`

READINGS IN PHILIPPINE
HISTORY
Module 3: Content and Contextual Analysis
of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine History pt. 2
IT1/HRS1
Teacher: Mrs. Emelia J. Romano

Module 3 Contents/ Lessons

1. Reading the “Proclamation of the Philippine Independence”

a. Analysis of the “Proclamation of the Philippine Independence”
2. A Glance at Selected Philippine Political Caricature of the American Era
(1900 – 1941)
a. Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the American Period
3. Revisiting Corazon Aquino’s Speech Before the U.S. Congress
a. Analysis of Cory Aquino’s Speech

Learning Objectives:
• To familiarize oneself with the primary documents in different historical
periods of the Philippines.
• To learn history through primary sources.
• To properly interpret primary sources through examining the content and
context of the document.
• To understand the context behind each selected document.

READING THE "PROCLAMATION OF THE PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE”

Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the Philippine

Independence proclaimed on 12 June 1898, in the province of Cavite. Indeed,
such event is a significant turning point in the history of the country because it
signaled the end of the 333 years of Spanish colonization. There have been
numerous studies done on the events leading to the independence of the
country but very few students had the chance to read the actual document of
the declaration. This is in spite of the historical importance of the document and
the details that the document reveals on the rationale and circumstances of that
historical day in Cavite. Interestingly, reading the details of the said document in
hindsight is telling of the kind of government that was created under Aguinaldo,

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

and the forthcoming hand of the United States of America in the next few years
of the newly created republic. The declaration was a short 2,000-word document,
which summarized the reason behind the revolution against Spain, the war for
independence, and the future of the new republic under Emilio Aguinaldo.

The proclamation commenced with a characterization of the conditions in

the Philippines during the Spanish colonial period. The document specifically
mentioned abuses and inequalities in the colony. The declaration says:

“...taking into consideration, that their inhabitants being already weary of

bearing the ominous yoke of Spanish domination, on account of the
arbitrary arrests and harsh treatment practiced by the Civil Guard to the
extent of causing death with the connivance and even with the express
orders of their commanders, who sometimes went to the extreme of
ordering the shooting of prisoners under the pretext that they were
attempting to escape, in violation of the provisions of the Regulations of
their Corps, which abuses were unpunished and on account of the unjust
deportations, especially those decreed by General Blanco, of eminent
personages and of high social position, at the instigation of the Archbishop
and friars interested in keeping them out of the way for their own selfish and
avaricious purpose, deportations which are quickly brought about by a
method of procedure more execrable than that of the Inquisition and
which every civilized nation rejects on account of a decision being
rendered without a hearing of the persons accused."

The above passage demonstrates the justifications behind the revolution

against Spain. Specifically cited are the abuse by the Civil Guards and the
unlawful shooting of prisoners whom they alleged as attempting to escape. The
passage also condemns the unequal protection of the law between the Filipino
people and the "eminent personages." Moreover, the line mentions the avarice
and greed of the clergy like the friars and the Archbishop himself. Lastly, the
passage also condemns what they saw as the unjust deportation and rendering
of other decision without proper hearing, expected of any civilized nation.

From here, the proclamation proceeded with a brief historical overview of

the Spanish occupation since Magellan's arrival in Visayas until the Philippine
Revolution, with specific details about the latter, especially after the Pact of Biak-
na-Bato had collapsed. The document narrates the spread of the movement "like
an electric spark" through different towns and provinces like Bataan, Pampanga,
Batangas, Bulacan, Laguna, and Morong, and the quick decline of Spanish forces
in the same provinces. The revolt also reached Visayas; thus, the independence
of the country was ensured. The document also mentions Rizal's execution, calling
it unjust. The execution, as written in the document, was done to "please the
greedy body of friars in their insatiable desire to seek revenge upon and
exterminate all those who are opposed to their Machiavellian purposes, which
tramples upon the penal code prescribed for these islands." The document also
narrates the Cavite Mutiny of January 1872 that caused the infamous execution
of the martyred native priests Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora,

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

"whose innocent blood was shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious
orders" that incited the three secular priests in the said mutiny.

The proclamation of independence also invokes that the established

republic would be led under the dictatorship of Emilio Aguinaldo. The first mention
was at the very beginning of the proclamation. It stated:

"In the town of Cavite Viejo, in this province of Cavite, on the twelfth day of
June eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, before me, Don Ambrosio
Rianzares Bautista, Auditor of War and Special Commissioner appointed to
proclaim and solemnize this act by the Dictatorial Government of these
Philippine Islands, for the purposes and by virtue of the circular addressed
by the Eminent Dictator of the same Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy."

The same was repeated toward the last part of the proclamation. It states:

"We acknowledge, approve and confirm together with the orders that
have been issued therefrom, the Dictatorship established by Don Emilio
Aguinaldo, whom we honor as the Supreme Chief of this Nation, which this
day commences to have a life of its own, in the belief that he is the
instrument selected by God, in spite of his humble origin, to effect the
redemption of this unfortunate people, as foretold by Doctor Jose Rizal in
the magnificent verses which he composed when he was preparing to be
shot, liberating them from the yoke of Spanish domination in punishment of
the impunity with which their Government allowed the commission of
abuses by its subordinates."

Another detail in the proclamation that is worth looking at is its explanation

on the Philippine flag that was first waved on the same day. The document
explained:

"And finally, it was unanimously resolved that this Nation, independent from
this day, must use the same flag used heretofore, whose design and colors
and described in the accompanying drawing, with design representing in
natural colors the three arms referred to. The white triangle represents the
distinctive emblem of the famous Katipunan Society, which by means of its
compact of blood urged on the masses of the people to insurrection; the
three stars represent the three principal Islands of this Archipelago, Luzon,
Mindanao and Panay, in which this insurrectionary movement broke out;
the sun represents the gigantic strides that have been made by the sons of
this land on the road of progress and civilization, its eight rays symbolizing
the eight provinces of Manila, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija,
Bataan, Laguna and Batangas, which were declared in a state of war
almost as soon as the first insurrectionary movement was initiated; and the
colors blue, red and white, commemorate those of the flag of the United
States of North America, in manifestation of our profound gratitude towards
that Great Nation for the disinterested protection she is extending to us and
will continue to extend to us."

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 This often overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate
meaning behind the most widely known national symbol in the Philippines. It is not
known by many for example, that the white triangle was derived from the symbol
of the Katipunan. The red and blue colors of the flag are often associated with
courage and peace, respectively. Our basic education omits the fact that those
colors were taken from the flag of the United States. While it can always be
argued that symbolic meaning can always change and be reinterpreted, the
original symbolic meaning of something presents us several historical truths that
can explain the subsequent events, which unfolded after the declaration of
independence on the 12th day of June 1898.

Analysis of the "Proclamation of the Philippine Independence"

As mentioned earlier, a re-examination of the document on the declaration

of independence can reveal some often overlooked historical truths about this
important event in Philippine history. Aside from this, the document reflects the
general revolutionary sentiment of that period. For example, the abuses
specifically mentioned in the proclamation like friar abuse, racial discrimination,
and inequality before the law reflect the most compelling sentiments represented
by the revolutionary leadership. However, no mention was made about the more
serious problem that affected the masses more profoundly (i.e., the land and
agrarian crisis felt by the numerous Filipino peasants in the nineteenth century).
This is ironic especially when renowned Philippine Revolution historian, Teodoro
Agoncillo, stated that the Philippine Revolution was an agrarian revolution. The
common revolutionary soldiers fought in the revolution for the hope of owning the
lands that they were tilling once the friar estates in different provinces like
Batangas and Laguna dissolve, if and when the revolution succeeded. Such
aspects and realities of the revolutionary struggle were either unfamiliar to the
middle class revolutionary leaders like Emilio Aguinaldo, Ambrosio Rianzares-
Bautista, and Felipe Buencamino, or were intentionally left out because they were
landholders themselves.

• The Treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and the United
States of America regarding the ownership of the Philippine Islands and
other Spanish colonies in South America. The agreement ended the short-
lived Spanish-American War. The Treaty was signed on 10 December 1898,
six months after the revolutionary government declared the Philippine
Independence. The Philippines was sold to the United States at $20 million
and effectively undermined the sovereignty of the Filipinos after their
revolutionary victory. The Americans occupied the Philippines immediately
which resulted in the Philippine-American War that lasted until the earliest
years of the twentieth century.

The proclamation also gives us the impression on how the victorious

revolutionary government of Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for
independence. There were mentions of past events that were seen as important

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

turning points of the movement against Spain. The execution of the GOMBURZA,
for example, and the failed Cavite Mutiny of 1872 was narrated in detail. This
shows that they saw this event as a significant awakening of the Filipinos in the
real conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose Rizal's legacy and martyrdom was
also mentioned in the document. However, the Katipunan as the pioneer of the
revolutionary movement was only mentioned once toward the end of the
document. There was no mention of the Katipunan's foundation. Bonifacio and
his co-founders were also left out. It can be argued, thus, that the way of historical
narration found in the document also reflects the politics of the victors. The enmity
between Aguinaldo's Magdalo and Bonifacio's Magdiwang in the Katipunan is
no secret in the pages of our history. On the contrary, the war led by Aguinaldo's
men with the forces of the United States were discussed in detail.

The point is, even official records and documents like the proclamation of
independence, while truthful most of the time, still exude the politics and biases
of whoever is in power. This manifests in the selectiveness of information that can
be found in these records. It is the task of the historian, thus, to analyze the content
of these documents in relation to the dominant politics and the contexts of
people and institutions surrounding it. This tells us a lesson on taking primary
sources like official government records within the circumstance of this
production. Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking at multiple
primary sources and pieces of historical evidences in order to have a more
nuanced and contextual analysis of our past.

A GLANCE AT SELECTED PHILIPPINE POLITICAL CARICATURE IN ALFRED MCCOY'S

PHILIPPINE CARTOONS: POLITICAL CARICATURE OF THE AMERICAN ERA (1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered
away from classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its
subjects. Such art genre and technique became a part of the print media as a
form of social and political commentary, which usually targets persons of power
and authority. Cartoons became an effective tool of publicizing opinions through
heavy use of symbolism, which is different from a verbose written editorial and
opinion pieces. The unique way that a caricature represents opinion and
captures the audience's imagination is reason enough for historians to examine
these political cartoons. Commentaries in mass media inevitably shape public
opinion and such kind of opinion is worthy of historical examination.

In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era

(1900-1941), Alfred McCoy, together with Alfredo Roces, compiled political
cartoons published in newspaper dailies and periodicals in the aforementioned
time period. For this part, we are going to look at selected cartoons and explain
the context of each one.

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 The first example shown above was published in The Independent on May
20, 1916. The cartoon shows a politician from Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing
his crown to his brother-in-law, Dr. Barcelona. A Filipino guy (as depicted wearing
salakot and barong tagalog) was trying to stop Santos, telling the latter to stop
giving Barcelona the crown because it is not his to begin with.

The second cartoon was also published by The Independent on June 1917.
This was drawn by Fernando Amorsolo and was aimed as a commentary to the
workings of Manila Police at that period. Here, we a Filipino child who stole a
skinny chicken because he had nothing to eat. The police officer was relentlessly
pursuing the said child. A man wearing a salakot, labeled Juan de la Cruz was
grabbing the officer, telling him to leave the small-time pickpockets and thieves
and to turn at the great thieves instead. He was pointing to huge warehouses
containing bulks of rice, milk, and grocery products.

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases of

colorum automobiles in the city streets. The Philippine Free Press published this
commentary when fatal accidents involving colorum vehicles and taxis occurred
too often already.

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 This fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at the
screen saying that couples are not allowed to neck and make love in the theater.
Two youngsters looked horrified while an older couple seemed amused.

The next cartoon was published by The Independent on 27 November 1915.

Here, we see the caricature of Uncle Sam riding a chariot pulled by Filipinos
wearing school uniforms. The Filipino boys were carrying American objects like
baseball bats, whiskey, and boxing gloves. McCoy, in his caption to the said
cartoon, says that this cartoon was based on an event in 1907 when William
Howard Taft was brought to the Manila pier riding a chariot pulled by students of
Liceo de Manila. Such was condemned by the nationalists at that time.

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24 August 1907. In
the picture, we can see Uncle Sam rationing porridge to the politicians and
members of the Progresista Party (sometimes known as the Federalista Party) while
members of the Nacionalista Party look on and wait for their turn. This cartoon
depicts the patronage of the United States being coveted by politicians from
either of the party.

Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the American Period

The transition from the Spanish Colonial period to the American

Occupation period demonstrated different strands of changes and shifts in
culture, society, and politics. The Americans drastically introduced democracy to
the nascent nation and the consequences were far from ideal. Aside from this, it
was also during the American period that Filipinos were introduced to different
manifestations of modernity like healthcare, modern transportation, and media.
This ushered in a more open and freer press. The post-independence and the
post-Filipino-American period in the Philippines were experienced differently by
Filipinos coming from different classes. The upper principalia class experienced
economic prosperity with the opening up of the Philippine economy to the United
States but the majority of the poor Filipino remained poor, desperate, and victims
of state repression.

The selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion of certain media outfits
about the Philippine society during the American period but also paint a broad
image of society and politics under the United States. In the arena of politics, for
example, we see the price that Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled after
the Americans. First, it seemed that the Filipino politicians at that time did not
understand well enough the essence of democracy and the accompanying
democratic institutions and processes. This can be seen in the rising dynastic
politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon published by The Independent.
Patronage also became influential and powerful, not only between clients and
patrons but also between the newly formed political parties composed of the
elite and the United States. This was depicted in the cartoon where the United
States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole outs for members of the
Federalista while the Nacionalista politicians looked on and waited for their turn.
Thus, the essence of competing political parties to enforce choices among the

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

voters was cancelled out, The problem continues up to the present where
politicians transfer from one party to another depending on which party was
powerful in specific periods of time.

The transition from a Catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an

imperial American-assimilated one, and its complications, were also depicted in
the cartoons. One example is the unprecedented increase of motorized vehicles
in the city. Automobiles became a popular mode of transportation in the city and
led to the emergence of taxis. However, the laws and policy implementation was
mediocre. This resulted in the increasing colorum and unlicensed vehicles
transporting people around the city. The rules governing the issuance of driver's
license was loose and traffic police could not be bothered by rampant violations
of traffic rules. This is a direct consequence of the drastic urbanization of the
Philippine society. Another example is what McCoy called the "sexual revolution"
that occurred in the 1930s. Young people, as early as that period, disturbed the
conservative Filipino mindset by engaging in daring sexual activities in public
spaces like cinemas. Here, we can see how that period was the meeting point
between the conservative past and the liberated future of the Philippines.

Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the
Philippines now governed by the United States. From the looks of it, nothing much
has changed. For example, a cartoon depicted how police authorities oppress
petty Filipino criminals while turning a blind eye on hoarders who monopolize
goods in their huge warehouses (presumably Chinese merchants). The other
cartoon depicts how Americans controlled Filipinos through seemingly harmless
American objects. By controlling their consciousness and mentality, Americans
got to control and subjugate Filipinos.

REVISITING CORAZON AQUINO'S SPEECH BEFORE THE U.S. CONGRESS

Corazon "Cory" Cojuangco Aquino functioned as the symbol of the

restoration of democracy and the overthrow of the Marcos Dictatorship in 1986.
The EDSA People Power, which installed Cory Aquino in the presidency, put the
Philippines in the international spotlight for overthrowing a dictator through
peaceful means. Cory was easily a figure of the said revolution, as the widow of
the slain Marcos oppositionist and former Senator Benigno "Ninoy” Aquino Jr. Cory
was hoisted as the antithesis of the dictator. Her image as a mourning, widowed
housewife who hand always been in the shadow of her husband and relatives
and had no experience in politics was juxtaposed against Marcos's
statesmanship, eloquence, charisma, and cunning political skills. Nevertheless,
Cory was able to capture the imagination of the people whose rights and
freedom had long been compromised throughout the Marcos regime. This is
despite the fact that Cory came from a rich haciendero family in Tarlac and
owned vast estates of sugar plantation and whose relatives occupy local and
national government positions.

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 • The People Power Revolution of 1986 was widely recognized around the
world for its peaceful character. When former senator Ninoy Aquino was
shot at the tarmac of the Manila International Airport on 21 August 1983,
the Marcos regime greatly suffered a crisis of legitimacy. Protests from
different sectors frequented different areas in the country. Marcos's
credibility in the international community also suffered. Paired with the
looming economic crisis, Marcos had to do something to prove to his allies
in the United States that he remained to be the democratically anointed
leader of the country. He called for a Snap Election in February 1986, where
Corazon Cojuangeo Aquino, the widow of the slain senator was convinced
to run against Marcos. The canvassing was rigged to Marcos's favor but the
people expressed their protests against the corrupt and authoritarian
government. Leading military officials of the regime and Martial Law
orchestrators themselves, Juan Ponce Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos, plotted to
take over the presidency, until civilians heeded the call of then Manila
Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin and other civilian leaders gathered in EDSA.
The overwhelming presence of civilians in EDSA successfully turned a coup
into a civilian demonstration. The thousands of people who gathered
overthrew Ferdinand Marcos from the presidency after 21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven months since Cory became president, she

went to the United States and spoke before the joint session of the US. Congress.
Cory was welcomed with long applause as she took the podium and addressed
the United States about her presidency and the challenges faced by the new
republic. She began her speech with the story of her leaving the United States
three years prior as a newly widowed wife of Ninoy Aquino.

She then told of Ninoy's character, conviction, and resolve in opposing the
authoritarianism of Marcos. She talked of the three times that they lost Ninoy
including his demise on 23 August 1983. The first time was when the dictatorship
detained Ninoy with other dissenters. Cory related:

"The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked
him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell in a military camp in the north. They
stripped him naked and held a threat of a sudden midnight execution over
his head. Ninoy held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well. For forty-
three days, the authorities would not tell me what had happened to him.
This was the first time my children and I felt we had lost him."

Cory continued that when Ninoy survived that first detention, he was then
charged of subversion, murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military court,
whose legitimacy Ninoy adamantly questioned. To solidify his protest, Ninoy
decided to do a hunger strike and fasted for 40 days. Cory treated this event as
the second time that their family lost Ninoy. She said:

"When that didn't work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a
host of other crimes before a military commission. Ninoy challenged its
authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then he felt God intended him

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back
from his determination to see his fast through to the end. He stopped only
when it dawned on him that the government would keep his body alive
after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life in his body,
he called off the fast on the 40th day."

Ninoy's death was the third and the last time that Cory and their children
lost Ninoy. She continued:

"And then, we lost him irrevocably and more painfully than in the past. The
news came to us in Boston. It had to be after the three happiest years of
our lives together. But his death was my country's resurrection and the
courage and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator
had called him a nobody. Yet, two million people threw aside their passivity
and fear and escorted him to his grave.”

Cory attributed the peaceful EDSA Revolution to the martyrdom of Ninoy.

She stated that the death of Ninoy sparked the revolution and the responsibility
of "offering the democratic alternative" had "fallen on (her) shoulders." Cory's
address introduced us to her democratic philosophy, which she claimed she also
acquired from Ninoy. She argued:

"I held fast to Ninoy's conviction that it must be by the ways of democracy.
I held out for participation in the 1984 election the dictatorship called, even
if I knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the opposition,
that I ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that
were clearly going to be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but for
the people in whose intelligence, I had implicit faith. By the exercise of
democracy even in a dictatorship, they would be prepared for democracy
when it came. And then also, it was the only way I knew by which we could
measure our power even in the terms dictated by the dictatorship. The
people vindicated me in an election shamefully marked by government
thuggery and fraud. The opposition swept the elections, garnering a clear
majority of the votes even if they ended up (thanks to a corrupt Commission
on Elections) with barely a third of the seats in Parliament. Now, I knew our
power."

Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people's struggle and
continued talking about her earliest initiatives as the president of a restored
democracy. She stated that she intended to forge and draw reconciliation after
a bloody and polarizing dictatorship. Cory emphasized the importance of the
EDSA Revolution in terms of being a "limited revolution that respected the life and
freedom of every Filipino." She also boasted of the restoration of a fully
constitutional government whose constitution gave utmost respect to the Bill of
Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress:

"Again as we restore democracy by the ways of democracy, so are we

completing the constitutional structures of our new democracy under a

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

 constitution that already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously
independent constitutional commission is completing its draft which will be
submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved,
there will be elections for both national and local positions. So, within about
a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned a
dictatorship, we shall have returned to full constitutional government."

Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist
insurgency, aggravated by the dictatorial and authoritarian measure of
Ferdinand Marcos. She asserted:

"My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist

insurgency that numbered less than five hundred. Unhampered by respect
for human rights he went at it with hammer and tongs. By the time he fled,
that insurgency had grown to more than sixteen thousand. I think there is a
lesson here to be learned about trying to stifle a thing with a means by
which it grows."

Cory's peace agenda involves political initiatives and re-integration

program to persuade insurgents to leave the countryside and return to the
mainstream society to participate in the restoration of democracy. She invoked
the path of peace because she believed that it was the moral path that a moral
government must take. Nevertheless, Cory took a step back when she said that
while peace is the priority of her presidency, she "will not waiver" when freedom
and democracy are threatened. She said that, similar to Abraham Lincoln, she
understands that "force may be necessary before mercy" and while she did not
relish the idea, she "will do whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom
of (her) country."

Cory then turned to the controversial topic of the Philippine foreign debt
amounting to $26 billion at the time of her speech. This debt had ballooned during
the Marcos regime. Cory expressed her intention to honor those debts despite
mentioning that the people did not benefit from such debts. Thus, she mentioned
her protestations about the way the Philippines was deprive of choices to pay
those debts within the capacity of the Filipino people. She lamented:

“Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion dollar foreign
debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet, the means by which we shall
be able to do so are kept from us. Many of the conditions imposed on the
previous government that stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us
who never benefited from it."

She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities
brought about by the corrupt dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate
assistance was yet to be extended to the Philippines. She even remarked that
given the peaceful character of EDSA People Power Revolution, "ours must have
been the cheapest revolution ever." She demonstrated that Filipino

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

people fulfilled the "most difficult condition of the debt negotiation," which was
the "restoration of democracy and responsible government."

Cory related to the U.S. legislators that wherever she went, she met poor
and unemployed Filipinos willing to offer their lives for democracy. She stated:

"Wherever I went in the campaign, slum area or impoverished village. They

came to me with one cry, democracy. Not food although they clearly
needed it but democracy. Not work, although they surely wanted it but
democracy. Not money, for they gave what little they had to my
campaign. They didn't expect me to work a miracle that would instantly
put food into their mouths, clothes on their back, education in their children
and give them work that will put dignity in their lives. But I feel the pressing
obligation to respond quickly as the leader of the people so deserving of
all these things."

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as

they tried building the new democracy. These were the persisting communist
insurgency and the economic deterioration. Cory further lamented that these
problems worsened by the crippling debt because half of the country's export
earnings amounting to $2 billion would "go to pay just the interest on a debt whose
benefit the Filipino people never received." Cory then asked a rather compelling
question to the U.S. Congress:

"Has there been a greater test of national commitment to the ideals you
hold dear than that my people have gone through? You have spent many
lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant
to receive it. And here, you have a people who want it by themselves and
need only the help to preserve it."

Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her
family for what she referred to as the "three happiest years of our lives together."
She enjoined America in building the Philippines as a new home for democracy
and in turning the country as a "shining testament of our two nations' commitment
to freedom."

Analysis of Cory Aquino's Speech

Cory Aquino's speech was an important event in the political and

diplomatic history of the country because it has arguably cemented the
legitimacy of the EDSA government in the international arena. The speech talks
of her family background, especially her relationship with her late husband, Ninoy
Aquino. It is well known that it was Ninoy who served as the real leading figure of
the opposition at that time. Indeed, Ninoy's eloquence and charisma could very
well compete with that of Marcos. In her speech, Cory talked at length about
Ninoy's toil and suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he resisted. Even
when she proceeded talking about her new government, she still went back to
Ninoy's legacies and lessons. Moreover, her attribution of the revolution to Ninoy's

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

death demonstrates not only Cory's personal perception on the revolution, but
since she was the president, it also represents what the dominant discourse was
at that point in our history.

The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also
be seen in the same speech. Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast
between her government and of her predecessor by expressing her commitment
to a democratic constitution drafted by an independent commission. She
claimed that such constitution upholds and adheres to the rights and liberty of
the Filipino people. Cory also hoisted herself as the reconciliatory agent after
more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian politics. For example, Cory
saw the blown-up communist lnsurgency as a product of a repressive and corrupt
government. Her response to this insurgency rooted from her diametric opposition
of the dictator (i.e., initiating reintegration of communist rebels to the mainstream
Philippine society). Cory claimed that her main approach to this problem was
through peace and not through the sword of war.

Despite Cory's efforts to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her
speech still revealed certain parallelisms between her and the Marcos's
government. This is seen in terms of continuing the alliance between the
Philippines and the United States despite the known affinity between the said
world super power and Marcos. The Aquino regime, as seen in Cory's acceptance
of the invitation to address the U.S. Congress and to the content of the speech,
decided to build and continue with the alliance between the Philippines and the
United States and effectively implemented an essentially similar foreign policy to
that of the dictatorship. For example, Cory recognized that the large sum of
foreign debts incurred by the Marcos regime never benefitted the Filipino people.
Nevertheless, Cory expressed her intention to pay off those debts. Unknown to
many Filipinos was the fact that there was a choice of waiving the said debt
because those were the debt of the dictator and not of the country. Cory's
decision is an indicator of her government's intention to carry on a debt-driven
economy.

Reading through Aquino's speech, we can already take cues, not just on
Cory's individual ideas and aspirations, but also the guiding principles and
framework of the government that she represented.

Activities:

A. Essay
1. Give your own analysis of the following documents: (in not less than 500
words)
a. Proclamation of the Philippine Independence
b. Caricatures during the American Period

READING IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY