism. Filipino nationalism was there even before the Americans came to intervene (in our forefathers fight for independence against Spain), brutalize, occupy our homeland and transform our people into a herd of sheeps.

Filipino nationalism is to assert our sovereignty,i.e. control within our territory just like any nation, including

America, to be assertive in the control of its economy, politics, etc. within its borders (in fact, America is avowedly internationalist,i.e. wanting and having control BEYOND its borders in reality).

We native Filipinos are not in control. And we the educated are to blame; not the uneducated masa. Thus the masa has to be educated (for employment and including so-called educated, for critical thinking to understand "what is really going on."

Then with that understanding, they will be transformed to be assertive and act to pressure, or fight for and replace subservient leaders in all sectors of society and thus regain control of the homeland.

To finish the unnfinished revolution of our native heroes.

At 10:29 PM, Jason Paul Laxamana said...

And the last thing we need in the regions is to be dominated again. It is hypocritical how Filipino-language fighters EVADE the idea that lots of Filipinos are not born Tagalogs. Tagalog, like English is merely a foreign tongue to us.

And how dare Tagalogs deny us of the chance for global competency by replacing English with their own sweet Tagalog, while leaving our mother tongues to rot in the household?

Excuse me. If this is your idea of nation-building, you can have Philippines on your own and allow us to secede from your nation which you mold using Tagalog hands - alone.

Post a Comment

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful