After the threat of another attempt at doing some extra-constitutional changes in the government, some noise over independence from Ilocanos, Cebuanos and Davaoenyos have resurfaced. Some years ago, Republic of Cebu was a Cebuano inside joke made funnier when Manilenyos took it seriously. Recently, it seems people are more serious. While this does not make it more feasible, it might be an interesting to discuss how this came to be.
It seems that people are already exasperated with Manila’s fumbling leadership of this country, moving one step forward and pulled back by another dramatic EDSA revolution. The recent turmoil in Manila may be the sparkplug to this furor, but there may be deeper reasons why people are thinking that it may be better that they abandon the leaking ship of the Philippines. I think one factor that keeps a country together is a common identity. In the case of the Philippines, I think that many people have lost the sense of being Filipinos. More than the not so great reputation of the Philippines, I think bad education is the culprit. Particularly in two areas: Language and History.
1) Language:
It’s ironic that the national language created in 1937 would be an impediment to unity but it seems that it is. Being the uso of that time, it was natural for the Philippine nationalist to think that a national language is essential to unity (multiculturalism and protection of minority languages and culture are fairly recent usos). But it may have not been the best way to go.
National language implies that it is the language representing a nation. Naturally, the better you are at the national language, the closer your identity is to the identity that nation. In the Philippines, the national language is called Filipino. The relationship between language and being part of the nation is thus made even closer: it’s almost saying you have to speak Filipino to be Filipino.
Everyone in the country, except Tagalogs, will sooner or later realize that the national language is not his native tongue. That puts him in a weird situation. He knows that it’s good to love ones language (especially after being threatened of smelling like fish if he does not). He also knows that his ancestors have been speaking a language for hundreds or even thousands of years which is not the Filipino language.
Linguistic nationalism rests on the premise that ones native tongue gives one his identity.
A Frenchman’s native tongue is French; a German’s, German; an Englishman’s, English; and Filipino’s would presumable be Filipino. One would then be led to think… If my lolo and my lolo’s lolo did not speak Filipino, would they have been Filipinos? If my native tongue is not Filipino, am I Filipino? I am forced by the educational system to learn Filipino. Does that mean I’m forced to be Filipino? Am I Filipino? Maybe not….
2) History
Many nationalists think that the Filipino identity as we know it grew and solidified as people of the Philippines fought against the Spanish colonialists. Our textbooks highlight 1898 and the provinces represented by the eight rays of the sun in the Philippine flag. One would then think: Does this mean that the unrepresented areas are less Filipino? It seems that my ancestors didn’t really take part in the Philippine revolution. Does that disqualify them from being Filipinos? If my forefathers were not Filipinos, am I Filipino? Maybe not…
It seems logical that the Philippines would have a better chance of getting out of this dunghole if the load is carried by the whole archipelago. It is therefore unfortunate that we’ve come to a point where people would rather cease to be Filipinos than try to make Filipino a name to be proud of. I don’t really blame them, considering the above. But it doesn’t have to be that way.
Other countries are multilingual and multiethnic and it may benefit us to take a look at their language policies: Switzerland, India, Singapore, USA and Taiwan, just to name a few…
And the teaching of history could definitely improve. It might be best to seek what really happened first, rather than start with the framework of nationalism and use history to support that. For example, Cebuanos have long been known to be one of the most unFilipino of Filipinos. But in 1899, long before the national language and the official history curriculum, one Cebuano general gave this almost cheesy call to arms:
The hour has already sounded when the Mother Country, in the midst of her tortures and countless sufferings, calls to us, Cebuanos, with a sorrowful and pleading voice, so that we, her sons, may without hesitation or dismay, raise the war cry throughout the fields... Independence or death--this is our theme... Let us fight then without hesitation or dismay, because God is in us, and His power is great, and however powerful the American nation may be, He can overthrow its power, destroying it as He did the giant Goliath, by the hand of the boy, David, with no weapon but a sling.
Let us fight, I repeat, and trust in God, the God of armies, who is watching over us.
(Mojares, Resil: War Against the Americans, p. 46)
While fighting against colonizers might not be the definite foundation to being Filipinos, a good knowledge of your people’s history is always a good thing. It might be good to know what your ancestors thought of being Filipino before you try throwing it out of the window…
What do you think?
Why All the Clamor for Independence?
Originally Posted by markuswill
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
