'" -'-t --*-r

;:W \
t

,
h

FILIPINO I{ATIONALISM

I
,

HE development of nationalism in the Philip-

7 are at best illusive, and any attempt to define it to
AWgq, Err,ruarjqeL JERtc A.
Agoncillo, Teodoro. Filipino Nationalism: 1,g72_1971.
Quezon City: R.p. Garcia publishing Co., 1974
prnes, as weil as in other countries of Asia
which had experienced the trauma of colonial-
ism, is necessarily different from that of Europe where
the idea germinated, Definitions of the term itself
encompass the whoie of human experience, time, and
space is a trying task. This is Lrecause nationalism has
connotatiorrs that shift according to time, place, and
circumstances. Particulariy rvith reference to the
f,ormer Asian colonies, it is @ ancl
it rather unfair of some WesLerners, especialiy those
j.s
who have not experienced the sorrows and tribulations
of the coionials, to criticize the colonized Asian peo-
ples for making nationalism an emotional outlet for
tireir l:itterness and disenchantment with the less de-
sirable a,sFpets of foreign ruI", Emotion
sociated from nationalism, for this is a "*rnot-66ffi-
deeply human
experience and does not belong to the realm of pure
idea. It is- in facr, the distiilation of emolion. senti:
@ Consequently, .its nature, direction,
and development in Asia are necessarily different from
those in European countries, for nationalism in Asia
has been to a defense
perialism in i manifold forms. I shall,
re, not make any attempt to on the
1

h,.o H&^l
t
 I

1;
? tr,ILIPINO NATIONAI,ISM ttg.r'rl: Iuatgi TILPINO NATIONALISM 3

suirject ancl to define its broad rrrulticolored perspec_ proximately 1872' to 1896, may be called the Reform
tives. For my particular purpose, it is to Movement; the third, from 1896 to about 1901, the
affirm that the term, in orcler to be least "rroogh
misund.er_ Revolutionary Period; the fourth, from about 1901 to
stood, must be explained in its proper historicai milieu. 1910, the era of passive or "suppressed" nationalism;
In the Asian context, nationalism is a sentimen the fifth, from 1910 to 1921, the "Filipinization"
defensive in nature,avhich the
period; the sixth, from !92L to 1934, the period of
ing to live an inde t political e, to direct independence missions; tfie seventh, from 1935 to the
economlc provemen outbreak of the war in the'Pacific in 194L, the period
1n terests. As s na nalism is neither de,structive, of the Commonwealth; the eighth, from 1942 to 1945,
as some writers assert, nor positive, as some politicians the Japanese occupation period; ancl the ninth, from
aver. Its nature is generally defensive: deiensive in 1950 to the present, may be described as the reawaken-
the sense that it is usecl by a people to keep and. to ing. Filipino nationalisrn was in deep slumber be-
protect what they have achieved, sueh as unity, culture, tween 1946 and 1950. This periodization, like other
prosperity, national dignity, freedom, and indepenclence. periodizations in Western history, is not meant to
Wpnts n,
Nationalism is militant or ,,on the when it cornpartmentalize history, which is continuous, but is
oftac- done merely for the sake of convenience and simpli-
rS a nlze eto unity anri in-
+ de,pendence in defiance of, the colonizing country. It fication which is usually dangerous. But this is a
Lhw** is destructive only of impe rialism and of the im- risk that students of history must take, for history
perialists's attempts to dominate another people. When itself, both as actuality and as a species of writing, is
nationaiism steps out of bounds in order to encourage a risk.
or to preach hatred of other peoples, then it ceases to In all the stages in the developrnenb of their na-
be nationalism; it becornes chauvinism and it must be tional polity, the Filipinos responded in various ways
so labeled. When , at other-Emeq it is used in order to alien challenges, but their response may be charac-
to conquer foreign lands and peoples in the name of terized as
-
defensive.'
religion, civilization, foreign markets, and political,
social or racial domination, then nationalism becomes II
I}'en il imperiatrism and must be called as such. Fili na cannot be understood apart
ho (u6h is a mis a from its for any unique his-
+hihq L 0r
as" chaur,'inism which is
i is torieal event does not ppen ln a vacuum but is the
ded and im ialism result of numerous complex little events which, taken
0.4- is destru together, produce a massive impact on the eourse of
il"hmlgn In the Philippines, nationalism has several stages: history. Thus, I have to teiescope, in a manner of
ffi,lefir.st,fromapproximately1850to1872,rnaybe speaking, the distant events in order to capture the
'-{,,.--' descrjbed as the awakening; the second, fnom- essence of Filipino nationalism.
ap_
Coa.rrrrrniCf Or. t"rll' o"tio1* $"t
\ r*'* ) ,t '"4
a ittl,IPINo NATIoNALISivI FII,IPTNO NN,TTONALIS}I 5

There was, from the beginning' no Fiiitrrino

na- powerful friars, to kill their own kinsmen.n It was
tion, nor a Filipino state, for what is now
known as impossible for the Filipinos of the period to forge a
the Philippine* *u* composed of communities rulers rrnity that could respond adequately to the Spanish
called

barangay-si with their more or less

independent chailenge, for the insular character of the country, the
of the Span- lir:guistic diversity, and the hold of the friars over
called datus or raiahs' With the coming
iards in the sixteenth century, however' the
numerous the simple-minded Filipinos who had been condi-
were conquered now by tioned Lo obey unquestio'ningly, were responsible for
islands and their inhabitants
'the
the incantation of Cross, now by the swish of the narrow localism whieh diseouraged common action
of the two' against the foreign intruder. This condition existed
the sword-, now by a strange corubination
most hu- until the nineteenth century when the Filipino 61ite,
Spanish colonial policy wils, 0n paper' by force of circumstances, clamored for reforms in
*r,n.,* but in the Philippines, as elsewhere
in many
greatllr at the administration of the colonial government
puttu of Hispanic America, tire theory was ;
variance with actuality'' In the Philippines'
in parti- ' In L872, the Spanish colonial government, headed
t by the reactionary governor Rafael de lzquierdo, with-
.oirr, the coionial ofiicials and the Spanish clerics
drew the privilege of the Filipino workers in the ar-
-a.pi.O the policy of "d'ivid'e and rule"' Thus' the
plagued the more senal at Cavite to be exempted from paying tribute.
hundreds of uprisings and revolts that
in the Phil- Redenting the withdrar,val of this privilege, the Fili-
than three hundretyears of Spanish rule pino workers mutinied. The government, encouraged
1896'
ippirr.*, before the revolutionary explosion -of the .L
*ur. dismal failures, for the Fiiipinos I use Eg by the friars,putpromptly sent a punitive expedition to
term to mean the ancestors of the
- Filipinoss
present
had no unity and ideology and' consequently'
too ri Cavite and the mutineers to the sword. The
Spaniards labeled the mutiny an insurrection 'vvhose
-weak to challenge Spanish authority' The Spanish
chroniclers, lay anA clerical, e'xpltiinecl these
failures
by
r] P"1
aim was to secure Philippine independence.' The
$panisir friars ascribed the so-caiiecl insurrection to
the coming in of iibertarian ideas from Europe which
either by attributing them l'o niiracles performed
o
L
tire liberal newspaper ill Eco ltilipino (The Filipino
some saints who were obviously biased against
nitipirro, because the latter were aiways defeated'
the
or $i Echo), published in Spain, espoused in its columns.
iv ifr. superiority of Spanish military
tactics. The fact, however, is that the
science
policy
and
of divide
of the
I L
This newspaper was surreptitiously introduced in the
Philippines by Spaniards of liberal persuasion.c
The upshot of the mutiny ot 1872 was that the
and rule was mainly responsible for the failure
t)I
revolts and uprisings before 1896' A revolt or up- Filipino priests identified with the secularization and,
rising in one prouin.* was put down not by the Spanish eventually, with the "Filipinization" of the parishes
soldiJrs, whose number was negligihie, but by-Filipino in the Phiiippines, were falsely aecused of having been
t"pa,ieated in the
mercenaries from other provinces who were hired
by "insurrection." Prominent among
the Spanish colonial officials, with the help of the ane priests were Fathers Jacinto Zamora, Jos6 Bur-

6 FILIPINO NTITIONALISIII
gos, anci Mariano Gomes. Together with other Fili-
pino priests and well-to-clo Filipin*s of Spanish descent,
ih. th*u. priests were arrested and tried' Gomes, Bur-
Sos, and Zamora were sentencecl to death,
while the
o-thurt vrere banished to the Carolines" On 1? February
1872, the three priests were garr''rted in public''
To und.erstand w-hy the Spanish, authorities im-
plicated the Filipino priests in the "insurrection", it is
necessary to summarize the backgrountl of the move-
ment for the secularization of the parishes in the Phil-
ippines, a movement which ultimately led to the execu-
tion of the three Filipino priests. When the Spanish
conquistadores succeeded in colonizing the Philippines
for Spain, the religious orders came over to Christianize
the native inhabitants. Consequently, parishes were
established in many parts of the Philippines and the
friars, who belonged to the religlous orders (Dominican,
Recolleet, Augustinian, and Franciscan), took posses-
sion of the parishes. This'uvas contrary to the decision
of the Council of Trent (1545-1563) to the effect that
the parishes were to be administered by seculars or
priests who did not belong to any religious order' But
ih.*. were at the time very ferv, if any, seculars who
eould administer the parishes, and so the regulars, or
those who belonged to the reiigious ordeiis, were com-
pelled by circumstances to occupy the parishes. As
such, they were called fi'iar-curates. As regulars, they
were responsible to their respective provincials; but
as curates they were responsible to the bishop or arch-
bishop of the diocese to which their parishes helongetl'
This anomalous setup gave rise to controversies be-
tween the bishops or archbishops, on the one hand, -and
the friar-curates, on the other. The former.ptr,fl-
to exercise their right of visitation, but the os the
FILIT{NO NAT.IONAI,ISM 7
thre*tened to resign en rnnsse if visitation was en-
forced. The controversies generated by the question
of visitation lasted for centuries, with the friar-curates
having the edge in the ecclesiastical intramural. Yy'hen,
however, the friar-curates refused to vacate the pa-
rishes in spite of the fact that there were already
qualified Filipino secular! to administer them, the Fili-
pino priests insisted on their right to administer the
parishes.' The controversy now shifted from visitation
to seculari;ation. As already intimated, the Filipino
priests Gomes, Burgos, and Zamora wel'e proponents
of secularization ancl, when the Spanish seculars
dwindled in number, the Filipino seculars clamored for
the "Filipinization" of the parishes. Originating from
* religious question, the conflict became raciai: the
Spanish regulars and seculars, on the one hand, and
the Filipino seculars, 0n the other. It is thus clear
why the Spanish friars wanted the leaders of "Fili-
pinization" removed from the scene: they were tho-
roughly convinced that they had a vested right in the
parishes which, through the contributions of the lrili-
pino parishioners and the brisk sale of religious objects
to the ignorant and superstitious Filipinos, were the
prirnary source of their rvealth and comfort. To the
Filipinos, friar obesity was the symbol of this wealth
and good living in spite of the vow of poverty.
-
of the three
vinced the Fili at, the educa
was not uclve
an banished to
ihe Carolines, agitated for the "Filipinization" of the
parishes, and while the former suffered martyrd,om
antl the latter insults and abuse, they nevertheless
 .FILIPINO
8 NAI'IONALISM
trItrLil,}X}\.JCI NATIONAT,ISI|I{ $
fought not for the nationai patrimony, but for their 1872 which, in turn, led to a frightening
peace that
priestly class.This interpretaLion needs emphasis, characterized the period frr:m l"SiZ to 1-SAZ,
tor ihe
lbr almost every Filipino believes the three priests Spanish authorities, lay and clerical, terrorized
the
to be heroes. But Jos6 Rizal, the national hero, in trilipinos into abject subrnission. But the deafening
dedicating his second novei E{ trtiltbustorismo to the siience that followecl was the beginning
memory of the three martyred priests, showetl a sense of potniir-
tion, a pre-condition tq,an arlrnei eonfiiet.
of history when he said:
The Church, by refusing to degrade you, has placei in trII
doubt the crime rthat has been imputed upon you; the
Government, by surrounding your trials with mystery and This polarization was cleal, Iy shown in
the his.
shadows, causes the belief that there was some effor torical process Arnold Toynbee called
co'mmitted in lfatal moments; and ail the Philippines, by "challenge and
response." The chailenge, posed
wo'rshipping your memory and caiting you martyrs, in by the Spaniards,
no sense r,eco,gn;zes your cuipabiiity. In so far,' there- took the form of persecutions whose
fore, as your cornplicity in the. Cavite rnutiny is not clear-
aims were tb
corv the Filipinos into maintaining
ly p,roved, $s you nx:ay o't, tndy y*, have ltecil palriots, the statnts qu0\
drld as you mtN or may nQl h:avet cherithed sefi,tlm:e,n'ts for on the one hand, antl to preverrt the exploited
colonials
iustice and lor liberty,I have the right rto dedicate my work from resorting to any form of subversion,
to you as vicrtims of the evil which I undertake to combat.
IUnderscoring supplied]
other. The status quo was fundamentallyonwhat the
Marcelo H. del Pilar, the bril liant srtirist
Obviously, Rtzal, who was eleven years old when and re-
formist, called "friar sovereignty.,, The
the three priests were execu'Led, clonbted whether first aspect
of Filipino response to Spanish challenge was
they were real patriots or rryhether they "cherished a series
sentiments for justice and for liberty." Consequent-
of broa dsicles, wrl tten in different literary forms,
that shook friar soverelgn ty in the Philippines.
ly, he recognized them as uicttms of Spanish in- This
justice which reached its acme in 1896 when it made I
response, whieh have called the
Reform Movemen t,
\,vas meant not to drive the Spaniards
him its eminent victim. Even so, the execution of away, but to
1872 served as a eatalyst which produced a feeling
of unity among the Filipinos. And so what the
rvealth of the emergi.ng Fiiipino 6lite class failed to
achieve, the garroting of the three priests accorn-
plished.
The absence 0f dialogue between the colonized
and the colonizer, which had extsted since the eoming
of the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, eontinued
ur to the disintegration of tlie Spanish Empire in
1898. It was this absenee of dialogue that led tcr
l0 FILIPXNO NATtrONAtr trSiW
intellectual health. It was in Europe that Rizal con-
ceived and wr.ote his two devastating novels, Noti
Me Tangere .(Touch Me Not) and EI filibusterismo
(The Rebetr), and his satirical pamphlet tro Visthn
de Fray Rodriguez (The Visiorr of Friar Brrdriguez),
ernd his essays, principally n,La trnd,olencin Ae bi trttt-
pinos" (The Indolence of the Filipinos) and ,'yili_
pinas l)e.ntro de Cien Afi,os,,
lTne Fniiippines Within
a Century). LSpez Jaena, on the other hand, used
his "gift of gab,, to lay bare before the Spanish au-
dience the evils of friar misrule in the philippines.
Itris oratorical excellenee mar1e his Spanish antl i.,atin
American audience foiget his dirly coat liberaiiy
sprinkled with tomato sauce from ean$ of Spanish
sardines.
The rnost ricvastating of all the rvritings of the
Filipino reformists were those of Marcelo H. iel pilar"
As propagandist and political analyst, I place him
above Jos6 Rizat, {or'*del=pilAf wrote ef-feciively not
only in the language of the colonir*i., U*t also in the
bryg1g.- of his people. It was his rvorks in this
language which made the masses _ thal. is, the
masses of the Tagalog region _ laugh and riclicule
the obese fr.iars-and their rnisdeecls. It was del pilar,
too, who empioyeci his intellectual energy to make
the
fortnightly newspalrer La Soliclttridad
fSoliclarity) the
tlncompromising mouthpiece of the Filipino *.for*_
ists.e But clel Pilar, who tregan as a reformist, ended
as a revolutionist. Only he among his colleagues
realized the futility of the reform movement and
so
he switched his vigorous mind to the irlea of winning
freedom and independence through force. But
it was
too late. IIe died on 4 July 1896, the eve of the re-
volution that the masses hatl been preparing for years.
FITII'INO NATIONAI,ISM T1
It is rather ironic that the man responsible for
the --a-ffned -revolution wasquite unknown /o the in-
tellegtual 6lite, for he did not corne from their ranks
but from the ranks of the pxgstrate and dCIperate
masses. IIe was AnrJr6s Bonifacio (1863-1897). In-
telligent although with Qiscanty education that woulcl
not pass for Grade IY today, Bonifacio instinctively
felt the failure and, therefore, the uselessness of the
refornr movement. fle therefore founded the revo-
lutionary Katipunan (Association)' in 1892 with se-
paratist aims. With'the founding of this association,
Filipino response to the Spanish ehallenge niay be
said to have beeorne active in its aspect. Why the
reformists failed in their mission, on the one hand,
and why the revolutionists or activists, lvlto were
denied fhe help and sympathy of the intelleetually
sophisticated and the wealthy Filipinos, succeeded in
iiquidating or at least in helping liquidate the last
bastion of Spanish imperial power in Asia, on the
other, are interesting subjects for speculation. It is,
holever, clear that the Filipino intellectual 6litc and
their wealthy eolleagues were revolutionaries in the
sense that they passionately, sometimes angrily, de-
manded reforms in the colonial goYernment, reforms
which, if granted, would make their position in Phil-
ippine soeiefy respectable in the eyes of the Spaniards.
They did not agitate for separation from Spain; on
the contrary they wanted the ?hilippines to be made
a province of Spain believing that as a province of
Spain the Philippines rvould be given representation
in the Spanish Cortes and the 6lite wouid thus enjoy
the rights of Spanish citizens. In this sense, they
were conservative. Spain, however, was too pre-
occupied with her own domestic and international pro-
12 FII,TPXNO bIATNfiNALXS&g
blems to }isten'to the Filipino reforrnists, and the latter
missed this fact entirely" l\{oreover, as educated
men thel' were supposed io behave in the approved
lnanner of the perioci ancl an armed revoltttion was
not, insofar as tiley rvere concernerl, the wav to na-
tional sslvation. They were tr:o poXite a class to think
of a dirty thing ]ike re,roXi"rtion vrhich would endangen
I
i flict with the Spaniards, but also looked down upon
their sociirl end economic position in the community.
Hence with tire exception uf }llarcelo I{. de1 Pilar who
belateclly saw the futiiity of the reform rnovement, atrl
the reformists were politicaliy naive.
On the other hand, Bonifaeio, who symbolized
the sufferirrg masses, was a realist and a skeptic
who saw through the nature and character of the
Spanish colonial administration. Handicapped in the
u-se of tlie metrlifluous Spanish language, Bonifacio
wrote in the only languag+ he knew well, Tagalog,
and whipperl the masses into line by the simplicity
of his style ancl the directness of his a,pproach to the
Philippine problem.'n }lis seconctr in command, the
youthful Emilio J'acinto, wrote in the same ,zein but
in a more polished language" ?he explanation, then,
why Bonifa,cio and his men sllcceecled in forcing the
Spanish authorities to take a hartl second look at the
Philippine scene was that the tr{"atipuna??, had a mass
base, whiie the 6lite had none. This was so because
there was no dialogue between the 61ite, who wrote
in Spanish (except del Pilar wtro also wrote in Taga-
iog), and the masses wiro could not understand the
language cf their colonizer except the Spanish
u,ords they corrupted and incorporated into Tagalog.'1
While there v/'as no open hreak between the 6lite and
the rnasses, there was a yawning gap between them,
in sentiment and in social and economic status, that
FII-IPINO I{.ATIONALISKI 1.5
led to mutual suspicion aud irence to a silent and un-
cieclared class conflict. I must hasten to explain the
use of the unpopular phrase "class confiict", which
some Fiiipinos deny. The conflict lies in the fact
that the wealthy and the ilustrq.dos or the highly edu-
cated class, were not oniy opposed to an armed con-
the masses, in the manner of their Spanish masters,
with aristocratic contempt. On the cther hand, the
rnasses, who bore the brunt not only of Spanish in-
justices, but also of the armed revolution, suspected
the 6lite of being indifferent, if not hostile, to their
c&use." And so when the revolution broke out in
August 1896, the 61ite, in getreral, watched the bloody
confliet with Olympian detachment. Some even had
the gall to denounce the revolution. Hence, the quiet
hostility of the masses to their social and economic
sriperiors in Filipino society.'3
Teodoro M. Kalaw, scholar, writer, patriot, and
statesman who saw the rise and fall of the Revolution,
testified to the class conflict. I{e said in his memoirs
Ar.de-de-Camp to Freed,om:
The fall of tho Spanish sovereignty in Lipa [Batangas
Province] was oelebrated with much festivity. General
Malva,r and his staff established their official residence
in 'the town.
That was an unforgetable political Spring in
the life of a nation just emerged from vintual- Spring
slavery.
As was expected, certain social conflicts arose, natural
results of that period of hansition. Th,e Lipa artstocrdcy
mair,tained ils grand air even in the face of an enthusiastic
ardor for denrocracy and Liberty which had finally dawned
upon {he land.
There were in Lipa, then in the custo'dy of the [revolu-
tionary] authorities, a group of Spanish prisoners of war
who were qu,artered in a big house outside tt1s town.
The news sornehow leaked out that these prisoners, sorne
12 T.ILIPINO NATIONALI$}T
of whom were handsoms afld dashing Spanish officers,
continued to be friendly with cer,tain young women of the
Lipa aris,to,cracy, who often visited them and held parties
with them on moonlight nighls. Clws antmoslties llwed
up Lltttt'w, animostties th'at a!! had thougiht were ded.
Several young men, incltrding myself, decided to teach
these young ladies a lesson they would never forget.
Utalics supplied.l
ffi
Without the help of the upper-class Filipinos
-- exceptions were very few
- the masses launched
headlong against the comparatively well-arrned
Spaniards and their hireiings among the Filipinos,
armed with bolos, banrboo spears, brute strength, and
tunflinching courage. Spain was thus caught in a
vise: there was also the Cuban revolution which
was sa.pping her strengttrr and antagonizing American
vested interests in that Caribbean island. Jos6 Rizal,
then on hi"s way to Cuba to join the Spanish medical
corps, was detained at Barcelona, returnerl to the
Phiiippines, mistried, an(i execttted on 30 December
1896. The Spanish authorities, goaded by the ju*py
Spanish friars, became ferocious but thou.ght that
with Rizal's liquidation the revolution woukl lose its
momentLlm since they mistakenly believed that Rizal
was its "brains." Rizai, of course, had nothing to
do with the revolution, for he detested it believing
in evolution rather than in revolution to attain free-
dom. The Spanish mistalte was thrown in bold relief
when the.Filipinos made Rizal's immolation the symbol
of their struggle for freedom and dignity.
At first confined to the eight provinces around
the City of Manila, known as Intramtu,ros or the
Walied City,'n the armed resistance spread to other
provinces of Luzon. In l\{indana\r and other islands,
i'ILIPINO NAT,IONALISM 15
the Filipinos were unaware of the death struggle go-
ing on in Luzon, for the poor means of communication
and the lack of communication meclia in other parts
of the country, isolated thern effectively from the
dyrramics of a society in turmoil. As, however, the
levolution gathered strength, the Filipinos in the far-
flung provinces of the s'outh began to get an inkling
of the armed struggle of their countrymen, and al-
thottgh they could not help the revoiutionary forces
nraterially, they nevertheJess sympathized with their
embattled countrymen. ,'The revolution against Spain
iasted until 1898, with the shaky Truce of BiySk-na-
bat6 of Deeember 1897 serving as an interregnum
in which both sides tried to outwit eaeh other. This
resulted in the resumption of hristilities in May 1899'
This revolutionary phase marked the climax of the
nationalist struggle for freedom and independence
during the rule of Spain.
iVleanwhile, the United States government, goaded
by the yellow newspapers and by vested interests,
protested alleged Spanish brutality in Cuba, parti-
cularly the destruction of sugarcane fields owned by
American capitalists. The Spanish governrnent tried
to avoid a clash with the United States, but some
Americans in sensitive positions, especially Theodore
Roosevelt, then Assigtant Secretary of the Navy, cla-
rrored for blood. The excuse for drawing biood came
when the American battleship Nlaine was mysferiously
sunk off Havana Harbor. The American,- Congress
not long after declared war against Spain.Iu General
Emilio Aguinaldo, the leader of the Filiilino revolu-
tionists who went to llongkong and then to Singapore,
was persuaded by the American consuls in those cities
to cooperate with the Americans in ousting the Span-

16 t'ItII,trNO NATIfINAI-I$fr,1
iards from the Philippines' 0n 1 May 1898' Cotn-
rnodore George Dewey, cornmanding the American
Asiatic Fieet, destroyed the Spanish flotilia in the
Battle of hlanila Bay. But Dewey, now hailed a
great naval hero in the United States, which was
ihen entering her "Days of Ernpire",'u had no land
broops to invade the Wallecl City and so he encouraged
Aguinaldo to besiege it. Aguinaldo cut off the food
arid water supply of the city and brought sufferings
to the Spaniards, especially to the penniless but still
arrogant among them. The Spanish governor-general'
fearing Filipino reprisals, entered into a secret agree-
-ttttorgl,
rnent, Belgian Crlnsul l{douarcl AnclrrS' with
the Auierican military ancl travai authorities' There
rvould" be a rnock battle after rvhich the Spaniards
in the Watlerl City woulcl surrender' At the same
time, he made sure that General Aguinaldo's soldiers
*ouid not be allowed by their American allies to enter
the City. The "battle" was well staged, with only
the top commanders priry to the "battie" plans' The
tr'ilipino soldiers nearly spoiled the show, for they
advanced to storm the Walied City, that rainy d'ay
of 13 August 1898, in ord.er to force the Spanish
governor-general to surrender to them' But an Aurer-
ican field commander, obeying superior order, threat-
eneci Aguinaldo and his men with extinction if
they
entered ihe city. A fer,v shots were exchanged be-
tween the Spaniarcls ancl the Ameri'cans, and soon the
former', on orders of their commancler-in-chief, imme-
diately hoisted the white fiag at the southwest bastion
of the Walled City facing Manila Bay'"
Aguinaldo and his men, particularly the field
commanders who had eariier appriseil him of their
suspicions about Arnerican intentions, fetrt cheated
FNLII}INO NATIONALISM L7
and sulked in their headquarters. It was the begin-
ning of the parting of their rvays. Meanwhile, on i-2
June 1898, General Aguinaldo proclaimed the inde-
pendence of the Philippines, and a few montirs later
he convoked Congress. It was Apolinario Mabini
(1864-1903), Aguinaldo's intransigent and briliiant
adviser, who carried the burden of structuring a de-
nocratic government called, firsL, the Revolutionary
Government, and then, the Phiiippine Republic. The
Congress, as Mabini conceived it in thc 18 June 1898
tiecree he wrote for Aguinaldo, was to be a fllere
advisor:y hody.,' BriL the inembers of Congress, all
I:ei,rnging to the 6lite, proceeded to frame a consti-
tuticn. I,Iabini objectecl, for he thought tirat in su-
1:,r:emelv ci'itical times the Executive shoultl be clotired
with vast powers in order to cope r,rrith the erisis.
The members of Ccngress thought otherwise and
framed a constitution which made the legislative arm
of the gorrernment suprerne over the executive and
judicial branches. Mabini fought a delaying battle
to hold up approval of the constitution, iii;t in the
end, after a compromise, it r,vas promuigated by Gen=
eral Aguinaldo on 21 January 1899.1* Two days later,
t,ire Philippine Republic \vas inaugurated.
In the meantime, the I'ilipino-American dialogue
was beginning not only to slacken but also to be
heated. The diaiogue ceased r,vhen President Wiilianr
I\{cKinley announeed his so-called "Benel'olent As-
similation Proclamation" in December 1898 and made
it clear that the Americans were in the Philippines to
stay. Filipino soldiers and iiterary men reacted shar$-
ly to McKinley's proclamation and the nationalistic
newspaper La Independ,ancin (Independence), edited
by the fiery General Antonio Luna, later to become
ie TTLIPINo NATIoNALISM
the foremost military leader against the Americans,
started a scorching anti-American campaign designed
to unify the people against the new enemy. By now
the Fiiipinos, f,rom northern Luzon to Mindanaw, had
heen sufficientiy oriented to reject American im-
portunities. Essays, poems, propaganda leaflets, and
handbiils were disserninated far and wide to prepare
the people for more painful sacrifices ahead. This
activity gave rise to a revolutionary literature that
was permeated with a deep feeling of nationalism.
It was this period which saw the composition of what
later on became the Philippine National Anthem and
the writing of its Spanish lyrics by the poet Jos6
Palma" From the literary viewpoint, it was also the
period that witnessed the rise to national prominence
of two of the Philippines's greatest poets in Spanish:
Fernando Ma. Guerrero whose nationaiistic poems
"fu|'t Patrta" (My Country) and "A Filipirws" (To
the Fhilippines) were reaci with trembling passion,
and Cecilio Ap6stol whose X)oems "Al Hdroe Nacional"
(To the National lIero) ancl "A los ,.Md,rt;ires An6-
n,tmos a!,e la Patria" (To the tlnknown Martyrs of the
t)ounfi:y), reminded the people rif the unselfish sac-
rifices of their heroes who, knor,vn and unknown, gave
rup their. Iives during the darkest hours of the night
in orcl.er to color with their illood the beautiful dawn
of freedom.
The American response to this nationalistic tem-
per of the Fiiipinos was to strengthen their position
in and arouncl Manila in anticipation of the expected
clash of arms. The American military authorities
ty'ied to hedge off this armed conflict by trying to
inalee the Filipino leaclers believe that they, the Amer-
icans, were wiiling to talk things over rvith Aguinaldo.
FtrLIt II''JO NATIONALISM 19
But General Antonio Luna saw through the ruse and
denounced rvhat he eonsiclered American duplicity and
dilatory tactics. General Elwell Otis, the American
iirilitairy commander, denied the accusation, but his
subordinate, Brigadier-General R. p. Hughes, one of
Otis's commissioners who. met with Aguinlldo,s peace
commissionerg later onl testified thai they tried to
prolong the conference with their Filipino counter_
parts "until General Lawton,s ship could get there
t"* lManila j with four battalions, which *u ,r*.d*d u.ry
f rnuch."'o
# Meanwhile, Aguinaldo, upon Mabini,s ad.vice,
., s€rit out diplomatic agents abroad. Learning that a
lu peace
eonference rvas being prepared. by Sp-ain and
the United States to end the war officiaJly, Agui_
naldo sent Felipe Agoncillo, then in Hongkong as re_
fugee ancl later as president of the Revolutionary
Junta, to the United States as ambassador extra_
ordinary to work for the recognition of philippine in-
rieperrdence. Agoncillo's mission in Washington was
a failure, and so he left for paris to plead the Fili-
pino cause before the American peace commissioners.
Wtrriie some American delegates to the paris peace
Conference were privately synrpathetic to the Filipino
cause, Agoncillo nevertheless was made to understand
in cliplomatic language that he was pleading a lost
cause.* The Treaty of paris, in which deposed
Spain" gave the Philippines to the United States upon
the latter's payment of US $20,000,000, was signed
on L0 December 1898. Agoncillo, realizing the futility
of his mission in Paris, returned to 'Washington, D. C.
to fight the ratification of the treaty in the Senate.
He subrnitted a Memortat to the Senata giving his
reasons why_ the transfer of the philippines to the
**, .,"*\
'''"* *
"'
,,,;,,qfifi,s
'
rlim't r'1'r r!
e
" M&M&;i;,;,, ; Ll
20 TILIPIT{O NATIONAI,IJ$AI{
TTLPINO NATIONALiSM 21
Ilnited States was illegal ancl irumoral. At the out- in a suburb of Manila shot and killed a Fiii-
senl,ry
set, the Senate was not inclined to approrre the treaty, pino soldier. The resulting Filipino-American
but certain vested interests were for colonizing the war
was twisted in the American press as iraving been
Fhilippines: the military and naval authorities, in- provoked by the Filipinos and that
spired and influenced by the naval Captain Aifred T. Agoncillo, tlen in
lVashington, had something to tio with the
I\{ahan," who saw in the P}rilippines a base for the outbreak
of hostilities. The Amq,rican yellow press denounced
protection of American interests in Asia; the busi- hirn, and he had to flee for his life to Canada,
.ness and commercial interests which needed an ideally *n.*u
he sailed for Europe to work for the recognition
iocatecl colony in the Pacific as a jumping board for of
Philippine independence, a futiie, if heroic,
.American business \rentures, particularly the establish- work in
view of the fact that the European nations
ment of Asian markets for American surplus goods; were not
disposed to take cognizance of an obscure
and the religious (Protestant) interest rnhich also Asian coun-
tl'y. Filipino opposition to American colonial ad-
needed an Asian outpost for missionary work. Some tenture was almost unanimous. The poorly
Americans were candid enoug'h to admit American armecl
men. rvith harcliy any training in
imperialistic aims. Thus, then Secretary of the Trea- military scilnce and
tnctics fought the enemy *itt, great
sury Lyman J. Gage, saicl that "Philanthrophy and courage and
brarrer)r, aceording to the American
five percent go hand in hand"" This was echoed by newspaper cor_
respondents who witnesserl how the
his Assistant, Frank A. Vanclerlip, who said with Fiiipinos ?ought.r,
The masses backed up their soldiers and gave
frankness ancl harcl realism thab "We see with sudden stop the Americans from destroying th.
all to
clearness that some of the most revered of our poiitical nupuntic
they hacl inaugurated on ZB January 18gg.
rnaxirns have outlivecl their force and that among Makrini,
tire soul of the struggle, issued manifesto uftu,
these revered maxims were Washington's Farewell nianifesto from the sanctuary of his
Address . and the later crystalization of its main wheel_chair ex_
horting the people to fight ior their patrimony,
'thought by President Monr6s" that is, the Monroe for
- that the future of their .ornt.y, for the defense
Doctrine and arlded cynically "A new main- of in.i,
freeclom and independence. But the
spring - has become the directing force . . the and some intellectuals hated him for his
moneyed ctuss
mainspring of commercialism."2t Agoncillo,s ergu- integrity and
intransigence, and so they intrigued to
ments aird the splendid wor.k of the Anti-Imperialist have hirn re_
nroved as General Aguinalclo,s premier
Leagi.re in the United States, including Andrew Car- and. principal
aclviser" With Mabini out, Aguinaldo became
negie's ilenunciation of Arnerica's new venture in u uir-
tr-ral captive of the moneyed class and
imperialism, did not neutralize the awesome powers their allies
among the intellectnals who lost no time in
of the Presictrency. Rumors circulated freely that eollaliorat-
ing with the enemy. har.,e already explained ancl
some Senators had been bribed into becoming turn- I
analyzed elser,vhereru r,vhy these Fiiipinos
coats" Worse, on 4 February l_899, an American collaborated
with the Americans. It is enough to say here that
22 FILIFINO NATIONAX,TSM
not only were they afraid of the people and their
leaders,'" but they also r,vanted to preserve the sym-
bols of their status in Philippine society.
The defection of the moneyed class to the enemy
did not in any wa;y lessen the nationalistic 6lan of
the people who continued to bear the brunt of saving
their country from what they called "exploiters.""
The few intellectuals who chose to remain with the
people used their pen freely, and so the mighty pens
of Mabini, Ap6stol, Guerrero, the Palma brothers
(Rafaei and Jos6), and a few others, sang in cadence
with the patriotic cries of the peasants and workers,
ancl together they brought Filipino nationalism to
its aeme. When Aguinalclo, helpless before the well-
armecl enemy, orderecl his arrny to disband and to re-
sort to guerrilla warfare, the people acted harmonious-
ly with the guerrillas. Thus the birth of the under-
ground movement. In 1901, Aguinaldo was captured,
and in L902, the last Filipinq general in the field,
Miguel Malvar of Batangas province, sur,rendered.
Erren s0, complete peace and order did not return
to the country until 1907 when Macario Sakay, the
last reb,ei with a cause, r,vas lured into surrendering
on a promise of pardon" He was nevertheless ex-
ecutecl for brigandage, according to the American
-
colonial officlals.
V I
With the establishment of the American colonial
government in the Philippines at the turn of the cen-
tnry, Fiiipino nationaiism entei'ed a new phase. Whitre
the nationalisrn that rvas aroused by the Spaniards
and the Americans in 1899 was active and led to
anned conflicts, the nationalism of the first decade
FILiPil\{O NATIONALISM 23
of the century may be described as passive or ,,sup*
I pressed." The Americans, in order to consolidate
their
I polver in the new colony, deported to Guam the in-
transigent Filipinos, headed by Mabini, who refused
I to swear by the Star Spangled Banner, and passed
I the Sedition Law (1901) which prohibited tne f.'iti_
pinos from uttering ,,se&itious *ord., speeehes, write,
publish, or circulate, scurrilous libels against the Gov-
i
ernment of the United States . . . .', Violation of thiq
law meant a fine of US $2,000 or imprisonment not
exceeding two years or both. That this threat of
I punishment did not frighten the Fiiipino nationalists
is shown by the fact that the Filipino writers in Taga_
I
iog and Spanish wrote scathing articles ancl dramas
against the imposition of American sovereignty on
the trilipinos. In particular, the plays written in
Tagalog kept the spirit of 1gg6 aglow. At least two
oJ the Tagalog plays written and. staged by Aurelio
Tolentino (Kahapon, Ngay1n at Buias, teshrday,
Today and Tomorrow) and Juan Ab6d (Tanikaldngtr
I
Gint6, Golden Chains) led to riots. The Arnerican
authorities moved swiftly and filed charges against
I
the two playwrights, 0n the journalistic front, the
t
$
newspaper in Spanish El Rerwcimtento (The F,enais-
t
sance) and the Tagalog Muting pagsilang (The Re_
birth), opposed the changes introduced by the Amer_
icans.
The Filipino writers stood adamantly against the
use of English as the medium of instruction in the
public schools. The late Teocloro M. Kalaw remi-
nisced:'*
'f/e w.ere agains( the use of English, the language of the
American conqu€ror, in the scho-ols, The art'icle"s ," tfri,
subject that I dared nor us,e as editoriatrs, i
;;;;ar;';
pen namd.
24 FILfi'INO NATtrONAI,ISR{
Almost daily, the columns of the two nationalistic
newsllapers were filleri vrith sharp critieisms of Amer-
ican rule, particularly of the abuses committed in
an.d outside the governrnent" But whatever national-
istic sentiments the people had \,yere nourished in
silence, for the Sedition tr-,arv could be strctched to
include almost anythinp, tJ:at even remotely resernblecl
protests or criticism of tilc t:xisting order. There rvas,
it is true, some degree of freedorn bnt this was al-
lor,vec'I. only insofar as it did not contradict or achersely
affect the policies of the American colonial govern-
ment. This rvas so liecause the Amerieanst had not
as yet consolidated their position in the Philippines
and so they had to limit the bounclaries of freedom in
order not to enclanger their colonial policy. l\feanwhiLe,
they began to instruet the Filipinos in the English
language and introduced American political and cul-
tural institutions. The hunger for education, which
was denied the Filipinos during the Spanish re-
gime *.- except to a ferv led the young generation
- to his benefit.
to enroli in the public schools. And so the nationalists,
who were now in sympuLthy with tlie Spanish trrancl of
education, were frustratecX in their attempts to dis-
courage the Filipinos from enrolling in the pubiic
schoois. Within a clecade, from 1901 to 1910, literacy
soared to a height never before attained. Thus Eng.-
lish became widely used in rnany parts of the country.
This, however, led to the conditioning of the Fiti-
p'ino mind to things American resulting in colonial
mentality which is ver3, much in evidence even toclay.
ldationalism slumbered in the hearts of those wiro
imbibed things American and so they came to master
the verses of such poiite vrriters as Longfeilorv, Bryant,
atrd others. But those vrho dranii froiir the fountaiit
FILIPINO NATIONALISM 2,5
of Cervantes, P6rez Galdos, Zorrilia, Espronceda, and
Campoamor, kept the flame of nationalism bright.
This nationalism u,as frankly re-asserted toward the
close of the first decade when, on 30 October L908, the
Spanish-reading public came across tire eclitorial of
ill Renacimiento. Entltled "Aucs de Rapufi,a" (Bircls
of Prey), it said partlyi'n
The eagle, symbolizing liberty and strength, has found
the most admirers. And men, collectively and individual-
ly, have desined to copy and imitate this most rapacious
of birds in order to tridmph in the plundering of his
fellowmen.
But there is a man who, besides being like the eagle, also
has the characteristics of the vulture, the owl, and the
vampirq.
He ascends the mountains of Benguet ostensibly to classify
and measure lgorort skulls, to study and to civilize the
Igorot, but, at the same ,time, he also espies during his
flight, with the keen eye of the bird of prey, where the
large deposits of gold are, the real pr,ey concealed in the
lonely mounrtains and then he appropriates ,these all to
himself afterward, thanks to, the legal faciliti,es he can
make and unmake at rvill, always, however, redounding
Dean C. 'W'orcester, a zoologist and an anthro-
pologist who was then Secretary of the Interior, felt
allucled to and promptiy sued Martin Ocampo, publish-
er of the neurspaper, and Teodoro M. Kalarv, editor.
In the eyes of the Filipinos, the eelebrated case had
lacial implications: a white American against the
brown Filipinos. Rightly or ,r.vrongly, the Filipinos,
particularly the newspapermen, felt that the judge,
being an America.n, could not be expeeted to decide
the case against his fellow-American." In 1910, the
defendants were sentenced to a jail tern: and to pay
damages to the plaintiff in tlie amount of ?60,000.
The case was elevated to the Supreme Court which

F'ILIPINO NATIONALISM
firmed the clecision of the lower court. The de-
ndanLs, howevei, were pardoned by Governor-Gen-
al Francis Burton Harrison. ?hat the Filipinos
nsidered Kalar,v a hero was shown v,zhen, in 1909,
hile his case was still pending in court, he ran for
legate to the Philippine Assembly ancl won."
Though the nationalists's attempt to delay, if not
prevent, the "Americanization" of the Filipinos
,iled, they nevertheiess rnade indepenclence not only
r issue against tl,e pro-American Federal (later
ranged to Progr"esista) Partv, hub also a politicai
ogan. The political parties formed at the kreginning
i the century, except the Federal Parly, were pro-
:ribed by the American colonial authorities orving
, their independence platforln. Later on, when peace
rd order had been restorecl in the country except
r Muslimland * the Arnericans tolerated the - forrn-
tion of political 1:arties whose platform was anehored
r political independence. This was the Filipinos's
rst experience in the art of practical politics. The
'acionalista Party, founded in 1907, opposed the
rogresista Party, fou.nded as the Federai I'}arty by
re scholar Trinidad H. Pardo cle Tavera and a few
;hers belonging to the rnoneyed class, on the issue
I political independence. 'Ihe Federal Party, it must
: notecl, was the party which staunchtry advocated that
re Philippines be made a state of the American Union,
stand which was not new, for the reformists of the
380's wanted the Philippines to be a province of
rain. The Progresista Party, the successor of the
ederal Party, went down in ignominious defeat, and
e Nacionalista Party, composed of young men, was
,tapulted to power. Delegate Sergio Osmeiia, then
rly twenty-nine years o1d, was eieeted Speaker of the
I
.l
i
FILIPINO NATIONALISM 27
;
Assembly whose work he guided with infinite patience,
tact, and sagacity. Reminiscing on this period, Osmefia
said:32
That the Nacionalista Party won by electing the ov'er-
whelming majority of the members of the Philippine
Assembly in 1907 was proof incontrovertible that the Fili-
pino people repudiated anhexation and accepted our an-
noulced resolve to, work'vigo'rously for independent na-
tionhood. It was therefore to our great fortune, through
the Philippine Assernbly, to' establish the actual bases of
firm and friendly cooperation with Americ,a so that we
would advance step by step in tthe, shortest po,ssibtre time
,to the goal of national freedom. First of all, through the
creditable p,erforma.ncs clf 'the assembly. w,e demonstrated
beyond cavil the capacity oif our people for self-govern-
ment. Throus-h the recogmition of our leadership by the
American administration, we next proved rthat our counset
in national affairs, esp,:ciallv in the fo'rmulatio,n of na-
tional policies. was not devoid of any wisdom and states-
manship. Then, we established .as a consistent policy and
rtraditio.n in the Assemb:ly to approve, at the close of each
sessicn, a resolutio,n addressed to the government and peo-
rrle of the United S,tates. respectfuily pointing out tlrat we
Filioinos had sufficientiv proved our readiness for self-
governmen.t and sho,trld, ther,efore, be speedily granted our
liberty.
Itmust be observed at this point that Filipino
nationalism had become politieaily oriented, which is
t;o say, that through their elected leaders in the legis-
la,tive body the Filipinos expressed their rlesire for
political independence in a manner consistent with the
demands of democratic processes. The era of sup-
pressed nationalism was over and the United States,
by pursuing a colonial policy different from that pur-
sued by the European colonial powers, guided the
Filipinos in training themselves in the art of self-
government. Consequently, during the second decad.e,
or approximately from 1911 to 192L, the colonial
government progressively ca,me under the control of
the Fitipinos. Gorrernor-General Franeis Burton IIar-
28 FILIPINO I{ATIONALISN'I
rison, in his desire to hasten the '*Filipinization,, of
the government, replaced the Arnerican l:ureaucrats
with F ilipinos and, in the ptrocess, antagonized the
former. ThCI l-ilipino politieians, especially the ebul-
lient and meycurial Manu-el I",. Quezon who was slowiy
wresting political powers frorn the eool, calculati.ng,
gentlernanly *lergio Osmefra, as ieader o:[ the Filipino
participation in the governmenL, took adva,ntage of
Harrison's apparent clocility and sympathy f"oy ther
Pilipino people b-v eneroaching upou his executive
powers whieh were rrested in the governor-general by
the Jones Lar,v of 191-6. The Ameriean eoLonial ca-
reerists, par:ticuiarly the Republicans alnong thene,
sre\rerely eriticized tr{arrison for sury'enclering much of
his prer,ogatives as C}:ief Executive to the Filipino
political leaders. but Harrison eontinued his happy
rapport with the latter in the belief that they had
proved themselves' equal to the tash of evolving a
rlolitica.lllr incl"enendent nation.3l There was for Elar-
rison "no turning back of the hands of the elock" and
that the United States could not o'in honor and gootl
faith" d-ela11 the "grant" of inclependence t(l the Fili-
pinos."ta
But the Harrisonian era of Filipino-American
rapport in running the colonial go\rernment ended in
1921 u,hen the Republican adrninistration in Washing-
ton sent Major-General Leonard Wood to the Philip-
pines as American proconsul. Wood,, an honest, effi-
cient, and competent, if stiff-necked, administrator,
promptly restored to his high office the powers wrested
frorn it by the Filipino political ieaders during the
Harrison regime. !"rood, in contrast vrith his pre-
decessor, did not believe that the Filipinos were pre-
pared for independence and rhat it would requiro
F'ILIFINCI NATIONAI,IS$T 29
much more time and experience before they could
prove worthy of America's trust. More, Wood de-
manded the Filipino leaders's cooperation in making
the government run efficiently and honestly so that
the people could receive maximum benefits from it.
Uirtil such time as the dolonial government had been
cleaned up, i! was "folly to talk of any further auto-
rromy".*u Wood's attitucle naturally did not rvin the
sympathy of Manuel I-,,. Quezon, now Senate President
and leader of Filipino participation in the govern-
rrient, and his follorvers. Having tasted power uncler
Harrison, Quezon w'as not disposed to relinquish it
to an American executive, least of all to a military
one. To embarass Wood, Quezon had the colonial
legislature pass defective bills which he knew woulcl
be vetoed by the governor-general. As erpected, the
wary but nevertheless politically unsophistieated Wood
flell into Quezon's trap: he vetoed the defective bills.
Quezon took advantage of Wood's vetoing of many
bills to mount a relentless attack on the governor-gen-
eral, who was accused of being anti-Filipino" The
elimax of the attack came in L923 when Wood re-
quested, through his secretary, the reinstatement of
an American detective in the l\faniia Police Depart-
ment, Ray Conley, who had been previousiy suspended
by the Filipino Mayor of the City of Maniia for alleged
graft and corruption. Secretary of the Interior Jos6
P. Laurel, a nationalist to the core, instructed ttre City
Mayor to comply with Wood's request to have Ccnley
reinstated to his former position. Ilowever. on t4
July Laurel sent his letter of resignation to Wood.
"I cannot," Laurel said in his letter, "conscientiously
eontinue as Secretary of the Interior and at the same
time have under rny department a man who, I am
3O lryLIP'NO NATIOWAL.IS}T
convinced, is dishonest. In view thereof, I hereby
tender my resignation as Secretary of the Interior.',30
Three days later, a Filipino committee headed by
Quezon conferred with Wood, who lost no time in
defending his acts as Chief Executive. Believing that
the governor was trying to curtail the rights of the
Filipinos and that he acted in "utter ,disregard of the
authority and responsibility of the department heads
and other officials concerned," the members of the
Cabinet and the Council of State resigned enl nlasse.
Wood consiclered this an attaek on the sovereignty of
the United States and accepted the mass resignations.
On 24 July, the Commission of Independence requested
the President of the United States to recall Wood.
Not contented with this, the Commission sent a mis-
sion to \Mashington, D. C. to present the Filipino
leaders's side of the controversy. But President Calvin
Coolidge, in a }etter to the mission, 5 March LIZA,
rebuked the Filipino political leaders, saying:3'
Looking at the whole situation fairly and impartially,
c,ne can not b,ut feel thait if the Filipino people can: not
cooperate in the supp,ort and encour,agement of as good
an administration as has been afforded under Governor-
General Wood, their failure will be rather a testimony of
unp,repar:dness for rthe full obligations of citizenship than
an evidence of patriotic eagerness to advance theii coun-
try.
The Coolidge administration backed up Wood and
the Filipino mission u,ent home with bloody but un-
bowed head. The conflict between Wood and the
Filipino leaders ended in 192T when the former died
on the operating table in the United States.
succeeding governors-general, learning from the les-
sons Wood bequeathed to them, were tactful in their
dealings with the Filipino poiitical leaders, especially
with Quezon who said at the height of the controversy
FILIPINO NATIONALISM 31
with Wood: "I would rather have a government run
iike hell by Filipinos than a government run like
heaven by Americans." Quezon probably did not fore-
see the future with his usual brilliance .
VI
"i
Meanwhile, independence missions were sent to
the United States from 1919 to L932 to secllre a
solemn pledge from American officials in Washington
that independence would be given to the Philippines
at the earliest possible time. The missions failed to
accomplish their purpose, for American and Filipino
vested interests interposed objections to the grant of
independence. In December 1931, Senator Sergio Os-
rnefla and Speaker Manuel A. Roxas headed a mission
to the Ilnited States to take advantage of the changing
climate of opinion in and outside Congress broug'ht
alcout by the depression of the late 1920's and the
early l-930's. The Osrox mission, as the Osmeffa-
Roxas Mission was popularly called, was ironically
aided in its campaign by the American pressure
groups which represented various interests allegedly
affected by the free trade relations between the PhiI-
ippines and the United States. The American farmers,
for one, beiieved that their critical position in the
late l-920's and eariy L930's was traceable to the
competition of PhilippirTe agricultural products which
entered the American market free of duty. On the
other hand, the American labor group thought that
The Filipino immigration and cheap labor were responsible
for the widespread unemployment. The cottonseed
pressure group also favored independence because of
the fear that continued entry of Philippine coconut
products, sugar, and other products, was detrimental
,.)
F'ILIPINO }IATION ALISM
to their interest.u* The result was the passage of the
Hare-Hawes-Cutting Bilt which provided for a ten-
year transition period before political independence
could be granted the Philippines. President Herbert
Hoover saw many defects in the bill and consequently
vetoed it. But Congress, in the firm grip of the pres-
sure groups, voted to override the veto. The bill be-
came a law.
The triumph of the Osro:< I,fission, however, made
Quezon unhappy, for the senior' leader of the mission
would return a hero and, therefore, a threat to his,
Quezon's, political leadership. He denounced the H-H-C
Law with all his oratorical prowess and succeeded, by
skillful political maneuvers, to have it rejected by the
legislature on the ground that ( 1) the restrictions
on Filipino immigration to the United States was
repugnant to the Filipino people; (2) the powers
vested in the American High Commissioner to the
Philippines were indefinite; (3) some of the provisions
of the law imperiled the political, social, and economic
institutions of the Philippines; and (4) the provision
regarding Arnerican military and naval reservations
in the Philippines was contrary to the spirit of tme
independence" In doing so, Quezon made the biggest
gamble of his life, for it was the popular belief that
the American Congress \vas no longer receptive to
other independence proposais. Quezon, a good poker
player, led a mission to the United States to secure
a better independence law than the H-H-C Law. By
a clever maneuver', he had the I{-H-C Law rehashed
and presented to the American Congress as the Ty-
dings-McDuffie 8i11. It was immediately passed by
Congress and approved by President Franklin Delano
R,oosevelt, who defeated Hoover in 1932. The T-M
i.,ILIPINO }IAflONALISM 33
Law was substantially the same as the H_H-C Law
except that the former provided for future negotia_
tions between the President of the United States and
nf the Philippines, within two years after independence,
for the adjustment and setflement of outstandlng ques-
tions relating to America4,naval reservations and fuel-
ing stations in the Phiiifupines. The T-M Law was
accepted by the people in a piebiscite. A constitution
of the Commonwealth, the semi-inclependent govern-
ment during the ten-year transition period., was framed
by the Filipino delegates to the Constitutional Con-
vention, and duly approved by president Roosevelt on
23 March 1935. On 15 November of the same year,
the Commonwealth was inaugurated with euezon as
president and Osmeffa as vice-president. For the first
time since the American occupation the Filipinos had
almost complete control of their gorr"rr*urr1, except
those relating to currency and foreign relations.
The Commonwealth may be regarded as an experl-
mental stage preparatory to political independence,
that is to say, that the Filipinos were given oppor-
tunity to adjust themseives politically and economical-
to their new status as a semi-independent people.
must be noted that during the six_ year period prior
to the outbreak of the war in the Facific, the Filipino
leaders, still imbued with the spirit of nationalism,
tried to evolve a national language based on Tagalog
by establishing the Insti tute of National Language
early in 193?; shelved the traditional teaching of the
iives of American heroes and substituted the study
the lives of great Filipinos; and gave impetus to
developmen t of Filipino national consciousness
hich, in essenee, was American oriented. The out-
of the war on 8 December Lg4l, when the
34 FILIPINO NATIONALISM
Japanese launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor,
Hawaii, and some parts of the Philippines, followed
by the invasion of Malaya, the Dutch East Indies
(Ind.onesia), and. other parts of Asia, dissipated the
Filipinos's dream of a prosperous and independent
existence. On 2 January L942, the Japanese forces
occupied Manila. When Bataan feII on 9 April and
Corregidor capitulated on 6 May L942, the Filipinos
conducted two kinds of resistance: the active, repre-
sented by the guerrillas, and the passive, represented
by the populace who refused to cooperate or cooperated
half-hearteclly, with the Japanese army of occupation.
For three ye.ers, the Filipinos suffered untold
misery, hunger, disease, and brutality. For the third
time Filipino nationalism was aroused to the point
of feroeity. But the nationalism thus aroused differed
from that of 1896 and 1899 in that the latter's di-
reetion was toward independence and freedom, while
the former's purpose was to make the return of the
Americans possible. With the exception of the guer-
rilla outfit Hukbalahd.p (short fov Hukbo ng Bayan
Laban sa Hapon or People's Anti-Japanese Army),
all the guerrilla outfits, which sprouted in every
mountain ancl liiil throughout the length and breadth
of the country, were for the "return of the beloved"
Americans who gave the Filipinos universal educa-
tion, broadened the democlatic base, taught them the
modern principles of hygiene and sanitation, and irr-
troduced thern to American luxtlry goods which later
on became necessities. Obviously, only t'he Hukbala'
h,aps or"Huks for. short, were politically sophisticated,
for although they were not hostile to the Americans,
they nevertheless thought in terms of freedom and
independence not only from the Japanese, but also
FILIPINO NATIONALISM 3:D
from the Americans. Consequently, only the Huk
organization had its roots in 1896. The reason for
this is not the presence of communists among the lluks,
but the degree of political sophistication the Huk
leaders had and the fact that the outfit hact the sup-
port of the Central Luzgn peasants who had been the
victims of their landlords,s predatory instincts. Just
as the peasants and workers generally propelled the
Revolution of 1896, so the Huks comprised. the most
effective guerrilla organization during the Japanese
occupation.'n The Filipino nationalists, then, during
the Japanese oceupation were of two persuasions: those
who craved for the return of the Americans and
those who wanted American authority terminatecl
after the war. Both, however, had one thing in
common: they were fiercely anti-Japanese. It was
this sentiment and the fact that the Filipinos were
openly pro-American that led the Japanese military
authorities to resort to brutal methods of persuading
the Filipinos to abandon their ,,folly,, of depending
on the Americans and to accept instead the ideological
implications of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity
Sphere. The fact that the Filipinos, brutalized though
they were, did not succumb to massive Japanese pro-
paganda is a tribute to their moral stamina which
seeretly nurtured their nationalistic spirit in a time
of crisis and to the effectiveness of the Ameriean edu-
cational system which conditioned the minds of the
Filipinos to the American way of life and institutions.
With the active help and participation of FiIi-
pino guerrillas of varying hues and moti ves, the
forces avenged their defeat on Bataan and
and, on 3 February 1,945, entered North
almost without firing a shot. A year late4
38 FILIPINO NATIOI.IALISS{ FILIPU{O NATIONALISM 89
Against this hackground of physieal and moral heip-
lessness, the Americans, thinking of the future i.n
terms of the Arnerican century, imposed upon the
physically and morally disabled F ilipinos the unequal
treaties which niake a caricature of political independ-
ence. The Americans found an ally in the first pres-
ident of the Republic of the Philippines. Today, the
nationalists who saw the last war and its indescribable
barbarism and those born in and after 1946, see the
present dilemma of the tr'ilipinos as the upshot of the
late President Manuel A. Roxas's failure, or refusal,
to stand up to the Americans of the Paul V. McNutt
type whose rnain preoccupaLion was the perpetuation
of the Philippines as an econorulie coiony of the United
States.

VIT
At this point, it is perhaps proper to shift
the religious aspect of trilipino nationalism. trt must
be emphasized at the outset that during the rule of
Spain there was no religious freedom. Only Catholic-
ism, Spanish brand, was allowecl in those areas al-
ready effectively piaced under Spanish control. When
one considers that Church and State were wedded,
not so blissfully to be sure, ons: iuunediately realizes
the clual arrrl anornalous chalacter" of the union, a,
condition that was setrdom conc'iuclve Lo harmony not
only within the Church ancl the State, but also within
the confines of the Catliolic community. The Spanish
friars were, uncler the circrimstances, the lords and
masters not oni1, of the souls of Lhe ignorant Filipinos,
but also of their bodies. Consequently, the friars be-
came the fa,r,orite targets of the Filipino reformists
who, whiie neither anti-Catholic nor anti-Spanish,
to
country from Spanish yoke and rnalfeasance. Agui-
naldo, however , commissioned Aglipay to go to north-
ern Luzon to persuade the people in that region to
join the revolution. Nozaleda, learn ing of
Aguinaldo's
countered by instructing ASI ipay to go to the
north not to follow Aguinaldo,s instructions, but to
look into the condition of the bishopric there. Again,
Aglipay follolved the arch bishop and secured. the re-
of two Jesuits from the custody of the rebels.
to Manila to render a report to his reli-
superi or, Aglipay found the city besieged by the
no and American forces. Aglipay then and
t{eeided to join the revolu tionary cause" On 20
1898, Aguinaldo appointed him Militarv Vi-

40 NATIONALISM
.. ",,*,*O
of
car General. I{e thus became the religious leader
the revolutionarY movement'
Manlr of the Filipino ciergy joined or sympathized
r,vith the revolution, for not ontry were they thinking
and feeling as Filipinos, but ihey also believed that
it was time for them to clamor openly for the "Fili-
pinization" of the .Church. There was, therefore, no
attempt to separate from Rome. Taking advantage
of the situation, Apolinario lVlabini issued a rnanifesto
calling for the establishment of the trilipino National
Church which, althougil Catholic, woulcl nevertheless
cooperate with the Filipino revolutionary leaders
in their struggle for national emancipation' In
other words, the Filipino National Church woulcl be
Filipino first, and only secondarily Catholic' On 23
October 1899, the Filipino clergy rnet and' framed a
constitution which declared the Filipinos free from
Spanish control. The Filipino-American war, how-
.rr.*, did not give the clergy a chance to develop the
National Church.
1n 1900, when the Philippines was under military
control, the American Apostolic Detr'egate t'o the Phil-
ippines, Mons. Pl6cido Chapelle, arrogantly d'eciared"
tGt fr. would use force if necessary to return the
hated Spanish friars to their Philippine parishes' The
Filipino clergy thought that ile went too far' Conse-
qrr.rrtly, they agitated for a Filipino Church, still
Catholic but contr'olled by Filipinos' Two Filipirro
priests were sent to Rome to piead with the Pope'
Lut His Holiness sho"nved partiality to the Spanish
friars. I\{eanwhiie, Isabelo de los Reyes, a scholar
and publicist, wrote in the newspaper he was then
editing in SPain:
FILII'INO NA.TIONALISM 4T
Enough of Romel Let us now form without vacillatioo
our own congregation, a Filipino Chwch, conserving all
that is good in the Roman Church and eliminating all tttc
deceptions which the diabolical asturteness of the 611nning
trtomanists had introduced to eorrupt thc moral purity and
sacredness of the doctrines of Christ.
Iteturning to the Plflippines in 1901, de los Reyes
founded the tJnion Obrbra Dem,ocrdtica (I)emoeratic
Labor Union), first labor union in the country. On
the night qf 3 August 1902, he ealled a rneeting of
the labor union and proposed the establishrnent of the
Irilipino Independent Church with Father Gregorio
Aglipay as Supreme Bisliop. The proposal was approved
unanimously. This was the beginning of the schism
v;'ith Rome. It must be noted that the Independent
Church was founded by an intellectual labor lead.er and
that the base was, and continues to be, the rnasses, not
the 6lite. When de los Reyes, in his enthusiasm, men-
tjoned the names of prominent members of the 6lite as
being in sympathy with the new Church, those con-
cerned hastened to belie de los Reyes's claim. At the
same time, Aglipay, who had not as yet broken away
from Rome and was then with a Spanish Jesuit trying
to work out a modus ahtendi, was irked at de los Reyes's
untimely and unseemly proclamation of the new Church.
ft was only after the Spanish Jesuit's insolence in de-
claring, in Aglipay's face, that the Filipino priests
\,vere complete nonentities, that Aglipay finally and
irrevocably broke away from Rome. Years later,
another Jesuit attempt to bring back Aglipay to the
Catholic fold proved futile. The Filipino Independent
Chureh, popularly known as the Aglipayan Church,
won followers. Today, a great majority of its pa-
eome from the lorver class; only s" few
tellectuals are in it. It is then the religion of the

F"IDIPIf{O }'IATIONALISM
or, while its Catholic mothez" is, as it has always
ln, allied with the .rich and the powerful.
Religious natiollatrisrn rlirl not cnri rpith the found-
; of the Philippine Independenl Chr-rrch. In LgL4,
tix Y. Manalo, having turned from Catholicism to
ctestantism durirrg the early ye&rs of the Arnerican
:upation, found the two Christian religions not
ictly aclhering to the HoIy Billle antl proceeded to
:ach his religious doctrines which derived inspiration
rm the Bible. The preacher founded a new Church
ich he christened lglesia ni, CTisto (Church of
rist). With patience and with deep devotion to his
igious beliefs, he preaehed to the masses who be-
.gecl to the Cattrrolie Church and rnade conrrerts here
I there. This levolt against the foreign religion,
ich the Filipino reformists identifiecl with friar
srule and misconduct, tvas more sustained than
rt of the Philippine Independent Cirurch, for Manalo
s a disciplinarian and did not allorv any deviation
rm his doctrines and discipline. ITe thus gave the
esia Movement an aggressive leader:ship which the
lependent Church lacked anrl stiil lacl<s. It is for
s reason that, .qtarting, with a few converts in 1914,
r Iglesia allegedly trras grown to 3,500,000 in 1963,
',h 1,250 local churehes and thir.ty-five (as of 1963)
ge and expensive churches all over the eountry.
asi-Gothic in their architecture, the Iglesia churches
llect the religious concept of the INC founder and
followers: the reaehinq out for the heavens
'ough' truth as for-rntl in the Bikrle.
The Iglesia has been the target of critieisms and
lignation, for Manalo and his son and suecessor
I throvrn the r.veight of aronnd 600,000 solid Iglesia
:es behind presiclential and congressional eandidates
H
FILIPINO NATIONALISIU 43
of l\llanalo's choice. So solid is the Iglesia vote that
presidential and congressional candidates, from Ramon
I,(agsays6y to Ferdinand Marcos, considered it political-
ly wise to pay homage to Brother Felix Y. Manalo, the
first lNxeeutive Minister, and to his son and successor,
Brother ltrr'afio G. Manald. Even so-called rabid Ca-
tholics among the politicians secretly pay homage to the
Iglesia's Executive Minister in order to win his favor
and, consequently, 600,000 solid Iglesia votes.
The trglesia is the only home-grown religious seet
that prospered and has become politically powerful.
Like the Phiiippine Independent Church, the Iglesia is
by the masses. The masses who belong to the Catholic
. Church are superficial Catholics, rvhile those belonging
to the Iglesia are devoted followers and loyal adherents
of their Church. Again, while the Catholics among
the masses are fanatical only in the sense that they
adhere to certain superstitious practices like the
-
barbarous pr"actice of inflicting wounds on one,s body
olr }Ioly Friclay the Iglesia followers are fanatical
in the serrse that -they follow or obey blinclly the orclers
and religious teachings of their. Execntive Minister
whom they consider the messeng.er of God. The Ca-
tholics, it is true, go to church on Sundays and holi-
days, but they do so not because they und.erstand and
appreciate the mysticism and poetry of the Catholic
rites, l:ut beeause it is the fashion to be seen in the
church on such days. And so, while statistics show
that the Catholies comprise BB% of the total population,
actually the genuine Catholics do not probably com-
' prise 50% of the whole population. It is this fact
of Filipino religious life which makes the lglesia, a -
minority religion, a real power, politically speaking, J
44 FILIPINO N:ITIONALISh{
in tire midst 0f the dorninant, and wealthy Catholic
Church"
Another religious rnoveulenb, if it can be called
a movement, ernanating directly f,r'anl the Philippine
Catholic Churcir and propelled by nationalistic feei-
ing, gave rise to a eontroversy that is stiil remembered
today. In L957, six Fiiipino Cathr:lic priests of the
religiolis orders lnacle a -qtudy of the status of the Fili-
trrino religious clergy and forln.rl out soffre disconcerting
faets. On l.,tr December 195?, the six reiigious priests
sent a petition to Pope Pius XII asking the Holy
Father to allow them to bare the problerns of the
Filipino reiigious priests and nuns. Quoting from the
Catholic Dir"ectory of 195?, the petitioners, headed by
Fr. Hilarin ;\. Lim, S.J., pointecl out that after moye
than fonr hundred years of Christianity in the Philip-
pines, "the number of foreign religious priests" was
1,511, whiie the Filipino reiigious ;rriests numbered
only 163 and that the latter had "little or no prospect
of improveffient." Not receiving any answer, the petl-
tioners, unfazed by the siience of the Holy Father', sub-
rnitted a Mem,orial to the Pope, on 2L November 1957,
citing facts ancl figures to support their findings re-
garding the unenviable status of the Filipino religious
priests ancl submitting proposals for the "sincere and
efficacious imillementation of Papal Encyclicals here
in our land." The Memorial showecl that the Filipino
religious pi'iests were and stiltr are not only in the
minority in their own countly, but also not given the
opportunity to rise since they rvere given only subor-
dinate positions in the Catholie Church, In Catholic
sehools and cblleges, the high positions were, and stiil
are, given to lloreign religious priests. In particuiar,
Fr. Hilario A. Lim, S.J., frankly ntade the statement
FILII'INO NATIOI.{ALISM +5
that "the American Jesuits must gradually return to
America, just as the American soldiers and civil of-
ficials gradually went back even before we became
sovereign and independent . , , ." Continuing, Father
Lim said in defense of his position when he was ex-
pelled from the Jesuit Order: "The Jesuit Order in
the Philippines should iro longer be the center of
American language and cuiture in the Philippines
"4.11
I'ilipino Jesuits today preach in English. and are
conversant on the subject of American History but
not e",en ten (fi%) per cent of them can preach i"
the Filipino language, or know the writings of Rizal
and Mabini . . . ." Father Lim's intransigent national-
ism led to his expulsion from the Jesuit Society, but
he attractecl the attention of the people when he held
lrublic meetings, exposed the pitiable condition of the
Filipino religious priests, and continued preaching
the cloctrine of tire "Filipinization" of the Catholic
Church and schools in the Philippines. His five co-
signers of the Memorial to the Pope retreated when
confronted with the massive strength of their respective
leligior-rs orders, and they found themselves exiled in
remote places where they could not influence any
intelligent and thinking Filipino. As for ex-Jesuit
Hilario A. Lim, he gave up the priesthood, got him-
setrf a wife, preached nationalism, attended meetings
of na"tionalists, and spoke at seminars conducted by
nationalists.ao Today, he humorously signs letters and
notes to friends thus: "Hilario A. Lim, X. J."
Lim's efforts were not, however, wasted, for with-
in ten years of his crusade, some Catholic educational
institutions began to "Filipinize". Thus, the Ateneo
de Manila University, the famed Jesuit institution of
higher learning, led the "Filipinization" movement in
46 T'IL.IPINO NATIONALIS}T
the Catholic seg:nent by appointing a Filipino to the
Rectorship. Later, & Filipino Jesuit was appoinLed
Provincial of the Society of Jesus, Philippine Province,
the first time a Filipino ever became head of a reli-
gious province. Ateneo's example was followed lafur
by other Catholic educational institutions, notably by
San Juan de Letran College, the first Dominican-run
college to have a Filiplno Rector, and by the University
of Santo Tom6s, also Dominican-run, whose Vice-Rec-
tors for Acatlemic Affairs and ftl:: Administrative Af-
fairs are Filipinos. A few years later, a Filipino
was electecl Reetor of the University. The "Filipi-
nization" of the hitherto foreign-dominated religious
educational institutions is a continuing process. Lirn
has thus been vindicated.
vIm
Mention has already beerl macle of the military
hases and other one-sided agreelnents entered into
between the Philippines and the United States frorn
1947 to 1951. When the "colcl war" blew hot in the
late 1940's especially when lilorth Korea invadetl
South Korea in June 1950, the United States, reacLing
apprehensively to this significant event, deeided to
strengthen and eniarge her l:ase-s in the Philippines.
To the few nationalists who had never believed in the
myth of "special reiations" witir the United States,
the establishment of more and larger American bases
was repugnaqt to the concept of political independence.
It was, then, that about 1950 Filipino nationalism'was
reawakened. Senator Claro M. Recto, parliamentarian,
statesman, man-of-Ietters, jurist, brilliant barrister,
and acadernician, began his crusade against colonial
mentality, on one hand, and against American en-
rII,IPINO NAfiONALISM 47
croachments on Philippine sovereignty, on the other.
This crusacle was preceded in 1949 by his critique of
the Quirino administration's Asian policy vzhen, in a
eoinlnencernent address hefore the graduating students
of a l\fanila university on I April ]-949, he said:*'
To securs the continued otjoyment r:rt ths American market
and thorse marvelous i\mericlir assemblylines, without
whose pr:,eferences and advantages it seemed that rve mts,t
perish, or at least suffer, we granted Americans the right
of citizens in our own country for the exploitartion and
enjoyment of the national patlinrony, We sacriliced our
,sovereignty over strategic bases within our frontiers. We
bound o,urselves rto buy weapons for our defense only from
this one friend, which had indeed proved the vastness of
its resources as the arsenal of democracy in the greatest
war the human race had ever fought. We were neither
allies nor wards but our engagemerrts leit no doubt ttrat
ws were ready to fight again with America, if not for
America, in mutual defense. The world was thus pre-
sented with the adm,irable phenomenon of a. new nation
more dependent, and mor,e willingly dependenit, on its
former sovereign after independence than beforet.
There was a time wh,en like America, in the memorable
words of Wendell Willkie, the Filipino people had a re-
servoir of goodwill in Asia. That was the time when
our people, the most adva,noe'd political$ among the races
of ,this region, precocious in democracy, rincompromising
in the common struggle for independence, provided a
model and an inspiratiou for the masses of a submerged
and subjugated continent. That was a time when the
rapidly developing nationalism of Burma, Indonesia, fndo-
China, and even India, looked to the Filipinos, even more
than we ever knew o,r realized, for leadership and sym-
pathy. Tha,t was the time when the portraits of Filipino
h,ercrcs and leaders were enshrined in the secret conclaves
of the subject races of Asia.
But the same fatality o,t history that impelled us to sub*
mit to, the diplomatic dornination of America led us, for
analogous reasons, to abdicate this moral leadership in
Asia. Perhaps our p'eople cannot be blamed for feeling
a. natural aversion, and even indifference, to rthe cause of
Asia for the Asiatics, so cynically perverted by the Ja-
pares,g for their own end,s. Yet i,t is certain that under
the impulse of 'that curiously split personality of which,
 (}N ALIfiM
48 FILIPINO tr*I A'fi
as the onJy Christian petryle. in Asia, we are- possessed, wo
wantonly wa$ted our rese'rvoir o{ goodwitrl"
This opening salvo awek{rn*{t & sector of
sophisticatett Finipinos to ttre daruger of atrways d'e-
pending on Arnerica's largess alrci alleged benevoietrce'
They railier-l around Senatol' Itecto and becauie &
potent, if smatrl, grollp in * s*ci*{y that was large}y
influenced },ry the Arneric*ns" On 1? April tr951'
Recto, speaking this tirne at ttrre Cotnmencemertt
Exercises of the University uf i;ht Philippines, obli-
quely criticized the American policy of making Phil-
ippine indepencience a joke ancl severely casLigatecL
ftr. Filipino politicai leaders's habit of accepting
American impositions without us ntuch as a whimper"
He said:*
The tragedy of our foreign potricy is tira't beinrg. an Asian
people 1tn thousanrl miles away from effectivo cerlter
'American power, our behaviuur has been tha't of a
o,f
banana republic in 'ths Caribb*arr'. We have fed uponr
th" trrr"y that we ar:e somehow tirt' favorite children of
a*"tiou," and that she, clriven by some' strange predilection
iri- ""0 people, will never forsake us nor sacrifico our
interests io lr"r own or to those of oth'ers for her own
sake.
Recto \Irarned the F ilipinos against reposing fuo
much confidence in America's promises, for it $'as &
mistake to suppose that "Atnerican policy can ever
have any objective other thatr the security, welfare,
and interest of the Arnericalr peCIple." As a critic
of American policy towgLrcl the Philippines and the
Filipinos's iack of moral eoulrege La stand" up to Amer-
ican im1:ortunities, Recto showerl fairness, for he
blamed the Filipinos more tliau the Americans f,or
the piight in which the Philippines has to this da
found herself. Impliedly, [hen, I{,ecto urged the Fili-
pinos, particularly their poiitical leaders, to indulgc,
FX].T[,INO NATIONALISiItr 49
llor a change, in self-criti.cism, for the first duty of
of a nationaiist is to discover the defects of his coun-
trymen in order to correct them. Thus, he said in
t}re
thc salnc spcecil:
Whcn we are so, dishonest, inept and prodigal, that we
cannot run a governrnent on dre resources of lhe poteu-
tially richest and mo,st deruocratically schooled people in
Asia, and must beg conStantly for subsidies, then ths
United States har,e the right to see to irt that. the dollars
they lcnd are not dissipatecl in extrava,ngance, purloined by
malefactors in high office, or missp,ent on fraudulent elec-
tions, and that, in return for their assistance, they shall
have the final say on our foreign policy and receive the
services of our diplomats as ,their spokesrnen and press
reLa,tions officer.
Arnerica, however, continuetl to bring pl.essure
on the trilipino political leailers in order to make
American power pararrount in this part of the Paci-
llic. Consequently, Amelican importunities continued.
unabated. In February 1953, the American Embassy
in l\{anila sent a note to the Philippine Foreign Office
expressing the desire of the United States government
to acquire title to extensive lands in the area surround-
ing the strategic Subic Ruy, an al'ea of rnore than
2,000 hectares, for military and naval purposes. The
Ilnitecl States wanted absolute ownership of those
Iands and the title to other lands acquired by virtue
of the L947 bases agreement. The American Em-
bassy's note was basecl on tI. S. Attornev General
Ileri-iert Brownell's oiriirion that the United States
ownecl the base lands in the Philippines. If valid,
Lhe Philippines r,vould alienate l-99,570 hectares to
the United States." Fresiclent trlpidio Quirino re-
jected the Ameriean ciaiin, but on 28 August l-953,
Brownell officially wrote that the lands occupied by
American bases belongerl to the United States, citing
the bases agreement and other tr:eaties concluded be-

50 FILIPIN$ NATIONALtrSB1
to shore
tween the Philippines and the llnitr:tl States
his opiniori" Senator Recf o stud'ied Brorn'nell's
"p
opirrion ancl on 1 T.iebluary t!}i"'4' he wrote the Phitr-
ippine Secrctar'3r of Foreigr: Aff'rai'rs rnaintaining
that the lJniteri States merely le:ased--the lands in
question f,rorn the Philippines' When' finally'
Brownell's opinion \Maq rileclassified on 16 Marctr
1954, it became the target of the Filipino national-
ists's severe indictment' In a rnemorandum to Sec-
rectary of Foreign Affairs Carlos P' Garcia' Recto
answereil Brownell by citing ieg'al precedents and
the
Treaty of General Relations between the Philippines
and the Unitecl States, signeci on 4 July 1'946' under
which the latter withdrerv ancl surrendered to the
juris-
former "all r'ights of possession, supervision'
d.iction, controI," o, *o'"''tignt-r existing and exercised
Ly the United States in inc{ over the territory ancl
puopf. of tlie Philippines, et:t:rt'1tt' tlt'e use of srt'c'lt'
bases, rlecessal'y appurtenances tr: sl'lch bases'
and the
rights incident itl."nto, as the Unitecl States of America
by agreement with the Hepubiic of the Philippines'
*uy t.u* necessary to retain for the mutual plo-
teciion of the contracting parties'*n With an air of
triumph, Recto saicl: "It is inferable frorn Article 1
of the treaty that there had already been a grant or
surrencler to the Philippines of the title held by
the
United Stal,es to all the base iancls at the time of the
proclamation of independence," ancl added: "Tlte
ff,lippines could not have granled the use of the base
tands if it were not in the first piace the owner
thereof. Under a weli-know'll principle of thebene- traw
of lease, the United States ir's ttre lessee or the
ficiary of the L1se, is estoppecl to cleny the title of
the lessorr oY grantor."
.'i
FII,trPU{O NATIONALISM 5],
The soundness of Recto's iegal opinion was im-
piicitly recognized when the United States in 1956
admitted "the sovereignty of the Philippine Govern-
ment over the base Iands." It was the triumph of
the Filipino nationalists not only over the Ameriaan
government, but also ovpr the tr''ilipino professional
apologists of American hctuation and thinking. The
nationalists did not relax their campaign to make
more F ilipinos realize the folly of pinning their faith
and hope exclusively on the United States whose
national interests did. not always coincide with those
of the Philippines. They depiored, and continue to
tleplore, the habit of presiclential candidates of boast-
ing about their being the "fair-haired boys" of the
Arrrericans but not of having the moral courage to
tell the eiectorate that they were and are pro-Filipino.
It was not until the American military in the Philip-
pines acted like masters that many Filipinos realized
the folly of aping and defending anything American.
In spite of the well-known pro-Americanism of
President Ramon MagsaysSy, who once said that the
people coulcl not eat nationalism, the nationalists con-
tinued assailing not only Ameriean arm-twisting
tactic, but also MagsaysSy's alacrity in doing the
bidding of his American advisers. The wave of na-
tionalist sentiment engulfed even the Congress, and
one of its aggressive leaders, Speaker Jos6 B. Laurel,
Jr" of the House of Representatives, oblioueiy warned
the Arnerican neocolonialists that "Mutuality and
respect must repiace arrogance and imposition par-
ticularly in the so-called underdeveloped regions of
ihe world."no Under his leadership, the House of
Iiepresentatives moved for the re-examination of Fili-
American relations and passed the Retail Trade
 FILIPINO NATIONALISM 53
62 T'ILIPM{O NAT'IONAI'ISM
tiorr of the colonial mentality that vitiated, and still
Nationalization bill' Significantly' it was
also during
vitiates, the posture of those who were in positions
rhis period that the stud'ents' led by those Lyceum
enrolled
*i tf,. University of the Philippinesofand the of power to lead, but did not or could not. Thus,
Recto's nationalist ideology remains valid'today, per-
of tfru Phitippinls, began a series Philippines'
demonstrations
haps rlore so today than during his lifetime.
,gri""t e*.ri.un policy toward' the nationalists' Even
after the death oi the two great
Jos6 Incidents involving-,Filipinos and Americans, in
P. Laurel orrJ Cl,'o M' Recto in 1959fighting for
and 1960' and outside the military and. naval bases, led to
respectively, the nationalists continued tensions. trilipino demonstrations against American
raised by behaviour in the Philippines became common occur-
national digniiy and kept al,ive the issues Amer-
Recto and Larirel against alien' particularly death rences. The more than forty cases of killings of
ican, domination of the country' No cloubt
the Filipinos by Filirrino and American guards in the
of Laurel ancl Recto, particularly the latter's'-
affected American }:ases, particularly in Clark Air Base, on
the nationalist movement, for after Recto's
death the the ground that the victims were allegedly pilfering
*antt. he left behind was too heavy for any Filipino -A,merican property, and the stubborn refusal of the
to wear. This is no reflection 0rl' the ability and Arnerican base authorities to surrender the killers to
courage of many nationalists' particularly
Recto's Filipino authorities to be tried in the courts of justiee,
friencl and' colleague, Senator Lorenzo M' Taflad'a' in accordanee with the bases agreement, Ied to wide-
but it is the consensus thaL Recto's death left an spreacl Filipino protests against what they considered
American aruogance and injustice. Even in cases
appalling void in the ranks of the nationalists' "If
i."to *ur. alive . . ' the phrase the people' from where the offenses were perpetrated, intentionally or
"'is say whenever - American
the highest to the lowest, by accident, outside the bases and when the killers
imposition or arrogance becomes too obvious to be were off-duty, the base commanders tried to frustrate
jr-rstice by sending the'offenders baek to the United
ignored, or whenever Filipino leaders succumb to
the
States or to other American bases outside the Philip-
siightest American pressure' Even so' Recto's death
served as a tie that bound, ancl still binds' the
diverse 1"rines. On 25 November 1964, a Filipino boy was
kilietl by an over-enthusiastic American soldier in Clark
elements that compose the nationalist camp' Conse-
quently, he is now the glowing syrnbol of th-t struggle Air Base, and the following month, 13 December, a
io, poiiticat and economic emancipation from alien fisherman was shot and killed by two American
sentries in the Olongapo naval base. The American
strangle holcl. While his nationaiistic ideas were not
Bmbassy, in an attempt to justify the murder of the
so po-pular during the administration of Magsays6'y'
whom the the nationalists described as "America's boy, issued a statement to the effect that the killing
errand boy", today they are the comrnon fare of of the unarmed boy was the result of American se-
even those wiro, in the 1950's, silently resented Recto's curitlr measures after certain unidentified Filipinos
campaign for national dignification and the eradica- allegedly threw a bomb at the American school at

54 FILIPI}'{O }i{A,]TONALISSI
to the press'
Clark Air Base. A bomb rvas shown conclusively that
but subsequent investigations shovred
the bomb lvaij an old oiie anti coul'r} not
have ex-
Lhose who habitual-
pi"A.t- Thinliing Filipinos' evetlt'trrc drop of a hat'
iv" a.i."a.A the Ameiituttu at
cloubted the veracity of the American
Embassy's
;;."pf*"rtion" and conclucled that bhe "bomb story"
by the
was a hoax' Yet, this hoax wus circulat'ed
worlcl' thereby
American press serviees throughout the
*uLi"g tfre fitipinos appe*r tt sadistic people' which
they are not * not having assassiuated
any President'
held a
On 25 January 1965, the university students
Em-
mammoth demr:nstration be{oye Lhe American
arro'
Hu*.V and denounced American nctuations and
with the
;;";". During the demonstrations, leaflets
iiu**.r-and-silkle emblem tnysteriously appeared'
the obvious pul'pose of which was to smear the
clemon-
stration as communist-inspired'' The people' how-
ever, affere not taken in by such ancient and wornout
tactic. The netvspaper colnmnist, J' V" Cruz' known
for his national'ist orientalion anit trlointed criticisms
by American behavior in Asia, intirnatecl that the
leaflets trvere prinLed in ihs Trress of the United
Sta,tes Infoi'mation Service, ihe propagancla
arm ot
the American Embassy' To my i<lior'vledge' the latter
ne\rer denied the implieil actusation"
There are irritants i:hat have made Philippine-
American rela,tions shak-v, but t le n:ost sensitive have
been what Filipinos consider the Li"nnecessary killings
perpetratetl by American set:vicet-len inside or neal:
American inilitary and naval bases' In 1"968' a Fili-
was shot clead hy an American sentry
-just young man
pino
lutsicle the l{aval Barie in tavite City' There
was no prorr6galion and the young fiIan was unarmed'
FI{,IE}NNO NATIONAI,ISM 55
Tile Ameriean naval authorities refused to surrender
the killer to the Filipino law officers. The killer was
tried by the American authorities and acquitted. The
F'ilipinos protested vigorousiy but the Americans
ignored them. In l-969, another Filipino was shot
dead tr..',r an American gentry in Clark Air Base in
Fampanga Prorrince and when the killer was inves-
tigatecl he said he thought the Fitripino was a wild
iroar. This Arnerican killer was hastily tried by the
r\rnerican military court, which promptly acquitted
hirn. A few days later, he was reportecl to have
Ieft for the United States. What Filipinos, including
thtr known pro-American among them, resented was
the Arnerican serl,icernen's proneness to shoot to kill
and in a friendly country. These incidents led
-Filipinos
to agitate for the re-examination of the
Bases Treaty in order to prevent the oceurrence of
bioody affairs or to bring the erring American service-
men to justice in the Philippine courts.
ALtempts have been made to compose the differ-
ences between the Filipinos and the Americans. In
1959, the Philippines and the United States, through
their rr:presentatirres, arrirred at an understanding,
namely:
1. recognition by the United States of the right
of the Philippines to be consultecl on the operational
use r:f American bases in the Philippines in situations
in which the United States might be involved in
Asia;
2. formal inclusion of tlie principle of automatic
retaliation in the Mutuai l)efense Treaty of 1951;
3. recluction of the ninety-nine-year lease of the
bases to twenty-five years subject to renewal or ter-
mination by mutual consent; and

56 FILIPINO NATIONALISM
4. long-range programming of the different as-
pects of Crnerican military assistanee to the Philip-
pines.
This "unclerstatrding" trvas never taken seriously
by the Americans'
On 10 August 1"S65, Lht Phllippine Secretary
of Foreign Affairs and the American Ambassador in
Manila signed an agreement revising Article XIItr of
the Lg47 Bases Treaty. Under the agreemeirt, the
Ilnited States agreed to (1) renounce exclusive juris-
diction over on-base offenses, (2) define clearly the
term "on-duty", (3) irnprove the provisions on
waivers of jurisdiction and (4) create a criminal
jurisdiction implementation committee eomposed of
offi.i*lt of both governments. This agreement, how-
ever, has not been officially implernented.*
In recent years, Filipino-American relations took
a turn for the worse owing mainly to two issues:
the American adventure in Vietnam and the Manila
"Sumnrit" cf 1966. It is no secv'et in the Philip-
pines that Ameriean officialrloni hacl "persuaded" the
!'ilipino political lead.ers to throw their weight behincl
President Lyndon B. Johnson's rvar in Vietnam in
order to make it a "democratic" war in which Asians
are invohred. The nationaiists severely castigated,
often in intemperate Langr-rage, the Marcos Adminis-
tration and the American poiicy makers, especialiy
the latter for using "doIlar diplomacy" to win over
Asian allies for Johnson's war on Asian soii. In the
same year that Filipino political lead"ers succumbed
* This agreement was not ratified by the Philippine Congress' The
Secretary of that
Justicr:, in an opinion rendered on the subject', ruled
the
Bases Treaty of 1947 remains in force owing to the failure cf the Philip"
pine Congress to ratify the agreernent of 1965'
FIT,IPINO NATIONALISM 57
tp the charms of the American dollar, the lVIanila
"summit" was anRouneed by Presiclent Ferdinand E.
I\{arcos. trt rvas during the first day of the "Summit"
rneeting, 24 October 1966, that students and laborers
staged a huge demonstration before the Arnerican
Ernbassy and at the ma.in gate of the Manila Hotel
where Johnson was billeted. The demonstrators car-
ried placards saying "Johlson, go home," "Yank-ky,
go horne," "Shoot now, talk later LBJ!', "Vietnam:
Duigdig rLg nlga Apt" (Vietnam.:- The World of the
Oppressed), and "Ifey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did
you kill today?" The brutal behavior of the police,
vrho were rumored to have tal<en orders from Amer-
ican agents, led to widespread condemnation of the
police methods, on one hand, and the Americans, on
other'. The brutalized students immediately converted
their 24 October demonstration into the October 24th
Movement, which t{re professional anti-communists
immediately labeled communistic.
The sending of Filipino engineer battalion, with
security cover, to Vietnam a,nd the catrIing of the
Manila "Summit" led thinking Fi'lipinos to re-consider
F'ilipino-American relations. The alleged special ties
that bind the two peopies are loosening insofar as the
nationalists are concerned, and even those who were
previously uncommitteci no'w came out openly asking
serious questions about American motives, sense of
justice, and fair play. Thus, Congressman Rarnon
V. Mitra called for a thorough reexamination of
Philippine-American relations in all fielcls - - "polit-
ieal subversion, eeonomic control, [and] cultural do-
mination." Speaker Jos6 B. Laurel, Jr. for the second
time led the movement for the "thorough re-exemina-
tion" of Philippine relations with the United States"
58 T'ILIPINO NAfIOI{ALISM
Congressman Mitra sounded. bhe nationalist ered'o
when he said:*
We should reexamine otrr bases egreement beyond the
military anrl julidical aspects. We havs Ieglect'ed the' eco-
nomic significanc'e of these bases. Cc sidcring the rampant
srnuggling of American goods that these bases sustain, ef-
f.ective measures are certainly needecl if we are to protect
our own industries.
Also, in orde.r to safe.guard our dlgnity and independence,
the Executive Departrnent sho'trld revise the current practico
of allowing ambassadors, assistant secteitaries and other
minor Amirican officials to go directlv to t'he Prisident.
They should be made to go through the proper channels.
If -this reexamination of Fhilippine-Americanr relations leads
to a r,ettrrinking of our attitudes and a readiustme.nt of o'ur
reLations in these and other spccific area^s, then we shall
have achicved rnuch in aftirmi:ng and bolstering our in-
dependence. But thess will tot be permanent gains un-
less we do something tcr ensure that Filipinos in rthe fiture
are so imbued rvi.th nrationalism that they will readily see
through any attempts rto slight the dignity and diminish the
scvereignty of their country, and act resolutely to safe-
guard the national interesrt. T'his is a task for our edu-
catinnal svstem. Ws should educats our citizens to tie"
come Filipinos, to think and act as FilipinoS.
It must be noted that the primary target of the
nationalists have been those Americans who have been
connected, directly or indirectiy, with the potritical
and econornic domination of the Philippines. The
patriots among the Americans call this phenomenon
"anti-Americanism" which, to them, is unthinkable
in view of the alleged benevolence of the United States
in colonizing the Philippines at the turn of the cen-
tury. Any Filipino who has the courage of his con-
.riction and rvho has shecl off his colonial mentality
has been labeled "Retl" or "Pink" by not a few Amer-
icans. If today Americau$ $ee n'anti-Americanisrn"
among Filipinos, it is because Arnerican poliey to-
ward the. Philippines precisely since nominal inde-
pendence in 1946 has been to subvert that independ-
FILIPIN0 NI\TIONALISI{ 69
ence in the interest of America. This American aL
titude directly clashes with the Filipino concept of
frienship and loyalff, a coneept that is nourished in
sentimentalism. Unfortunately for the Filipinos,
Americans are not sentirnental; on the conbrary, they
are ruthlessly trusinesslilte. trn the face of Arnerican
realism, the late Senator Claro M. Recto, who although
a poet, was realistic in his approach to foreign policy
ancl international politics, advised his countrymen
before his death in 1960: "As Filipinos, we must
look out for ourselves because no one else wi11."
IX
Filipino economic nationalism lags behind pol-
itieal nationalism. Within a decade after Ameriea
had established her sovereignty over the Philippines,
trade relations betrveen the two countries were based
on free trade. The passage of the Payne-Aldrich
Act in 1909, which provided for partial free trade
relations between the United States and the Philip-
pines, 'was beneficial to the sugar and tobaeeo in-
terests of the Philippines, but its effect was the loss
of revenue for the country.*' The Filipino political
leaders, led by Speaker Sergio Osmefla, opposed the
f,r'ee trade relations law for fear that it would make
the Pliilippines an economic dependency of the United
States even after independence. This fear was also
expressed by Congressman tr'rancis Burton Harrison
of New York, who described the law as aimed at the
"selfish exploitation of the islands [the Philippines]
in behalf of certain American industrial monopolies."u'
But American vested. interests were too powerful to
be overcome, and in 1913 the Underwood-Simmons
Act was passed. This law, unlike the Payne-Aldrich
 }'II,IPINO NAITT}T{ALISM 61
FILIPUq0 t{ ATtrONi\LISe{
restrictions on cer- tioneli Economic Protectionism Association (NEPA)
of 1909, removed the quota
coutd enter the United whose primary aim was to improve the quality of
that
, efrifippine products Speaker Philippine-made goods so that Filipinos would be
;; i";; of dtity' the new measure osrneffa once more
on the ground encouraged to patronize them. The New Katipunan
;pposition to
ffi ht--pftiiippines as an economic movement did not last long, for Speak-
t'th.
itr" woultl be forcecl to depend' solely
er Roxas was too preoccupjed with power politics
Ar*er1ca'i, rnarket thus n'egtrecting the other to lead the movement effectively and to endow it
,rfn"tu of the wqrrlcl. The
passaga: of the tvro tariff
irnllorts and exports' u,ith the spirit of a crusade. On the other hand,
Lr i.O to inereased Philippine the NEPA for a time succeeded in bringing to the
ant1" the suglnr planters beneflited
; .*r;; ilru o'hu.*a,tracle relatione' As a whole' the attention of the Filipinos the beauty and quality of
;#ffi the free from a deluge of American their products and, consequently, led to the encourage-
,t irn^* sufferecl rnent of the industrial arts. On the lighter side, the
the Philippine market'
,A* *fti.tt to this day clomina'te alibreviation NEPA became a byword and has since
Those .n'ho foresaw the pitfalls and
folly of rely- to a Philippine-made or -prepared
been used denote
,n ut*o.t excltisively on free tracl'e with
the United
object or food, made of Philippine materials. The
to the people regard-
-p"..ilrlea stern warning
l?r"-^'=*"ded NEPA still exists, but it is doubtful whether it has
.1" tfr. effects political lntlependence might loosenecl the alien hold on the domestie trade. When
or1 the economy of the country'
It was d'uring the war broke out in December 1941, the aliens were
"f"A.pendence
rB,ve
il. Congress of 193{J that economic safely in control of the Philippine domestic and foreign
rationalism v/as launched' by
then Speaker Manuel
the Bclyon'g Kattpun'&n (New
trade. The Chinese, for instance, had an invest-
il"n""r. who organized aim rn'as- economic protectionism
ment amounting to ?200,000,000 in retail and whole-
iriip""""i wholewas a- c1}l for economic self-suffi-
saie merchandising, banking, real estate, distilleries,
in essence,
vhich, --l'W. and in the manufacture of cigar, cigarette, soap,
ffi; said the manifesto of the Nerv
sha11,"'
of our economic bondage candle, etc. On the other hand, the Americans had
ffiiJ;".n, "brealc the chains a total investment of P537,000,000 in mining, public
abroacl onlv those coutmodities which
il;;G from shall enco-urage the restora- utility, lumber operation, and in the sugar, coconut,
ve eannot prclc{uce" We and abaca pla,ntations. The Japanese, too, had their
;;"; the household industries' We shall patronize share of the local eeonolny: F100,000,000 invested
)ur eountrymen who are engagecl'
in business and
in abaca plantation and in the fishing industry. The
,orra.*" those who exploit their
cttstorners'"
'ilhen the Filipinos, then, were a poor minority in the economic
These were brave words at a time activities of the country before the war.
power to compel
,orriry had no independent political It was after the last world war that the well
;;';ii""s to hehave properlv as befit guests' Even informed emong the Filipinos realized the true signi-
;; ;;;" Filipino businessrnen' ea'::i:ieci by Roxas's ficance of Filipino-American relations. In September
,r"Ltrrv and apparent nationalism' founded the Na-
 FTLtrPINO N A1'rOl{ ALISIVi
45, the BelI 8111 was filed with the American Con-
'ess providing for free trade relations between the
nited States and the Phiiippines for a period of
renty-five years. Some conscience-stricken Amer-
ans opposed the biil on the ground that the Philip-
nes would, under the bili, becclme an economic de-
rndency of the Llnited. States. This bill was set
ide and another, aiso by Jasper Bell, was introduced
rd, later, approved, providing for an eight-year per-
d of free trade relations between the two countries.
fter L954, taxes would be levied gradually on both
rilippine and American goods. But what the Fili-
nos, even in their hunger and sickness, could not
rderstand was the imposition of the so-calIed parity
r them even to the extent of having their constitu-
on amended to accommodate the Americans. "Parity"
eans that the Arnericans would have the same rights
i the Filipinos in the disposition, exploitation, de-
llopment, and utilization of "all agrieultural, timber,
rd minerai lands" of the Philippines, the right to
perate public utilities and to exploit the waters,
rinerals, coal, petroleum, and mineral resources of
re Philippines." Insult was added to injury when,
rrly in 1946, the American Congress passed the Ty-
lngs Rehabilitation Act providing for an outlay of
'S
$620,000,000 to be given to those who suffered
lmage during the war. But & condition was at-
rched to the payment of, war damage: that no amount
r excess of US $500.00 would be given unless and
rtil the Presidents of the United States and the Re.
ublic of the Philippines had reached an agreement
:garding trade relations between the two countries
1d, what was galling to the nationalists, until the
ilipinos had amended their Constitiltion in such a
FILIPINO NATIOX\IALISM 63
way as to give "parity" rights to the Americans.
When l\{anuei A. Roxas, riding on the back of General
Douglas MacArthur, won the presidential election of
1946, he immediately set his political machinery in
motion to rarn through Congress the amendment to
the Constitrition. Since the Constitution requires
three-fourths majority of Conlress to pass an amend.-
ment, Roxas could not get such majority because
of the apposition of some nationalistic congressmen,
whose negative votes would frustrate Roxas's design
to give "parity" rights to the Americans. In the
circumstances, he instigated the filing of a resolution
in Congress declaring Luis Taruc, the Huk supretno,
and his six nationalistic colleagues belonging to the
Democratic Alliance party, unseated on the ground
that they won the elections through frauds an
obviously manufactured charge since no proof was
presented to prove it. With the seven expelled from
Congress, the amendment to the Constitution was
pushed through with the required three-fourths
majority. Roxas became the "hero" in the eyes of
the American neo-imperialists headed by the late
Paul V. McNutt. The amendment was submitted
to a plebiscite. Jos6 P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto
took to the field to assail the "parity" amendment,
but the people w'ere too sick and hungry to listen to
the voice of reason: they approved, the proposed
amendment to their Constitution because finaneial
and other aid from the United States could. be secured.
only if the Constitution were amended to give "parity,,
lights to the Americans. Parentheticaily, most of the
rehabiiitation money went not to the Filipinos, but
to the American and other alien business firms which
suffered during the war.

t ITILIPI.I{fi NrtTI(}}iAII$hI
The paradise thal, Roxas promised the Fiiipinos
when he wail carnpaigning to ha','e tlie "parity" amend"-
ment approrred by the people in a plebiscite dicl not
materialize. The negligible ri.eveleipment of the Phil-
ippine economy, in spite of "parity", led President
Ramon Magsaysiy, Anterica's greatest friend so far,
to send a mission to the United States in 1954 for the
purpose of revising some onerous provisions of the
Bell Trade Relations Act. Led by Senator Jos6 P.
Laurel, the mission signed an agreement on 15 De-
cember 7954 with the American panel. The agree-
ment, knorvn as Lhe Laurel-Langley Agreement, pi:o*
vides for the "ilccelerAtion of the ;rpplication of Phii-
ippine duties on imports front the United States alrd
deceleration of rhe appiicatinn of the United States
duties on iruports from the PiriXippines during the
period Januiery 1", 1956 to July iJ, 1974"" In exchange
lor. this American "benevoience", the American panei
succeeded in rnaking the tr'iiipilio mission agree to
the revision of the "par"ity" artrendment so as to ex-
tend the right of Americans to engage in all business
a.ctivities in the Philippines. To salve the feelings
of the Fiiipinos who had no bargaining power to speak
of, the Anrericans agreed to give the Filipinos the
ssme right as the Americans in the United States
to engage in'businessmen
L'usiness an empty "parity" right since
no Filipino
- woulcl har''e a chanae against
American "bigl business." 1\'1ot:eover, the tr'ilipino
,,parity" right in the lJnitetl l]tr;,rtes is limited by the
statutes of tire indiviclual States of the American
I]nion whicl"l clo not' encollragir competition from
a'liens assullling of cours'i that Filipino "big busi-
-
ness" exists.
The continuecl clominance of the Philippitle eco-
',,i
IrtrL}F.INO N,{TIONAI,ISi},I 65
nomy by the aliens, par.ticularly by the Americans
anrl tire Chinese, led the economic nationalists to
pleacl for: industriaiization, the curtailment
tretir.,ities of a,liens in the retail tracle, and
of the
the pre-
ferenee for foreign loans to clir"ect investments
in
order" to g:r"nerate capital.;, Again, as in the
field, Senator Recto lecl the crusade for e-conomicfohtical
rrationalism. He said in 19b6:an
Al1. things considered, what should ,then be our economic
policy? .':
It must be industrialization in its fullest sense. The
aim
ri:
is an economy of prosp,erity, ,that is, an ever l'
tional productio,n.
growing na_
Xt is an economy where the major economic activities
and
efl'orts of the peo-plc are incr,.-asingly directea towaids-non_
rur:al pursuits. That has been rJre rvay of all industrial
natians. That has.been the way of att prospeio,u;;;;"r.
That is what I envis.ion for our peop,le. 'We' siou1d,1ii.._
fore, oppose the maintenance trei-e of a nuat
thc adoption of any. policy ojr program that tend; """".*V'""a
G] p"*
petuate it. I do not mean ,thai our agriculture
shoulj be
-altogether or that we shouTd "ot i_lror"- o"
abandoned
present methods. What I clo, mean is that, if we want-not to
prosper, we should concentrate less on agricultur.e
regard it as the main basis of our national econornv. It
anA
is un error a grievous one _ ro iden,rify
- r-"--- --
nomic deveioprnent with rural clevelopment. "r;q;;;"''"oo_
Owing to increased ilirect investments of aliens,
especialiy American investment, Recto sounded a
ii
vrarning against relying too lnuch on foreign capital
broi;ght into the country by aliens. Speaking in
1957 hefore the Rotarians, Recto saici:'o
I'inir: anrl again I have voice,l my opposi.tion to lurthe,r
foreign riirect investments here. ft" is "wittr detiberate em_
phasis ttrat I use the worc1, ,,further',, bscause I want
positio,n clearly understood. Existing foreign investments
my
here constiFrte vested rights which u.J u. m[ch e rtitled
protection under our Constitu'iion, and statutes as those
to
of
Filipino nationals.*** But in the inter,est of both
particularly of Filipino nationals, and for the sake ;r;;p;
k ilri
i6 trILIPINO NATIONALISM f"ILIP$iO NATIONALISM 61
nation itself, I propose, thar,t it is alien investments in the the Ameriean Embassy, to frustrate the implementa_
form o,f loans tha,t shotrld be, by all means encouraged.
tion of the law. Even then president l_,y"aori'il.
Recto quoted a writer in the l/e'r.u Yorlc Times son lent his name to the American businessmen,s John-
Weekly Reaiew (5 August 1956) who pointed out that belated cry of ,,persecution,, when he
foreign investment was "closely linked with political ident Diosdado Macapag6l in June 7964 wrote pres_
power" and the "long-range effects of the influx of enforcement of the, law rnight adversely
that the
capital [owned by foreign investors] is to change the attect ,,the
mutual interest of the two countries.,, f[e
,rationalists
itolitical as well as the econolnic and social conditions took rhis not-too-subile threat to withhold
in the capital-receiving countries." Recto cited the American
aid to castigate the ,,American carpetbaggers,,
€x&mple of Puerto Rico and Venezuela where, owing their arm-twisting tactic. This feeling vii* and.
to the influx of foreign capital, the people are poor exacerbated in September 1964 when
i,r*tfr.,
lUu .fouinat of
although theil countries are rich. Recto continued: the American Chamber of Commerce wrote in Manila
If we should only ponder on the experience, of Puerto Rico that "The drive behincl the nationatizalion--iffiUtio.,
. and Venezuela, noit to mentio'n that of Canada and others, during the past clecad.e and more is the natural
we would c,ease clamoring fo'r direct investments here.
They are €con,ornicolly disadvantageous to ithe countnies sire of the Filipinos to play a d.ominant p*i-in de-
t}ru
that receive them because whatever pro'fits, dividends and cond.uct of the industry and trade of the -country _
interests on dii'ect investments are realized flow out of the
when it is not merely the aim, as no doubt
country. Since much of this outward flow of investment
income is generally from investments in mines and miner,als, a few, to enrich themselves by stealing from
it is of
the, final result is that besides losing this income to foreign
investor, the underdevelop'ed country loses its irreplace-
Bristling with indignation, Senator Lorenzo others.,,
frada, Recto,s friend and successor as leader
M. Ta-
able minerals. of the
nationalist crusade, said. in the halls of the
In
1954, the Congress of the Philippines, in order Senate:
Are these the words of friends that Americans
to protect Filipino economic interest in the retail are supoosed
to be? Th.ey recognize, or claim they J;,-il.';;#fi;;ii
trade, passed the Retail Trad"e Nationalization Law, of the nationalization movement. yet fi,.y ,;iil ;-^i;
which completeiy places the retail trade of the coun- rhey would- place the entire ,rroor_.nt ,Ld"r ^r"rpi.ioo
-as "the aim of a few to enrich themsellves Uy ,t"ufirg"iio"_
try in the hancls of Filipinos. In other words, only oth.ers."- They sneer at it as blind natio.ifir_,
p.?"'i"Ji
cor"poiai;ions or Liusiness firms wholly owned by Fili- an inferioritv comolex. They take potshots
at our Supreme
Cou r t, w h i ch h a s courage ou siy
pinos can engage in retail tracle. To give the aliens as the legitimate -upirefa ;;;i#rT;
;-;',iril;.
police-power of the state,
sufficient time to adjust, the law was made to take at Congress and "*"^r":-:_otitie
the executive arm of'our government.
effect in 1964, or ten years after the approval of the The unfortunate comment of the ,r,ou,rnnl
law. There was no protest from the aliens. But in arouslng odium against many Americans,
helped
1964, when the law became effective, the American and in
beram ammoth demonstra tion, led by university
businessmen branded it anti-American, by now a dis- ts and laborers, was held, first, in front of
credited ciich6, and they proceeded, with the help of American Embassy and, later, at the gates
o!
f.,

fk

TILPINO NATIONALIS},g
.alakanyang (the office anC official residence of
re Presiclent of the Philippines) q'here the guards,
sing their heacls, swung at the Ceuronstrators, whtl
:manded the abrogation of the rniiitary bases treaty,
re Laurel-Langley Agreement, arltl t'he parity pro-
sion of the Constitution- They also demandecl that
resident MacapagSl make hnor,vn iris stancl on the
nestions, but he kept his silence wirich the demon-
;rators interpreted as Macapag6.l's lvay of saying
rat he couid not do so because he was scheduled to
rave for the llnited States and" r,vouid not therefore
reak his image before the American public'
The American businessmen questioned the le-
atity of the Retail Trade NationalizaLiott Law be-
ieving that "pai'ity" and the Laurel-Langley Agree-
rent extend their right to all eccinomic activities and,
herefore, they were exempted frorn the operation of
h law. On 16 December 1966, Juclge Hilarion U.
'arencio of the Manila Court of Fii'st Instatrce ruled
hat neither the Executive Agreernent of 4 July 1946
ror the Laurel-Langley Agreement, contains any spe*
rific provision erempting Arrrevicatrs anrl their busi-
less firms from the opei'afion of iire Retail Tracle
$ationalization Lar,v. The following cla,y, Supreme
lourt Justice Jesfis G. Barrera" rn'ith the unanimous
roncurrence of the other justices, ruled in another
)ase that "a business enterprise, to be entitled to
rarity rights in the Phiiippines, must be owned and
rontrolled by American citizens v'hose home states
live reciprocal rights to tr'ilipinos." Justice Barrera
old the newspapermen that the implication of the
lecision was that in.the enjoyment of 'oparity" rights
he Americans cannot have ulc,re rights than the
,'ilipinos in the latLer's country. Tn the face of the
FILIPII.IO }{A1'IONALISM 69
Jarencio rlecision, the American businessmen sought
Pre.qid"er:t Marcos's intervention, for this method of
ap1:ruaeh, according to the nationalists, was easier i
anrl less costly than an appeal to the Supreme Court
rvnrose c:leeisi.on on "parity" was an indication that ir
it, mri5lht sustain Judge Jarencio. Public opinion, ,:,
howevcr, .lnclurding that of the economic nationalists,
plrer,,eni,cr.l L,he A.rnerican businessmen from pressing
thci' iappeal to the President. Instead, they elevated
the ease to the Supreme Court.
'llhe drive to wrest control of the economy from
the crlieyrs is not confinecl to the retail trade. More
signiliicantly, the econornic nationalists objected to
the American-inspired proposai to buy thirty-three
percent of the Filipino banks's stocks in order to in-
crease the tratter's capital. A few Filipinos, mostly
corning frorn the o'sugar block", hailed the idea with
alacriLy, but the economic nationalists objected to the
propos;rl on the grouncl that the foreign, meaning
Amc:"ican, capitatr could easily control the loca1 banks
througir fair nieans or foul, and control of the lend.
ing institutions meant control of the national economy
anrl .politics" Senator Lorenzo M. Taflada, in a speech
on ttrre floor of the Senate, brought out the fact that
"77.6 per cent of an alien bank's loan went to aliens
and only 22,.4 per cent to Filipinos, when Filipino
deposits in this bank amounted to p49,651,0C0 oy 64.5
per ceirt of the total deposits of the bank.,,u' This
is typical, for all alien banks in the Philippines loan
Filipino depositors's money mostly to aliens, not
to tr''ilipinos.
The official recognition of the right of the Fili-
to iie master in his orvn house lvas spelled out
President Carlos P. Garcia's arlministration
 FTLIPN\O i'i.\?5ONAL SM FIL1PINO NATT$NALISId ?1

195?-1961) when the National" fleonomic Council, vetroprnent; but the direetion and implementation of Iti

this progra,m, insofar as the nationalist is concerned',

;i,i:
re nation's highest economic Imtly, adopted in a re*
clution of 2l- August X958 the *'$'ilipino First" lnust .tle undertaken by Filipinos. lirii r !i
[,iitl
olicy. Henceforth, triiipinos w*ultt flre given priority The grow-Lh of nationalism since 1950, four years ' l ai;',.

r matters pertaining ttl the econornic development after political independence, lvas again manifested ,1r...

f the country * s ptatiturle, tlt1c ltright say, but in when, on ?-8 Fetrn:.ary 1$p?, the nationalists from :.r.

he context of Philippine society iL was a revolutionary ati secbors banded themselves together into a Move- I.
ment for the Arlvancement of Nationalism (I[' A'N')'
i |::'.

tep, for the simple but uncrrmfortabtre reason that 'ii:;*:r

,r.{:ii;l

he Philippines had not been for the tr'ilipinos but Papers were read on the different aspects of Filipino 'iili::l_
r,ll,rri

or the economically puissant atriens who had the nalionalisur. Xn its "General Declaration," the o1"- r'lili:r'
llrl

racking of their weaithy ancl peiwer"ful governments. ganizr:ns of the M. A. N' said: it'
'li,'

lriticisms were leveled against, the 'utr'ilipino First" hX. A" N. prclposes to rouse, rnobilize and ori;aniler a'11

rolicy, eoming urostly f,r'om Ameriean and Chinese
rusinessmen who were ruclelv awakened to the bitter
;ruth that the Filipinos were nb last, coming to an
Iwareness of their true role as lnastr:rs of their des-
;iny in their own country" T*o cushion the impaet
patrintic and nationalistic elements of the nation to' funda-
nrentally alter, or at leas't substarrtialiy .9dYT, t!r9 qndu'e
foreign"clorninance {fver o'ur en'tire national life" M' A' N'
is th6 rnrainstueam of zr general awake'n'ing among Filipinos
in this root-crisis of Philippine life ancl expects such an
awakenirrg to inspire legioni of supporters to- the advocacies
and specific pl:ograms of a,ction of the Movemenf' t.f
lilii I
l

lf the policy, tl-re aliens, acfing through Filipino dum- objectives of the M. A' N',
"lllr!

mies, spread the rrlmor that Ilresiclent Garcia was .!n:ong the list of :i: '
'ii .
ii

anti-alien, that is, anti-America.n s,nd anti-Chinese. probably one of the most crucial is that of moral re- lr:l'
:.
larcia dismissed the rulnol' as idle and. emphasized" generation, for it is obvious to all that Fiiipino society t:,

that the "Filipino first" policy wa$ not directed is noL exactly morally laudable. "A rnoral regenera' !"
llir

against any foreigner, but a struggle "for the na- tion carnltaign," said the i\{. A. N. organizers, "with i,tt
,i;l:.

ernpirasis on self-respeet, self-reliance, self-denial and

.

tural right of the Filipino people to be supreme in {,r

their own country." assertion of Fitipino dignity, shail be one of the major ll'
und.ertakings of the M. A. N'" i.r
The Fiiipino nationalists's ilesire to wrest econo-
This is a re-assertion of the revolutionary tra-
lu

mic power from foreigners is zrnchored in the krelief

dition of the late nineteenth century, of the era of
rt:'

that economic power spells political po]Mer. It is

Jos€ Hizal, Andr6s Bonifacio, and Apolinario Mabini,
.',.

thus that to the nationaLists, the program of economic

clevelopment can have meaning ancl" r'etrevance to their in which self-criticism was )rasically a part of the 'it
-

lives only if the S'ilipinos thernsetrr,es, and not the national.ist struggle f,or emancipation, for it was ob- firl

aliens, will unclertake its rigicl inlplernentation. This vious to the past revolutionaries, as it is to the con-
ternporary nationalists, that the first duty of a na-
,ij
,;:i: l

does not mearx, of corlrse, that the aliens will be

tionalist is to find out his and his countrymen's weak-
li':' -

totally exeluded frotn this pr"ogrlarn of economie de- t.':l

iili !

,;ilt'
 tr, ILIPIN (} .$,,r ;1"'i' [ (-]]i AL i$E't
sses in orcler to remecly them. j.r is chauvinlsm to
ny or hide one's weaknesses, f*r it essllmes that
e is perfect and has no need for improvement. It
in this context that the M. A. l,i.,s declaration should
construed.
When one looks intentty nt Lh.e re-awakening of
lipino nationalisrn sirice appri:xinral.LeXy LgS0, one
ls its main tirreat'l. fo hr: cotror,*d rryi.f,h what ryrany
nericans like to call ,oanti-Atni:ricnnisnl.,, tr use
.s term, populalizerl in tho _flr)tilipliir:es hy sotne
nericans in high piaces ancl the!,r: r:r,rr*loyal ititipino
lowers, with :rt ser.villioi:1, for, :r:i,ghiiv looked upon
)re never has hecx: a113r d(ai1ti*;Lrnericirnism,, since
: beginning of the second clecnde of the century.
.t certainly there has been, sinfer l-|}b0, an ,,anti-
:ericanism". To prii it in nnuther w&y, it is
: the American gtzn American that is the object of
l Filipino nationalists,s sevcre crit,icisms, but the
ti-Filipino policy of the Arnerican grl\,ernrnent and
ne American officials, especiail3, the miiitary, who
rsider the Philippines their exclusi"u,e preserve and
: Filipinos their glor:ifieci serfi;. ,\s economic na_
nalist Alejandro Lichauco saicl:,,n
If, at the montL.tlt, colltL,mpofary nrerii[cs,llliions of na_
tionalism are aimed. et A-rneriicnn policy in tfr* ftifippinJs
a:rd against American investment hciclings, th;
simply ,is that the prescnt character oil Amcrican
iJ;;;;
coupled wjth the practices of American i,rms i;;ir";;,1:
;;H",
try, constifute thu immecliate and mosl Ioi-inid,abie ;_rJi-
ments to nationalist objectives, and rhc princifal #ri[;
to economic refor.rns.
Sych_3-_folicy' and.business practiccs suppress
.the Philippines, rnd other a"vetopiirg ct_runrriesefforts
in
o{
towards full economic developmcnr. ' Asia
To be specific, the prirnary interest oI American potricy
and American business here evidently is to rnaintain'u* u
source of cheap raw material for America,s industries, and
FILTP1NO NArIONATISM ?3
iis * market for American manufactuied produots. Atd
where . . . America is unable to prevent Filipi.no industrial-
izafio,u, then the alternative strategy is to conrtrol it.
Erit it is not only economie clominance by Arner-
icans that the Filipinos resent, but also it"s concomitant
political power. To ensrtre geonorrtic dominance, the
Americans, hacl<ed" up by thdir powertul government,
harre been }inou,n to i.nterfere, elireetly or indirectly,
in Phrlippine <;lections .[n ord"er bo assuro the election
of pro-Aruel'iean cand"j.d"ates. trt is n{l secret to the
iriiipinos that Arnerican trrusinessmen and some offi-
cials have heen investing heavily in presitlential elec-
tjons by making this or that canclidate their "fair-
hairerl hoy." Thus even fiff?e rnagazine, in its issue
of ZlJ Novernber 1953, stated that "Xn spite of a Fili-
pino law which forbids foreigners to eontribute to
elecl,ion campaigns, U. S. business interests in the
islantls anted up sodle [U" S.] $250,000 at a time
rvhen L{agsays6y's Nationaiist [sic] Party was ser-
iously shol't of funds."
It is noL, to be fair, solely the fault, of the Amer-
icans that the Phiiippine goverllment has been short-
changr:rl in practicaily all, if not all, its dealings with
the .rLnrerican governrnent. The Filipino political
ieaclers thernselves must shoulder most of the burden
for the colonial status of the country, for they have
allow'etl themseh,es to be dictated to and treated ca-
valier'ly by their American'"friends" whose realistic
concept of friendship is diametrically in opposition
to that of the Filipinos's. While the Amerieans act
accoi:ding to the dictates of their natir:nal interests,
anrl no other, the Filipinos, or at least their political
leatters, still cling to the maw,kish sentimentaiism of
the hinterland r,vhich has been made the basis of the
 tr.ILIPINO N ATTCINALISSI
th called "special relations" with tiie United
States.
the other hand, the Americans eannot understand,
refuse to und.erxtand., the imperatives and goals of
ipino nationalism and bull-heacleclly label the lat-
's manifestat-ions as u'anti-Americanism" which, in
: lexicon of thr:se Arnericans, is synonymous with
nmunism. Unless the Anrericans anti their govern-
Int recognize the folly of sueh hrull-headedness and
,et the Filipino nationalists wittr sornething more
rsible than nrel:e witeh-iiunting, c{nti-Arnericanism
its real sense will sweep the Philipplne landscape,
d it will then be boo late for the United States to
uhe amends. As General Emilio Aguinaldo scrib-
rd on a copy of a circular distributed by the pro-
anish Pedro A. Paterno exhorting the Filipinos to
:urn to the fold of Mother Spain ,'vhen the Spanish-
nerican 'War exploded in 1898: n'You are too late !"
x pinrr sculpture during the Spanish times, the percep-
The cultural aspect of Filipino nationalism, un-
e its political, religious, and econornic aspects, has
t been directed against any for.eigner.. It has been
aracterized by atternpts to cultivate Filipino cul-
r:e which is the sum total of tr'ilipino achievements
the field of language, arts, and ietters. Filipino
Iture as such is the resultant of external and in-
'nal forces which, for more than four centuries,
ve acted ancl resporided __ and continue to act and
;pond in such a manner as to make possible a
-
rmonious combination of indigenous and foreign
ments. Thus in language, arts, and letters, Fili-
ro culture is a h*ppy, at times contradictory, com-
ration of foreign elernents: Mala;v=an, Chinese, In-
rr, Arabic, Spanish anrl Arnerican.
FILIPU{O NA'ftrONr\LIS}I 75
For more than three centuries after the coming
of the Spaniards, there had been attempts on the part
of the F ilipinos to sea.rch for their national identity,
for the Spanish authorities, Iay arrd ecclesiastical,
never gave them a chance to assert themselves in any
line of, end"eavor" The Filipino's mind during more
than three centuries of Spanfsh ffitelage was circum-
"scribed
within the limits of the church, and whatever
literary inelination he rnight have had was dissipated
kr;z the strict censorship, first, by the Church authori-
ties and, in the middle of the nineteenth century, by
the colonial government. Even in painting and sculp-
ture, Filipino artistry was generally limited to geo-
metrieal designs and images of innumerable saints.
While some Filipino 6lite with artistie pretensions
have recently started the fad of collecting santos
(sculptured likenesses of saints) and, with trembling
forefingers, pointed to them as masterpieces of Fili-
tive trncl the less enthusiastic critics and art lovers
consicter those poorly earved santos as mere begin-
nings (primitives) in the history of Filipino sculp-
ture under Spain. With very few exceptions, the
sarne holds true with painting and music which, in a
manner of speaking, smelled heavily of the convent.
It was in language that the Filipinos, a year
a,fter the outbreak of the Revolution in 1896, decided
that Tagalog, one of the major languages of the
Philippines and principal language of the capital city,
"qhould be the official language of the Revolutionary
Government. This was incorporated in the Consti-
tution of Biydk-na-bat6 of 1897. This decision mark-
ed the first attempt of the revolutionists to identify
themsehzes as a linguistic unit. It is not difficult
 II'TLHPIN O N ATIO}.{ ALIS}I
surmise why such a step rvas faken by ttrose in
ms. The revol.utionary spirit, despite the tem*
rary lull in the field of combat, was still aflame,
d the Filipino leaders, niding qrn the crest of the
tionalistic rnovernent, strnck an sttitude that was
rant to symbolize the forging r:f, trilipino nationality.
rce the majority of the rev*lutio:rists and their
rders came from the Tagalog region and its peri-
ery, it was naltural for therrn flo cl.ror:se their lan-
age the official language of their government. Thus,
o forces worked toward the expression of national
idarity: first, the revoiutionary spirit, which was
tn spreading like wildfire in the distant provinces
the Philippines; and second, ttre negionalistie in-
nct so characteristic of Filipinos €ven to this late
y, which expressecl itself eourageously with the pro-
umation of Tagalog es the official ianguage of the
volution.
The ways of illter"natiunal poiitics dissipated the
'st atternpt at linguistic nationaiism. Spain was
iven fronr the country, l:ut the Uniter.l States took
r place against the will of the Filipinos. trnglish
rs imposed as the language of instruction in all
blic schools, while Spanish continued to be the
lguage of high society and of some schools with
anish orientation. .This new development did not
mpen the spirit of the Tagalogs. Militant national-
11 swept the city and the countryside, making it
)re potent through the press and the stage. In
ptember 1908, the representatives of the different
Lguistic groups of the Philippines r:ret for the first
ne at the etlitorial office of tire nationalistic EI
mac'itnienta to diseusi$ the steps uo be taken to
lirre a eonlmon national ianguage for ti:.e Filipinos.
}"ILXFS$$ i{ rtTIt}NA},ISn,I 7't
These representatives, coming frorn different linguis-
tic regions, were not averse to making Tagalog the
national language of the Philippines. They launched
a strririted carnpaign to have their idea translated into
reality, but the Philippine Commission, most of whose
members were Amerieans, qd not approve the bill
providing for an indigenous national language.
.1
It would take a long while for the Philippine
governrnent to act officially on the language situation.
Meanwhile, in 1915, a group of nationalistic Tagalog
writers foundecl the Akademyd rLg Wilcang Pi.ltpino
(Academy of Filipino Language) whose purpose was
to enrich Tagalog by the inelusion in its vocabulary
of words from other Philippine languages. The re-
sulting language was to be calied Pilipino. A Taga-
log writer and nationalist, Eusebio Daluz, published
a Filipino-English vocabulary based on Tagalog. The
vocabulary, &s the author admitted in his preface, was
a congiomeration of words tahen frorn the different
Philippine languages. However, technical terms were
derived from Latin and Greek. This nationalism
went beyond theory. Daluz and Juiian Craz Bal-
maseda wrote poems in the Pilipino language. Un-
fortunately, the people did not sympathize with the
idea and it died a natural death like the artificial
Ianguages Esperanto, Ido, Ro and Volapuk.
The period from about 1910 to approximately
1935 was, however, characterized by an attempt on
the part of Tagalog linguistic scholars to minimize
the number of foreign-loan words in Tagalog, on one
hand, and to coin new words for concepts not found
in Tagalog, oD the other. I shall not attempt to make
a detailed study of this phenomenon. Perhaps it suf-
fiees to say that some of the eoined words were ac-
 F'I I,IPIN O N A'1'IO }d A.].I S$T
rted by the people, while others were rejected and,
rsequently, have disappeared from the Tagalog
ricon. Even so, the movement for evolving a com-
)n national language continued. Language and
erary societies made it a habit to pass resolutions,
ually on 2 April, the birth anniversary of the
'st great Tagalcg poet, Francisco Baltazar (Batag-
i), asking the legislature to pass a law making
rgalog the national language of the Filipinos. Their
lorts were rewarded when the Constitutional Con-
ntion, in 1935, included a provision in the draft
rstitution which was incorporated in the final
-
aft providing for the adoption of one of the
Lilippine languages as the basis of the future com-
rn national language of the Filipinos. This rather
Cefinite provision was approved, instead of the
iginal provision making Tagalog the national lan-
age of the Philippines, in order to humor the non-
ugalogs who were vocal opponents of Tagalog. All
€w, however, that the indefinite pr.ovision really
rant Tagalog, but this word was not mentioned in
I provision in order to assuage the feelings of the
ti-Tagalog Filipinos who preferred. English or
anish to Tagalog as the national language of the
ilippines
To implement the constitutional provision, the
r,tional Assembly, in
Lg36, passed Commonwealth
t No. 184 providing for the creation of the Na_
nal Language Institute which would choose, after
:areful study, the native language to be used. as the
lis of the future national language. Of course,
:rybody, even the die-hard anti-Tagalog, knew that
, basis of the national language would be Tagalog.
30 December 193?, Commonwealth presideni Ma-
FILIPIIi0 N;\i'I{}itALISSt ?9
nuei I"" Queaon, acting upon l}:e reeomrnendation of
the National Language Institute, issued an executive
order proclaiming Tagalog the "basis for the evolu-
tion and adoption of the national language of the
Philippines." It was felt, however, that proclaiming
Tagalog the basis of the future national language
was not enough; it was o"c,isrury that the language
be taught in all public schools and colleges in order
to disseminate it and so to provide a linguistic bridge
between the Tagalogs and the non-Tagalogs. Conse-
quently, the Department of Public Instruction issued
an order to all school officials instructing them to
include Tagalog in the curriculum. Later, the rla-
tional language, as Tagalog has been camouflaged to
avoid regional jealousies, became one of the official
languages, the other two being English and Spanish.
Thus, the passage of Act 184 and the subsequent
issuance of Executive and Departmental orders mak-
ing Tagalog or Pilipino, as it is called today, a subject
in the schools and universities, were the culmination
of more than forty years of nationalistic carnpaign
to have a native ianguage recognized as the national
language of the Philippines. Tagalog, as the basis
of the national language (a camouflage since it is
actualiy the national language) does not supplant the
other Philippine languages, but acts as a bridge be-
tween Filipinos speaking different languages. In
1940, during the celebration of the first anniversary
of the Philippine Writers' League, President Quezon
deplored the fact that Filipinos had to use a foreign
language in conversing with their countrymen from
other regions of the country. It was for this reason,
he added, that he felt the need to develop a native lan-
} }TJLIPTN{} J\ATTf,}}iALISN,{
uage to be the eventual national language of the
'ilipinos.
With the dissemination of Tagalog throughout
he Philippines, more educated writers began to be
,ttracted to it as a medium of iiterary expression.
lhere \ ras an awakening to the faet that neither
ipanish nor Engiish could be the proper and corn-
retent medium of literary expression, for there were,
md are, Tagalog nuances which could not be tran-
rlated into .ar:y foreign language. Most Filipino
rriters in English couid not bring themselves to be-
ieve that their command of English was dubious and
;hat, eventually, the,;' would be writing for a very
imited audience. They pointed to the example of
loseph Conrad who had so mastered the English
anguage as to write novels now consideretl classics
rf modern English literature. This, of course, is a
lorm of narcissistic gratification which, however,
ras not led to the writing of a great Filipino novel
n English .
The Japanese occupation of the country brought
:he frustrated Joseph Conrads down to earth. The
vritings in English were lirnited not only because
he Japanese authorities discouraged the use of Eng-
ish, but also because there was a very limited outlet
cr works in English. Consequently, sorne writers
n English shifted to Tagalog, but this shift was not
,s easy as they thought. As far as writing in Taga-
)g lr'as concerned they were complete beginners. And.
o they wrote Tagalog along Engiish sentence con-
truction and succeed.ed in producing unconscious
umor. Their sentences could hardly be understood,
:r they were English in their construction and idiom.
FII,IPINO NATIONALISM 81
But a few learned the nuances of Tagaiog and wrote
in it with sympathy and understanding. It was then
that they discovered their ignoranee, on one hand,
and the beauty of their own language' on the other,
and this discovery led them to continue to write in
Tagalog. No less than N.",,V. M. Gonzales, one of
the finest Filipino fiction writers in English today,
advanced the idea that the future national literature
would l:e written not in English, much less in Spanish,
but in Tagalog. Today, many university-educated
Filipinos with a penchant for writing are dedicating
their talent and efforts to mastering Tagalog and to
writing cornpetently in it. The best Tagalog fiction
and poetry today are being written by these univer-
sity graduates. This is, indeed, a decided improve-
rnent over the previous years when university grad-
uates looked down upon their native languages as
unfit for literary expression.
In the other cultural aspects, Filipino national-
ism began during the pre-war years of the Common-
wealth. It was in the old site of the University of
the Philippines in Manila that cultural nationalism
developed. Under the leadership of the nationalistic
President of the University, the late Dr. Jorge C'
Bocolio, Mrs. Francisca R. Tolentino (now Aquino),
Physicai Director of Women Students of the Univer-
sity,
-theund.ertook the study of Filipino folk dances which,
at time, had almost been forgotten. Some of the
folk dances and folk songs collected were "primitive"
ancl represented the unadulterated-, or almost un-
adulterated, type of culture. Other folk dances with
obvious Spanish elements were similarly coilected, as
were the costumes, musical instruments, and music
found in the unsophisticated parts of the country'
 F"I LIPINO N ATION ALIS1VI
hen put together, many of the folk dances showed
rious influences: Malayan, Spanish, English, and
en French. Even so, these influences have been so
similated and modified by foikways over the cen-
ries as to be called Filipino.
Under the direction of Mrs. Tolentino, folk
nces were taught to the University students. Im-
:diately the dances became popular and other schools
.d colleges included folk dances in their currieula.
ost programs, even those held in honor of visiting
reigners, inclucled folk dances an innovation that
ught the imagination of the -people. Having seen
e beauty, pageantry and, most of all, the grace of
eir folk dances, the Filipinos began to realize what
ey had lost even temporarily when they in-
scriminately -accepted the popular -dances from for-
gn lands. Thus, the years immediately before the
lr witnessed a sense of revival among the Filipinos:
ere was an awareness of things native, an aware-
ss that has continued to this day"
This awat'eness .was sharpened during the Ja-
rnese occupation when the Japanese authorities not
Lly allowed the performance of Filipino folk dances
rd the singing of folk songs long neglected, but en-
uraged them. It was part of their campaign to
literate Anglo-American cultural vestiges, on one
rnd, and to compel the Filipinos to return to the
.ltural fountains of Asia to drink their waters, on
e other. But whether the Japanese were sincere or
,t, the incontrovertible fact is that the Filipinos
Lickened the pulse of their cultural life and, in the
ocess, found themselves enjoying, &s they never en-
yed before, the spectacle of multi-eolored strands
their culture. After the war, the Filipinos, now
FILIPB{O NATIONALISM 83
Iiving an independent political existence, took steps
to preserve and strengthen their cultural heritage.
Schoois, colleges, and universities formed folk-dance
troupes which exhibited and still exhibit
Fiiipino folk dances throughout the country. The
now famous Bayanihqn troupe, which especializes in
Filipino folk dances, has gone to America and Europe
to exhibit those dances. Another troupe, the Fili-
pinescas, which especializes in the ballet variations of
the folk dances, has likervise won acclairn in Europe
and America.
In music, Filipino nationalism showed signs of
awakening in the period after 1915 when Francisco
Santiago, Iater to become Director of the University
of the Phiiippines Conservatory of Music, modified
the nineteenth-century kundiman (love song) and
Lransformed it into a song with haunting melody and
harmony. By 1920, the kund,iman had become the
Filipinos's favorite song and. since then has come to
syrnbolize Filipino sentimentality. Soon other Fili-
pino composers, notably Nicanor Abelardo, Bonifacio
Abdon, Francisco Buencamino, Antonio J. Molina,
and others, composed. kundi,mnrus which expressed not
only the sorrows that accompany unrequited love, but
also a longing to be independent. It was also during
the 1920's and early L930's that Santiago and other
composers began to use folk songs as thematic ma-
terials in their compositions. Thus, Santiago's Con-
certo in E Mi,nor for piano and orchestra is based
on the Visayan balitnw, the TagaTog kwmintdng and
a. folk song. With more po\Mer and vitality than
Santiago, Abelardo composed his Mountain, Suite and,
Concerto dn, B Flat Mr.nor for piano and orchestra,
both based on Philippine foik melo?ies.
4 FILIPINO ],{ATTONALISM
The pioneering works of Santiago, Abelardp,
Buencamino, ar'd others, in the use of folk melodies
as thematic materials for sophisticated compositions,
became an inspiration to the succeeding generation of
composers. Antonino Buenaventura, Lucio San Pedro,
Eliseo PSjaro, Felipe Padilla de Le6n, Rodolfo Cor-
nejo, Hilarion Rubio, and a few others, have, in many
of their compositions, anchored their nationalistic
feeling on themes derived from Filipino folk songs'
In the arts, Filipino nationalism is a little be-
hind. Where before the war, Filipino painters,
sculptors, and architects were mostly competent copy-
ists, today there is a serious aLtempt on their part
to seek their identity as Filipinos. Having gone
abroad to stucly art, the Filipino 1:ainters today are
still seeking their identity as F ilipinos. Foremost
among them are Victorio Edades, Diosdado Lorenzo,
Hernando R. Ocampo, Vicente Manansala, the late
Carlos V. Franciseo, the great muralist, and a few
modernists, who have parted ways with the so-
called eonservative artists. The same tendency to
look for their Filipino identity characterizes some
sculptors, principall.y Napoleon V. Abueva, who as-
tonishes people by driving his home-made chariot
around the campus of the University of the Philip-
pines.
In architeeture, a few Filipino architects are
beginning to use Filipino or Malayan motif in the
construction of buildings. Thus, Juan F. Nakpil and
his sons, architects and engineers, gave Filipino ex-
pression to the lglesia ni Cristo Church in San Juan,
Riza1 province, by using the native sulakit as motif
in its tower. The Malayan motif is also found in
FILIPINO NATIONALISI}T 85
the architecture of some residential houses and com-
mercial establishments. But in general, Filipino
architects have not come abreast of Filipino national-
isur in other fields. This is so probably because most
of them do not believe in nationalism in art, or that
they do not have enoughr,time to ponder deeply on
the neecessity of having a style of their own, which
is to s&y, a style distinctly Filipino.
XI
Filipino nationalism, then, is very much alive
and has been expressed in various forms and med-ia.
Originating from a religious question, it expressed
itseif in the political field by an appeal to arms in
order to realize freedom and independence when the
struggle f,or reforms in the colonial government proved
futile. From then or, its political aspect became
more or less tangent to the other aspects of the move-
ment. In this development, the role of the foreigrrers,
whether as invaders or as economie czars or both, was
that of challenger. The Filipino response to the
crhallengewas to develop their nationalistic instinct
in such a way as to parry the alien thrusts in order
to preserve their identity or to minimize the impact
of the thrusts upon the people. The first the
parrying of alien thrusts -
was exemplified by the
-
Revolution of 1896 and the Filipino-American war of
1899-1"901. The second the minimizing of the
impact of alien thrusts was exemplified by Filipino
-
adaptation of Ameriean political and cultural insti-
tutions under American guidance. The first took
centuries to reaeh its climax, while the second is a
tinuing process.
 FILIPINO NATIONALISM
Nationalisn: under. America viras characterized.
'the Filipinos's attempt to rvrest control of the co-
nial government through peaceful means. There
ere rare instances of direct confrontation between
re ruling power and the ruled partly because the
mericans, having once been colonials, introcluced in
re Philippines their own democr.atic institutions ancl
'aditions, and partly because the Ii,ilipinos, in turn,
ppreciated Arnerica's humane policy of etlucating
rem in the art of self-government. Xt was only when
r
-American
proconsul, conscious of his powers as
rch and not convinced that the I,ilii:inos were ready
)r independence, tried to impose ]:is will on the
ilipinos that a heatecl but pe;Lceful confrontation
rok plaee. Filipino nationalism under America,
ren, rmas directed toward the attainment of political
rdependenee through constitutional process. At the
lme time, the Filip.inos took steps to develop a na_
onal Ianguage in order to bridge the linguistic gap
mong them. EconomicallSr, they had -not much
lance to develop their naturai resorlrces outside
of
:ing suppliers of raw materiatrs to the Ilnited States,
lr the latter sarv to it that the philippines remained
mere supplier of raw materials by the simple
ex-
:dient of instituting free tracle betlveen the two
runtries.
In the immediate post-war years when the Fili-
inos regained their poiiticai independence, national-
m suffered an atrophy largely because they were,
nd continue to be, too sentimental ancl naive to be_
eve that America, in pursuit of her destiny and na_
onal self-interests, was capable of exploiting them
ho stood by her in her hour of need. But continuecl
.meriean impositions, expressed in various treati.es
F'ILIPINO NATIONALISM 87
and agreements generally advantageous to the United
States
-- particularly "parity", the bases agreement,
and the Laurel-Langley Agreement ruled awak-
- brutal fact
ened the sophisticated Filipinos to the
that America, the land of the brave and. the free,
was and still is not disposed to humor them in the
naule of so-called special relations relations which
have been special only to the Americans - but galling
to the Filipinos. Feeling that they were being co-
lonized ali over again, the Fiiipinos showed signs of
re-awakening in the L950's and began to express dis-
illusionment with a frankness the Americans never
associated with the Fiiipinos. Whether this re-awak-
ening will succeed in making American respect the in-
dependence and territoriai integrity of her former
ward is difficult to predict. Much will depend on
the attitude of the Filipino leaders: whether, for
the sake of personal or politieal convenience they will
succumb to the importunities of the Americans or
whether, having learned the bitter lessons of their
country's history, they wiil hearken to Apolinario
Mabini's nationalistic exhortation: "Striue for tlue
independence of thy country because thou alone h,ast
real interest 'tn its greatness and enaltation, since its
independence tnea,ns thA own fre'edom, its greatness
tlty own, perfection, its emaltation thy own glory and,
immortalitg!'
 NOTES
L. The word barangay is lthe Hispanized form of the old
tlangay whose original meaning was a boat. The Malays who
igra,ted to the Philippines came in their hplangays. After tthe
raqish conquest of the Philippines, the St'auiards, in initroducing
rliitical subdivisions, adopted the word (bqt changed the I to z)
mealn n)ay.on or barrio, lthe equivalent of the Malay kampong"
he chief of la nayan. was called cabeza de, bararugdy.
2. For humane Spanish laws governing Spanish c,olonies, see
eco;p'ilaci6n de las Leyes de to,s Reynto's de las Indiast. Madrid:
onsejo de la Hispanidad, 1943. 3 vols. A reproduction of the
l9l editio,n. tsor a discussion and appraisal of the Spanish
ilorrial system, cf. Wilhelm Rosch'er: The, Spantsh Co'lonial
Ntem. G. E. Stechert & Co., 1944" r'eprint of the 1903 edition.
ut see also C. H. Haring: The Spani.sh Entpire tn Anter'iiti'
ew York: Oxfo'rd University Press, 1,947; and Salvador de
ladariaga: Tha Rzire ol lhe Spantish:-Ame'rican Emptre. New
ork: The MacMillan Company, 7947.
3. Up,to aoproximately 1898, the term "Filipino" meant a
raniarrl born in the Philippines. while 'the native was called lndio,
rterm which, from fhe beginning, had no p,ejorative connotation
,rt which the later friars transformed irvto a term pregnant with
mtempt. Conseque.ntly,'th5: Filipin6 (native) liberal intellec,tuals
I the ]ate nineteenth century resenrted ltheir being called "ilrxdio:i,"'
4. There are still some Filipino iteachers of history who
.sis[ that the Spaniards united the Filipinos hnd, therefore, taugtlt
rem nationalismr Nega'tively, the statemenlt is true, but it is
3t meant to be taken in the negarf"ive sense, wihch is rto say. rtha,t
Le Spaniards willingly and wiith unbou,nded love and benevolence
.ught nationalism to ,the Filipinos. This ,twisted interpretation is
ro absurd to be taken seriously by any man in his righl sen:s,ss.
5. For the "Spanish 1ay account of the mutiny, see Jos6 Mon-
ro y Viclal: Histloria Genera;l d.e Filtpinas Desde el De'scubrl-
tlento de Dichos Isbs Ho'sta Nu:e'stros Dias. Madrid: Imp. de
fanuel Tello, 1887. Vol. 3; for the Spanish clerical point of view,
l. Rese:ftn que De,nuestra el Fundamenta y Causas de la, Insil-
'ecct6n del 20 d,e Entdro en Fi,Hptnas. Madrid: Imp. de Segundo
lartinez, 1872; for the Flliqino viewpoin,t, cf. Manuel Artiglas y
uerva: Las Sttcesos de 1872. Manila: Imp. de La VanguLrdia,
)11; and for a French account, cf. Edmund Plauchurt: La Al-
trod,q Cavitefia da 1872. Manila, Manila Fi1at6lica, i916. This
o,rk was originally published in French \n Revr.re, des Dedx Maru
zs in 7877 and translated into Spanish by the edi,toriai staff of
a Sa\idartd.ad, the Filipino organ in Spain, in its issue of 15
:bruary 1892.
'-A
F'ILIPINO NATIONALISM 87-B
6. See Article XII of Resefin que Diq'muvtrlra- - ., cited in
the preceding
" Note.
?. Th; hial of the three martyred priests was, as 1he Fiii
lino national hero said, shroudgd in- The whole trial was
-qystery.
The docuneents of these
i fut"*, as was Rizal's trial in 1896.
,ffials aie in Spain 'and attempts by even by the then
Ambassador to Spain, Leon Ma. Guerrero II., 1to consult them
-researchers,
proved
- tutile.
E, For the friar arguments again.s{ secularization, see D'ocu-
ntantos Inleresanites AcerZa de ta Secularizaci6n y Amot,ilidad de
los Culas Regul"a,res de Fitipinas. Madrid: Imprenta de 1a Viuda
de M" Minu,esa d,e los Rios, 1897.
g. There is in Manila today a magazine, an associatiorr, and
a book store, named after this famous newspaper. The similarity
en<Is in the name. Some volumes of the newsp'aper La Solidaridad'
have been ,translated and volume one has recently come oft ther
press with much fanfare. But the translation is not only muddled
and inaccuraite in many plaoes in fact, in almpst every page
but also palpably erroneous in - others. There are also passag-es -
in, the original wtrictr have, been 'toned down or omitted by the
translator. fn all, a bungled job.
10. Teodoro A. Agoncillo: The Writings end Triel of Andres
Banifwio, Manila: Manila Bonifacio Centennial Commission, 1963.
1 1. The Filipinos, especially the Tagalogs, were not the only
guil.ty party in the case of langrrage corrup,tion. The Spanialds,
too, corrupted many Tagatog words and spelled them according
to Spanish phonetic peculiarities. Up to lthis day, many geographical
namis in ithe native languages are spelled in the Spanish-conupted
way.
12. Cl. Teodoro A. Agoncillo: Th,e Revolt oJ the Masses:
T,he Srory oJ Bontlacio and the Kalipuna4. Quegon City: Univ*
ersity of the Philippines, 1956, Chapter VII.
13. My peternal grandfather affirmed that generally, the
wealthy and ,the highly edrircated were hr:stile to the revolution.
Very ferv Fiiipinos with Spanish educqtion, ,that is, who cotrld read
and wri,te in Spanish, ioined the plebeian Kctipunnn. That there
were o'class animosities" may also b,e gleaned from Teodoro M.
I(alaw: Aideie-Camp to Fre'edom. Manila: Teodoro M. Ka-
law Society, Inc., 1965, p. 16.
14. The first provinces which initiated the revolution were
the provinces of Manila (as dirstinguished from ithe City), Cavite,
Batangas, Laguna, Bulakan, Pampanga, Tarlak, rand Nueva Ecija.
The eight rays of the sun in lthe Filipino flag represent these
eight provinces.
tr5. For 6he diploma'tic correspondence between the Spanish
and the American governments befor,e the declaration of wff,

'-c Frr,rptNo NATToNALTSM
>e Di lonaaltc Conespondence and Documen$s" Washington, GoJ*
r"-tr,t Printing Offite, 1905. But ses also R' A' Alger: The
mnisk Andericttn,l/ar. i'{ew York: Harper &Brothers, 1901' Alger
* S""i"trw of War before and during the Spanish-American war'
16. Foi a frank and perceptive urnalysis of America's ex-
ansion, see Walter LaFeter: fhe New Ernpire: /1 ffierpre'
tion oJ Anwrlcan Expansion, 1860-1898. New York: American
listorical Associaition, 1963"
17. This part of the Walled City is still intact and faces not
danila Bay, but the Manila Hotel. The reason for tthis seeming
hift of ground is that what is now Manila HolBl was water. During
he American regime, parts <rf Manila Bay were reclaimed. Even
he present locaton of tthe American Embassy in Manila, which
s contiguous [o the bay, was water up to the early 1930 s.
18. For a study of the conflict tretween Mabini and the
nembers of Congre,ss, ef. Teodoro A. Agoncillo: Malolos: The
)rtsts of ike Republtc, Qu,ezon City: University of the Phitip-
rines, 1960, Chapters VIII and X. Fo,r the decrees M'abini pre-
rared for Aguinaldo, cf. Teodoro M. Kalaw (ed.): La Revola-
:i6n Filipina con Qtros'Docurnsntos de la Epoca Manila: Bureau
>f Printing, 1931, Vol. II.
19. General Elwell Otis, the military commander of the Amer-
can expeditio,nary force, denied the accusation, but Generat R. P.
Ffughes, one of the American commissioners who m,e.t wi'th Agui-
raldo's commissioners "to ,talk things over pe,acefully", Iater con*
lessed before the U. S. Senzite hear,ings ttrat the Arnericans, indeed,
tried to pull rthe rvool over the Filipinos's eyes. Cf. U. S. Se'nate
Docurne,nd 331, 57th Congress, lst Session. Washington: Gov-
)rnment Printing Office, 1902, Part l, p. 527.
20. Told to 'the writer by the late Felipe Agoncillo. For the
:fficial co,mmunicatio,ns between ths American cornmissioners in
Paris and Washington, D. C., and the Tr,e,n,ty of paris, cf. U. S.
lenate DocumeAt 148, 56th Congress, 2d Session. Washington:
Sovernm,e,nl Printing Office, 1901; U. S. Sanale Documen{ 62,
i5 lr Congress, 3rd Sessions. Washington: Governrnent printing
Office, 1899. For an American view of [h,e. peace conference,
iee Ff. Wayne Morgan (ed.): M,aking Peace Wllh S;pNnt: The
Diary of Whit,e,i,tw Rei:d: September-Decem.bter, 1898. Austin:
Jniversity of Texas Press, 1965, especially Chapter XV. The
etiters of William R. Day, another Amcrican peace commissioner,
:o President McKinlev regarding the negotiations with the Spanish
reace co,mmissioners are found in the William McKinley Fapers,
t896-1901, in the Manuscripts Division, l,ibrary of Congress,
ilashington, D.C.
21. BV the (ime. thoTreaty of Paris was sipyned on 10 December
i898, Spain had already been driven out o{ the Philippines. Only
FILIPINO NATIONAI,ISM B?-D
a garrison in Zamboanga in Mindanaw and another in the small
to#n of Baler, Tayabas, along the Pacific, were in the hands of the
Spauialds who were facing disaster' The Americans on the other
hind, were in posselssion Jf th" City of Manila, that is, the' Walled
City or Intramiros (not the City of Manila today), and the Cavite
Arscnat. The Filipinos held rthe rest of the Philippines' Conse-
quenttry, as Felipe Agoncillo polnted 9ut in tlta Me'morio:l' :tu-{fo
'(washington,
,i,iiiti 1899;, Spain-,hacl no riglrt to cede something
which was no longer hers. t
22. LaFeber, op. ctt., ptp. 92, 360. The best American in-
diotment of Ar&erican misadventure in the Philippines is James H'
Blount: Tlw American Oacupdtton of tht Plt^llipptrws, IB98'
1912. New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1913'
Blounrt was an Arner,ican voluntecr in the Philippines from 1899 to
I9O1 and Ju<Ige from 1901 to 1905. He exposed American im-
perialistic motives in lo,ccupying the Philippines. Not ths leastt in'
ieres'ting arc his accounts of American brutalities' Blount's book
is docrirnl:nted and rlrew praises boen from American imperialists
and rtheir apologists.
23. Quoted in Blount, p. 123.
24. For eyervitness accottn{ts of the Filipino-American war,
cf. Albsrt G. Ro:binson: Tlte Pkitippfnes: The Ww d,ttd 'the
People. New York: McClure,, Phillips & Co., 1901; Karl Irving
Flauslt: Campaigrcing in the Philippines. San Francisco: The Hicks-
Judd Company, 1899; and Marion Wilcox (ed.): Harpeis EI'is'
'tor1t ol the War fur' lh.e Phtti,ppinvs. New York: Harper's, 19001
Robinson, in particular, admired Filipino tenacity, courage, anc
bravery in lthe face of *.he itrained and well-arnrred enemy.
25. Ct. M,alolas: The Crisis of the Republic, Chrapters X ano
XVI.
26. Tlte moneyed class and many of the intelleqtuals feareo
the masses, particularly because the Filipino Army was comp,osed
of people who cam,e from the lower class. See Felipe G. Calderon:
Mts Memorias Sobre la Revoluci6n Filiftna. Segilftd,a elap,a, 1898
d 1901. Man;la: Imp. de El Renacimiento, 1907, pp. 239-24O.
Calderon was ths framer of ttre Malolos Cons,titutilon (1898) which
Mabini opposed wilth all his might because it denuded the Presidenlt
of powers needed in a time of crisis.
21 . My generation and rlhe one before have been schooled in
the o''ral history of the Philippines, rradticularly in Spanish misdeeds
and the Filipino-American war. The oral hisitory was furnished
us. by our grandparents who, of an evening after supper, would
tell stories to {the children who sat at their feet to, listen wi,th rapt
attention tr-r ihe "after-dinner stories" of grandpa or grandma. (But
of course there were no radios and nelevision setts during our child-
hoocl da ysl) During my underggaduate days, I had the opportunity
87-E FILIPINO N;\TX.0Nr1'LIS&I
to interview many vstcran$ of the Rcvoltltion and of the Filip,p.e'rl
o'exploi+'ers".
Arnerican war. All called the Americans they fought
From ithem I also learned of American bnrtali,lies perpetrated upon
the Filipinos, soldiers or civilians. I doubted ,at (he time the vara-
cilty of 'th,eir accounts of American lrrutatity, but when I undertook
research work in the N{tional Archives, lVashington, D. C", I
fouhd letters senx, "back homs" by American soldiers describ ng
the brutal rnethods they employed and those by $heir comrades'in-
arms to force Filipinos lto tell on their countrymen. Irst tr be
accuse<I again of being anti-Arnerican, I refer the reader to Leon
Wolff (an .American) : Li{tle Brown Bralh"er. (New York:
Dorrbleday & Company, Inc., 1961), particularly Chapter XI. t
have never written anything as cotrsrfully "uanti-American" as Woiff's
accou,nt of the inverited benevoteuce of the Arnericans In the Phil-
ippines during lthe Filipino-Amcrican wirr.
28. Teodor:o M. I(alaw: ,4,ide-d*C'an4p lo Freedont, p, 71"
29. TecrrJoro h,I.. Ka'!aw: El llraceso d,a "El Ren:acirmtengd'.
Manila, 1947, p. 8. See also ibid., pp. 70-?1"
30. A year before tlu-: death of Serratcr Claro IvI. Rectn, wf,o
was a greait barrister, he told me flhat were lthe case to bo brought
in court atrthat,time (1959). Worcester could nqt have won. It
wat his conivction {hat ,the judge and, later, lthe majority in the
Supreme Court, erred in their reasoning and judgment. Recto
was at the time of the libel case a newspailerrnan on the staff of
the Spanish daily El ldeal.
31. Teodorr: M. Kalaw, true to [he ethics of journalism, did
nbt shirk his respo,nsibility. The author of he editorial was the
assistant editor, Fidel Reyes, who, like him, hailed &ona Lipa, prov-
ince of Batangas.
__. 32. Sergio Osmefia: Oar Sri*r,gpte tor lndapendetffi, Manila,
Pldlippine Inform,ation Agency, 1955, p. 3 ff.
33. Cf. Francis Burton Harrison: The Conters.tone of phiVp-
plne l,ndepandence,. New York: The Century Co., 1922, chapters
V, Vf, and XIV.
34. Ibtd., p. 285.
35. The Leonard Wood Diar1, quqted in Hermann Hagedorn:
I*onard Wood: A Bioglraphy. New York. Harper and Brothers,
1931, Vol. II, p" 412 tf.
35. Mixirno M. I(alarv: Philipltirue Govey',nme,nt UvMer '1lu
Jonet Law. Manila, Oriental Commercial Company, Inc., 1927, pp.
196-197. See also A Repot^o of the Govermor-General, 1923, ,fot
,the Arrrerica,n viewpoittt, ancl Teotioto M. Kalaw: Atde.deT'carnp
to Freetlam, Chapter XVIII, for the Filipino viewpoint.
37. Raporl ol the Govern:or-Genryo,l, 7923, p. 47.
38. For a study of the role of American pressure groups in tho
passage of the independence bill, cf. Graysyon Kirk: Ntiltppine In
f,IIIPINO I\SATIOI\ALISM 8?-F'
rtepeyfulye: Mo$ives, prab.lenw, and prospects. New york: Far_
rar & Rinehart, Inc., 1936, particularly C.irapters fV ooa- V.
39. The Ift&s
.(short f.or Hukba.lgitaps) ivere malignerl by their
guerrilla rival, the USAFFE, and were derscribed as airti-American.
However, an American. guerrilla leader, Donald Btrackburn, wrote
-*"."
t-h.at
-Jhg "1e-portedly hoiqite Hukbalahap irfirabitants very
f1!endly." Cf. Philip Harkins: Blsckburn,s Headtwtterx New york:
W. W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1955, p. 76.
40. The data orr this top,ii were taken fro,m my coinversations
with Father flilario A. Lim arrd from the following, U",orprtot to His
HoltntSs, Pope Alus.-Xil_, on thc Nativg Rqtig,i'ous Ci;r;y in ,ttry
Republic ,ol tha philipplnes. Manila, 2i Nov"ember-l9;i, signedr
by Rev. Hilario A. Lim, S.J.; Rev. Fr. Benito Voigu.,-bi.p.; Rev.
Salvador Calsado, ORSA; Rev. Ambrosio Manaligod SVO;hev. Fr.
Antonio Garin, OSA; and Rev. Fr. Julib ObviaI,"Of'M; [ev. ]filario
A. Lim, S.J.: fuIernorandwm of My Alpeal ,to Biis gmlnence Vale.rio
Cardinut Yaleri on My ,,Expulsion,, irom tne Sitii iy-iesus, 2g
luly 1958; Primer an
-\iligi?izglion, n.d., n.p.; and newspaper clip_
pings on the subject, 1957-1958.
41. Address delivered on the occasion of the conferment upon
Senator Claro M. Reqto_of.rhe degree of Doc,toi i;;;- honafit
cctusa, by the Arellano University, 9 April 1949. "f
42. "Our Mendican,t Foreign policy"i Hisorltc,alBuglelln, Vo,umo
VI, No. 1, March 196O, p. 59.
43. Olticial Ga.zette, Vol.. III, 15 December 1956, p. 7626.
44. For the full tell 'ot Foreign
9f the heaty, cf. Deparrm"oi
A{fairs, Treaty Seytes, Vol. I, No. 1. August- 1947, p. S.
45. Jos6 B. Laurel, Jr'.: ..The Resurg"nce of itr^itippine Na_
tionalism", Cutent ploblems, Manila: Bureau of printin^g, 195g,
p. 51 1.
46. Ramo,n V. Mitra, Jr.: ,,The Libe{taion of the Filipino,,,
PhiUqptrntes Free Press, 29 April 1967, p, 15 ff.
47. U. S. House of Repersentativesf Report Nic.7,61th Con-
gr€ss I st Session , passirn.
48. U. S. Co.ngressintMl Recard, 61th Congress, 1st Sessior:,,
-
Part II, p. 2003.
49. Claro M. Recto: "A Realistic Economic Policy for the
Philippines", speech cleli.iered before the Philippine Columblianr
;"1
Association, 26 September 1956.
50. Claro M. Recto: "Economic Nationalism" a speech de-
,
livered before the Manila Rotary Club on, 28 March 7957
51. Lorenzo M. Taflada "Foreign Banks and Economic In-
depnedence' fn: Natioruqlisrm: A Sumynaw lo Greabtss. eue-
zon City: Phoenix Publishing House, fnc., 1965, p. 49.
<", Alejandro Lichauoo: "Economic Nationalism", Chrontcl.e
1 April 1967, p. t9.
 FILIPINO I{ATtrONALISM 89

for I'ather Coria to prove that the seeulsl' clergy of

this country, or any other class of Filipinos, rightly
tleserr,'e so infamous an epithet. Our conviction on
A DEFENSE OF THE SECULAR CLERGY this point is so firm that rrye would wish his Reverence
(1870)
to cledicate hirnself exclusively to prove to us the con-
trar3r.

,oces Sur- on e
It is true that hist"*y'r*.ords the revolts of No-
A.
rros6-tsiz, \rales, of Tayabas, of lVlalate, and of Nueva Eeija,
feUr"laiv ",,-::'*i",::-1,,,J*,
th*" son of a Sp-anish father' Jos6 Burgos'
;;';-^dp;"ittt-hupi"" mother, de f'etran n t847 He
Florencia Garcia' en-
w[9r9
but how many were those responsible for them? How
rolled at the Cottege of So" ft'io ' many let themselves he drawn into these revolts? Did
he received his naciretor of Arts' In 1852' ho enrolled
he received his those fleeting disturbances perchance extend beyond
at the University of Santo Torn6s where
;;"il;l"rb-;;s; ti Phildsophv in. 1855; his *bachelor's
in Philoso-phy
the respective plaees in which they broke out? Did
;G;t; tfeotogy in 1859; his Licenr'iate
the native cler[fy take part in them or even five Phil-
ir Tg6ol his Liceiii4'te in Th-eology -in 1862; his bachelor's
;;;;;in Canon Law in 1866; anti been hls Doctorate in Theo' ippine-born Spaniards? And is it perhaps strange
ilff1""i8?1.-^-M""y works have attributed 'to him'' that among five million inhabitants there should be
-uf,'orrs
th"m La floAa Negra, a novelette dealing with five or six madmen. or f,anaties, or malcontents, who
ffi;;il;;-oi Gouu.nor-Gineral Manuel Bustamanto in
fifg, t"t many of them may be paiticular, regarded as of douLrtful at some time raise the cry of rebellion? Are there not
;;,h;t-hip.'- ni r-o'ua Negra, in is the work incomparably many more proportionately in other re-
;i;-;;;ert "forger". Because- of his role in the secu-
i*iuuti"r'of the Ftritippine parishes, Fr' Jos6 A' Burgos gions and in our own Spain? What does the Reverend
*u* *t"ttud, along *itt fud","rs Mariano' Gomes and Ja- Comrnissary of the F ranciscans have to say to this?
cinto Zamora, rnist?ied, and execu@d on Bagumbayan Field
on 17 FebruarY 1872. lVith regard to these oft-mentionecl rebellions we
[The following selections,. translated by John .N' ask his Reverence and our readers to note two cir-
Schurirracher, S.J., ui" irom Burgos's letters P q" cumstances. The first is that all-except for that of
editor of tlie Madrid "*t"tptt
(Spain) newspap€r D'tscus'on,-]o
.t'o' severe Novaies, which broke out inside the eity-toolc place
*t i"t he answared Fr. Joaquin ^the
de Coria's
T'
crrtrc-
A' A'l tn partsltes of the regular clergy. Secondly, that of
i"*t in" secular clergy of Philippines'
-
"f Novales, which could have assumed greater propor-
I tions given the circurnstances favorable to the rebels
*lts in which it oecurred, "met with resistance as vigorous
as it was deserved from the pa/t of his countrymen.
harbors
If by antl-spanish is meant' e\'I€ryone who
we admit
One of them was his own brother, who, being on guard
tendencies opposeci to Spanish rule' then in the fort or citadel of this capital, energetically re-
ir*"f.fy that ilru ,.g"lar clergy of Manila cannot be fused to hand over the keys to him." Thus he crowned
considered uu"tr. Similarly, 1t is totally hinrself with glory and bequeathed to history an act
impossible
eapable by itself of silencing the tongues of those rash
88
90 ' irrlrprNo NAqror{ALISM
oetractors of the proverbial loyalty of the sons of this
country. Sueh an act obliges the rnother-country to
treat us with solicitucle, ctrosing her ears to so hlack
a calumny ancl making us sharers }n the attentions and
rights granted to Spaniards. WilI Spain refuse to
look on us fl$ *ions? Ane nnt $orne three centuries of
proof sufficient for that magnanimous nation to con-
sider impostors those who wish to cast on us the mark
of insurgents and rebeliious sons?
+dr*
Let him say when the rnissionary of the Philip-
pines has opposed the anti-Spanish plans of this clergy
and of a certain class of Filipinos. This plan must
have manifested itself in attempts at revolt, for other-
wise we cannot und"erstand how any opposition has
been made. And since revolts cannot be attempted
rvithout noise, without publieity, and without energetic
measures being taken either to avoid them or to sup-
press them, or to punish the guilty with due severity,
nothing will be easier for the Father Commissary of
the Franciscans than to come out successfully and to
see us filled with opprobrium and humbied before his
Paternity.
U by harboripg an anti-Sipanish and anfi-hu-
manitarian plan is meant systematic opposition to the
decisions of the Spanish Government, just because they
narrow the circle within which are exercised certain
liberties, certain privileges, certain praetices, certain
customs; or because the;r cut off at the root ahuses
which cannot continue, or introduce ehanges demanded
by good order and the regularity with which a1l affairs
should proeeed in a weil-organizecl society, then we say
that far frorn it being the secular clergy or any other
r'ILIPINO NATIONALISM 91
classof the sons of this country, it is the regular clergly
wiro harbor that anti-Spanish and anti-hurnanitarian
plot which they believe they find in the others. They
are the ones-saving honorable exceptions which in
due time we will point out-who have at, all times
troubXed both eivil and ecclesiastical authorities when-
ever those have attempted to restrain their abuses.
They bring into play their rights, their privileges,
their influence, and their rvealtir, without ever ceasing
for a moment until gaining a victory so complete at
times, that it has eost very many provincial governors
and rnore than one captain-general their posts.
And it is surprising that this happens if they
have the richest haciend.as, the largest parishes, the
best country-houses, and the rnost comfortable and
spacious houses of this capital, rvhich they rent for a
greater or lesser amount and on conditions more or
less favorable, but in such a way that the advantages
are alvrrays for the lessee, whose influence and protec-
tion they hope to be able some day to make use of?
We do not have to insist a great deal, nor to furnish
facts-interesting ones nonetheless-to prove the truth
of what we have just indieated. For they belong to
those matters which are well within the realm of his-
tory, and are perfectly well known to all who have been
some time in this country.
*r+t
II
We begin today assuring you that the greatest
glory of Spain in these islands consists in being totally
bandoned to the loyalty, good faith, and excellent dis-
tions of the sons of the country.
tz rtr,rputcl N,tTIoNALIss{
The reasor:l i$ ottvtous. Til*: peminsular Spaniards
resident on this soil are very few; t}:ey would have no
means of defense, if thqy did not count with the natives
themselves. The distance which separates us from our
mother country is enormous; the oceasions which tumul-
tuous and rebellious $ons wouirl }:arre treen able to take
advantage of, have been many. Nonetheless, what has
happened during th.e three eenturies in which we have
been respeeting and obeying the Spanish Government?
\\''hen rurnors of, sorae constrrirae;r have been current
and the Governrnent, as is right, in rnatters of such
transcendent importance, has taken preventive meas-
ures, employing the persons rnost apt for discovering
the truth, rvhat have they succeeded in d.iscovering?
Has not the finai result ah,vays heen a disappointment?
What do our calumniators reply ti: this? Are these
gentlemen 1:erhaps so iael<ing in judgment as not to
know that the strongest proof against this calumny is
that it can onlrv be heard when the newspapers talk
about the regular clergy of the Phiiippines, asking for
the secularization of their parishes, or at least that the
tendency which they have to take possession of all those
islands be restrained?
Yes, Mr. Editor, these alarming rumors of at-
tempts against the Spanish Government have their
cycles. And though these are irregular in appearance
rvith regard to time, they are nor:etheless ,regular in
always coinciding with the questions of reform of
parishes.
We will not say rvho are thelr authors, but it is
certain that in these days rumors of attempted revoits
exist and spreacl about. And it is precisely a short
time ago that the question of the reform of parishes
in the Philippines began to be cliscussed"
FILIPINO NATISNALIS*I 9lr
trt is certain that F ather Coria, sallying to the fray,
says concerning one article: ,,If ryhat it proposes is
carried into effect, the result wouicl be the loss, not
oniy for Spain, but for humanity and for civilization,
of those dominions called by Providence to fulfill most
lofty and humanitarian ends.,, It is certain that at
the time of the discussion of parishes, particularly of
that of Antipolo, carried on so skillfully by Father
Pedro Pelilez, honor and glory of the clerg[r of this
country and splendor of the sacerdotal state, the rumor
circulated in Manila that the latter had formed. a
conspiracy which was to break out in revolt on the very
morning of Corpus Christi of 1868. To such a point
did the perverse intention of this clergy go that in the
columns of the newspaper La, Verd,<tcl it was said:
"Let us see what our correspondent of I\{anila says
about that most worthy captain-general in the follow-
ing paragraph of his letter dated November 5: ,But
just say that the collapse of tire Cathedral set - afoot
the ugly specter of rebeilion. But this Seflor Echague
noiselessly, without scandal or disturbing measures,
has saved the colony from two very grave evils, of
which the earthquake was the lesser one., This, as
our readels can recognize, is serious. This - means, at
the least, that there were in that country persons clis-
posed for a revolt. Hence it may be inferred how
correcl it is that ali those who direcily or indirectly
try to lower or destroy the prestige and rnoral force
which our Spanish missionaries have there, and which
so important to preser\re in those islands, necessarily
help (even without adverting to it) those who have
intent, and promote emancipation itself.,, And
t wouid those say rvho have dictated these lines if
majority or all the parishes were served by penin-
94 TI'IL.IPff,IO NATIONALIfi}$
sular secular ciergy, or if the regular clergy thern-
selves who now serve them were secularized? Can the
Friar, perhaps, boast of greater patriotism and loyalty
than the secular clergy? Let Father Coria say it.
For our part, we will oniy recall what iil feelings
Europe has for. them.
It is certain that Don Basilio Sancho, so famous
for the persistence with which he undertook to put into
practice the holy diocesan visitation, said to Charles III
that the first ancl rnost overwovked refuge to which
the religious have always had recourse when hard-
pressed is to make the Government believe that these
islands would be lost if the secular clergy were put
in the parishes. These are the exact words of that
gentleman in his exposition of May 10, 1768.
Finally, it is certain that in Parnpanga, a province
totally administered by religious parish priests (except
for two or three wretched and unhealthy parishes which
for this reason have been served for sorne time by
secular priests in a temporary capacity), the rumor
circulated iast Christmas eve that revolution was
going to break out. Prescinding from the notorious
falsity of the news by the mere fact that it did not
take place in spite of the fact that measures were not
taken to prevent it, r,ve decluce that the regulars them-
selves who were cowering w-ith fear that night must
be interioriy convinced that they lack the moral force
so exalted by Father Coria, and are therefore power-
less to restrain the tendencies of the towns they ad-
minister. Otherwise, why lyere they so alarmed? How
have they believed certain towns capable of revolting,
which, according to them, love them so much and respect
them as fathers? IIow true it is that the towns are
}'ILIPINO NAT*IONALISM 95
not more moral, nor more submissive, nor more loyal,
just because their parish priests are religious!
,Ittt
UI
+-ii*
We said: Secular phrish priests, one-half or a
majority of them peninsular Spaniards, and a suffi-
cient number of regular clergy, who while living in
monastic fashion in their monasteries in Manila, would
go forth for periods to preach mission through the
towns, while sorne of them fixed their residence among
the non-Christians in order to reduce them to Chris-
tianity-here is the secret, the means which is most
sure, most fruitful in results, most rapid and most ef-
ficaeious for the civilization, conservation, and progress
of these islands.
As a matter of fact, if the regular clergy desire
the prosperity of the country, if they long for a truly
regular life which better allows for the observance of
their vows and their respective constitutions, if finally,
they desire to achieve the perfection which is the pur-
pose of the religious state by means of the practice
of the evangelieal counsels, and. to correspond more
fully to the modest but glorious name of missionaries
which the regular clergy of the Philippinesj still at-
tribute to themselves, Father Coria must agree with
us that the reform of the parishes just outlined ought
to be implanted. For it ii is carried. out in the terrns
ted, it would be of greater advantage to the
try and to the State. It would, moreover, place
the regular clergy in a more favorabie situation to con-
u€ converting the non-Christians who inhabit part
the mountains of this archipelago, and likewise be
I)6 r.'TLIPI}{O NA"IONALI$ffi
their
an aid to the better observance of their vows and
rules.
rf rt {+
It is not possible, humanly speaking' that the
missionary wiro cherishes hopes of being transferred
some day to a parish wiil give himself for a
long time
to his evangelical conquests with that unshatterable
zeal and constancy *hitf' distinguish the
man who
only longs for the saivation of souls' as everypriest
mis-
parish
sionary should. Encouragecl to become a
brothers
by the comfortable life which he observes in his
who are such, or recalling the comfortable life which
seeing
he led if he has been one already, or resentful-at
young men still bearclless and' newly entered into his
1"a., administer wealthy parishes' while he' who than con-
more
siders himself to possess ai least some merit
they, is left forgotten in the winding depths
of the
mountains, suffe"ring privations and frustrations'
he
the apostle of God'
ceases to he the peaceful missionary,
and only thinl<s of putting into play his connections
and his intrigues, or in sighing for the time of the
Provincial Cirapter, so that the tr'athers of his party
may taku po*.i. For it is public and notorious that
the party spirit is strong also, and very much so'
with-
in ifre religious orders of the Philippines' And even
though it is true that this happens in all the communities
of the world, still we cannot give any other reason for
the marked preponderance it has in those of of these
all
islands than ihe^ cl.sire which takes possession
their individuals-with the exception of some few-to
o..rrpy parishes. It can be said without exaggeration
that there are as marry parties in a singlepriestsord'er as
of
there are six, eight, or ten religious parish
FILIPI}.iO NAT'IONALISM 97
the same comrnunity, and at times as rnany as there
are groups of religious born in the same province or
the same town.
*{<rt
Here too is the explanation of the static state of
the missions of this arcfiipelago for. at least the past
century. For we see that his Excellency the Arch-
irishop of Manila, Basilio de Santa Justa y Rufina,
ah'eady was complaining of this in his memorial to
the throne of October 1, 1768. "Unburdening the re-
gulars of the charge of the parishes," said that zealous
prelate, "they will be free so that your Majesty ean
eurploy them in new eonversions. For in spite of the
fact that this is the prineipal encl for which they
'were sent from the beginning, for many years now
these missions have all but ceased completely."
In the very recent past we see these same ob-
servations reproduced by the archbishop's office of
this diocese in a communication of November 10, 1862
clirected to the Superior Civil Governor and Vice-Royal
Patron of these islands. Manifesting the difficulties
in having friars occupy the parishes, it says among
other things: "If from what has been said to this
point it is not clear that the Cltwclt, and the State in
the Philippines should suffer from the increase of the
ber of religious parishes and the deerease of those
the seculal clergy, T would recall in proof of it the
tion so often made, even by prelates of this
that the progress of the active missions has
or at least greatly diminished since so many
have been lavished on the regular c1ergy."
From these authoritative deelarations which can-
be objected to as suspeet or partial, inasmueh as
 FILIPINO NA?'NONA"LISM 9S
98 T'ILIPINO NATIONALISM
to the reiigious orders thernselves because of the im-
they come from respectable dignitari"t gl that the
the Church
minent risk that some may grow tepid and withdraw
in these f.fu*a*, 1i" said truth is evidentfarce'. serving from the observance of their rule, and because manJr
missions of the Philippines are a complete virtuous and absternious men, whom obedienee would
defense for their
the regula" .iurfr' ;; pr-otection and' notable pre- assign to the same offices, would, be atftinted, to li,ue
particular interlsts and clesigns but with the pros- outsid,a the cloister to whiph tlteir aocation brought
i"ai* t" the Church and the State and to
they exploit them. Attending to all ihis, and having sure in-
perity and. wealth of the country' which formation that in all or the majority of the dioceses
in benefit of tt. rural and urban estates they
"uf"'Ufe of my dominions of Ameriea there is a sufficient supply
p0ssess. of, secular clergy ad.orned. with gifts of aptitude and
These difficutties would disaPPear
the rnoment
in the PhiliP- learning, praiseworthy morals, and other qualities cor-
that we had no regular P arish Priests responcling to their state, to whom ean safely be en-
For all their Pretensions would
disaPPear;
p1nes.
exclusivelY to conver-
trusted the care of souls, thus unburdening the reli-
they would declicate themselves gious of the heavy charge which they hnae \r,eld, onrt"
uxiliaries of the Parish
sion, theY woul d be zealous a in the confes- which, h,as been entmrcted to them on a temporclrA basis,
priests, helplng them with Preaching, the same tirn - and avoiding the evils which may have been caused irt
At
sional, and otirer plous exercises. sorne of their individuals by the absence of their pre-
they would be trulY regulars
in the full extension of lates, the lack of the visible example of their brothers,
or not this is true
the word. Let us hear whether de C6rdenas of the and perhaps the want of attention to their moral and
from the ceiebrated Fr. Bernardino of Peru and religious life, I commanded, etc."
Order of St. Francis, famous Preacher who sai d: "And if Does Father Coria want more proofs of the neces*
afterwards bishoP in Parag;uaY, to leave the Parishes, there is of the above-mentioned reforrn? Are not
wished
for this reason the religious to the religious orders; which have been brought forward enough to eon*
may no other evil ever come hnul,rlg tltem. TheY him that not only the Church, the State, and
so mnq haPP en to tltem from
fm their monas teries in recollec- country would gain much, but even the religious
would be much better in risks and danger witlr' ? Does not his Reverence see that if all
tion than exposed to so many
whose rule theY can- parish priests of a diocase are secular priests, the
great hnrrn to th,e raligious ord,er,
from their monasteries. would have more freedom of action to govern,
not ProPerlY keep being away
of Fernando VX in and punish? Does he not see either that in
Sim ilar to these are the vro rd"s and irrePar- fashion there would be no way to mock their au-
his cedula of tr'ebruarY 1' 1?53. "Graue of religious living ty, as often happens in these islands, where &
able euils," he says, "are the result priest, removecl by the bishop, is transferred
separ ated fiom their insti tute
without the observation
prelate to another diocese, in which he is again
of their superl ors ancl sui:orclina tion to therrl,
w
is as parish priest, tc the great lowering of
apptied to these ministries. This disPersion
100 FILIPIN-O N./TTIGNAI,ISII{
prestige a,nd downgrading of ecctresiastical ai.rthority
and spiritual dainage to the faithful who have for
pastor a nlan judicially declared r.rnworthy of being
such. Does he perchance not see that the secular
priest, laching that collective life of the regular clergy
and placed under the immediate inspection of one singie
prelate, the bishop, without aid, withr:ut support, with-
out protection, without other refu.ge than the justice
and rectitude of his actions, undoul:tedly has to excel in
the futfillment of all the duties rvhich his charge im-
pose on hini? I)oes Father Coria ttot see, finally, that
if the regulars were unburrlened of their parishes,
those who were in their monasteries could from tinre
to time go forth to help the parish priests, and in that
manner they would be, as they ouglat to be, coadjutors
of the latter and of the bishoPs?
{.*)F
is absurd and very glaringly so, for it does not agree
with what we propose to demonstrate in the following
lines.
VARIOUS ARTICLES ON THE PHILIPPINES
Gracinno L6pea Jaetw
[Graciano' }./rpz Jaena,.'ths brilliant orator of the
Reform Movement in Spain during the, last two decades
of the nineteenth c,entury, was born in Jaro, now a dis-
trict of Iloilo, City, on 17 December L856, the son bf
Pl6cido L6pez and Maria Jacobo Jaena. He studied at
'the, Seminary of Jaro but his rebellious nature led him
to foresake the priesthood. Before he left for Manila, he
circulated his ,tale Fray Botod which ridiculed and exposed
the, brutality and irnmorali*y of a friar. This work led
the' friars to run after him, and in 1880 he sailed for
Spain to continue his medical studies. But the night life
of Barcelona and Madrid led him to, forsake medicine
for rvriting. The, first native Filipino, to call the attenrtion
of the peninsular Spaniards to the plight of the natives
of the Philipp,ines, particularly to friar rrlJe, lipez faena
delivered speeches after speeches and wrote articles which,
rvhile not as w,ell written and as deep as Rizal's, had
nevertheless a poptrlar ap,peal.
[L,6pez Jaena founded and became the first editor
of La Soltdaridad, the organ of the Filipino reformists in
Spain. He died in Barcelona on 20 January 1896. His
collected works, Discursos y Articulos Voios, was puF
lished in Barcelona inr 1891. The following selectioos
are frorn the book and translated by Dr. Encarnasi5n
Alzo,na.-T. A. A.l
I. LOGIC ]N TIIE PHII,IPPINES
( 1884)
Unlucky frorn the start. The title of this article
101