Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Writing for Foreign Affairs in 1968, Filipino national hero Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino lamented: "Almost half a century of American rule bequeathed to the Asian Filipino a trauma by making him uncomfortably American in outlook, values and tastes..." No wonder then, in one survey after the other, the Philippines has held the distinction of having the most favorable view towards the United States, its formal colonial master.
In the 2013 Global Attitudes survey, conducted by the Pew Research Center, as many as 85% of Filipinos expressed a favorable view of America, astonishingly beating even the Americans themselves (81%). By 2015, even a greater number of Filipinos (92%) expressed a favorable view of the global superpower. In one war after the other -- from the struggle against Imperial Japan during the Second World War to the proxy wars against Communism in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam during the Cold War -- Filipinos stood should-to-shoulder with America. Without a question, if there were anything like a "loyalty award" for America's friends, the Philippines would have qualified as an undisputed contender.
Throughout the world, the United States is praised and/or envied for its cultural prowess (think of Hollywood), dynamic centers of innovation (think of Silicon Valley), and military muscle. In the Philippines, America is also broadly seen as a savior, a Knight in shining armor that has protected the island nation from bogeymen and menace of undemocratic ideologies. One can argue, however, that the Philippines's love affair with America is partly a product of its historical amnesia. For long, the glaring gap in the Filipino national discourse was the Philippine-American War (1899-1902), a heroic struggle for national independence, which Washington, quite hubristically, dismissed as an "insurrection".
It is this largely forgotten part of the country's history that "Heneral Luna" (2015), the Philippines' official entry for Oscars this year, tries to decipher. Choosing General Antonio Luna as its main subject, the movie manages to communicate the vast potentials as well as tragic outcome of the Philippines' quest for national independence -- and the predicaments of nation-building.
It is a movie not about aggrieved and aggressive nationalism, which Albert Einstein rightly dismissed as an "infantile disease" and "measles of mankind", but instead the moral logic of patriotism and the perils of divisive tribalism. Heneral Luna isn't a tale about morality per se, but instead an honest portrayal of the moral dilemmas of nation-building.
A Forgotten History
To be fair, within few decades of (overt) colonial rule, the United States managed to leave a larger imprint on modern Philippines than Spain, which brutally occupied the country for more than three centuries. As historian Arnold Toynbee described, the Spaniards held onto to the Philippines "by a handful of soldiers, administrators, and friars after the fashion of the Spanish empire of the Indies."
The Southeast Asian nation, after all, was America's showcase colony. Washington made a conscious effort to demonstrate that it wasn't just another Western imperialist. As award-winning journalist Neil Sheehan explains,"[h]aving overt colonies was not acceptable to the American political conscience", for the American people, who themselves had to valiantly revolt against British dominion, "were convinced that their imperial system did not victimize foreign peoples." Under America's rule, the Philippines saw the establishment of universal education, a modicum of modern infrastructure, and libera
Clik here to view.
Writing for Foreign Affairs in 1968, Filipino national hero Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino lamented: "Almost half a century of American rule bequeathed to the Asian Filipino a trauma by making him uncomfortably American in outlook, values and tastes..." No wonder then, in one survey after the other, the Philippines has held the distinction of having the most favorable view towards the United States, its formal colonial master.
In the 2013 Global Attitudes survey, conducted by the Pew Research Center, as many as 85% of Filipinos expressed a favorable view of America, astonishingly beating even the Americans themselves (81%). By 2015, even a greater number of Filipinos (92%) expressed a favorable view of the global superpower. In one war after the other -- from the struggle against Imperial Japan during the Second World War to the proxy wars against Communism in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam during the Cold War -- Filipinos stood should-to-shoulder with America. Without a question, if there were anything like a "loyalty award" for America's friends, the Philippines would have qualified as an undisputed contender.
Throughout the world, the United States is praised and/or envied for its cultural prowess (think of Hollywood), dynamic centers of innovation (think of Silicon Valley), and military muscle. In the Philippines, America is also broadly seen as a savior, a Knight in shining armor that has protected the island nation from bogeymen and menace of undemocratic ideologies. One can argue, however, that the Philippines's love affair with America is partly a product of its historical amnesia. For long, the glaring gap in the Filipino national discourse was the Philippine-American War (1899-1902), a heroic struggle for national independence, which Washington, quite hubristically, dismissed as an "insurrection".
It is this largely forgotten part of the country's history that "Heneral Luna" (2015), the Philippines' official entry for Oscars this year, tries to decipher. Choosing General Antonio Luna as its main subject, the movie manages to communicate the vast potentials as well as tragic outcome of the Philippines' quest for national independence -- and the predicaments of nation-building.
It is a movie not about aggrieved and aggressive nationalism, which Albert Einstein rightly dismissed as an "infantile disease" and "measles of mankind", but instead the moral logic of patriotism and the perils of divisive tribalism. Heneral Luna isn't a tale about morality per se, but instead an honest portrayal of the moral dilemmas of nation-building.
A Forgotten History
To be fair, within few decades of (overt) colonial rule, the United States managed to leave a larger imprint on modern Philippines than Spain, which brutally occupied the country for more than three centuries. As historian Arnold Toynbee described, the Spaniards held onto to the Philippines "by a handful of soldiers, administrators, and friars after the fashion of the Spanish empire of the Indies."
The Southeast Asian nation, after all, was America's showcase colony. Washington made a conscious effort to demonstrate that it wasn't just another Western imperialist. As award-winning journalist Neil Sheehan explains,"[h]aving overt colonies was not acceptable to the American political conscience", for the American people, who themselves had to valiantly revolt against British dominion, "were convinced that their imperial system did not victimize foreign peoples." Under America's rule, the Philippines saw the establishment of universal education, a modicum of modern infrastructure, and libera