Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T10:41:30.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Western Colonisation and the Filipino Response*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Onofre Dizon Corpuz
Get access

Extract

Nationalism in the Philippines is undergoing the fate of ideologies and ideas that have passed from the vocabulary of critical and original thinkers, into the language of popular discussion. As a concept and as a political force, therefore, nationalism is in the process of losing in precision what it is gaining in popular appeal. Its triumph in Filipino politics is pointedly shown by the diligence with which partisans of opposing political interests and orientations all claim to be the faithful and discerning interpreters of nationalism. Its triumph as an idea is similarly shown by the indiscriminate use of the term by social commentators who have no more than vague and hazy impressions of ideological distinctions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , March 1962 , pp. 1 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Fox, Robert B., “Prehistoric Foundations of Contemporary Filipino Culture and Society”, Comment (First Quarter, 1958), pp. 39–51.Google Scholar

2. This theme runs through Phelan, John Leddy, The Hispanization of the Philippines (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1959).Google Scholar

3. An example of the materials which were apparently consulted by American policy-makers in U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Colonial Administration, 1800–1900; Doc. No. 15, Part 9; 57th Cong., 2d Sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office 1903). During the early years of the century, British works on colonisation enjoyed marked popularity among the Americans.

4. This is aptly illustrated by the somewhat unsystematic administrative arrangements for the oversight of United States colonial dependencies. According to a former governor-general of the Philippines, “the new-found dependencies of the United States had no home in Washington. Their representatives wandered from department to department like homeless ghosts.” He proposed that there be set up a “Department of Administration”, since a “Colonial Department” would be “objectionable and inaccurate”. — Forbes, W. Cameron, The Philippine Islands (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1928), II, 403, 405.Google Scholar

5. U.S. War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs, Reports of the Philippine Commission, the Civil Governor, and the Heads of the Executive Departments of the Civil Government of the Philippine Islands, 1900–1903 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1904), pp. 3–11.Google Scholar

6. ibid., pp. 154–155.

7. ibid., p. 5.6.

8. ibid., p. 137.

9. ibid., p. 145.

10. Taft, William H., “Civil Government in the Philippines”Google Scholar, in Roosevelt, Theodore and Taft, William H., The Philippines (New York: The Outlook Company, 1902), p. 109.Google Scholar

11. Stimson, Henry X., “Future Philippine Policy Under the Jones Act”, Foreign Affairs, V (04, 1927), 462.Google Scholar

12. U.S. War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs, op. cit., p. 143.Google Scholar

13. See, e.g., Lowell, A. Lawrence, Colonial Civil Service (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1900).Google Scholar

14. Harrison, Francis B., The Corner-Stone of Philippine Independence (New York: The Century Company, 1922), p. 50.Google Scholar

15. See the discussion in Corpuz, Onofre D., The Bureaucracy In The Philippines (Manila: University of the Philippines, Institute of Public Administration, 1957), pp. 137–141.Google Scholar

16. Gerth, H. H., and Mills, C. Wright, eds. and trans., From Max Weber: Essays In Sociology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1958), pp. 196–244.Google Scholar

17. “Memoirs of Elpido Quirino”, Sunday Times Magazine (01 27, 1957), p. 26.Google Scholar

18. This is the argument in the writer's “The Cultural Foundations of Filipino Politics”, Philippine Motif, I, (03, 1960).Google Scholar

19. SirBowring, John, A Visit To the Philippine Islands (London: Smith, Elder and Company, 1859), p. 194.Google Scholar

20. Mr. Teodore Agoncillo, a prominent Filipino historian, is fond of shocking his audiences by declaring that “there is no Philippine history before 1872”.

21. supra, pp. 16–17.

22. The hostilities, characteristically, were referred to as the “Filipino insurrection” in the American reports, and as the “Philippine-American War” in Filipino patriotic literature.

23. One of several works on this subject is Storey, Moorfield and Codman, Julian, “Marked Severities” in Philippine Warfare (Boston: George H. Ellis, Company, 1902)Google Scholar

24. Forbes, , op. cit., I, 143, 144.Google Scholar

25. See U.S. Public Law No. 370, 79th Congress (1946).

26. See U.S. Public Law No. 371, 79th Congress (1946).