AN IDENTITY UNDER QUESTION

I was really proud to be a Filipino before I went to college – before I got to know other angles of Philippine history. Now, I can say an identity, my identity is under question. What is truly Filipino?

            Fernando Zialcita mentioned problems in the Filipinos coming in terms of one’s culture and identity. He said ordinary restaurants, both here and abroad, do not make their offerings visually attractive. Why? They lack of concern for the customers. Zialcita said this is a question of self-respect. Well, I can see some restaurants giving full effort in serving their customers. Yet, I can’t deny the fact that good service isn’t free – you must pay a big amount for it. Thus, only elites could avail it. Thus, self-respect is over powered by self-interest. Some Filipinos are more concerned about what we could get from whom than what we could give to whom. For them, profit is more important. Zialcita added that some Filipinos’ tendency to denigrate, without basis, their major cultural symbols shows in other realms, and works against it. For instance, barong Tagalog is supposed to be the national shirt. Then it turned out to be a “slave shirt” because according to Zialcita’s reference: wicked Spaniards compelled Filipinos to wear their shirttails out to mark their low status, and obliged them to use a transparent fabric so as to expose their weapons. So, some Filipinos refuse to wear barong Tagalog. It’s killing me. It’s killing our culture. It’s killing our identity. Do they have evidences which can prove that Spaniards really did it? If yes, then who’s that silly person who declared barong Tagalog as the Filipino national shirt? Zialcita also mentioned free standing structures either in timber or stone that attempts to symbolize the cosmos and Man’s place within it indicate a sophisticated level of social development. He also talked about “forced labor.” I hate the fact that most of the Filipinos allowed those wicked Spaniards controlled them. It’s sad to know that they didn’t have the strength to speak up and tell those cruel people how bad their faces were – as bad as their doings.

According to Zialcita, during the downfall of thrones, the state drew its legitimacy from the “will of the people.” Legitimacy from the people – did it really happen? Think about it. I’ve read about national-states – each protective of its interests and each eager to maximize its gains. We all know that individuals differ when it comes to their interest. Now, can you say that national identity exists? I do not think so. That’s why I agree with Zialcita when he said that culture itself is under scrutiny. He said diverse peoples of the islands should have a common vision and a sense of pride in their heritage. I guess, the best way to do it is to respect one another. Let’s say, I am a Roman Catholic, you are a Protestant. So what? We are Filipinos, anyway. As what Zialcita said: we are obliged to articulate our uniqueness when planning tourism campaigns, attracting investors, selling finished products on the world market, or even when just entertaining foreign visitors. Then things would get better that way. And yes, it would probably be more fun in the Philippines!

I agree that the Philippines is culturally diverse. Some Filipinos practice animism, others embraced Islam and most are Christians. So, angst of Christianity follows. Zialcita said that one reason of this angst may be that internationally there seems little respect for lowland Filipino culture. He added self-confidence and respect by others reinforce each other. To quote my favorite part in An Identity under Question: “If we are confident about our identity, others take notice of this and respect us. On the other hand, if others respect us, then our self-confidence deepens.” It’s very true, isn’t it? However, it is useless because Filipinos do not put it into action. We are so anxious about our identity. Thus, preexisting anxiety is reinforced, as what Zialcita said. Zialcita presented another sad truth: Filipinos are marginal. Meaning, we are not important. Other countries chose not to recognize our achievements. Yes, lowland Christian Filipinos may be English-speaking but their culture is less known and less appreciated among the English-speaking public in Asia, Europe or the Anglo-countries. The question is, what can we do about this? Will we just sit here and let them underestimate Filipinos. No way. We must continue what we’ve started though it wasn’t recognized. I believe Filipinos are creative. In fact, Philippines has a lot of achievements at present. Yet, we must always remember that everything is temporary. According to Zialcita, Filipinos love their way of life. However, problems appear when they reflect on their identity and try to explain this to themselves, to fellow Filipinos, or to outsiders.

Zialcita said Filipinos are unease about their culture. This stems from (1) the demonization of Spanish influence, (2) a limited menu of binaries for interpreting culture, and (3) reductionist interpretations.

(1)   How the Spaniards did colonize the Philippines for so long?

Ø  Using armed forces to control Filipinos

Ø  Influence Filipino’s mind through religion

Ø  Using local government

I got this from one of the educational discussions I attended. It is clear that the Spaniards used many methods in order to colonize the Philippines. I guess, they were good enough to achieve their motive. Some Filipinos were fooled then.

For Zialcita, one of the problems during the Spanish colonization is, power was concentrated at the upper levels of the state and church. This is not new to me because it’s still happening at present. Though we already have Article II, Section 6 in the Philippine Constitution, conflicts between the two is often. However, I also agree with Zialcita when he said, not every accusation made today about that period can be accepted in the name of nationalism and anti-colonialism, without supporting evidence. We have to be reliable with our sources, of course. We must ask at least three sources and we must read until we find out that evidences were provided. History is part of the past which could help us understand the present. So, instead of judging it, try getting to know more about it. According to him, it is claimed that the Spaniards were so perverse that they deliberately kept Filipinos ignorant. I would agree to that. Perhaps, if I were a citizen during that time I’d think Spaniards were being helpful. Yet, I’ve read books and PDF about their cruelty. I just found out that Filipinos on that time were wrapped by ignorance. Another problem is the church and state in Catholic countries fought with each other over who would control the educational system. At first, it’s good to hear that they want to educate Filipinos. But the question is: what would they teach? If it’s all about Spain or America, what culture would we have then? Spanish-like and American-like – most probably. No doubt many Filipinos are unease about their identity. He added that Spaniards also introduced a regular and obligatory system of taxation. It became the basic pillar of the state. Taxation – most part of it is for government satisfaction only.

(2)*Colonial versus Non/Anti-colonial.

Ø  “kin-based community” versus “community broader than the kin”

Filipinos are individualistic. I’d agree. We are focused only to ourselves. We tend not to care about the problems in our community and nation. Zialcita suggested that we should be careful of reducing this to either Western influence or to colonial residues.

Ø  “state versus non-state”

He mentioned the nation has become part of ordinary discourse – but not the state. To understand it better, we must first differentiate nation, state and nation-state. As what I’ve learned in our Political Science 11: nation is a group of people who share a common cultural inheritance and regard themselves as a natural political community. State is a political association that establishes sovereign jurisdiction within defined territorial borders, characterized by its monopoly of legitimate violence. Nation-state is a sovereign political association within which citizenship and nationality overlap; one nation within a single state. We used Andrew Heywood’s book, by the way. So, I believe that Philippines is a nation-state. Correct me if I am wrong though. Zialcita then suggested that we must compete with other nation-states. He said Philippines has to improve its infrastructure, attract investments and offer more product. To do all these, it has to project internal stability. How? That is the problem. As what has been said earlier, Philippines is culturally diverse. Despite this, people must be united. Unfortunately, that is not the case. It actually leads to another problem – an attitude of dependency on the US. Last June 12, people were posting “Happy Independence Day” on Facebook. I didn’t like their status. I was thinking – are we really independent? Independent of being dependent on US, I guess.

Ø  “pre-democratic versus democratic”

Like Zialcita, I would say that democracy matters because every individual has rights as a human being and as a citizen. I’ve read a book of Fareed Zakaria. In his book, he questioned: what comes first, freedom or democracy? It is an interesting question, isn’t it? Think about it! And yes, I will think about it, again.

    *Beyond Asia versus West

> As what Zialcita said, Filipino’s achievements are often not appreciated enough either by himself or by others because they do not seem “Asian” enough. Here’s the problem: authenticity is confused with exoticism. When we say it’s authentic, it’s genuine. When we say it’s exotic, it’s from another country. However, we cannot say that it is not authentic just because it was introduced by another country. I don’t know if you get my point. You know, everybody can create a new from something they knew from someone. I just don’t get why they can’t appreciate Filipino’s achievements. Maybe, we’re so good they’re jealous.

(3) Zialcita said the claim that all Spanish influence is evil injures our sense of national identity. Filipinos lost their culture and ended up as mere copycats. We have no one to blame, only the Spaniards. I salute those Filipinos who were awakened from coma and made their stand not just for their selves but for the Philippines and its people.

He mentioned that many use “culture” and “race” interchangeably. Why? Is it so hard to remember that culture is the action and race is the doer? And again, correct me if I am wrong. You can search for the exact definition of the said words, anyway. The meaning I’ve presented was merely my clues.

According to Zialcita, the oppressed saw in the verses of poems imbued with Christian doctrine as ideology that justified their revolt against the rich, the educated and even against the priests. I forgot to comment about education. Yes, elites can go to school and those who are not cannot. Education is an issue even at present. It seems to me that education is a privilege when in fact it’s a right. I would not blame the Filipinos who were responsible for the revolts in the past. I believe there’s nothing wrong about it, there was something wrong that’s why they did it.

When asked what my identity is, I’d probably say I’m a girl. Others might question your identity but in the end, it’s still you who know what it is. So, what is truly Filipino? For me, a true Filipino is someone who is proud that he is a Filipino. We’re very good of saying “past is past” yet we’re not practicing it. So, move on people! That is why we are studying History so that we can understand the present. So, if someone would ask me “Why is there so much Spanish in your culture?” – I’d say because Spaniards were part of Philippine history. They colonized us so badly. Their faces were so scary it made Filipinos on that time so weary. Seriously, I’m a Filipino. It’s my identity. Do not question it!