1.What makes Portugal popular?
Literature
Portugal is sometimes known as "a country of poets". In fact, Portuguese poetry has a bigger influence in the country's literature than prose. In the dawn of nationality, poetry in Portuguese-Galician was widely popular in the Northwest of the Iberian Peninsula. There are excellent works, in lyrical as in epic poetry. Without a doubt, the most worldwide known Portuguese poets are Luís de Camões and Fernando Pessoa, but we should also state the modern Portuguese poetry (since the 19th century) has its roots in a handful of relevant poets, from neo-classicism to these days.
Prose developed later than verse and first appeared in the 14th century in the shape of short chronicles, lives of saints, and genealogical treatises. The line of the chroniclers which is one of the boasts of Portuguese literature began with Fernão Lopes, who compiled the chronicles of the reigns of three kings of that time. He combined a passion for accurate statement with a especial talent for descriptive writing and portraiture. Eanes de Zurara, Gil Vicente and Priest António Vieira are some pre-modern Portuguese writers. But, it is the modern Portuguese literature that is more internationally known, especially the works of Almeida Garrett, Alexandre Herculano, Eça de Queirós, Sophia de Mello Breyner Andresen, António Lobo Antunes and the 1998 Nobel Prize for literature, José Saramago.
[edit]
Music
Fado (fate in Portuguese) is a form of melancholic music. The music is linked to the Portuguese word saudade (there is no translation into English; it means a mixture of feelings of sadness, pain, loss, and love) and other feelings. Fado's origins probably come from a mixture of African slave rhythms with the traditional music of Portuguese sailors, it also is influenced by Arabic music.
There are two varieties of Fado: Lisbon and Coimbra. The Lisbon style is more traditional (for the people), while Coimbra's style is more refined (linked with university students); both are seen as ethnic music for a sophisticated audience and as candidates for UNESCO recognition. The notable Amália Rodrigues introduced the most well-known variety of fado. After her disappearance, a new wave of performers added stylistic changes and brought more international popularity to the traditional Portuguese music. Performers Mariza and Mísia brought a new sound to traditional fado songs, while Dulce Pontes mixed fado with Portuguese pop music. The band Madredeus completely revolutionized the sound of fado by using new instruments -- in fact, all that they kept from the original Fado were its looks and the concept of "saudade".
In fado, the audience must always keep silent until the song is completely over, because the music is transmiting pain or some feeling of the interpreter (called the fadista). The fadista normally has his/her eyes closed, and sings as if he/she is crying. While most varieties of Fado are sorrowful; some can be joyful. Morna (or Cape Verdian Fado), the style in which Cesária Évora sings, is a variety of Fado originated from the Portuguese Fado. It also keeps the concept of "saudade", but it is sung in Portuguese Creole.
Portuguese pop-rock has grown markedly since the 1974 revolution. The most notable bands and musicians are Sérgio Godinho, Xutos e Pontapés, GNR, Rui Veloso, António Variações, Heróis do Mar, Rádio Macau, Clã, Delfins, Santos e Pecadores, Pedro Abrunhosa, Silence Four, The Gift and more recently Toranja, Ornatos Violeta, Pluto, Supernada, O Projecto é Grave!, Fingertips, Gomo or The Legendary Tiger Man.
Other genres include a local version of hip hop, influenced by the American style by descendants of immigrants from former Portuguese colonies in Africa. Hip hop tuga (Portuguese hip hop) is very popular among the younger population in Portugal. Cool Hipnoise, Da Weasel and Mind da Gap are some of the most popular and are becoming internationally known. In the metal genre there is also Moonspell, a well known band in Europe.
Other Portuguese musicians include the globally recognized pianist Maria João Pires and guitarist Carlos Paredes.
[edit]
Painting
Portuguese art was very restricted in the early years of nationality, during the reconquista, to a few paintings in churches, convents and palaces.
It is after the 15th century, with the national borders established and with the discoveries, that the Portuguese art expanded. Some kings, like John I already had royal paintors. It is during this century that the Gothic art is replaced by a more humanistic and Italian-like art.
In the reing of King Alfonso V, an important Portuguese artist Nuno Gonçalves shaped the Portuguese art, leading it to gain local characteristics (Escola Nacional, National School). His influence on the Portuguese art mantained after his death. He was the royal paintor for the famous Retábulo do Altar das Relíquias de São Vicente in the Cathedral of Lisbon (Sé de Lisboa). The painting became alighted and it was substituted by a Barroque structure. Parts of his work still subsists and can be found in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga National (Museum of Ancient Art).
During the Golden Age of Portugal, late 15th century and early 16th century, the Portuguese art mad great contact with Flemish art. And during this period, Portuguese art became internationaly famous, mostly because of its very original and diverse characteristics, but most artists are unknown due to the midieval culture that considered paintors has artisans. It should be glossed that the Portuguese anonymous artists in the Portuguese "escolas" produced art not only for metropolitan Portugal but also for its colonies, namelly Malacca or Goa or even Africa, gratifying the desires of local aristrocat and religious clients.
In the early 20th century Portuguese art knew an increase both in quality and quantity, mainly due to members of the Modernist movement like Amadeo de Souza Cardozo and Almada Negreiros.In the post-war years the abstraccionist painter Vieira da Silva, settled in Paris, gained widespread recognition as the contemporary Paula Rego.
Theatre
Portugal never developed a great Dramatic theatre tradition due primarily to the fact that the Portuguese were more passionate about lyric or humorous works rather than dramatic art. Gil Vicente is often seen has the father of the Portuguese theatre, he was the leading Portuguese playwright in the 16th century. During the 20th century theatre found a way to reach out to the people, specially the middle class, through what in Portugal is known as "Revista" - A form of humorous and cartoonish theatre.
Food
Eating in Portugal, is one of the visitor's most remembered characteristics of the country. Each region of Portugal, has its traditional dishes, including various kinds of meat, cheap sea-food, fresh fish (including the 1001 ways of making cod dishes, the national dish) and the famous "Cozido à Portuguesa".
[edit]
Wines
Portugal is the country for wine lovers, known since the Roman Empire; the Romans immediately associated Portugal with its God of Winery and Feast, Bacchus. Today, many famous Portuguese wines are known as some of the world's best: Vinho do Douro, Vinho do Alentejo, Vinho do Dão, Vinho Verde, and the sweet: Port Wine (Vinho do Porto, literally Oporto's wine), Madeira wine, Moscatel of Setúbal and Moscatel of Favaios.
Popular Festivities
During the summer, in the month of June, festivities dedicated to three saints known as Santos Populares take place in all over Portugal. Why the populace associated the saints to these pagan festivities is not known. But it is possibly related to Roman or local deities before Christianity has spread in the region. The three saints are Saint Anthony, Saint John and Saint Peter. A common denominator in these festivities are the wine and água-pé (drink basically constituted by grape juice), traditional bread along with sardines, marriages, traditional street dances, fire, fireworks and joy.
Saint Anthony is celebrated in the night of 12 to 13th, especially in Lisbon (where that saint was born and lived most of his live), with Marchas Populares (sort of a street carnival) and festivities. In the meantime, several marriages known as Casamentos de Santo António (En., Marriages of Saint Anthony) at the same time are made. But the most popular saint is Saint John, it is celebrated in many cities and towns troughout the country in the night of 23 to 24th, especially in Porto and Braga, where the sardines, Caldo Verde (traditional soup) and plastic hammers to hammer in other person's head for luck are indispensable. The final Saint is Saint Peter, celebrated in the night of 28 to 29th, especially in Póvoa de Varzim and Barcelos, festivities is similar to the others, but more dedicated to the sea and extensive use of fire (fogueiras). In Póvoa de Varzim, there is the Rusgas in the night, another sort of street carnival. Each festivity is a municipal holiday in the cities and towns where it occurs.
2. Based on the film showing that we watched, describe at least one place in Portugal.
LISBON PORTUGAL
The word "Lisbon" always held a sense of magic and mystery in my own personal travel lexicon. Portugal's capital city brought images of unkempt streets and slightly run down buildings to mind as I pictured it as bordering on the Second World in terms of modern amenities and efficiency.
So, it was with mixed emotions that I wandered through this quickly modernizing city, hopping onto always on time trains, shopping in spotless shops and snapping photos of clean and well-kept monuments and buildings. After all, I came for the grunge!
Fortunately, I was able to spend some time exploring some of the older districts of town. I loved seeing clothes strewn on lines strung from neighborly windows and buildings whose walls looked like an old woman's makeup-less face, blotches of dark age showing up amidst cracks and flaws. The soft "ch" and "sh" sounds of the Portuguese language being spoken at hole in the wall cafes would often compete with the clattering noise of the city's historic trams winding their way up hills and squeezing through tight streets.
Lisbon's many charms are still apparent, but since an international Expo in 1998 and the Euro2004 soccer tournament, redevelopment is equally apparent and it's possible that much of the city's uniquely old and slightly tattered allure will begin to fade out in the years to come.
My suggestion is that you visit soon, before things change more than they already have. Prices are still well below par when compared to the rest of western Europe and the people are welcoming and helpful. You'll be entranced by the Manueline masterpieces of Belem, the spectacular views from the Castelo de Sao Jorge and the hilly, cluttered streets of the Alfama and Bairro Alto. You'll leave with memories of mosaic pavements, nights of dancing that run into mornings and food that will make you want to return for more.
111 comments:
The American Occupation in Japan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undoubtedly, the American Occupation in Japan was a historical success story. During the seven year occupation from 1945 until 1952, the Americans restructured the Japanese government and gave Japan the footing after its post WWII demise. The Occupation provided the groundwork from which one of the strongest nations of the 20th century emerged by laying the foundation for democracy and successful capitalism. On a ideological level, the American occupation was intended to instill democratic values and eradicate imperialist ways. On a practical level, the American occupation was intended to disarm the military, break up the zaibatsu businesses, reform the educational system, give power to the local level, and give women suffrage.
First of all, the biggest success of the Occupation was the constitution. JapanÍs constitution was written during the Occupation, and that has remained wholly unchanged until today. This was the OccupationÍs first step in democratizing Japan. One of the largest problems with the Meiji constitution was that it did not have a system of checks and balances, as every part of the government would act in the name of the emperor. So the Constitution had to define the roles of each branch of government with clear lines of responsibility. Thus, the House of Chancellors, the House of Representatives, the Cabinet, and the Judiciary were created with established purposes and responsibilities. Also, the emperor lost any political status he had previously and was only allowed to remain on as a symbol of the state and the unity of the people. Since the emperor was reduced to a status of common citizenship, in theory the Japanese people would cease to be submissive to him -- this too was a method of democratization. Most importantly though, the Occupation established in the constitution the idea of popular sovereignty ¿ the idea that the government is an entity of the people, and dictated by the people.
From the onset, the Occupation primary goals was to disarm the military. Article 9 of the constitution claims that Japan ñrenounces war as its sovereign right ƒî and that Japan will never maintain any sort of military. Even today, there has been little to no opposition of this idea save a few right-wing militarists that are ostracized and ridiculed by the Japanese people. The Occupation set the precedent for JapanÍs foreign policy. Because the occupation was such a positive campaign, even today, Japan maintains an overall friendly relationship with the US. Generally, the US and Japan have similar viewpoints of global issues, except, of course, US-Japan trade issues. However, usually, Japanese foreign policy is consistent with American foreign policy.
The Occupation also attempted to restructured the power relationships in Japan, both economically and politically. The Americans tried to break up the bureaucracy, establish a strong labor movement and unions (although, as the labor sector became more radical, the Americans retrenched this plan) , and redistribute resources around the economy. The Occupation philosophy dictated that local politics become more powerful over time, as that is an essential element of grassroots democracy. However, this was never achieved as many national institutions and bureaucracies today still maintain most of the power. Financially, the local level could not support an overwhelming amount of responsibilities, and so the bureaucracy remained intact even though the Americans tried to disband their agencies.
The Americans also tried to break up the zaibatsu and strengthen Japanese unions because it was felt that there was an disproportionate concentration of economic power. The zaibatsu had become an important part of the Japanese economy in the 1920Ís and the 1930Ís. This is a concrete example of democratization because it was designed to allocate wealth and resources more evenly throughout the economy. However, the zaibatsu was replaced by the keiretsu, or ñJapan, Inc.î (as the West calls it). This is the idea that the Japanese companies are all interconnected and they present a unitary front to the government. Big business is still highly influential in Japanese politics, more so that the Americans would have liked.
Also, the land reform too can be seen as an attempt at democratizing Japan in the same sense, as it was intended to redistribute resources more equally throughout the economy. Before the land reform, many farmers did not own their own land and had to pay rent to wealthy land owners. The land reform succeeded in reallocating land, and the credit for this is attributed only to American initiation. Today, the thankful agricultural community is still a loyal supporter of the LDP party.
Another Occupation goal was social liberalization -- the Americans tried to instill the values of human rights and civil liberties into Japanese politics and social ideas. The Japanese people had until this point a rather vague idea of human rights, but the Americans defined them in terms of freedom of speech and political freedom. The media was given a legal wide-range of freedoms. Whether or not today these rights are exercised to their potential is difficult to judge although it seems that they are not. But the reasons why it would not be exercised to its fullest are social, and not legal. Where these progresses are best seen is in the context of feminism, and rights for women. Most importantly, women were given the suffrage. Although the rights of women in Japan are far from progressive, legally, women do have some power. This all stems from the Occupation.
Also included in this social agenda was education reform. The education reform was intended to deconstruct the emperor in the eyes of the Japanese people, and to provide more social and economic opportunities for the average Japanese. The syllabuses were modified to eliminate the importance of nationalist mythology, and the idea that the emperor was a demigod of sorts, and to replace it with a more international perspective. The new public education system aimed at providing equal educational opportunities to every Japanese. These reforms have remained intact today, as an education is available to all Japanese. Also, the Occupation tried to transfer most of the educational responsibilities from the central government to the local level, but they were not successful at this. Even today, the monbusho, or the Ministry of Education, is a powerful national organization that sponsors foreign exchange programs, creates the national entry exams, and dictates the national syllabus.
In conclusion, the Occupation set up an American democratic model for Japan and laid the foundation for many of its institutions. It was a successful occupation, and it ensured a good relationship between Japan and the US indefinitely. However, it is important to realize that the American Occupation did not completely ñAmericanizeî Japan, nor did it completely ñwesternizeî its social system. As the Occupation becomes more distant past, it becomes apparent that Japan is still fundamentally dictated by its own unique origins and culture. Although, probably the most significant offspring of the occupation reform is the legal rights that the Japanese people are ensured, regardless of whether or not they are fully exercised. With time, Japan is becoming more and more democratic, and the American influence during the Occupation is to thank for that.
American Occupation of Japan
The occupation of Japan was, from start to finish, an American
operation. General Douglans MacArthur, sole supreme commander of the
Allied Power was in charge. The Americans had insufficient men to make
a military government of Japan possible; so they decided to act
through the existing Japanese gobernment. General MacArthur became,
except in name, dictator of Japan. He imposed his will on Japan.
Demilitarization was speedily carried out, demobilization of the
former imperial forces was completed by early 1946.
Japan was extensively fire bomded during the second world war.
The stench of sewer gas, rotting garbage, and the acrid smell of ashes
and scorched debris pervaded the air. The Japanese people had to live
in the damp, and cold of the concrete buildings, because they were the
only ones left. Little remained of the vulnerable wooden frame, tile
roof dwelling lived in by most Japanese. When the first signs of
winter set in, the occupation forces immediately took over all the
steam-heated buildings. The Japanese were out in the cold in the first
post war winter fuel was very hard to find, a family was considered
lucky if they had a small barely glowing charcoal brazier to huddle
around. That next summer in random spots new ho uses were built, each
house was standardized at 216 square feet, and required 2400 board
feet of material in order to be built. A master plan for a modernistic
city had been drafted, but it was cast aside because of the lack of
time before the next winter. The thousands of people who lived in
railroad stations and public parks needed housing.
All the Japanese heard was democracy from the Americans. All
they cared about was food. General MacArthur asked the government to
send food, when they refus ed he sent another telegram that said,
"Send me food, or send me bullets." American troops were forbidden to
eat local food, as to keep from cutting from cutting into the sparse
local supply.
No food was was brought in expressly for the Japanese durning
the first six months after the American presence there. Herbert
Hoover, serving as chairman of a special presidential advisory
committee, recommended minimum imports to Japan of 870,000 tons of
food to be distributed in different urban areas. Fish, the source of
so much of the protein in the Japanese diet, were no longer available
in adequate quantities because the fishing fleet, particularly the
large vessels, had been badly decimated by the war and because the
U.S.S.R. closed off the fishing grounds in the north.
The most important aspect of the democratization policy was the
adoption of a new constitution and its supporting legislation. When
the Japanese government proved too confused or too reluctant to come
up with a constitutional reform that satisfied MacArthur, he had his
own staff draft a new constitution in February 1946. This, with only
minor changes, was then adopted by the Japanese government in the form
of an imperial amendment to the 1889 constitution and went into effect
on May 3, 1947. The new Constitution was a perfection of the British
parliamentary form of government that the Japanese had been moving
toward in the 1920s. Supreme political power was assigned to the Diet.
Cabinets were made responsible to the Diet by having the prime
minister elected by the lower house. The House of Peers was replaced
by an elected House of Councillors. The judicial system was made as
independent of executive interference as possible, and a newly created
supreme court was given the power to review the constitutionality of
laws. Local governments were given greatly increased powers.
The Emperor was reduced to being a symbol of the unity of the
nation. Japanese began to see him in person. He went to hospitals,
schools, mines, industrial plants; he broke ground for public
buildings and snipped tape at the opening of gates and highways. He
was steered here and there, shown things, and kept muttering, "Ah so,
ah so." People started to call him "Ah-so-san." Suddenly the puyblic
began to take this shy, ill-at-ease man to their hearts. They saw in
him something of their own conqured selves, force to do what was alien
to them. In 1948, in a newspaper poll, Emperior Hirohito was voted the
most popular man in Japan.
Civil liberties were emphasized, women were given full equality
with men. Article 13 and 19 in the new Constitution, prohibits
discrimination in political, economic, and social relations because of
race, creed, sex, social status, or family origen. This is one of the
most explicitly progressive statements on human rights anywhere in
law. Gerneral Douglas MacArthur emerged as a radical feminist because
he was "convinced that the place of women in Japan must be brought to
a level consistent with that of women in the western democracies." So
the Japanese women got their equal rights amendment long before a
concerted effort was made to obtain one in America.
Compulsory education was extened to nine years, efforts were
made to make education more a traning in thinking than in rote memory,
and the school system above the six elementary grades was revised to
conform to the American pattern. This last mechanical change produced
great confusion and dissatisfaction but became so entrenched that it
could not be revised even after the Americans departed.
Japan's agriculture was the quickest of national activities to
recover because of land reform. The Australians came up with the best
plan. It was basis was this: There were to be no absentee landlards.
A person who actually worked the land could own up to 7.5 arcers.
Anyone living in a village near by could keep 2.5 acres. Larger plots
of land, exceeding these limits, were bought up by the government and
sold on easy terms to former tenants. Within two years 2 million
tenants became landowners. The American occupation immediately gained
not only a large constituency, for the new owners had a vested
interest in preserving the change, but also a psychological momentum
for other changes they wanted to initiate.
The American labor policy in Japan had a double goal: to
encourage the growth of democratic unions while keeping them free of
communists. Union organization was used as a balance to the power of
management. To the surprise of the American authorties, this movement
took a decidedly more radical turn. In the desperate economic
conditions of early postwar Japan, there was little room for
successful bargaining over wages, and many labor unions instead made a
bid to take over industry and operate it in their own behalf. Moreover
large numbers of workers in Japan were government employees, such as
railroad workers and teachers, whose wages were set not by management
but by the government. Direct political action therefore seemed more
meani ngful to these people than wage bargaining. The Japanese unions
called for a general strike on February 1, 1947. MacArthur warned the
union leadership that he would not countenace a nationwide strike. The
strike leaders yieled to MacArthur's will. The reafter the political
appeal of radical labor action appeared to wane.
The Americans wanted to disband the great Zaibatsu trust as a
means of reducing Japan's war-making potential. There were about 15
Zaibatsu families such as - Mitsui, Mitsubishi, Yasuda, and Sumitomo.
The Zaibatsu controled the industry of Japan. MacArthur's liaison men
pressured the Diet into passing the Deconcentration Law in December
1947. In the eyes of most Japanese this law was designed to cripple
Japanese business and industry forever. The first step in breaking up
the Zaibatsu was to spread their ownership out among the people and to
prevent the old owners from ever again exercising control. The stocks
of all the key holding companies were to be sold to the public.
Friends of the old Zaibatsu bought the stock. In the long run the
Zaibatsu were not exactly destroyed, but a few were weakened and
others underwent a considerable shuffle.
The initial period of the occupation from 1945 to 1948 was
marked by reform, the second phase was one of stabilization. Greater
attention was given to improvement of the economy. Japan was a heavy
expense to the United States. The ordered breakup of the Zaibatsu was
slowed down. The union movement continued to grow, to the ult imate
benefit of the worker. Unremitting pressure on employers brought
swelling wages, which meant the steady expansion of Japan domestic
consumer market. This market was a major reason for Japan's subsequent
economic boom. Another boom to the economy was the Korean War which
proved to be a blessing in disguise. Japan became the main staging
area for military action in Korea and went on a war boom economy with
out having to fight in or pay for a war.
The treaty of peace with Japan was signed at San Francisco in
September 1951 by Japan, the United States, and forty-seven other
nations. The Soviet Union refused to sign it. The treaty went into
effect in April 1952, officially terminating the United States
military occupation and restoring full independence.
What is extraordinary in the Occupation and its aftermath was
the insignificance of the unpleasant. For the Japanese, the nobility
of American ideals and the essential benignity of the American
presence assuaged much of the bitterness and anguish of defeat. For
the Americans, the joys of promoting peace and democracy triumphed
over the attendant fustrations and grievances. Consequently, the
Occupation served to lay down a substantial capital of good will on
which both America and Japan would draw in the years ahead.
Baghdad Bulletin: Dispatches on the American Occupation IRAQ WAR CULTURE REVIEW. The United States has already lost the Iraq War, but still functions within the delusion that it is winning. A literature of journalistic witness and on-the-ground realism, such as David Enders writes, is crucial to remove the blinders that have enabled the US public to normalize the war.
David Enders
Reviewed by Joe Lockard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a little-known feature of the Mexican-American War that when US forces invaded Mexico in 1846 they were accompanied by independent press-men who not only sent dispatches home, but established English-language newspapers in that country. These journalist-publishers believed in the call of Manifest Destiny: the English language was to be its vehicle. A couple loaded their presses on the back of wagons and followed the army; others rented presses in Mexico. When the US army withdrew from Mexico, the English-language press withdrew along with the troops.
David Enders occupies a paradox that is both similar to and dissimilar from this historical precedent. When the Iraq War began in 2003, he was an American student abroad in Lebanon demonstrating against the US invasion. He had been active in campus journalism at the University of Michigan and, together with friends, came up with the idea of establishing an English-language journal in Iraq. The day after George Bush stood on a carrier deck to announce the end of major combat operations in Iraq, Enders was in a service taxi headed from Amman to Baghdad. Even if its editor was an active opponent of the war, unlike the Mexican-American War press-men who supported the war, like those nineteenth-century newspapers the project of the twenty-first century Baghdad Bulletin was enabled by US military operations and the occupation.
Not surprisingly, the questions engendered by this position appear early in Enders’ book, in the preface. Explaining the journal’s rationale, he writes “It is extremely important to have English-language reporting here on the ground right now because English speakers (the Coalition especially) are going to be making most of the decisions – it’s an unfortunate fact, but they should be making them based on good information, and there should be a publication here to challenge and examine those decisions (in English) as well.” In translation, the Empire needs better information than it can obtain through its military intelligence and foreign media reporters, so an on-the-ground hybrid international-native news source can mediate an information flow that will benefit both Iraq and the US occupation authorities. Rather than be embedded with the troops, these anglophone journalists were embedded in Iraqi society.
The function of the English language here is to provide practical accommodation to an undesirable and unfortunate reality of military invasion. This reformist function represents accommodation rather than resistance, but it was the defining limit of English-speaking intelligentsia arriving in Iraq. Established as a UK-chartered corporation, the Baghdad Bulletin received a certain degree of expressive freedom that local Iraqi newspapers did not enjoy from the US occupation authorities.
As an editor willing to function within these limits, Enders emerges as an intelligent, observant, competent, and likeable reporter of the period of US occupation until the end of the Provisional Administration in 2004. He questions his own purposes: “It feels like the greatest fraternity prank of all time. A magazine in a war zone. Is this really what this place needs?” But it is a great way to avoid a post-graduation job search, no doubt. Enders questions established journalistic reputations: his description of Robert Fisk portrays a patronizing pretender to deep knowledge he does not possess. He identifies with those journalists who distance themselves from the US security apparatus and guided tours, who find their own way and their own stories. It might be that Enders had no idea what he has gotten himself into, but then neither did the entire US policy establishment when they decided to invade Iraq.
The journal staff establish themselves commune-style in a rented house in a middle-class Baghdad neighborhood; their neighbors execute looters on the front lawn; policemen rob Enders; their Iraqi staff discusses whether to kill their foreign bosses; the office guard sleeps over his Kalashnikov. Life is normal, almost suburban. Their reception from Iraqis is most frequently very friendly, but variable: one freelance journalist residing in the house gets killed with a bullet to the back of the head while standing on a crowded street.
This dichotomy of simultaneous warmth and murderous animosity characterizes the reception Enders receives. As expressed by one interviewee, among the many Iraqis who adore US film culture, he cried watching both American Beauty and Titanic. Yet even though “We love American culture…we support what the resistance is doing.” During its seven-issue run the Baghdad Bulletin definitely does not represent American mass culture, not even local American culture in Iraq. It attracts Iraqi contributors nonetheless, including the one who writes sardonically on the benefits of a local English-language outlet: “I am glad to express myself in the language of Shakespeare, Bob Dylan and the Wall Street Journal. But our education wouldn’t be complete with learning the action-men English, the language of movies, comics and the gangsters’ talk. We wouldn’t be cultured men till we use four letter words in our daily talk…” The babu intellectual talks back.
Like much else that did not go as planned in Iraq, neither did the Baghdad Bulletin, which collapsed after three months amid allegations that the journal’s translator-driver, a Saddam supporter, had offered to help finance the journal through underground arms sales. It was doomed in any case by its quixotic enterprise, negligible capital, inadequate advertising base, and the simple fact that throughout the Middle East most journals establish themselves through political connections. An independent English-language journal did not gain itself any exemption for its publishing language.
The second half of the book represents Enders’ subsequent work as a freelance journalist amid the hazards of daily life in Iraq, as well as working for the anti-war NGO Occupation Watch. Enders shines as an engaged witness and writer caught up in lives lived on a daily battlefield. As he details encounters with bereaved families, prison cases, visits to hospitals and cemeteries, and the spreading number of ruined lives, the depth of Enders’ anti-war emotions emerges in simply styled word portraits of scenes and exchanges.
Even as Saddam Hussein and his Baathist government have been overthrown, new replacement tragedies are being manufactured daily by the US occupation. Enders captures the dichotomous feelings of Iraqis pleased with the end of Hussein’s regime and supportive of armed resistance to the US occupation. His diary entries incorporate large numbers of field interviews that capture the incidents of US military violence, such as the al-Adamiyah fighting of December 2003, that lent impetus to the Iraqi mujahedeen. Equally, he records the words and surreal illusions of US military officers who believe that they can control Iraq with checkpoints, ‘actionable intelligence,’ neighborhood raids, and stand-off night firing technology. Or as Enders puts it so aptly, “The US military is fighting a turf war with a street gang.”
The ability of the United States to win every engagement is not remarkable given the limited resources of its adversary. What is remarkable is the ability of US policymakers to repeat the same consistent error of winning battles and losing wars, and never learn the lesson. The United States has already lost the Iraq War, but still functions within the delusion that it is winning. A literature of journalistic witness and on-the-ground realism, such as Enders writes, is crucial to remove the blinders that have enabled the US public to normalize the war.
Published by the University of Michigan Press. Original editions of Baghdad Bulletin remain available at http://www.baghdadbulletin.com/
Joe Lockard is assistant professor of English at Arizona State University
Baghdad Bulletin: Dispatches on the American Occupation IRAQ WAR CULTURE REVIEW. The United States has already lost the Iraq War, but still functions within the delusion that it is winning. A literature of journalistic witness and on-the-ground realism, such as David Enders writes, is crucial to remove the blinders that have enabled the US public to normalize the war.
David Enders
Reviewed by Joe Lockard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a little-known feature of the Mexican-American War that when US forces invaded Mexico in 1846 they were accompanied by independent press-men who not only sent dispatches home, but established English-language newspapers in that country. These journalist-publishers believed in the call of Manifest Destiny: the English language was to be its vehicle. A couple loaded their presses on the back of wagons and followed the army; others rented presses in Mexico. When the US army withdrew from Mexico, the English-language press withdrew along with the troops.
David Enders occupies a paradox that is both similar to and dissimilar from this historical precedent. When the Iraq War began in 2003, he was an American student abroad in Lebanon demonstrating against the US invasion. He had been active in campus journalism at the University of Michigan and, together with friends, came up with the idea of establishing an English-language journal in Iraq. The day after George Bush stood on a carrier deck to announce the end of major combat operations in Iraq, Enders was in a service taxi headed from Amman to Baghdad. Even if its editor was an active opponent of the war, unlike the Mexican-American War press-men who supported the war, like those nineteenth-century newspapers the project of the twenty-first century Baghdad Bulletin was enabled by US military operations and the occupation.
Not surprisingly, the questions engendered by this position appear early in Enders’ book, in the preface. Explaining the journal’s rationale, he writes “It is extremely important to have English-language reporting here on the ground right now because English speakers (the Coalition especially) are going to be making most of the decisions – it’s an unfortunate fact, but they should be making them based on good information, and there should be a publication here to challenge and examine those decisions (in English) as well.” In translation, the Empire needs better information than it can obtain through its military intelligence and foreign media reporters, so an on-the-ground hybrid international-native news source can mediate an information flow that will benefit both Iraq and the US occupation authorities. Rather than be embedded with the troops, these anglophone journalists were embedded in Iraqi society.
The function of the English language here is to provide practical accommodation to an undesirable and unfortunate reality of military invasion. This reformist function represents accommodation rather than resistance, but it was the defining limit of English-speaking intelligentsia arriving in Iraq. Established as a UK-chartered corporation, the Baghdad Bulletin received a certain degree of expressive freedom that local Iraqi newspapers did not enjoy from the US occupation authorities.
As an editor willing to function within these limits, Enders emerges as an intelligent, observant, competent, and likeable reporter of the period of US occupation until the end of the Provisional Administration in 2004. He questions his own purposes: “It feels like the greatest fraternity prank of all time. A magazine in a war zone. Is this really what this place needs?” But it is a great way to avoid a post-graduation job search, no doubt. Enders questions established journalistic reputations: his description of Robert Fisk portrays a patronizing pretender to deep knowledge he does not possess. He identifies with those journalists who distance themselves from the US security apparatus and guided tours, who find their own way and their own stories. It might be that Enders had no idea what he has gotten himself into, but then neither did the entire US policy establishment when they decided to invade Iraq.
The journal staff establish themselves commune-style in a rented house in a middle-class Baghdad neighborhood; their neighbors execute looters on the front lawn; policemen rob Enders; their Iraqi staff discusses whether to kill their foreign bosses; the office guard sleeps over his Kalashnikov. Life is normal, almost suburban. Their reception from Iraqis is most frequently very friendly, but variable: one freelance journalist residing in the house gets killed with a bullet to the back of the head while standing on a crowded street.
This dichotomy of simultaneous warmth and murderous animosity characterizes the reception Enders receives. As expressed by one interviewee, among the many Iraqis who adore US film culture, he cried watching both American Beauty and Titanic. Yet even though “We love American culture…we support what the resistance is doing.” During its seven-issue run the Baghdad Bulletin definitely does not represent American mass culture, not even local American culture in Iraq. It attracts Iraqi contributors nonetheless, including the one who writes sardonically on the benefits of a local English-language outlet: “I am glad to express myself in the language of Shakespeare, Bob Dylan and the Wall Street Journal. But our education wouldn’t be complete with learning the action-men English, the language of movies, comics and the gangsters’ talk. We wouldn’t be cultured men till we use four letter words in our daily talk…” The babu intellectual talks back.
Like much else that did not go as planned in Iraq, neither did the Baghdad Bulletin, which collapsed after three months amid allegations that the journal’s translator-driver, a Saddam supporter, had offered to help finance the journal through underground arms sales. It was doomed in any case by its quixotic enterprise, negligible capital, inadequate advertising base, and the simple fact that throughout the Middle East most journals establish themselves through political connections. An independent English-language journal did not gain itself any exemption for its publishing language.
The second half of the book represents Enders’ subsequent work as a freelance journalist amid the hazards of daily life in Iraq, as well as working for the anti-war NGO Occupation Watch. Enders shines as an engaged witness and writer caught up in lives lived on a daily battlefield. As he details encounters with bereaved families, prison cases, visits to hospitals and cemeteries, and the spreading number of ruined lives, the depth of Enders’ anti-war emotions emerges in simply styled word portraits of scenes and exchanges.
Even as Saddam Hussein and his Baathist government have been overthrown, new replacement tragedies are being manufactured daily by the US occupation. Enders captures the dichotomous feelings of Iraqis pleased with the end of Hussein’s regime and supportive of armed resistance to the US occupation. His diary entries incorporate large numbers of field interviews that capture the incidents of US military violence, such as the al-Adamiyah fighting of December 2003, that lent impetus to the Iraqi mujahedeen. Equally, he records the words and surreal illusions of US military officers who believe that they can control Iraq with checkpoints, ‘actionable intelligence,’ neighborhood raids, and stand-off night firing technology. Or as Enders puts it so aptly, “The US military is fighting a turf war with a street gang.”
The ability of the United States to win every engagement is not remarkable given the limited resources of its adversary. What is remarkable is the ability of US policymakers to repeat the same consistent error of winning battles and losing wars, and never learn the lesson. The United States has already lost the Iraq War, but still functions within the delusion that it is winning. A literature of journalistic witness and on-the-ground realism, such as Enders writes, is crucial to remove the blinders that have enabled the US public to normalize the war.
Published by the University of Michigan Press. Original editions of Baghdad Bulletin remain available at http://www.baghdadbulletin.com/
Joe Lockard is assistant professor of English at Arizona State University
General MacArthur’s job was to ensure that Japan never went to war again. To do so, he tried to change the entire social system of the country. He drew up a new constitution which stated that "the Japanese people forever renounce war". From then on, Japan was to have no army, no navy and no air force. Since the time of Emperor Meiji, the Japanese had been taught that the emperor was divine. General MacArthur’s new constitution stated that the Emperor was not divine. Instead he was a symbol of the state, a constitutional monarch like the Queen of England.
One important reform that MacArthur wanted to make was to break up the zaibatsu, the large family-run conglomerated which dominated the country’s economy. They were extremely powerful; and they had played a large part in supporting the war. A few were broken up, but many retained their power. In the end, MacArthur realized that these great businesses would play a vital part in speeding Japan’s economic recovery.
The Korean War
In 1950 war broke out in Korea. United Nations forces, consisting largely of American troops, were sent to support the South Koreans. For Japan, the Korean War was the turning point. The Americans no longer wanted a quiet, passive Japan. They needed a strong and co-operative ally in Asia. They also needed arms. Japanese factories began producing arms again, to supply the American soldiers fighting in Korea. There was also demand for lorries, tools and spare parts for military equipment and aircraft. As a result, Japanese heavy industry quickly began to expand.
Soon afterwards, in 1952, the Occupation ended, although American troops continued to be stationed in Japan. By the end of the Occupation, thanks to American financial aid and American help, the economy was already much strengthened.
On January 16, 1893, United States diplomatic and military personnel conspired with a small group of individuals to overthrow the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom and prepared to provide for annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States of America, under a treaty of annexation submitted to the United States Senate, on February 15, 1893. Newly elected U.S. President Grover Cleveland, having received notice that the cause of the so-called revolution derived from illegal intervention by U.S. diplomatic and military personnel, withdrew the treaty of annexation and appointed James H. Blount, as Special Commissioner, to investigate the terms of the so-called revolution and to report his findings.
The report concluded that the United States legation assigned to the Hawaiian Kingdom, together with United States Marines and Naval personnel, were directly responsible for the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government. The report details the culpability of the United States government in violating international laws and the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Kingdom, but the United States Government fails to follow through in its commitment to assist in reinstating the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Instead, the United States allows five years to lapse and a new United States President, William McKinley, enters into a second treaty of annexation with the same individuals who participated in the illegal overthrow with the U.S. legation in 1893 on June 16, 1897, but the treaty was unable to be ratified by the United States Senate due to protests that were submitted by Her Majesty Queen Lili‘uokalani and signature petitions against annexation by 21,169 Hawaiian nationals.
As a result of the Spanish-American War, the United States opted to unilaterally annex the Hawaiian Islands by enacting a congressional joint resolution on July 7, 1898, in order to utilize the Hawaiian Islands as a military base to fight the Spanish in Guam and the Philippines. The United States has remained in the Hawaiian Islands and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation to the present, but its continuity as an independent State remains intact under international law.
The main documents surrounding United States intervention and subsequent occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom are recorded in the following.
The American Occupation in Cebu
In the morning of February 21, 1899,
the American gunboat U.S.S. Petrel was sighted off Liloan, moving towards the Mactan channel. The vessel approached the cebu Pier at around 11 a.m. commanded by Charles C. Cornwell, Petrel had seen action in the Battle of Manila Bay and the siege of the port of Iloilo in the months just past. Its appearance in cebu signalled the start of the American annexation of Cebu Province in the course of the
Filipino-American War.
In a meeting with Cebuano leaders, Cornwell issued an ultimatum for Cebu to be surrendered to the Americans the following day or face bombardment by the U.S. gunboat.
This sent Cebu's leaders into a marathon, frenzied discussion of Cebu's options before the American threat. Resigned to the view that Cebu's utter lack of arms would make resistance both costly and useless, the Cebuano leaders decided to capitulate.
In the morning of February 22, Pablo Mejia and other local leaders kanded over to Cornwell a document of surrender "under protest." Thus began the American occupation of Cebu.
Source from Sun*Star Weekend
By: Ybarra
The American Occupation in Cebu
In the morning of February 21, 1899,
the American gunboat U.S.S. Petrel was sighted off Liloan, moving towards the Mactan channel. The vessel approached the cebu Pier at around 11 a.m. commanded by Charles C. Cornwell, Petrel had seen action in the Battle of Manila Bay and the siege of the port of Iloilo in the months just past. Its appearance in cebu signalled the start of the American annexation of Cebu Province in the course of the
Filipino-American War.
In a meeting with Cebuano leaders, Cornwell issued an ultimatum for Cebu to be surrendered to the Americans the following day or face bombardment by the U.S. gunboat.
This sent Cebu's leaders into a marathon, frenzied discussion of Cebu's options before the American threat. Resigned to the view that Cebu's utter lack of arms would make resistance both costly and useless, the Cebuano leaders decided to capitulate.
In the morning of February 22, Pablo Mejia and other local leaders kanded over to Cornwell a document of surrender "under protest." Thus began the American occupation of Cebu.
Source from Sun*Star Weekend
By: Ybarra
The American Occupation of Malolos (1899)
The descriptions are the original ones and show the American point of view 100 years ago
Army Suppy Train en Route to Malolos
General Wheaton and his Aids
"This is an army supply train en route to Malolos. The wagons are hauled by a species of buffalo peculiar to the Philippines. It is a patient animal somewhat livelier than the American ox. It does the hard labor of the islands." "General Wheaton and his aids at the suburbs of Malolos, preparing to enter after the retreating insurgents. This was the early seat of the Tagal government. The soldiers are at parade rest in the road awaiting orders to advance."
A Scene in Malolos on Entrance of Americans
Occupation of Malolos
"Chinese flags are everywhere flying for the protection of lives and porperty of Chinese residents and merchants. These flags were always respected as covering neutrals and non-combatans." "Distribution of troops in various portions of the town for preservation of lives and property of loyal natives, and to fortify against attacks of insurgents, as well as to insure the general safety."
American Troops Entering the Public Square
Destruction of Malolos Church
"The american troops are here entering the public square of Malolos. The church has just been set on fire by the retreating insurgents, ans was burned down nonwithstanding the efforts of the soldiers to save it." "The desperate character of the insurgents is shown in this wanton destruction of Malolos church. It was fired by them as they fled before the Americans just entering the town. It was done partly in revenge against the religious orders."
Congressional Hall
The Railroad Depot of Malolos
"Congressional hall and executive building occupied by Aguinaldo and his aids. Here Aguinaldo took the oath of office. After the Filipinos were driven away, Gen. McArthur made it his headquarters. Photograph taken on first day of occupation. " "The proclamation of General Luna is posted upon the wall near the door. The officers are Generals Otis, McArthur and Hale. Photograph was taken within half hour following evacuation of insurgents."
Source: A Wonderful Reproduction of LIVING SCENES In Natural Color Photos fo America's New Posssessions. F. Tennyson Neely. New York, Chicago, London: 1899.
Tausug Resistance to American Occupation ( 1898 - 1913 )
by Madge Kho
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 22, 1878 Last treaty signed by the Sultan Jamlul Alam with Spain after another defeat by Spain in 1876. This treaty had the same translation flaws as the one entered into in 1851, where the Spanish version stated it had sovereignty over Sulu whereas the Tausug version had the description of the relationship as being a protectorate rather than a dependency and Sulu customs, laws, religion were not subject to Spanish jurisdiction.
The differences are material and would have repercussions in 1899 in the territories that Spain ceeded to the U.S. (Treaties and Other International Acts of USA, edited by Hunter Miller, Vol. 4, 1836-1846, p. 355; also History of Sulu by Najeeb Saleeby, pp.124-129 ) This treaty made Jolo a sort of protectorate of Spain (Muslim in the Philippines, Cesar Majul, p. 299) while retaining a great deal of autonomy. The Sultan didn't have much interest in Jolo at this point and relocated his seat to Maimbung.
Dec. 10, 1898 Treaty of Paris signed over Philippines to the U.S. for $20 million. Spain considered possibility of withholding Mindanao and Sulu from the treaty by arguing that it didn't have sovereignty over those territories. The Americans were also deciding whether to take only Luzon or the whole archipelago.
May 1, 1899 Spaniards departed Jolo and on same day Americans occupied Jolo.
August 20, 1899 Sultan Jamalul Kiram II hesitatingly signed treaty with Gen. J.C. Bates. (Bates Treaty or Senate Document No. 136, 56th Congress, lst Session, Serial 3851) (Bates Treaty text available at the http://www.phil-am-war.org site) Terms included:
Mutual respect
Americans not to interfere with religion, social and domestic customs or internal economic or political affairs of Moros unless requested to do so.
Americans not to give or sell Sulu or any part of it to any other nations
continuation of the money payments initiated by the Spaniards, a monthly allowance of $250.00.
Abolition of slavery through purchase of their freedom
Protection of Sulu from foreign interference
Suppression of piracy, fly American flag and stop rifle purchases.
It was obvious that the U.S. signed this peace treaty as a way of stemming any resistance to its occupation in the South while it was suppressing the resistance in the north.
According to Sixto Orosa, the District Health Officer in Sulu during the American occupation "The people did not wish to come under American sovereignty; but Hadji Butu, 'recognizing the folly of armed resistance,' exerted all his influence to prevent another useless and bloody war." (The Sulu Archipelago and Its People, Sixto Orosa, p. 108-109)
November 7, 1900 The U.S. pays Spain another $100,000 to incorporate the islands stretching as far as Sibutu to Cagayan de Sulu. (U.S. Statues at Large, 56th congress, 1899-1901, Vo. 31, U.S. Gov't Printing Office, 1901)
The southernmost outlying islands of the Philippines--Turtle Island and Taganak were incorporated at a much later time period. They were part of the territories originally "ceded" (leased according to Tausug translations of the documents) by the Sultan Jamalul Alam to the North Borneo Company since 1763.
1901 Policy of Disarmanent implemented by Gen. Pershing met with resistance that culminated in the Battle of Bud Dajo on March 7, 1906
June 1, 1903 Moro Province, of which Sulu was a part of, was created under Gen. Leonard Wood, the first governor of that province.
Gov. Gen. Wood imposed a head tax of P2 for each person. This created resentment and dissatisfaction among the Tausugs which led to a series of Cotta (trench) wars against the Americans led by Panglima Hassan. (Orosa, p. 37)
March 2, 1904 The Bates Treaty was unilaterally abrogated by the U.S. Payments to the Sultan stopped. (Orosa, p. 37)
Nov. 12, 1904 U.S. Philippine Commission reissued annual payments to the Sultan of 6000 pesos and 1800 pesos to Hadji Butu and 900 pesos to each of his 6 advisers. Carpenter Agreement abolished slavery. Prior to its abolition, the Sultan owned 500 slaves (Orosa, p. 114).
March 7, 1906 900 Moros killed in Bud Dajo. (Mark Twain wrote about it in his autobiography, later reprinted in Jim Zwick's Mark Twain's Weapons of Satire, Anti-Imperialist Writings on the Philippine American War)
Jan-June 1913 Battle of Bud Bagsak. 5000 Tausugs fortified themselves in a cotta in Mt. Bagsak. 300 were killed, 100 rifles captured by the Americans when General Pershing attacked from June 11-June 16. (Orosa, p. 37)
August 13, 1913 People in Talipao municipality on island of Jolo refused to pay road tax. They fortified themselves in Mt. Talipao. On Oct. 22, 1913, engagement ensued and the Moros were defeated. (Orosa)
July 24, 1913 Dept of Mindanao and Sulu created. (Orosa)
September 1, 1913 Moro Province becomes history. (Orosa)
December 16, 1913 Officially ended military rule and civilian rule begins. Frank Carpenter, a civilian governor of the Department of Mindanao and Sulu and Guy N. Roher was the governor of Sulu.
Article by Madge Kho of Somerville, MA
Sources:
The Sulu Archipelago and Its People. Sixto Orosa
Muslim in the Philippines. Cesar Majul
Treaties and Other International Acts of USA. Edited by Hunter Miller, Vol. 4, 1836-1846
History of Sulu. Najeeb Saleeby
Collective Behavior(A.Dagoy)
Collective Behavior has a special meaning in sociology. It refers to social processes and events which do not reflect existing social structure (laws, conventions, and institutions), but which emerge in a "spontaneous" way. These are the behaviors that are not guided by norms.
The primary criticism of CONVERGENCE PERPECTIVE is that there is a tendency for people to do things in a crowd that they would not do on their own. The homogeneity of the group is over simplified as interaction takes place between individuals, whether or not they are of similar characteristics. The EMERGENT NORM PERSPECTIVE is a combination of like minded individuals that leads to a crowd behavior. It takes a symbolic integrationist approach to understanding crowd behavior. The VALUE ADDED APPROACH series of structural and interactional conditions resulting in definite patterns of behavior. Structural conduciveness (emergence of conflicting interests) structural strain, belief, precipitating event, mobilization and failure of social control.
A crowd is a group of people, also known (especially in the United States) as a mob. The crowd may have a common purpose or set of emotions, such as at a political rally, at a sports game, or during looting, or simply be made up of many people going about their business in a busy area. Milling, anonymity, suggestibility and circular interaction are present in the crowd. CASUAL CROWD (loosely organized , group has a little unity and members are come and go) example there is a 50% sale in Mall. CONVENTIONALIZED CROWD (it has a regular way of behaving) it can be seen in basket ball games were the people are clapping their hands. ACTING CROWD (persons whose attention is on controversial issues) example are the mod and the riots. Mob is group of persons stimulating one another to excitement and losing ordinary rational control over their activity. Riot are a form of civil disorder characterized by disorganized groups lashing out in a sudden and intense rash of violence, vandalism or other crime. While a riot may be premeditated and intentionally incited, a true riot is quickly joined by people without foreknowledge of the riot. While individuals may attempt to lead or control a riot, riots are particularly chaotic and exhibit herd behavior. Panic is the primal urge to run and hide in the face of imminent danger. It is a sudden fear which dominates or replaces thinking and often affects groups of people or animals. Panics typically occur in disaster situations, or violent situations (such as robbery, home invasion, a shooting rampage, etc.) which may endanger the overall health of the affected group. The word panic derives from the name of the Greek god Pan, who is said to have the ability to cause fear of lonely or open places.
Mass is consist of disparate individuals and each responding independently to same stimulus. It is very loosely organized and has a little unity. It may be observed in issues like “Hello Garci” tape.
Fashion is a prevailing custom or mode of behavior that reflects to the prevailing interest of society and is centered upon the spread of change in life-style. Fads it is a temporary fashion manner of conduct that is followed enthusiastically by a group. Crazes a popular or widespread fad and fashion. It is like fad but more intense.
Public is about the what of belonging to the people; relating to, or affecting, a nation, state, or community; opposed to private; as, the public treasury, a road or lake. Public is also defined as the people of a nation not affiliated with the government of that nation. Public also refers to the general body of mankind, or of a nation, state, or community; the people, indefinitely; as, the public; also, a particular body or aggregation of people; as, an author's public. "Public Network" means a network that is regulated as a common carrier. Public opinion is formed after the collective discussion for decision making. It is expressed through ballots, letter and etc. Through the use of personal persuasion mass media influence the public according to their opinions and behavior because it is more effective.
Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals and/or organizations focused on specific political or social issues, in other words, on carrying out, resisting or undoing a social change.
Expressive movement is a form of dissent against the existing power structures. It is not directed to bring about change in power relations. Resistance aims to change existing social values and institutions which members consider decadent. Protest aim to oppose social policies or programs. They are expression of dissent and a need for change. Reform is directed at changing certain aspects of the social class structure or a segment of the power relations in a social system. Rebellion and Revolutionary aim to change the whole social order and replace the leadership.
Collective Behavior(A. DAgoy)
Collective Behavior has a special meaning in sociology. It refers to social processes and events which do not reflect existing social structure (laws, conventions, and institutions), but which emerge in a "spontaneous" way. These are the behaviors that are not guided by norms.
The primary criticism of CONVERGENCE PERPECTIVE is that there is a tendency for people to do things in a crowd that they would not do on their own. The homogeneity of the group is over simplified as interaction takes place between individuals, whether or not they are of similar characteristics. The EMERGENT NORM PERSPECTIVE is a combination of like minded individuals that leads to a crowd behavior. It takes a symbolic integrationist approach to understanding crowd behavior. The VALUE ADDED APPROACH series of structural and interactional conditions resulting in definite patterns of behavior. Structural conduciveness (emergence of conflicting interests) structural strain, belief, precipitating event, mobilization and failure of social control.
A crowd is a group of people, also known (especially in the United States) as a mob. The crowd may have a common purpose or set of emotions, such as at a political rally, at a sports game, or during looting, or simply be made up of many people going about their business in a busy area. Milling, anonymity, suggestibility and circular interaction are present in the crowd. CASUAL CROWD (loosely organized , group has a little unity and members are come and go) example there is a 50% sale in Mall. CONVENTIONALIZED CROWD (it has a regular way of behaving) it can be seen in basket ball games were the people are clapping their hands. ACTING CROWD (persons whose attention is on controversial issues) example are the mod and the riots. Mob is group of persons stimulating one another to excitement and losing ordinary rational control over their activity. Riot are a form of civil disorder characterized by disorganized groups lashing out in a sudden and intense rash of violence, vandalism or other crime. While a riot may be premeditated and intentionally incited, a true riot is quickly joined by people without foreknowledge of the riot. While individuals may attempt to lead or control a riot, riots are particularly chaotic and exhibit herd behavior. Panic is the primal urge to run and hide in the face of imminent danger. It is a sudden fear which dominates or replaces thinking and often affects groups of people or animals. Panics typically occur in disaster situations, or violent situations (such as robbery, home invasion, a shooting rampage, etc.) which may endanger the overall health of the affected group. The word panic derives from the name of the Greek god Pan, who is said to have the ability to cause fear of lonely or open places.
Mass is consist of disparate individuals and each responding independently to same stimulus. It is very loosely organized and has a little unity. It may be observed in issues like “Hello Garci” tape.
Fashion is a prevailing custom or mode of behavior that reflects to the prevailing interest of society and is centered upon the spread of change in life-style. Fads it is a temporary fashion manner of conduct that is followed enthusiastically by a group. Crazes a popular or widespread fad and fashion. It is like fad but more intense.
Public is about the what of belonging to the people; relating to, or affecting, a nation, state, or community; opposed to private; as, the public treasury, a road or lake. Public is also defined as the people of a nation not affiliated with the government of that nation. Public also refers to the general body of mankind, or of a nation, state, or community; the people, indefinitely; as, the public; also, a particular body or aggregation of people; as, an author's public. "Public Network" means a network that is regulated as a common carrier. Public opinion is formed after the collective discussion for decision making. It is expressed through ballots, letter and etc. Through the use of personal persuasion mass media influence the public according to their opinions and behavior because it is more effective.
Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals and/or organizations focused on specific political or social issues, in other words, on carrying out, resisting or undoing a social change.
Expressive movement is a form of dissent against the existing power structures. It is not directed to bring about change in power relations. Resistance aims to change existing social values and institutions which members consider decadent. Protest aim to oppose social policies or programs. They are expression of dissent and a need for change. Reform is directed at changing certain aspects of the social class structure or a segment of the power relations in a social system. Rebellion and Revolutionary aim to change the whole social order and replace the leadership.
Sources:
--
Sociology focus on the philippines 4th edition by Isabel Panopio
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_behavior(yahoo)
--http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=tl&q=Collective+Behavior&btnG=Hanapin+sa+Google&meta=
The Encounter of the People of Austria with US Soldiers after World War II
An Austrian-American Dialogue
"Liberators and the Liberated"
"Occupiers and the Occupied"
The Encounter of the People of Austria with US Soldiers after World War II
An Austrian-American Dialogue
The first US troops - units of the 7th Army advancing from Belgium - reached the Austrian border on April 28, 1945. Supported by local resistance groups opposed to the Nazi regime, they liberated the province of Tyrol and its capital city. "Nowhere in Europe have we received a more festive reception than in Innsbruck," read the entry of a US soldier in his war diary. On the morning of May 4, 1945, tanks of the XV Corps, 106th Cavalry Division rolled through Salzburg. The city had been hit hard by American bombers only three days before. On May 5, 1945, elements of the 3rd Army reached Linz, which was surrendered without a fight. During their advance through Austria, the Americans came upon the Mauthausen concentration camp and its numerous auxiliary camps. One hundred thousand of human beings had been murdered here by the Nazis. Even after the liberation of the concentration camps by the Americans, hundreds of surviving prisoners died because their emaciated bodies could absorb no nutrition.
The zone of occupation controlled by the US Armed Forces consisted of the provinces of Salzburg and Upper Austria (south of the Danube River) and parts of the Austrian capital, Vienna. There were 70,000 American soldiers stationed in Austria in the Fall of 1945, though as early as January, 1946, the occupation strength was reduced to 41,000 men. Because US soldiers were constantly transferred, though, the number of GIs stationed here between 1945 and 1955 reached several hundred thousand.
How were these "victorious foreign soldiers" received: as liberators or as occupiers? What were the points of conflict or sources of friction; where did spontaneous sympathies emerge? Which preconceptions and prejudices did the respective sides hold toward their counterparts. How, then, did the first encounter between Austrians and GIs proceed?
The experience on the part of the Austrian population was very clearly marked by contradictory feelings: the relief that the war was over was accompanied by a bitter sense of defeat; the joy at their liberation was tempered by fear of the foreign soldiers, not to mention the widespread prejudices against the USA indoctrinated through Nazi propaganda. Zealous national socialists regarded the end of World War II as without a doubt "the end of the world."
Actually, the liberation of Austria had been carried out by the `wrong' US troops. Instead of proceeding as planned with the 5th Army under General Marc Clark advancing from the south, the first Americans to arrive were units from the west which had not been readied for Austria. Their 'Handbook for Germany', the land which they had been prepared to occupy, prescribed a strict treatment of the local population. These orders were applied as well to Austria, which the Americans - unlike, for example, the French - regarded as the territory of a defeated enemy. The victors' passion for `souvenirs' - watches, fountain pens, German medals and insignias - sometimes, in these early days of occupation, turned into outright plunder.
US Headquarters pursued a strict policy of non-fraternization at that time. Contacts between occupation troops and Austrians were discouraged. But this ban on fraternization ordered by the top brass was quickly being evaded in everyday practice and, indeed, by both sides. By August, 1945, the MPs could no longer keep up with the disciplinary proceedings resulting from all the infractions and the policy was annulled.
The most important factor paving the way to closer relationships in the immediate postwar years was foodstuffs. After all, an army of occupation that had plenty of everything was placed in the midst of an Austrian population suffering from extreme hunger. 80% of Austrian children were malnourished. The mood of the populace was depressed. In this contrast of poor Austrians - rich Americans , the `liberators and occupiers' can be seen in one of their many additional roles: that of provider and protector. And their assumption of this role was certainly encouraged by many Austrians. When radio station Rot-Weisz-Rot (red-white-red, the colors of the Austrian flag), which the Americans had set up in June, 1945, conducted a listener survey to gauge the popularity of its programming, the response was to a large extent bluntly pragmatic: "Words and music from America are very nice, but best of all would simply be food shipments, which arrive here much too seldom." Perhaps the Americans discovered that the way to the Austrians' hearts was through their stomachs.
Care packages, school lunch programs, clothing donations and, above all, the Marshall Plan became the magic words of the occupation era. These American aid programs were highly effective in much more than a material sense; rather, they also revived hopes that big, powerful America would not leave Austria in the lurch.
The US occupation of Austria lasted for ten years. In the Austrian popular imagination, this era is most closely associated with the 42nd (Rainbow) Division. How then did the "liberators and liberated," "victors and vanquished," "occupiers and the occupied." work out the details of the everyday life of occupation during the years from 1945 to 1955? What sort of contacts took place between the Austrian populace and the American soldiers? And what traces did these interactions leave behind?
Following in the wake of the Nazis' efforts to insulate society against foreign influences, the era of occupation was also a decade of intercultural encounter. Swing, jazz, American films, blue jeans, Mickey Mouse, Coca Cola and chewing gum came to symbolize the `cool', relaxed style of the Yanks and the American way of life. For the Austrian populace, these were both strange and fascinating . They were especially enchanting for adolescents growing up in postwar Austria.
The strongest impression made by the GIs was quite clearly as propagandists for the material prosperity of the American Dream, of which they themselves were living proof. For example, even the lowliest enlisted man in the US Army in those days earned more than an Austrian construction engineer. And that soldier's American homeland was the very epitome of modernity: in 1949, 70% of all telephones, 80% of all refrigerators and "100%" of all television sets in the world could be found in the USA. In Austria at that same point in time, there existed a mere 20,000 ice-boxes and fewer than 3,000 washing machines in the entire country. Thus, barely three percent of all Austrian households were equipped with these miracles of modern technology. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that America occupied a place somewhere between paradise and the promised land in postwar Austrian consciousness.
In American bars and clubs, Austrians could observe this material prosperity and American zest for life from a more intimate perspective. Army authorities attempted to make their boys' stay in Austria as pleasant as possible by instituting various measures to combat GI homesickness. These young men plainly regarded postwar Austria as a form of exile, as the American magazine Newsweek remarked ironically in December, 1945: cut off "from the land of milk and honey, of roadside hot dog stands, chocolate malted milkshakes and quiz programs, Rita Hayworth, baseball scores and bee-yoo-tiful Texas." The US Army helped them to transplant much of that life to Austria and `Little Americas' began to sprout up all over Austria.
Moreover, many postwar Austrians thronged overseas to the `real' America. Among them were several thousand Austrian women for whom the way had been opened by the passage of the War Brides Act. This law enabled American occupation troops to marry citizens of liberated and occupied countries and to bring them back to the USA. Within the first 14 days following the announcement of the passage of this bill, 300 such applications had already been filed in Austria alone, according to a report in the New York Times dated January 18, 1946. Major General Harry J. Collins, commander of the Rainbow Division, married an Austrian woman as well. What was it about Austrian females that GIs found so appealing? And why were Austrian women attracted to GIs?
The multifaceted nature of the relationships between Fräuleins and GIs was one of the most frequently discussed subjects of the era of occupation. The feelings of the Austrian public towards women who carried on liaisons with American soldiers were highly conflicted and often hostile. A commonly heard complaint was that they were dragging Austria's reputation down into the dirt. They were frequently reviled with insulting names such as `chocolate girls' and `Yank brides' - regardless of whether the relationship was a flirt, love, marriage or prostitution. And it was usually these women alone who had to accept and deal with the `consequences' of these relationships. Almost 2,000 illegitimate children of the occupation were born between 1945 and 1955 in the province of Salzburg alone. Many of them never met their American fathers.
Fifty years later, we asked teenagers of the 1990s to describe the current image of America among Austrian adolescents. Is The American Dream still, or once again, in their minds?
So much, then, for the encounters of Austrians and GIs during the era of US occupation from the Austrian perspective. What memories remain from this experience on `the American side'? What were the most lasting impressions made upon former US occupation troops by the land and the people of Austria? Let us hear from you.
United States occupation of Haiti
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from United States occupation of Haiti (1915-1934))• Learn more about citing Wikipedia •Jump to: navigation, search
History of Haiti
Before 1492
1492-1791
1791-1804
1804-1843
1843-1915
1915-1986
1986-present
Saint-Domingue
Haitian Revolution
United States occupation of Haiti
2004 Haiti coup d'État
Timeline
Military history
The first United States occupation of Haiti began on July 28, 1915 and ended in mid-August, 1934. Other occupations include ones that began in 1994 and 2004 (though these may have been partially under the UN banner, the US was the prime mover of the actions).
Contents [hide]
1 Causes
2 Government and opposition
3 Effects of the occupation on Haiti
4 Effects of the occupation on U.S. politics
5 Further reading
[edit] Causes
The instability in Haiti provided a potential opening for German influence during the ongoing World War I. In addition, it is alleged that a popular uprising against Haitian dictator Jean Vilbrun Guillaume Sam threatened American business interests in the country (such as HASCO). In response, American President Woodrow Wilson sent 330 U.S. Marines to Port-au-Prince on July 28, 1915. The specific order from the Secretary of the Navy to the invasion commander, Admiral William Deville Bundy, was to "protect American and foreign" interests. Within six weeks, representatives from the United States controlled Haitian customs houses and administrative institutions. For the next nineteen years, Haiti's powerful neighbor to the north guided and governed the country. During this period, the government of Haiti was effectively under the control of the U.S. Marines.
[edit] Government and opposition
Representatives from the United States wielded veto power over all governmental decisions in Haiti, and Marine Corps commanders served as administrators in the provinces. Local institutions, however, continued to be run by Haitians, as was required under policies put in place during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson.
Opposition to the Occupation began immediately after the Marines entered Haiti in 1915. The rebels (called "cacos" by the U.S. Marines) vehemently tried to resist American control of Haiti. In response, the Haitian and American governments began a vigorous campaign to disband the rebel armies. Perhaps the best-known account of this skirmishing comes from Marine Major Smedley Butler, who won a Medal of Honor for his exploits, and went on to serve as commanding officer of the Haitian Gendarmerie. (He later expressed his disapproval of the U.S. intervention in his book, "War Is a Racket".)
Philippe Sudré Dartiguenave, the mulatto president of the Senate, agreed to accept the presidency of Haiti after several other candidates had refused on principle. In 1917, President Dartiguenave dissolved the legislature after its members refused to approve a constitution written by Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt. However, a referendum subsequently approved the new constitution in 1918 (by a vote of 98,225 to 768). While generally a liberal document, the constitution allowed foreigners to purchase land. Jean-Jacques Dessalines had forbidden land ownership by foreigners, and since 1804, most Haitians had viewed foreign ownership as anathema.
[edit] Effects of the occupation on Haiti
The occupation by the United States had several significant effects on Haiti. An early period of unrest culminated in a 1918 rebellion by up to 40,000 former cacos and other disgruntled people. The scale of the uprising overwhelmed the Gendarmerie, but Marine reinforcements helped put down the revolt at an estimated cost of 2,000 Haitian lives.
Thereafter, order prevailed to a degree that most Haitians had never witnessed. The order, however, was imposed largely by white foreigners with deep-seated racial prejudices and disdain for the notion of self-determination by inhabitants of less-developed nations. Such attitudes particularly dismayed Haiti's mulatto elite, who had heretofore believed in their innate superiority over the black masses.
The white American occupiers, however, did not distinguish among Haitians, regardless of their skin tone, level of education, or sophistication. Their intolerance provoked indignation and resentment — and eventually a racial pride that was reflected in the work of a new generation of Haitian historians, ethnologists, writers, artists, and others, many of whom later became active in politics and government. Still, as Haitians united in their reaction to the racism of the occupying forces, the mulatto elite managed to dominate the country's bureaucracy and to strengthen its role in national affairs.
The occupation greatly improved some of Haiti's infrastructure. Roads were improved and expanded through the use of forced labor gangs. This violent form of "corvée labor" — with chain gangs, and armed guards permitted to shoot anyone who fled compulsory service — was widely regarded as tantamount to slavery.
The education system was re-designed from the ground up; however, this involved the destruction of the existing system of "Liberal Arts" education inherited (and adapted) from the French. Due to its emphasis on vocational training, the American system that replaced the French was despised by the elite. Thus, both of the major programs instituted by the government of occupation antagonized the Haitian populace: the use of forced labor enraged the lower classes of rural Haiti, and the educational "reforms" enraged the urban elite.
[edit] Effects of the occupation on U.S. politics
The occupation of Haiti continued after World War I, despite the embarrassment that it caused Woodrow Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and the scrutiny of a congressional inquiry in 1922. By 1930, President Herbert Hoover had become concerned about the effects of the occupation, particularly after a December 1929 incident in Les Cayes, in which Marines killed at least ten Haitian peasants during a march to protest local economic conditions. Hoover appointed two commissions to study the situation. A former governor general of the Philippines, William Cameron Forbes, headed the more prominent of the two.
The Forbes Commission praised the material improvements that the U.S. administration had wrought, but it criticized the exclusion of Haitians from positions of real authority in the government and the constabulary, which had come to be known as the Garde d'Haïti. In more general terms, the commission further asserted that "the social forces that created [instability] still remain — poverty, ignorance, and the lack of a tradition or desire for orderly free government."
The Hoover administration did not fully implement the recommendations of the Forbes Commission; but United States withdrawal was under way by 1932, when Hoover lost the presidency to Franklin Roosevelt, the presumed author of the most recent Haitian constitution. On a visit to Cap-Haïtien in July 1934, Roosevelt reaffirmed an August 1933 disengagement agreement. The last contingent of U.S. Marines departed in mid-August, after a formal transfer of authority to the Garde.
As in other countries occupied by the United States in the early 20th century, the local (U.S.-trained) military was often the only cohesive and effective institution left in the wake of withdrawal. This sowed the seeds for a sequence of military-backed dictatorships, all attached to American patronage, which would define the next 50 years of Haiti's history.
[edit] Further reading
Renda, Mary A. (2001). Taking Haiti: Military Occupation and the Culture of U.S. Imperialism, 1915-1940. University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 0-8078-4938-3.
Schmidt, Hans (1995). United States occupation of Haiti (1915-1934). Rutgers University Press. ISBN 0-8135-2203-X.
Harper's Magazine advertisement: Why Should You Worry About Haiti? by the Haiti-Santo Domingo Independence Society
[hide]v • d • eArmed Conflicts involving the United States
International World War I · World War II · Korean War · Vietnam War · Gulf War · Somalia · Bosnian War · Kosovo War · War in Afghanistan · Iraq War
External Quasi-War · First Barbary War · War of 1812 · Second Barbary War · Mexican-American War · Spanish-American War · Philippine-American War · Invasion of Grenada · Invasion of Panama
Internal Indian Wars · Revolutionary War · Shays' Rebellion · Whiskey Rebellion · Seminole Wars · Toledo War · Mormon War · Honey War · Bleeding Kansas · Utah War · Civil War · Brooks-Baxter War
Related articles List of conflicts in USA · List of wars involving USA · List of US military history events · Overseas expansion of the United States
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_occupation_of_Haiti"
Categories: History of Haiti | Military history of the United States 1900-1999 | Banana Wars | 1915 in the United States
Douglas MacArthur
and the American Occupation of Japan
General Douglas MacArthur was able to construct the only successful occupation of Japan to date. This was United States occupation which followed WWII. The occupation occurred in the late 1940's and towards the end of MacArthur's illustrious career.
On August 11th, 1945, General MacArthur was named the Allied Supreme Commander, which entitled him to accept Japan's capitulation when offered. He held a very large public ceremony, which left no doubt that the Japanese had finally lost. MacArthur and the United States were occupying a country which had previously never been defeated in war. General MacArthur now had the task of rebuilding not only a broken country, but its people as well.
This is a picture of MacArthur signing the surrender of the Japanese to the Allied Powers. The signing was a public ceremony, as opposed to the private signing of Germany's surrender to Eisenhower. MacArthur saw to it that the ceremony took place at a time when military representatives from many countries, including China, Russia, Britain, and the Philippines, could attend in full uniform. MacArthur wanted to make it clear that he had defeated Japan and that there was no doubt to that fact. He gave a speech that showed that other counties needed to be involved in restoring peace to Japan. MacArthur was able to make it very clear that the U.S. had defeated the Japanese, who had never been defeated before, while avoiding the humiliation of the Japanese people.
Photo From: Images of American Political History
MacArthur had many goals that he wished to achieve in the occupation. He wanted to destroy Japan's military power, punish war criminals, build the structure for a new representative government, revise the Japanese constitution, hold free elections, enfranchise the Japanese women, free political prisoners, liberate farmers, set up a free labor movement, support free economy, eliminate police oppression, develop a free and responsible press, liberalize education, and disperse the central political power in Japan. These tasks took MacArthur over 5 years to complete, but he was able to accomplish all of them.
MacArthur treated the Japanese people very kindly, carefully making sure there was no interference with their cultural lives. The Japanese people saw their emperor, Hirohito, as the divine being and if he had been indicted for war crimes, MacArthur knew that the people would react negatively. Because of MacArthur's efforts to prevent the indictment, Emperor Hirohito was not convicted of war crimes. The emperor was on good terms with MacArthur because he realized that he had no choice but to accept MacArthur's rule. He understood the democratic concept and became a spiritual leader to the Japanese. His overall loyalty, cooperation, and influence were large reasons that the occupation was successful.
The emperor of Japan came to have a conference with General MacArthur. MacArthur, before the meeting, told the Emperor that they were to take one picture. This photograph, which was published in the local Japanese newspapers, was very shocking. It shows MacArthur in an open shirt with "No neck tie," as the Japanese press said, towering over the little man who was the "larger than life" Emperor. The Emperor, whose image was very impressive to the Japanese people before this photograph, appeared meek and little in comparison to MacArthur, who was the symbol of American influence in Japan. The picture also signified that MacArthur would stand by the Emperor, who was possibly going to be tried for war crimes.
Photo From: Post-War Ventriloquism
The most daunting task that MacArthur faced was the writing of a new Japanese constitution. At first, MacArthur elected a committee of Japanese leaders to revise the old constitution. However, the committee took four months to rewrite the constitution, and when a draft was presented to MacArthur, it had little change to the existing laws.
MacArthur was very frustrated with these results, and ordered SCAP (Supreme Commander Allied Powers) political experts to prepare a draft guided by his principles. The task was completed quickly and reviewed by the Japanese committee, which again expressed its dislike for the democratic views of the new constitution. MacArthur finally forced both committees to meet together and wouldn't let them end the meeting until an acceptable constitution was drafted. The meeting lasted nearly 48 hours
The constitution allowed MacArthur to accomplish many of his goals. The constitution itself eliminated the emperor's political power. MacArthur, as Supreme Commander, was able to enfranchise Japanese women, give workers the right to unionize, force landowners to sell their land to the farmers that worked the land, set up reform programs for schooling, and break up companies that had monopolized in Japan.
By 1950, MacArthur had successfully instated democracy in Japan. The occupation didn't end until 1952, but MacArthur left Japan in 1950 to fight in the Korean War. In September of 1951 a treaty was signed between Japan, the U.S. and 47 other countries. It went into full effect in April of 1952, officially ending the military occupation and restoring full independence to Japan. The only successful occupation of Japan had ended and MacArthur proved that an occupation of a foreign nation could be beneficial.
This is an original cartoon that shows a lot about the relationship between MacArthur and the Emperor of Japan, Hirohito. The cartoon shows how MacArthur and the U.S. used Hirohito, who was open to the American forces, to appeal to the Japanese people. It also portrays Hirohito's willingness to go along with the wishes of the Americans. He did not object to the occupation and because of that the Japanese people were welcome to it also. Hirohito knew that if he did not go along with whatever the U.S. wanted, he would be indicted for war crimes. MacArthur, because of Hirohito's cooperation, tried to back the Emperor up when the U.S. accused him of war crimes. Hirohito's compliance to do just about whatever MacArthur wanted was a big reason why the occupation was successful and why he wasn't indicted. The Japanese people loved their emperor.
Drawn by Jimmy Foster
Douglas MacArthur
and the American Occupation of Japan
General Douglas MacArthur was able to construct the only successful occupation of Japan to date. This was United States occupation which followed WWII. The occupation occurred in the late 1940's and towards the end of MacArthur's illustrious career.
On August 11th, 1945, General MacArthur was named the Allied Supreme Commander, which entitled him to accept Japan's capitulation when offered. He held a very large public ceremony, which left no doubt that the Japanese had finally lost. MacArthur and the United States were occupying a country which had previously never been defeated in war. General MacArthur now had the task of rebuilding not only a broken country, but its people as well.
This is a picture of MacArthur signing the surrender of the Japanese to the Allied Powers. The signing was a public ceremony, as opposed to the private signing of Germany's surrender to Eisenhower. MacArthur saw to it that the ceremony took place at a time when military representatives from many countries, including China, Russia, Britain, and the Philippines, could attend in full uniform. MacArthur wanted to make it clear that he had defeated Japan and that there was no doubt to that fact. He gave a speech that showed that other counties needed to be involved in restoring peace to Japan. MacArthur was able to make it very clear that the U.S. had defeated the Japanese, who had never been defeated before, while avoiding the humiliation of the Japanese people.
Photo From: Images of American Political History
MacArthur had many goals that he wished to achieve in the occupation. He wanted to destroy Japan's military power, punish war criminals, build the structure for a new representative government, revise the Japanese constitution, hold free elections, enfranchise the Japanese women, free political prisoners, liberate farmers, set up a free labor movement, support free economy, eliminate police oppression, develop a free and responsible press, liberalize education, and disperse the central political power in Japan. These tasks took MacArthur over 5 years to complete, but he was able to accomplish all of them.
MacArthur treated the Japanese people very kindly, carefully making sure there was no interference with their cultural lives. The Japanese people saw their emperor, Hirohito, as the divine being and if he had been indicted for war crimes, MacArthur knew that the people would react negatively. Because of MacArthur's efforts to prevent the indictment, Emperor Hirohito was not convicted of war crimes. The emperor was on good terms with MacArthur because he realized that he had no choice but to accept MacArthur's rule. He understood the democratic concept and became a spiritual leader to the Japanese. His overall loyalty, cooperation, and influence were large reasons that the occupation was successful.
The emperor of Japan came to have a conference with General MacArthur. MacArthur, before the meeting, told the Emperor that they were to take one picture. This photograph, which was published in the local Japanese newspapers, was very shocking. It shows MacArthur in an open shirt with "No neck tie," as the Japanese press said, towering over the little man who was the "larger than life" Emperor. The Emperor, whose image was very impressive to the Japanese people before this photograph, appeared meek and little in comparison to MacArthur, who was the symbol of American influence in Japan. The picture also signified that MacArthur would stand by the Emperor, who was possibly going to be tried for war crimes.
Photo From: Post-War Ventriloquism
The most daunting task that MacArthur faced was the writing of a new Japanese constitution. At first, MacArthur elected a committee of Japanese leaders to revise the old constitution. However, the committee took four months to rewrite the constitution, and when a draft was presented to MacArthur, it had little change to the existing laws.
MacArthur was very frustrated with these results, and ordered SCAP (Supreme Commander Allied Powers) political experts to prepare a draft guided by his principles. The task was completed quickly and reviewed by the Japanese committee, which again expressed its dislike for the democratic views of the new constitution. MacArthur finally forced both committees to meet together and wouldn't let them end the meeting until an acceptable constitution was drafted. The meeting lasted nearly 48 hours
The constitution allowed MacArthur to accomplish many of his goals. The constitution itself eliminated the emperor's political power. MacArthur, as Supreme Commander, was able to enfranchise Japanese women, give workers the right to unionize, force landowners to sell their land to the farmers that worked the land, set up reform programs for schooling, and break up companies that had monopolized in Japan.
By 1950, MacArthur had successfully instated democracy in Japan. The occupation didn't end until 1952, but MacArthur left Japan in 1950 to fight in the Korean War. In September of 1951 a treaty was signed between Japan, the U.S. and 47 other countries. It went into full effect in April of 1952, officially ending the military occupation and restoring full independence to Japan. The only successful occupation of Japan had ended and MacArthur proved that an occupation of a foreign nation could be beneficial.
This is an original cartoon that shows a lot about the relationship between MacArthur and the Emperor of Japan, Hirohito. The cartoon shows how MacArthur and the U.S. used Hirohito, who was open to the American forces, to appeal to the Japanese people. It also portrays Hirohito's willingness to go along with the wishes of the Americans. He did not object to the occupation and because of that the Japanese people were welcome to it also. Hirohito knew that if he did not go along with whatever the U.S. wanted, he would be indicted for war crimes. MacArthur, because of Hirohito's cooperation, tried to back the Emperor up when the U.S. accused him of war crimes. Hirohito's compliance to do just about whatever MacArthur wanted was a big reason why the occupation was successful and why he wasn't indicted. The Japanese people loved their emperor.
Drawn by Jimmy Foster
The Occupation of Iraqi Hearts and Minds
By Nir Rosen
07/04/06 "Truthdig" -- -- Three years into an occupation of Iraq replete with so-called milestones, turning points and individual events hailed as “sea changes” that would “break the back” of the insurgency, a different type of incident received an intense, if ephemeral, amount of attention. A local human rights worker and aspiring journalist in the western Iraqi town of Haditha filmed the aftermath of the massacre of 24 Iraqi civilians. The video made its way to an Iraqi working for Time magazine, and the story was finally publicized months later. The Haditha massacre was compared to the Vietnam War’s My Lai massacre, and like the well-publicized and embarrassing Abu Ghraib scandal two years earlier, the attention it received made it seem as if it were a horrible aberration perpetrated by a few bad apples who might have overreacted to the stress they endured as occupiers.
In reality both Abu Ghraib and Haditha were merely more extreme versions of the day-to-day workings of the American occupation in Iraq, and what makes them unique is not so much how bad they were, or how embarrassing, but the fact that they made their way to the media and were publicized despite attempts to cover them up. Focusing on Abu Ghraib and Haditha distracts us from the daily, little Abu Ghraibs and small-scale Hadithas that have made up the occupation. The occupation has been one vast extended crime against the Iraqi people, and most of it has occurred unnoticed by the American people and the media.
Americans, led to believe that their soldiers and Marines would be welcomed as liberators by the Iraqi people, have no idea what the occupation is really like from the perspective of Iraqis who endure it. Although I am American, born and raised in New York City, I came closer to experiencing what it might feel like to be Iraqi than many of my colleagues. I often say that the secret to my success in Iraq as a journalist is my melanin advantage. I inherited my Iranian father’s Middle Eastern features, which allowed me to go unnoticed in Iraq, blend into crowds, march in demonstrations, sit in mosques, walk through Falluja’s worst neighborhoods.
I also benefited from being able to speak Arabic—in particular its Iraqi dialect, which I hastily learned in Baghdad upon my arrival and continued to develop throughout my time in Iraq.
My skin color and language skills allowed me to relate to the American occupier in a different way, for he looked at me as if I were just another haji, the “gook” of the war in Iraq. I first realized my advantage in April 2003, when I was sitting with a group of American soldiers and another soldier walked up and wondered what this haji (me) had done to get arrested by them. Later that summer I walked in the direction of an American tank and heard one soldier say about me, “That’s the biggest fuckin’ Iraqi (pronounced eye-raki) I ever saw.” A soldier by the gun said, “I don’t care how big he is, if he doesn’t stop movin’ I’m gonna shoot him.”
I was lucky enough to have an American passport in my pocket, which I promptly took out and waved, shouting: “Don’t shoot! I’m an American!” It was my first encounter with hostile American checkpoints but hardly my last, and I grew to fear the unpredictable American military, which could kill me for looking like an Iraqi male of fighting age. Countless Iraqis were not lucky enough to speak American English or carry a U.S. passport, and often entire families were killed in their cars when they approached American checkpoints.
In 2004 the British medical journal The Lancet estimated that by September 2004 100,000 Iraqis had died as a result of the American occupation and said that most of them had died violently, mostly in American airstrikes. Although this figure was challenged by many, especially partisans of the war, it seems perfectly plausible to me based on what I have seen in Iraq, having spent most of the postwar period there. What I never understood was why more journalists did not focus on this, choosing instead to look for the “good news” and go along with the official story.
My first direct encounter with American Marines was from the Iraqi side. In late April 2003, I was attending the Friday prayers in a Sunni bastion in Baghdad. Thousands of people were praying and the devout flooded out of the mosque and laid their prayer rugs on the street and the square in front of it. A Marine patrol rounded a corner and walked right into hundreds of people praying on the street and listening to the sermon, even approaching the separate section for women. Dozens of men rose and put their shoes on, forming a virtual wall to block the armed Marines, who seemed unaware of the danger. The Marines did not understand Arabic. “Irjau!” “Go back!” the demonstrators screamed, and some waved their fists, shouting “America is the enemy of God!” as they were restrained by a few cooler-headed men from within their ranks. I ran to advise the Marines that Friday prayers was not a good time to show up fully armed. The men sensed this and asked me to tell their lieutenant, who appeared oblivious to the public relations catastrophe he might be provoking. He told me: “That’s why we’ve got the guns.”
A nervous soldier asked me to go explain the situation to the bespectacled staff sergeant, who had been attempting to calm the situation by telling the demonstrators, who did not speak English, that the U.S. patrol meant no harm. He finally lost his temper when an Iraqi told him gently, “You must go.” “I have the weapons,” the sergeant said. “You back off.”
“Let’s get the fuck out!” one Marine shouted to another as the tension increased. I was certain that a shove, a tossed stone or a shot fired could have provoked a massacre and turned the city violently against the American occupation. Finally the Marines retreated cautiously around a corner as the worshipers were held back by their own comrades. It could have ended worse, and a week later it did when 17 demonstrators were killed by American soldiers in Falluja, and several more were killed in a subsequent demonstration, a massacre that contributed to the city’s support of the resistance.
I believe that any journalist who spent even a brief period embedded with American soldiers must have witnessed crimes being committed against innocent Iraqis, so I have always been baffled by how few were reported and how skeptically the Western media treated Arabic reports of such crimes. These crimes were not committed because Americans are bad or malicious; they were intrinsic to the occupation, and even if the Girl Scouts had occupied Iraq they would have resorted to these methods. In the end, it is those who dispatched decent young American men and women to commit crimes who should be held accountable.
Next Page: “I still feel guilt over my complicity in crimes the one time I was embedded...”
I still feel guilt over my complicity in crimes the one time I was embedded, in the fall of 2003. (I spent two weeks with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment stationed in Husaybah, an Iraqi town near the Syrian border that is a suspected entry point for foreign insurgent fighters.) Normally, I like to think, if I witnessed an act of bullying of the weak or the elderly, or the terrorizing of children, I would interfere and try to stop it. After all, a passion for justice is what propelled me into this career. It started when I arrived in the main base in the desert. Local Iraqi laborers were sitting in the sun waiting to be acknowledged by the American soldiers. Every so often a representative would come to the soldiers to explain in Arabic that they were waiting for their American overseer. The soldier would shout back in English. Finally I translated between them. One soldier, upset with an Iraqi man for looking at him, asked him: “Do I owe you money? So why the fuck are you looking at me?”
After a week, the Army unit I was living with went on a raid targeting alleged Al Qaeda cells. Included were safe houses, financiers and fighters as well as alleged resistance leaders such as senior military officers from elite units of the former Iraqi army. All together there were 62 names on the wanted list. A minimum of 29 locations would be raided, taking out the “nervous system” of the area resistance “and the guys who actually do the shooting.”
The raids began at night. The men descended upon villages by the border with Syria in the western desert. After half an hour of bumpy navigating in the dark the convoy approached the first house and the vehicles switched their lights on, illuminating the target area as a tank broke the stone wall. “Fuck yeah!” cheered one sergeant, “Hi honey I’m home!” The teams charged over the rubble from the wall, breaking through the door with a sledgehammer and dragging several men out. The barefoot prisoners, dazed from their slumber, were forcefully marched over rocks and hard ground. One short middle-aged man, clearly injured and limping with painful difficulty, was violently pushed forward in the grip of a Brobdingnagian soldier who said, “You’ll fucking learn how to walk.” Each male was asked his name. None matched the names on the list. A prisoner was asked where the targeted military officer lived. “Down the road,” he pointed. “Show us!” he was ordered, and he was shoved ahead, stumbling over the rocky street, terrified that he would be seen as an informer in the neighborhood, terrified that he too would be taken away. He stopped at the house but the soldiers ran ahead. “No, no, it’s here,” yelled a sergeant, and they ran back, breaking through the gate and bursting into the house. It was a large villa, with grape vines covering the driveway. Women and children from within were ordered to sit in the garden. The men were pushed to the ground on the driveway and asked their names. One was indeed the first high-value target. His son begged the soldiers, “Take me for 10 years but leave my father!” Both were taken. The children screamed ‘Daddy, Daddy!’ as the men were led out and the women were given leaflets in Arabic explaining that the men had been arrested
Home after home met the same fate. Some homes had only women; these houses too were ransacked, closets broken, mattresses overturned, clothes thrown out of drawers. Men were dragged on the ground by their legs to be handcuffed outside. One bony ancient sheik walked out with docility and was pushed forcefully to the ground, where he was wrestled by soldiers who had trouble cuffing his arms. A commando grabbed him from them, and tightly squeezed the old man’s arms together, lifting him in the air and throwing him down on the ground, nearly breaking his fragile arms.
As her husband was taken away, one woman angrily asked Allah to curse the soldiers, calling them “Dogs! Jews!” over and over. When his soldiers left a home, one officer emerged to slap them on the back like a coach congratulating his players during halftime in a winning game. In a big compound of several houses the soldiers took all the men, even the ones not on the list. A sergeant explained that the others would be held for questioning to see whether they had any useful information. The men cried out that they had children still inside. In several houses soldiers tenderly carried out babies who had been left sleeping in their cribs and handed them to the women. When the work at a house was complete, or at the Home Run stage (stages were divided into 1st, 2nd, 3rd, Home Run and Grand Slam, meaning ready to move on), the soldiers relaxed and joked, breaking their own tension and ignoring the trembling and shocked women and children crouched together on the lawns behind them.
Prisoners with duct tape on their eyes and their hands cuffed behind them with plastic “zip ties” sat in the back of the truck for hours, without water. They moved their heads toward sounds, disoriented and frightened, trying to understand what was happening around them. Any time a prisoner moved or twitched, a soldier bellowed at him angrily and cursed. Thrown among the tightly crowded men in one truck was a boy no more than 15 years old, his eyes wide in terror as the duct tape was placed on them. By daylight the whole town could see a large truck full of prisoners. Two men walking to work with their breakfast in a basket were stopped at gunpoint, ordered to the ground, cuffed and told to “Shut the fuck up” as their basket’s contents were tossed out and they were questioned about the location of a suspect.
The soldier guarding them spoke of the importance of intimidating Iraqis and instilling fear in them. “If they got something to tell us I’d rather they be scared,” he explained. An Iraqi policeman drove by in a white SUV clearly marked “Police.” He too was stopped at gunpoint and ordered not to move or talk until the last raid was complete. From the list of 34 names, the troop I was with brought in about 16 positively identified men, along with 54 men who were neighbors, relatives or just happened to be around. By 08:30 the Americans were done and started driving back to base. As the main element departed, the psychological operations vehicle blasted AC/DC rock music through neighborhood streets. “It’s good for morale after such a long mission,” a captain said. Crowds of children clustered on porches smiling, waving and giving the passing soldiers little thumbs up. A sergeant waved back. Neighbors awakened by the noise huddled outside and watched the convoy. One little girl stood before her father and guarded him from the soldiers with her arms outstretched and legs wide.
Next Page: “Did they just arrest every man they found?” he asked, wondering if “we just made another 300 people hate us.”
In Baghdad, coalition officials announced that 112 suspects had been arrested in a major raid near the Syrian border, including a high-ranking official in the former Republican Guard. “The general officer that they captured, Abed Hamed Mowhoush al-Mahalowi, was reported to have links with Saddam Hussein and was a financier of anti-coalition activities, according to intelligence sources,” a military spokeswoman said. “Troops from the 1st and 4th squadrons of the Third Armored Cavalry cordoned off sections of the town and searched 29 houses to find ‘subversive elements,’ including 12 of the 13 suspects they had targeted for capture,” she said.
That night the prisoners were visible on a large dirt field in a square of concertina wire. Beneath immense spotlights and near loud generators, they slept on the ground, guarded by soldiers. One sergeant was surprised by the high number of prisoners taken by the troop I was with. “Did they just arrest every man they found?” he asked, wondering if “we just made another 300 people hate us.” The following day 57 prisoners were transported to a larger base for further interrogation. Some were not the suspects, just relatives of the suspects or men suspected of being the suspects.
The next night the troop departed the base at 0200, hoping to find those alleged Al Qaeda suspects who had not been home during the previous operation. Soldiers descended upon homes in a large compound, their boots trampling over mattresses in rooms the inhabitants did not enter with shoes on. Most of the wanted men were nowhere to be found, their women and children prevaricating about their locations. Some of their relatives were arrested instead. “That woman is annoying!” one young soldier complained about a mother’s desperate ululations as her son was taken from his house. “How do you think your mother would sound if they were taking you away?” a sergeant asked him.
Three days after the operation, a dozen prisoners could be seen marching in a circle outside their detention cells, surrounded by barbed wire. They were shouting “USA, USA!” over and over. “They were talkin’ when we told ’em not to, so we made ’em talk somethin’ we liked to hear,” one of the soldiers guarding them said with a grin. Another gestured up with his hands, letting them know they had to raise their voices. A first sergeant quipped that the ones who were not guilty “will be guilty next time,” after such treatment. Even if the men were guilty, no proof would be provided to the community. There would be no process of transparent justice. The only thing evident to the Iraqi public would be the American guilt.
In November 2003 a major from the judge advocate general’s office working on establishing an Iraqi judicial process told me that there were at least 7,000 Iraqis detained by American forces. Many languished in prisons indefinitely, lost in a system that imposed the English language on Arabic speakers with Arabic names not easily transcribed. Some were termed “security detainees” and held for six months pending a review to determine whether they were still a “security risk.” Most were innocent. Many were arrested simply because a neighbor did not like them. A lieutenant colonel familiar with the process told me that there is no judicial process for the thousands of detainees. If the military were to try them, there would be a court-martial, which would imply that the U.S. was occupying Iraq, and lawyers working for the administration are still debating whether it is an occupation or liberation. Two years later, 50,000 Iraqis had been imprisoned by the Americans and only 2% had ever been found guilty of anything.
***
The S2 (intelligence) section in the Army unit I was with had not proved itself very reliable in the past—a fact that frustrated soldiers to no end. “You get all psyched up to do a hard mission,” said one sergeant, “and it turns out to be three little girls. The little kids get to me, especially when they cry.”
The reason for the lack of confidence in S2 was made clear by the case of a man called Ayoub. I accompanied the troop when it raided Ayoub’s home based on intelligence S2 provided: intercepted phone calls, in which Ayoub spoke of proceeding to the next level and obtaining land mines and other weapons.
On the day of the raid, tanks, Bradleys and Humvees squeezed between the neighborhood walls. A CIA operator angrily eyed the rooftops and windows of nearby houses, a silencer on his assault weapon. Soldiers broke through Ayoub’s door early in the morning and when he did not immediately respond to their orders he was shot with nonlethal ordinance, little pellets exploding like gunshot from the weapons grenade launcher. The floor of the house was covered in his blood. He was dragged into a room and interrogated forcefully as his family was pushed back against a garden fence. Ayoub’s frail mother, covered in a shawl, with traditional tribal tattoos marking her face, pleaded with an immense soldier to spare her son’s life, protesting his innocence. She took the soldier’s hand and kissed it repeatedly while on her knees. He pushed her to the grass along with Ayoub’s four girls and two boys, all small, and his wife. They squatted barefoot, screaming, their eyes wide in terror, clutching each other as soldiers emerged with bags full of documents, photo albums and two CDs with Saddam and his cronies on the cover. These CDs, called “The Crimes of Saddam,” are common on every Iraqi street, and as their title suggests, they were not made by Saddam supporters; however, the soldiers saw only the picture of Saddam and assumed they were proof of guilt.
Ayoub was brought out and pushed onto the truck. He gestured to his shrieking relatives to remain where they were. He was an avuncular man, small and round—balding and unshaven with a hooked nose and slightly pockmarked face. He could not have looked more innocent. He sat frozen, staring numbly ahead as the soldiers ignored him, occasionally glancing down at their prisoner with sneering disdain. The medic looked at Ayoub’s injured hand and chuckled to his friends, “It ain’t my hand.” The truck blasted country music on the way back to the base. Ayoub was thrown in the detainment center. After the operation there were smiles of relief among the soldiers, slaps on the back and thumbs up.
Next Page: “Oh shit,” said the S2 captain, “[we’ve got] the wrong Ayoub.”
Several hours later, a call was intercepted from the Ayoub whom the Americans were seeking. “Oh shit,” said the S2 captain, “[we’ve got] the wrong Ayoub.” The innocent father of six who was in custody actually was a worker in a phosphate plant the Americans were running. But he was not let go. If he was released, there would be a risk that the other Ayoub would learn he was being sought. The night after his arrest a relieved Ayoub could be seen escorted by soldiers to call his family and report he was fine but would not be home for a few days. “It was not the wrong guy,” the troop’s captain said defensively, shifting blame elsewhere. “We raided the house we were supposed and arrested the man we were told to.”
When the soldiers who had captured Ayoub learned of the mistake, they were not surprised. “Oops,” said one. Another one wondered, “What do you tell a guy like that, sorry?” “It’s depressing,” a third said. “We trashed the wrong guy’s house and the guy that’s been shooting at us is out there with his house not trashed.” The soldier who shot the nonlethal ordinance at Ayoub said, “I’m just glad he didn’t do something that made me shoot him [with a bullet].” Then the soldiers resumed their banter.
A few days later, the Army did a further analysis of the phone calls that had originally sent them in search of a man named Ayoub. In the calls, Ayoub had indeed spoken of proceeding to the next level and obtaining land mines and other weapons. This had rightfully alarmed the Army’s intelligence officers. But at some point an analyst realized that Ayoub was not a terrorist intent on obtaining weapons; he turned out to be a kid playing video games and talking about them with his friend on the phone.
The Procrustean application of spurious information gathered by intelligence officers who cannot speak Arabic and are not familiar with Iraqi, Arab or Muslim culture is creating enemies instead of eliminating them. The S2 captain could barely hide his disdain for Iraqis. “Oh he just hates anything Iraqi,” another captain said of him, adding that the intelligence officers do not venture off the base or interact with Iraqis or develop any relations with the people they are expected to understand. A lieutenant colonel from the Army’s civil affairs command explained that these officers do not read about the soldiers engaging with Iraqis, sharing cigarettes, tea, meals and conversations. They read only the reports of “incidents” and they view Iraqis solely as security threat. The intelligence officers in Iraq do not know Iraq.
In every market in Iraq hundreds of wooden crates can be found piled one atop the other. Sold for storage, upon further examination these crates reveal themselves to be former ammunition crates. For the past 25 years Iraq has been importing weapons to feed its army’s appetite for war against Iran, the Kurds, Kuwait and America. When empty, the crates were sold for domestic use. The soldiers with the Army unit I was with assumed the crates they found in nearly every home implicated the owners in terrorist activities, rather than the much simpler truth. During the operation described here I saw one of the soldiers find such a crate overturned above a small hole in a man’s backyard. “He was trying to bury it when he saw us coming,” one soldier deduced confidently. He did not lift the crate to discover that it was protecting irrigation pipes and hoses in a pit.
Saddam bestowed his largesse upon the security services that served as his praetorian guard and executioners. Elite fighters received Jawa motorcycles. Immediately after the war, Jawa motorcycles were available in every market in Iraq that sold scooters and motorcycles. Some had been stolen from government buildings in the frenzy of looting that followed the war and was directed primarily against institutions of the former government. Soldiers of the Army unit I accompanied were always alert for Jawa motorcycles, and indeed it was true that many Iraqi paramilitaries had used them against the Americans. On a night the troop had received RPG fire, its members drove back to base through the town. When they spotted a man on a Jawa motorcycle they fired warning shots. When he did not stop they shot him to death. “He was up to no good,” the captain explained.
On Nov. 26, 2003, after two weeks of brutal daily interrogations by military intelligence officers, Special Forces soldiers and CIA personnel, Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, the former chief of Iraqi air defenses whose arrest I had witnessed, died in a U.S. detention facility. Twenty-four to 48 hours before that, he had been interrogated and beaten by CIA personnel. The Army’s Criminal Investigation Division began looking into Mowhoush’s death that same day. The next day an Army news release stated that he had died of natural causes. “Mowhoush said he didn’t feel well and subsequently lost consciousness,” according to the statement, “ … the soldier questioning him found no pulse and called for medical authorities. A surgeon responded within five minutes to continue advanced cardiac life support techniques, but they were ineffective.” On Dec. 2, 2003, an Army medical examiner’s autopsy said the general’s death was “a homicide by asphyxia,” but it was not until May 12, 2004, that the death certificate was issued, with homicide as the cause. The Pentagon autopsy report in May said he had died of “asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression” and that there was “evidence of blunt force trauma to the chest and legs.” Mowhoush was one of several Iraqis whose death certificates were not issued until May of 2004, long after their deaths.
Next Page: “Iraqis in their own country are reminded at all times who has control over their lives, who can take them with impunity.”
American soldiers had no mission and viewed Iraqis as “the enemy” through a prism of “us and them.” An officer returning from a fact-finding mission complained of “a lot of damn good individuals who received no guidance, training or plan and who are operating in a vacuum.” Inside the G2, or intelligence, section of the Army’s civil affairs headquarters in Baghdad, on a bulletin board I saw an anecdote meant to be didactic. It told of American soldiers suppressing Muslim Filipino insurgents a century before. They dipped bullets in pig’s blood and shot some Muslim rebels, to send a warning to the others. A Latino civil affairs officer, fed up with Iraqis, explained that the only solution was to shut down Baghdad entirely. Military civil affairs officers are supposed to provide civil administration in the absence of local power structures, minimize friction between the military and civilians, restore normalcy and empower local institutions. One brigade commander explained to a civil affairs major that “I am not here to win hearts and minds, I am here to kill the enemy.” He failed to provide his civil affairs team with security, so it could not operate.
One morning in Albu Hishma, a village north of Baghdad cordoned off with barbed wire, the local U.S. commander decided to bulldoze any house that had pro-Saddam graffiti on it, and gave half a dozen families a few minutes to remove whatever they cared about the most before their homes were flattened. In Baquba, two 13-year-old girls were killed by a Bradley armored personnel carrier. They were digging through trash and the American rule was that anybody digging on road sides would be shot.
The 4th Infantry Division was especially notorious in Iraq. Its soldiers in Samara handcuffed two suspects and threw them off a bridge into a river. One of them died. In Basra, seven Iraqi prisoners were beaten to death by British soldiers. A high-ranking Iraqi police official in Basra identified one of the victims as his son. It is common practice for soldiers to arrest the wives and children of suspects as “material witnesses” when the suspects are not captured in raids. In some cases the soldiers leave notes for the suspects, letting them know their families will be released should they turn themselves in. Soldiers claim this is a very effective tactic. Soldiers on military vehicles routinely shoot at Iraqi cars that approach too fast or come too close, and at Iraqis wandering in fields. “They were up to no good,” they explain. Every commander is a law unto himself. He is advised by a judge advocate general who interprets the rules as he wants. A war crime to one is legitimate practice to another. After the Center for Army Lessons Learned sent a team of personnel to Israel to study that country’s counterinsurgency tactics, the Army implemented the lessons it learned, and initiated house demolitions in Samara and Tikrit, blowing up homes of suspected insurgents.
It is hard to be patient when mosques are raided, when protesters are shot, when innocent families are gunned down at checkpoints or by frightened soldiers in vehicles. It is hard to be patient in hours of izdiham, or traffic jams, that are blamed on Americans closing off main roads throughout Baghdad. The Americans close roads after “incidents” or when they are looking for planted bombs. Their vehicles block the roads and they answer no questions, refusing to let any Iraqi approach. Cars are forced to drive “wrong side,” as Iraqis call it, with near fatal results. Iraqis have become experts in walking over the concertina wire that divides so much of their cities: First one foot presses the razor wire down, then the other steps over. They are experts in driving slowly through lakes and rivers of sewage. They are experts in sifting through mountains of garbage for anything that can be reused.
It is hard to relax when the soldier in the Humvee or armored personnel carrier in front of you aims his machine gun at you; when aggressive white men race by, running you off the road as they scowl behind their wraparound sunglasses; when soldiers shoot at any car that comes too close. Iraqis in their own country are reminded at all times who has control over their lives, who can take them with impunity.
An old Iraqi woman approached the gate to Baghdad international airport. Draped in a black ebaya, she was carrying a picture of her missing son. She did not speak English, and the soldier in body armor she asked for help did not speak Arabic. He shouted at her to “get the fuck away.” She did not understand and continued beseeching him. The soldier was joined by another. Together they locked and loaded their machine guns, chambering a round, aiming the guns at the old woman and shouting at her that if she did not leave “we will kill you.”
The explosive-sniffing dog in front of the Sheraton and Palestine hotels is hated by the Iraqi security guards as well as the American soldiers who stand there because it, like the rest of us who live in the area, is subject to olfactory whims as it imagines every day that it smells a bomb, forcing them to close off the street for several hours. Two of my friends were arrested for not having a bomb last week when the dog decided their bag smelled funny. They were jailed for four days.
Imagine. The American occupation of Iraq has lasted over three years. The above stories are based on my two weeks with one unit in a small part of the country. Imagine how many Iraqi homes have been destroyed. How many families have been traumatized. How many men have disappeared into American military vehicles in the night. How many crimes have been committed against the Iraqi people every single day in the course of the normal operations of the occupation, when soldiers were merely doing their duty, when they were not angry or vengeful as in Haditha. Imagine what we have done to the Iraqi people, tortured by Saddam for years, then released from three decades of his bloody rule only to find their hope stolen from them and a new terror unleashed.
Copyright © 2006 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
American Occupation of Japan
The occupation of Japan was, from start to finish, an American
operation. General Douglans MacArthur, sole supreme commander of the
Allied Power was in charge. The Americans had insufficient men to make
a military government of Japan possible; so they decided to act
through the existing Japanese gobernment. General MacArthur became,
except in name, dictator of Japan. He imposed his will on Japan.
Demilitarization was speedily carried out, demobilization of the
former imperial forces was completed by early 1946.
Japan was extensively fire bomded during the second world war.
The stench of sewer gas, rotting garbage, and the acrid smell of ashes
and scorched debris pervaded the air. The Japanese people had to live
in the damp, and cold of the concrete buildings, because they were the
only ones left. Little remained of the vulnerable wooden frame, tile
roof dwelling lived in by most Japanese. When the first signs of
winter set in, the occupation forces immediately took over all the
steam-heated buildings. The Japanese were out in the cold in the first
post war winter fuel was very hard to find, a family was considered
lucky if they had a small barely glowing charcoal brazier to huddle
around. That next summer in random spots new ho uses were built, each
house was standardized at 216 square feet, and required 2400 board
feet of material in order to be built. A master plan for a modernistic
city had been drafted, but it was cast aside because of the lack of
time before the next winter. The thousands of people who lived in
railroad stations and public parks needed housing.
All the Japanese heard was democracy from the Americans. All
they cared about was food. General MacArthur asked the government to
send food, when they refus ed he sent another telegram that said,
"Send me food, or send me bullets." American troops were forbidden to
eat local food, as to keep from cutting from cutting into the sparse
local supply.
No food was was brought in expressly for the Japanese durning
the first six months after the American presence there. Herbert
Hoover, serving as chairman of a special presidential advisory
committee, recommended minimum imports to Japan of 870,000 tons of
food to be distributed in different urban areas. Fish, the source of
so much of the protein in the Japanese diet, were no longer available
in adequate quantities because the fishing fleet, particularly the
large vessels, had been badly decimated by the war and because the
U.S.S.R. closed off the fishing grounds in the north.
The most important aspect of the democratization policy was the
adoption of a new constitution and its supporting legislation. When
the Japanese government proved too confused or too reluctant to come
up with a constitutional reform that satisfied MacArthur, he had his
own staff draft a new constitution in February 1946. This, with only
minor changes, was then adopted by the Japanese government in the form
of an imperial amendment to the 1889 constitution and went into effect
on May 3, 1947. The new Constitution was a perfection of the British
parliamentary form of government that the Japanese had been moving
toward in the 1920s. Supreme political power was assigned to the Diet.
Cabinets were made responsible to the Diet by having the prime
minister elected by the lower house. The House of Peers was replaced
by an elected House of Councillors. The judicial system was made as
independent of executive interference as possible, and a newly created
supreme court was given the power to review the constitutionality of
laws. Local governments were given greatly increased powers.
The Emperor was reduced to being a symbol of the unity of the
nation. Japanese began to see him in person. He went to hospitals,
schools, mines, industrial plants; he broke ground for public
buildings and snipped tape at the opening of gates and highways. He
was steered here and there, shown things, and kept muttering, "Ah so,
ah so." People started to call him "Ah-so-san." Suddenly the puyblic
began to take this shy, ill-at-ease man to their hearts. They saw in
him something of their own conqured selves, force to do what was alien
to them. In 1948, in a newspaper poll, Emperior Hirohito was voted the
most popular man in Japan.
Civil liberties were emphasized, women were given full equality
with men. Article 13 and 19 in the new Constitution, prohibits
discrimination in political, economic, and social relations because of
race, creed, sex, social status, or family origen. This is one of the
most explicitly progressive statements on human rights anywhere in
law. Gerneral Douglas MacArthur emerged as a radical feminist because
he was "convinced that the place of women in Japan must be brought to
a level consistent with that of women in the western democracies." So
the Japanese women got their equal rights amendment long before a
concerted effort was made to obtain one in America.
Compulsory education was extened to nine years, efforts were
made to make education more a traning in thinking than in rote memory,
and the school system above the six elementary grades was revised to
conform to the American pattern. This last mechanical change produced
great confusion and dissatisfaction but became so entrenched that it
could not be revised even after the Americans departed.
Japan's agriculture was the quickest of national activities to
recover because of land reform. The Australians came up with the best
plan. It was basis was this: There were to be no absentee landlards.
A person who actually worked the land could own up to 7.5 arcers.
Anyone living in a village near by could keep 2.5 acres. Larger plots
of land, exceeding these limits, were bought up by the government and
sold on easy terms to former tenants. Within two years 2 million
tenants became landowners. The American occupation immediately gained
not only a large constituency, for the new owners had a vested
interest in preserving the change, but also a psychological momentum
for other changes they wanted to initiate.
The American labor policy in Japan had a double goal: to
encourage the growth of democratic unions while keeping them free of
communists. Union organization was used as a balance to the power of
management. To the surprise of the American authorties, this movement
took a decidedly more radical turn. In the desperate economic
conditions of early postwar Japan, there was little room for
successful bargaining over wages, and many labor unions instead made a
bid to take over industry and operate it in their own behalf. Moreover
large numbers of workers in Japan were government employees, such as
railroad workers and teachers, whose wages were set not by management
but by the government. Direct political action therefore seemed more
meani ngful to these people than wage bargaining. The Japanese unions
called for a general strike on February 1, 1947. MacArthur warned the
union leadership that he would not countenace a nationwide strike. The
strike leaders yieled to MacArthur's will. The reafter the political
appeal of radical labor action appeared to wane.
The Americans wanted to disband the great Zaibatsu trust as a
means of reducing Japan's war-making potential. There were about 15
Zaibatsu families such as - Mitsui, Mitsubishi, Yasuda, and Sumitomo.
The Zaibatsu controled the industry of Japan. MacArthur's liaison men
pressured the Diet into passing the Deconcentration Law in December
1947. In the eyes of most Japanese this law was designed to cripple
Japanese business and industry forever. The first step in breaking up
the Zaibatsu was to spread their ownership out among the people and to
prevent the old owners from ever again exercising control. The stocks
of all the key holding companies were to be sold to the public.
Friends of the old Zaibatsu bought the stock. In the long run the
Zaibatsu were not exactly destroyed, but a few were weakened and
others underwent a considerable shuffle.
The initial period of the occupation from 1945 to 1948 was
marked by reform, the second phase was one of stabilization. Greater
attention was given to improvement of the economy. Japan was a heavy
expense to the United States. The ordered breakup of the Zaibatsu was
slowed down. The union movement continued to grow, to the ult imate
benefit of the worker. Unremitting pressure on employers brought
swelling wages, which meant the steady expansion of Japan domestic
consumer market. This market was a major reason for Japan's subsequent
economic boom. Another boom to the economy was the Korean War which
proved to be a blessing in disguise. Japan became the main staging
area for military action in Korea and went on a war boom economy with
out having to fight in or pay for a war.
The treaty of peace with Japan was signed at San Francisco in
September 1951 by Japan, the United States, and forty-seven other
nations. The Soviet Union refused to sign it. The treaty went into
effect in April 1952, officially terminating the United States
military occupation and restoring full independence.
What is extraordinary in the Occupation and its aftermath was
the insignificance of the unpleasant. For the Japanese, the nobility
of American ideals and the essential benignity of the American
presence assuaged much of the bitterness and anguish of defeat. For
the Americans, the joys of promoting peace and democracy triumphed
over the attendant fustrations and grievances. Consequently, the
Occupation served to lay down a substantial capital of good will on
which both America and Japan would draw in the years ahead.
Rhea Rubenecia said....
American occupation 1945-1952
By the end of World War II more than 2 million Japanese lives had been lost and over 100 cities destroyed. Industrial production stood at less than 10 per cent of its pre-war level, and transportation networks had been severely damaged. An acute shortage of food was to continue for several years, as over seven million were repatriated from the armed forces and Japan's lost overseas empire.
The American occupation of 1945-1952 brought demilitarisation, democratisation, industrial and land reform, and a new educational system.
Under the terms laid down at the Potsdam Conference, the Japanese empire was dissolved and Japan was deprived of all territories it had seized by force during the war. Emperor Hirohito provided a valued element of continuity while co-operating enthusiastically with the reconstruction; the emperor publicly renounced his divinity and the new constitution adopted in 1946 renounced war and 'the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes'.
In 1951 Japan signed a peace treaty with most of its opponents in World War II, and once more assumed full sovereignty. A Treaty of Mutual Co-operation and Security was signed between Japan and the United States of America on 19 January 1960. In 1972 the USA returned the Ryukyu island chain (which includes Okinawa) to Japanese control.
rhea said...
Post-war economic recovery
The outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 provided an important boost to the Japanese economy, as the country became the principal supplier of food and arms for the US armed forces. During this period industry was restructured, new factories were equipped with the latest machinery, and millions of former soldiers rejoined the workforce, with the result that by 1955 industrial output had returned to its pre-war level. The increase in living standards and social changes which accompanied the economic growth of this period helped to reinforce the position of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which was to hold power in Japan for the next four decades.
Between the late 1950s and the 1980s the Japanese economy grew at a phenomenal rate, averaging annual growth rates of around 10 per cent. This may partly be attributed to the overall global economic expansion generated in the decades after the war as a result of the application of free trade principles. But other important contributing factors were also at work, notably the distinctively Japanese way of coupling largely private ownership of assets with conservative, public-spirited management, and the role of government in taking account of the social and economic context by selecting and nurturing industries regarded as important to Japan's future economic growth. In this way, the focus of development was on chemicals, iron and steel, shipbuilding and transistor radios during the 1960s, on automobiles and electronics during the 1970s, and on computers, computer chips and other high-technology industries during the 1980s.
Japan's acclaimed post-war education system, with its high educational standards and strict discipline, was another important factor in Japan's spectacular post-war economic success, since it helped to create an efficient and effective work force.
The oil crisis of 1973 underscored Japan's dependence on world trade and lack of domestic energy supplies, hastening an increasing, but unpopular commitment to nuclear power. After an initial downturn in economic growth the crisis set Japan on a new path, downgrading energy-intensive, polluting industries in favour of cleaner, high-tech ones. The second oil crisis of 1979 hardly affected Japan, now a world leader in energy-saving technology.
Modern Japan
The death of Emperor Hirohito in January 1989 brought to an end the longest imperial reign in Japanese history, removing a powerful symbol of continuity. In November 1990 Emperor Akihito became the 125th emperor of Japan and the first under the post-war constitution.
The start of the Heisei era coincided inauspiciously with the onset of economic recession. Over the preceding decades, thanks to close co-operation between government and industry, a strong work ethic, mastery of high technology and a comparatively small defence allocation, Japan had developed into one of the world's largest economies. Already the largest supplier of automobiles, washing machines and watches, Japan had emerged in the late 1980s as the second largest overseas aid donor and a leader in biotechnology-related fields.
However, in 1989 over-investment, coupled with domestic policies intended to counter the effects of speculation in the stock and real estate markets, brought a stock market crash which signalled the end of the so-called 'bubble economy' and ushered in a decade of stagnant economic growth.
With recession came political change - in 1993 the LDP lost power for the first time in four decades to a coalition of opposition parties. Although it has since won several elections and is currently the party of government under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the LDP has in recent years lost considerable ground to the opposition Democratic Party of Japan, indicating that after decades of one-party rule Japan has evolved into a two-party democracy.
The Great Hanshin Earthquake of January 1995 devastated a large area of southern Hyogo Prefecture around Kobe City, taking the lives of 6,433 people. Two months later members of the Aum Shinrikyo cult planted bags of sarin nerve gas on the Tokyo subway, killing 12 and injuring 5,500 others.
Over the past decade government efforts to revive economic growth have met with limited success, and these were further hampered in 2000 to 2001 by the slowing of the global economy. However, since 2005 the Japanese economy has begun to show clear signs of recovery.
Today Japan continues to maintain close economic and military relations with its key ally the United States, foreign policy as before hinging on the US-Japan security alliance.
Japan is a member-state of the United Nations and currently serves as a non-permanent Security Council member. It is also a member of the G8, APEC, 'ASEAN plus three', and ASEM.
Japan is involved in an ongoing dispute with North Korea over its abduction of Japanese citizens, its missile programmes and its nuclear intentions. Japan is also involved in several territorial disputes with its neighbours concerning the control of outlying islands.
Controversially, the past 10 years have witnessed Japan's re-emergence as a military power. A proposal during the Gulf War of 1993 by Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu to create a UN peace co-operation corps that could be sent abroad in response to resolutions from the United Nations (something expressly forbidden by Article 9 of the 1947 constitution) sparked a political crisis. Ultimately Japan, a major importer of Middle East oil, played no military role in that particular conflict, although it did pledge billions of dollars to the war effort and also sent mine sweepers after war as a part of the reconstruction effort. However, in 2004 Junichiro Koizumi's cabinet sent a 600-strong contingent of Japan Self-Defence Forces to Iraq at the request of the USA, in order to assist the US-led occupation. This controversial deployment marked a significant turning point in Japan's history and its legality is hotly contested on the domestic front.
RUSH: Mark Levin, affectionately known as F. Lee Levin, as the legal division head here at the EIB Limbaugh Institute, has a piece that points out just how ugly it got in postwar Germany, too.
"Headline: Germans Reveal Hate of Americans. Oct. 31, 1945. (Stories)
The German attitude toward the American occupation forces has swung from apathy and surface friendliness to active dislike. According to a military government official, this is finding expression in the organization of numerous local anti-American organizations throughout the zone and in a rapid increase in the number of attacks on American soldiers. There were more such attacks in the first week of October than in the preceding five months of the occupation, this source declared. This official views the situation as so serious that he and others are protesting the withdrawal of 1,600 experienced military-government officers from the German governments on township, county and regional levels between Nov. 1 and Dec. 15."
Sound familiar? You know, this is what I call -- I don't mean to be redundant -- but historical perspective. So many people think that we've never been through anything like this before. "Iraq is horrible and wrong." It's understandable when you look at the press coverage the Democrats are getting, talking about this "micromanaging" every little thing that goes wrong. How many news reports were there of World War II when one or two soldiers died? Zip. We didn't know until we went to the Movietone news on Saturday. We didn't really see any moving pictures, you know, we had newspapers in their daily accounts. Not being critical, I'm just saying it's different. The coverage is different, but the reality is not different. What happens in war happens in war, always has, always will.
Why, where have I heard this before? I think it goes something like this. [Doing John Kerry impression] "Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and thooose neocons, theeey didn't plan effectively for the aftermath! Whhhy, this is an abject failure. Whhhy, we're losing this war." Or losing the peace, whatever the hell they say we're losing. "They didn't plan for the aftermath. They had no idea what was going to happen." And look at this, 1945. This is almost 60 years ago, and it's the exact same thing.
"Might soon lose the fruits of victory in Germany through the failure to prepare adequately for carrying out its long-term commitments under the Potsdam Declaration."
"Germans Declare Americans Hated, December 3rd, 1945. (Stories)
An exhaustive compilation of opinions of Germans in all walks of life on their reaction to the United States occupation of their country was released this afternoon from the confidential status under which it was submitted to officials of the United States Forces in the European Theatre recently. Bitter resentment and deep disappointment was voiced over the Americans' first six months of occupation, though there was some praise for the improvements in transportation, health conditions, book publishing and entertainment."
The New York Times then, the New York Times today. Sixty years ago. Virtually identical. And one more, December 19th, 1945. "German Election Set In Towns of U.S. Zone. (Stories) "United States Seventh Army headquarters announced today that plans had been completed for initial German elections in January at Gemuende. A statement said that a vast majority of Germans remained passive in attitude toward politics and displayed no disposition to take over civic responsibilities."
Folks, just keep listening to this program. If you want to understand reality and truth and life and all these sorts of things. If you want to have an accurate portrayal of historical perspective, understand that what's happening in Iraq is quite normal, and, in fact, probably ahead of schedule, compared to Germany or Japan. Way ahead of schedule. It's good news. It's reason to be optimistic. They still got the same naysayers today as you had then, but what we have today is what we had then. We have committed leadership. What is so funny? [Talking to program observer] I'm not being funny right now, what are you laughing at in there?
I'll bet you we can find a German prison scandal. I betcha there were some scandals. I'll betcha there were. You think this is the first time we've had prison scandals? I'll betcha some people do. They try my patience in there. Here I am in the middle of being brilliant and they have to go off into jocularity, but I got the point out, folks, I was not distracted. I finished my point to you before I asked them what they were so rudely laughing at in there. We'll be back in -- I don't mind that you're laughing. I mean I love laughter. But now you got me -- I'm going to find a German prison scandal. I know there had to be one. Be back here in just a second. Probably Reagan was involved in it.
rhea Rubeneciab..
American occupation
..The American Occupation. Greenbelt, Makati · Crystal-clear water of Sorsogon beaches. Photographed by Mike Dioneda · Bridal Veil Waterfalls along Kennon ...
With the assurance of the Americans’ promise to free the country, General Aguinaldo, a municipal mayor and the commander of the Philippine forces, declared the Philippine independence on June 12, 1898. He confirmed the establishment of Philippine Republic on January 23, 1899 with himself as president.
The Spanish rule in the islands ended when Spain and the United States signed the treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898. It was an agreement between the two countries to pass the possession of the Philippines to the United States in exchange of $20 million. Not being able to consult the Filipinos, this arrogant settlement resulted to a new resistance and battle for freedom.
By the time the treaty of Paris was ratified, conflict between Filipino forces and Americans had broken out due to strong resistance of the Filipinos against the US sovereignty over the islands and the uncertain grant of independence. Aguinaldo led the revolutionary movement and fought the Americans for two years. His capture in March 1901 ended the resistance and gave the US a clear course on setting out their colonial establishment in the country. William Howard Taft was the one chosen to handle the position of presidency and at the same time as chief justice.
The invasion of the Americans moved the Filipinos to a more unfamiliar authority. English was chosen to be the official language of instruction in businesses and schools, the economy flourished and the country’s economy begun relying on the US. Under the supremacy of Governor Taft, systems were regulated in most districts. New government organizations were established along with the general establishments of schools and other related institutions. Construction of roads, highways, and ports were prioritized to consolidate more business all over the country.
Despite the growth of industrialization, the Filipinos never gave up their desire for independence. In early 1900’s Filipinos were given the opportunity to participate in politics. This gave them the chance to hold positions in the government and express themselves more liberally. It was during the proclamation of Manuel L. Quezon in 1935 as the president of the Philippine Commonwealth under the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 that assured the Filipinos of freedom and self reliance. This act however, didn’t fully grant the country of complete autonomy. The US, under what they called the transition period, retained power on national defense and foreign affairs before granting the Philippines its absolute independence. This transition period took ten years more.
167 political prisoners killed. A mob then formed near the French Legation where Vilbrun Guillaume Sam was hiding. The mob broke in and mutilated his body in the street. The city of Port au Prince was in anarchy following the overthrow of the government of President Vilbrun Guillaume Sam. Rear Admiral William B. Caperton landed 340 sailors and Marines from the USS Washington. Also at Cap Haïtien more troops were landed from the USS Nashville, and USS Eagle. The landing parties from these two ships prevented the capture of Cap Haïtien. Soon after the Second Marine Regiment, First Brigade Headquarters and the First Marine Regiment arrived later in the month
The Caco War
The Caco were a bandit organization in Haiti that , would fight for the highest bidder. When Vilbrun Guillaume Sam was assassinated a Caco army hired by Rosalvo Bobo was on the outskirts of the city. But the Marines landed by Caperton quickly forced the Cacos out of Port au Prince. A Campaign was then carried out by the First Marine Brigade to knock out the Cacos in the north and center of Haiti. The last major event of the campaign was the capture of the Caco strong hold at Fort Rivière, by Marines under the command of Major Smedley Butler. In this fight Sergeant Ross Iams, Private Samuel Gross, and Major Smedley Butler all received the Medal of Honor.
The Second Caco War
A second Caco outbreak began late in 1918. This second outbreak was in response to some Gendarmerie detachments using forced unpaid labor to build roads. The Haiti Gendarmerie were unable to contain the Cacos and the First Marine Brigade got the task of counter guerrilla fighting against the Cacos. In October 1919 the Caco attacked Port au Prince. Also in October of 1919 Caco leader Charlemagne Peralte was killed by a marine patrol. The Second Caco War ended in the mid 1920's due to the focussed attacks on Caco strongholds and leaders.
On August 14, 1934 the occupation ended.
COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR
(Princess Aggabao)
As we conduct our selves in our structured social life, we are guided by norms and values which make our behavior patterned, recurrent and settled. There is no single definition of the term collective behavior, and no agreement as to its important features. Collective behavior is a kind of group of behavior characterized by spontaneous development of form and organization, which contradict or reinterpret the norms of the group.
Turner and Killian define collective behavior as “forms of social behavior in which the usual convention cease to guide social actions and people collectively transcend, bypass, or subvert institutional patterns and structures.” For Zanden, collective behavior refers to “ways of thinking, feeling and acting that develop among a large number of people which are relatively spontaneous and unstructured.”
In the Philippines, collective behavior occurs in the form of demonstration, rumors, protests, riots, coup d’ etat, cults, religious revivals, and even revolutions. Various explanations and theoretical formulations have been given to describe the conditions that bring about collective behavior. CONVERGENCE PERSPECTIVE. This explanation is premised on the idea that human behavior is determined by forces within the individual. EMERGENT NORM PERSPECTIVE. this states that collective behavior is not characterized by unanimity but by differences in expressions and emotions. SMELSER’S VALUE ADDED APPROACH. Smelser notes certain conditions, which may bring about collective behavior. These are structural conduciveness, structural strain, generalized belief, precipitating factors in the form of dramatic events, mobilization of participants to join the action after the precipitation, the ineffectiveness of the means of social control.
Forms of collective behavior are crowd, public, mass and social movement. A CROWD is a transitory group of persons in an ambiguous and, to some degree, unstructured situation where participants do not have clear and pre-existing knowledge of how to behave, but feel that something can be done. Types of crowd are casual, conventionalized and acting. CASUAL CROWD is a spontaneous, loosely organized and very momentary type of grouping whose members come and go. CONVENTIONALIZED CROWD is characterized by established regular way of behaving, depending upon the time and place of performance and order of activities. ACTING CROWD is the type most observed by sociologists.
A MASS is diffused collectivity, unlike the crowd. It is made up of a number of separate individuals, each responding independently to the same stimulus. The mass has no social organization, no established leader, no structure of statuses and roles.
Cultural drifts, such as the changes in fashion, fad, and crazes, are forms of mass interaction or diffused collectivities.
FASHION is applied to short-lived, socially approved variations in clothing and adornment, art, housing, furniture, and other areas of behavior.
FADS are passing fancies or novelties related to trivial deviation from the conventional behavior.
CRAZE is an intense attraction to an action, activity, object, or person. They are like fads, although more intense.
In the public, members are confronted by issues and they discuss, argue, debate, compromise, and form composite views known as public opinion. PUBLIC OPINION is dependent upon mass media to make information about the issue accessible. MASS COMMUNICATION is organized communication through some systemized structures directed toward a relatively large audience during a short period of time.
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS emphasize social change and emerge from stressful changes in one’s environment which bring about dissatisfaction with the existing living conditions. The objective of the social movements is to promote change or, in a few cases, to resist change.
COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR
Cherry Soriano
There is no single definition of the term collective behavior, and no agreement as to its important features. Collective behavior is a kind of group behavior characterized by spontaneous development of forms and organization, which contradict or reinterpret the norms of the group.
According to Turner and Killian, they define collective behavior as “forms of social behavior in which the usual convention cease to guide social actions and people collectively transcend, bypass, or subvert institutional patterns and structures.” For Zanden, collective behavior refers to “ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that develop among a large number of people which are relatively spontaneous and unstructed.”
Collective behavior occurs in times of rapid social change.
In the Philippines, collective behavior occurs in the form of demonstration, rumors, protests, riots, coup d’etat, cults, religious revivals, and even revolutions.
A number of theoretical frameworks have been formulated to describe the conditions that bring about collective behavior. Among them are the convergence perspective, the emergent norm perspective, and the value-added approach.
Convergence Perspective. This explanation is premised on the idea that forces within the individual determine human behavior. The criticism to this perspective is that the homogeneity of the group is over-simplified as interaction takes place between individuals, whether or not they are of similar characteristics.
Emergent Norm Perspective. It states that collective behavior is not characterized by unanimity but by differences in expressions and emotions.
Smelser’s Value Added Approach. Smelser notes certain conditions, which may bring about collective behavior. These are: Structural conduciveness, Structural strain, Generalized belief, Precipating factors in the form of dramatic events, Mobilization of participants to join the action after the precipitation, and lastly, the ineffectiveness of the means of social control.
Forms of collective behavior include the crowds, mass, public, and social movement. A crowd is a transitory group of persons in an ambiguous and, to some degree, unstructed situation in which participants do not have a clear and pre-existing knowledge of how to behave, but feel that they can do something to correct the situation. Some types of crowd are the casual, conventional, acting, and expressive crowds. The casual crowd is a spontaneous, loosely organized and very momentary type of groupings whose members come and go. The conventional crowd is characterized by established regular ways of behaving, depending upon the time and place of performance and order of activities. The acting crowd is the type most observed by sociologist. Panics are situations in which people are largely affected by fear, such as stampedes. While the expressive crowd is characterized by rhythmic activity, intense emotional contagion, and emotional release.
A mass is composed of disparate individuals, each responding independently to the same stimulus in a similar way, Mass behavior may be seen in migration, evacuation, and rushes to mining sites or to reported sites of miracles and faith healers.
Cultural drifts, such as the changes in fashion, fad, and crazes, are forms of mass interaction or diffused collectives.
Fashion is applied to short-lived, socially approved variations in clothing and adornment, art, housing, furniture, and other areas of behavior.
Fads are passing fancies or novelties related to trivial deviations from the conventional behavior.
Craze is an intense attraction to an action, activity, object or person.
In the public, members are confronted by issues and they discuss, argue, debate, compromise, and form composite views known as public opinion. Public opinion is dependent upon mass media to make information about the issue accessible. Mass communication is organized communication through some systemized structures directed toward a relatively large audience during a short period of time.
Social movements emphasize social change and emerge from stressful changes in one’s environment which bring about dissatisfaction with the existing living conditions. The objective of the social movements is to promote change or, in a few cases, to resist change.
The American occupation and postwar Japanese politics
According to Bix, Hirohito proved his use to the American occupational forces from as early as 1946, when the country was on the verge of an economic collapse, touring the country and providing consolation to the devastated people. (Bix, 619-620) It was, from Hirohito's own point of view, the way to "democratize" the emperor through getting him acquainted with the people in a casual setting. Furthermore, it was his opportunity to exhort the Japanese to recover from defeat and move on. (623) Despite his rigid manners, Hirohito obviously enjoyed a lot of popularity so that by Jan. 1948, the American occupational forces had to cancel his tours for fear of promoting the old idolatry. (631)
Despite the American caution not to prop up Hirohito too much, the occupational forces wanted a continued reverence for the emperor from the Japanese people, as MacArthur argued, a monarchy system was effective against Communism (this was after 1947 when the Cold War started). Thus the "crabwalk incident" (633) when attempts to treat the emperor as a human being by Matsumoto Jiichiro, vice president of the House of Councilors in 1948, was sanctioned. It is just one example of how the Cold War shaped and reinforced the neo-conservative policies of the American occupational forces in Japan. With the exit of socialist cabinets and the incoming conservative Yoshida Shigeru cabinet in 1948, a conservative collaboration between the U.S. and the Japanese government was guaranteed. After the Korean war broke out in 1950, the government became more politically repressive, and punished any criticism of the emperor.(642) Bix argues that Hirohito continues to work behind the scenes to address a mistake he allowed to happen before the war: deviation from an alliance with the British and Americans. (646) That was why he was willing to concede Okinawa and many other parts of Japan to the U.S. for military bases in the San Francisco Peace Treaty (Sept.1951). The Cold War, the Korean War, and the anti-Communist stance of Britain and the U.S. encouraged a conservative national policy in Japan, which used the emperor cult to foster a new nationalism and to dissuade popular and radical politics.
Consequences of keeping Hirohito on the throne: the issue of collective historical memory
• External acceptance of war responsibility to the outside world and internal denial to the Japanese people by the Yoshida cabinet (652-653).
• Conservative attempts to restore the power of the emperor in order to deal with social conflicts between unions and business firms. (654)
• Enshrining the WWII dead and Hirohito and the PMs visits to the Yasukuni Shrine,(653, 658) despite the abolition of State Shinto: the branch of Shinto religion established after the Meiji Restoration, on the worship of the emperor as a deity and other deities, including the recent ones, e.g. the war dead. Many kamikaze fighters were told as soon as they crashed their planes into allied objects, they would be apotheosized into deities. Hirohito and the PMs defied the disestablishment of the Yasukuni shrine that enshrined the fallen in military battles after 1945, and continued to pay visits there.
• Denial of the Nanjing massacre, invasion of China, officially and in textbooks. (659, 680)
• NO official apologies to Asia’s victims of the Japanese war by Hirohito, except for the wording "deploring that unfortunate war." (676)
Growing democratization
Despite the conservative twist in Japanese politics, certain changes were irreversible.
• The militancy of the trade unions, Communist Party, and Socialist Party.
• (Merger of the Liberal and Democratic Parties (1955) to counter communism (LDP).)
• Japanese veterans’ denunciation of the war (657).
• Fight against the LDP’s attempt to revise the constitution (re: emperor and armament).(659)
• Public welcome to Crown Prince Akihito marrying a commoner. (661)
• Public dissent of the emperor’s military briefings (673)
• Fight against official protection of Yasukuni shrine.
Right wing activities
With the growth of democratic politics, the right wing has also been politically active.
Enshrining the war dead in 1958 (658).
Attacking the author Fukazawa Shichiro and publisher of "A Dream of courtly elegance" in 1960. (663-666)
Reinstituting the "imperial time," the "era name law" of 1979 (680).
In conclusion, Bix argues that Hirohito helped the new Japan build consensus in politics, which facilitated Japanese economic takeoff after WWII. A "democratic" figure appearing in the limelight with athletes, Nobel laureates, foreign leaders, and in Disney World, Hirohito refashioned the image of the modern Japanese citizen and the focus of Japanese nationalism by representing what the Japanese has become.
The American occupation and postwar Japanese politics
According to Bix, Hirohito proved his use to the American occupational forces from as early as 1946, when the country was on the verge of an economic collapse, touring the country and providing consolation to the devastated people. (Bix, 619-620) It was, from Hirohito's own point of view, the way to "democratize" the emperor through getting him acquainted with the people in a casual setting. Furthermore, it was his opportunity to exhort the Japanese to recover from defeat and move on. (623) Despite his rigid manners, Hirohito obviously enjoyed a lot of popularity so that by Jan. 1948, the American occupational forces had to cancel his tours for fear of promoting the old idolatry. (631)
Despite the American caution not to prop up Hirohito too much, the occupational forces wanted a continued reverence for the emperor from the Japanese people, as MacArthur argued, a monarchy system was effective against Communism (this was after 1947 when the Cold War started). Thus the "crabwalk incident" (633) when attempts to treat the emperor as a human being by Matsumoto Jiichiro, vice president of the House of Councilors in 1948, was sanctioned. It is just one example of how the Cold War shaped and reinforced the neo-conservative policies of the American occupational forces in Japan. With the exit of socialist cabinets and the incoming conservative Yoshida Shigeru cabinet in 1948, a conservative collaboration between the U.S. and the Japanese government was guaranteed. After the Korean war broke out in 1950, the government became more politically repressive, and punished any criticism of the emperor.(642) Bix argues that Hirohito continues to work behind the scenes to address a mistake he allowed to happen before the war: deviation from an alliance with the British and Americans. (646) That was why he was willing to concede Okinawa and many other parts of Japan to the U.S. for military bases in the San Francisco Peace Treaty (Sept.1951). The Cold War, the Korean War, and the anti-Communist stance of Britain and the U.S. encouraged a conservative national policy in Japan, which used the emperor cult to foster a new nationalism and to dissuade popular and radical politics.
Consequences of keeping Hirohito on the throne: the issue of collective historical memory
• External acceptance of war responsibility to the outside world and internal denial to the Japanese people by the Yoshida cabinet (652-653).
• Conservative attempts to restore the power of the emperor in order to deal with social conflicts between unions and business firms. (654)
• Enshrining the WWII dead and Hirohito and the PMs visits to the Yasukuni Shrine,(653, 658) despite the abolition of State Shinto: the branch of Shinto religion established after the Meiji Restoration, on the worship of the emperor as a deity and other deities, including the recent ones, e.g. the war dead. Many kamikaze fighters were told as soon as they crashed their planes into allied objects, they would be apotheosized into deities. Hirohito and the PMs defied the disestablishment of the Yasukuni shrine that enshrined the fallen in military battles after 1945, and continued to pay visits there.
• Denial of the Nanjing massacre, invasion of China, officially and in textbooks. (659, 680)
• NO official apologies to Asia’s victims of the Japanese war by Hirohito, except for the wording "deploring that unfortunate war." (676)
Growing democratization
Despite the conservative twist in Japanese politics, certain changes were irreversible.
• The militancy of the trade unions, Communist Party, and Socialist Party.
• (Merger of the Liberal and Democratic Parties (1955) to counter communism (LDP).)
• Japanese veterans’ denunciation of the war (657).
• Fight against the LDP’s attempt to revise the constitution (re: emperor and armament).(659)
• Public welcome to Crown Prince Akihito marrying a commoner. (661)
• Public dissent of the emperor’s military briefings (673)
• Fight against official protection of Yasukuni shrine.
Right wing activities
With the growth of democratic politics, the right wing has also been politically active.
Enshrining the war dead in 1958 (658).
Attacking the author Fukazawa Shichiro and publisher of "A Dream of courtly elegance" in 1960. (663-666)
Reinstituting the "imperial time," the "era name law" of 1979 (680).
In conclusion, Bix argues that Hirohito helped the new Japan build consensus in politics, which facilitated Japanese economic takeoff after WWII. A "democratic" figure appearing in the limelight with athletes, Nobel laureates, foreign leaders, and in Disney World, Hirohito refashioned the image of the modern Japanese citizen and the focus of Japanese nationalism by representing what the Japanese has become.
The American occupation and postwar Japanese politics
According to Bix, Hirohito proved his use to the American occupational forces from as early as 1946, when the country was on the verge of an economic collapse, touring the country and providing consolation to the devastated people. (Bix, 619-620) It was, from Hirohito's own point of view, the way to "democratize" the emperor through getting him acquainted with the people in a casual setting. Furthermore, it was his opportunity to exhort the Japanese to recover from defeat and move on. (623) Despite his rigid manners, Hirohito obviously enjoyed a lot of popularity so that by Jan. 1948, the American occupational forces had to cancel his tours for fear of promoting the old idolatry. (631)
Despite the American caution not to prop up Hirohito too much, the occupational forces wanted a continued reverence for the emperor from the Japanese people, as MacArthur argued, a monarchy system was effective against Communism (this was after 1947 when the Cold War started). Thus the "crabwalk incident" (633) when attempts to treat the emperor as a human being by Matsumoto Jiichiro, vice president of the House of Councilors in 1948, was sanctioned. It is just one example of how the Cold War shaped and reinforced the neo-conservative policies of the American occupational forces in Japan. With the exit of socialist cabinets and the incoming conservative Yoshida Shigeru cabinet in 1948, a conservative collaboration between the U.S. and the Japanese government was guaranteed. After the Korean war broke out in 1950, the government became more politically repressive, and punished any criticism of the emperor.(642) Bix argues that Hirohito continues to work behind the scenes to address a mistake he allowed to happen before the war: deviation from an alliance with the British and Americans. (646) That was why he was willing to concede Okinawa and many other parts of Japan to the U.S. for military bases in the San Francisco Peace Treaty (Sept.1951). The Cold War, the Korean War, and the anti-Communist stance of Britain and the U.S. encouraged a conservative national policy in Japan, which used the emperor cult to foster a new nationalism and to dissuade popular and radical politics.
Consequences of keeping Hirohito on the throne: the issue of collective historical memory
• External acceptance of war responsibility to the outside world and internal denial to the Japanese people by the Yoshida cabinet (652-653).
• Conservative attempts to restore the power of the emperor in order to deal with social conflicts between unions and business firms. (654)
RafaEL mArEciL r.
1a4 MW 7am-8:30am
BSBA- mArkeTinG
AMERICAN OCCUPATION
The Philippine-American War[2] was a conflict between the United States of America and the First Republic of the Philippines from 1899 through at least 1901, with the capture of Philippine President Emilio Aguinaldo. Fighting continued between American colonial troops and remnants of the Philippine Army until 1913, and some historians consider these unofficial extensions part of the war.[3]
The Muslim people in Mindanao conducted wholly independent resistance against American invasion, which also lasted up to 1913. This is sometimes referred to as the second phase of the war.
hilippine Revolution
Katipuneros, Filipino rebels against Spain
Katipuneros, Filipino rebels against Spain
On July 7, 1892, Andrés Bonifacio, a warehouseman from Manila, founded the Kataastaasang Kagalanggalang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (“The Highest and Most Honorable Society of the Sons of the Country”) or the Katipunan ("Society") for short, a secret society which aimed to win independence from Spanish rule by armed revolt. The Katipunan spread throughout the provinces, and the Philippine Revolution of 1896 was spearheaded by its members, called Katipuneros.
While a charismatic and decisive figure, Bonifacio proved an ineffectual military leader and suffered defeats at the hands of the Spanish. On the other hand, the Revolution was fought on many local fronts, led by many leaders; in particular the fighters in Cavite province won early victories. One of the most influential and popular Caviteño leaders was Emilio Aguinaldo, mayor of Cavite El Viejo (modern-day Kawit), who now controlled much of eastern Cavite. Eventually, Aguinaldo and his faction gained control of the movement. The Katipunan was superseded by a revolutionary government, of which Aguinaldo was elected president, and the “outmaneuvered”[3] Bonifacio was executed for treason.
Aguinaldo's exile and return
Emilio Aguinaldo
Emilio Aguinaldo
By December 1897, the futility of the struggle was becoming apparent on both sides and came to a stalemate. In August 1897, armistice negotiations were opened between Aguinaldo and the current Spanish governor-general, Fernando Primo de Rivera. By mid-December, an agreement was reached in which the governor would pay Aguinaldo 800,000 pesos in three installments if Aguinaldo would go into exile. Aguinaldo then established himself in Hong Kong. Before leaving, Aguinaldo denounced the Revolution, exhorted Filipino combatants to disarm and declared those who continued hostilities to be bandits.[3] However, some Filipino revolutionaries did continue armed struggle against the Spanish crown.[3][5][6][7][8][9]
Admiral George Dewey, having engaged and defeated the Spanish fleet at Manila Bay on May 1, 1898, ferried Aguinaldo back to the Philippines on May 19.[8] In a matter of months, the Philippine Army conquered nearly all of Spanish-held ground within the Philippines. With the exception of Manila, which was completely surrounded by the Philippine Army of 12,000, the Filipinos now controlled the Philippines. Aguinaldo also turned over 15,000 Spanish prisoners to the Americans, offering them valuable intelligence. On June 12, Aguinaldo declared independence at his house in Cavite El Viejo.
By August, the Spanish had surrendered Manila, and the Americans had occupied it. Governor-General Fermin Jaudenes had made a secret agreement with Dewey and General Wesley Merritt. Jaudenes specifically requested to surrender only to the Americans, not to the Filipino rebels. In order to save face, he proposed a mock battle with the Americans preceding the Spanish surrender; the Filipinos would not even be allowed to enter the city. Dewey and Merritt agreed to this, and no one else in either camp knew about the agreement. On the eve of the mock battle, General Thomas M. Anderson telegraphed Aguinaldo, “Do not let your troops enter Manila without the permission of the American commander. On this side of the Pasig River you will be under fire”.[4]
The June 12 declaration of Philippine independence was not recognized by the United States or Spain, since the Spanish government ceded the Philippines to the United States in the 1898 Treaty of Paris, which was signed on December 10, 1898, in consideration for an indemnity for Spanish expenses and assets lost.
On January 1, 1899, Aguinaldo was declared President of the Philippines — the first and only president of what would be later called the First Philippine Republic. He later organized a Congress at Malolos, Bulacan to draft a constitution.[4]
Admiral Dewey later argued that he had promised nothing regarding the future:
“From my observation of Aguinaldo and his advisers I decided that it would be unwise to co-operate with him or his adherents in an official manner.... In short, my policy was to avoid any entangling alliance with the insurgents, while I appreciated that, pending the arrival of our troops, they might be of service.”[8]
War begins
[edit] Conflict origins
Filipino soldiers outside Manila in 1899.
Filipino soldiers outside Manila in 1899.
In December 1898, the U.S. purchased the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam from Spain as part of the Treaty of Paris for the sum of US $20 million, after the U.S. defeated Spain in the Spanish-American War. The U.S. government made plans to make the Philippines an American territory. However, the Filipinos, fighting for independence from Spain since 1896, had already declared independence on June 12, 1898, and had considered the Americans allies.
Tensions between the Philippine and the American governments existed because of the conflicting movements for independence not movements for colonization, aggravated by the feelings of betrayal on the part of Aguinaldo, who had been brought to the islands by the United States Navy on the understanding that the Americans would help his cause.
The Filipino Spirit
Tausug Resistance to American Occupation ( 1898 - 1913 )
July 22, 1878 Last treaty signed by the Sultan Jamlul Alam with Spain after another defeat by Spain in 1876. This treaty had the same translation flaws as the one entered into in 1851, where the Spanish version stated it had sovereignty over Sulu whereas the Tausug version had the description of the relationship as being a protectorate rather than a dependency and Sulu customs, laws, religion were not subject to Spanish jurisdiction.
The differences are material and would have repercussions in 1899 in the territories that Spain ceeded to the U.S. (Treaties and Other International Acts of USA, edited by Hunter Miller, Vol. 4, 1836-1846, p. 355; also History of Sulu by Najeeb Saleeby, pp.124-129 ) This treaty made Jolo a sort of protectorate of Spain (Muslim in the Philippines, Cesar Majul, p. 299) while retaining a great deal of autonomy. The Sultan didn't have much interest in Jolo at this point and relocated his seat to Maimbung.
Dec. 10, 1898 Treaty of Paris signed over Philippines to the U.S. for $20 million. Spain considered possibility of withholding Mindanao and Sulu from the treaty by arguing that it didn't have sovereignty over those territories. The Americans were also deciding whether to take only Luzon or the whole archipelago.
May 1, 1899 Spaniards departed Jolo and on same day Americans occupied Jolo.
August 20, 1899 Sultan Jamalul Kiram II hesitatingly signed treaty with Gen. J.C. Bates. (Bates Treaty or Senate Document No. 136, 56th Congress, lst Session, Serial 3851) (Bates Treaty text available at the http://www.phil-am-war.org site) Terms included:
1. Mutual respect
2. Americans not to interfere with religion, social and domestic customs or internal economic or political affairs of Moros unless requested to do so.
3. Americans not to give or sell Sulu or any part of it to any other nations
4. continuation of the money payments initiated by the Spaniards, a monthly allowance of $250.00.
5. Abolition of slavery through purchase of their freedom
6. Protection of Sulu from foreign interference
7. Suppression of piracy, fly American flag and stop rifle purchases.
It was obvious that the U.S. signed this peace treaty as a way of stemming any resistance to its occupation in the South while it was suppressing the resistance in the north.
According to Sixto Orosa, the District Health Officer in Sulu during the American occupation "The people did not wish to come under American sovereignty; but Hadji Butu, 'recognizing the folly of armed resistance,' exerted all his influence to prevent another useless and bloody war." (The Sulu Archipelago and Its People, Sixto Orosa, p. 108-109)
November 7, 1900 The U.S. pays Spain another $100,000 to incorporate the islands stretching as far as Sibutu to Cagayan de Sulu. (U.S. Statues at Large, 56th congress, 1899-1901, Vo. 31, U.S. Gov't Printing Office, 1901)
The southernmost outlying islands of the Philippines--Turtle Island and Taganak were incorporated at a much later time period. They were part of the territories originally "ceded" (leased according to Tausug translations of the documents) by the Sultan Jamalul Alam to the North Borneo Company since 1763.
1901 Policy of Disarmanent implemented by Gen. Pershing met with resistance that culminated in the Battle of Bud Dajo on March 7, 1906
June 1, 1903 Moro Province, of which Sulu was a part of, was created under Gen. Leonard Wood, the first governor of that province.
Gov. Gen. Wood imposed a head tax of P2 for each person. This created resentment and dissatisfaction among the Tausugs which led to a series of Cotta (trench) wars against the Americans led by Panglima Hassan. (Orosa, p. 37)
March 2, 1904 The Bates Treaty was unilaterally abrogated by the U.S. Payments to the Sultan stopped. (Orosa, p. 37)
Nov. 12, 1904 U.S. Philippine Commission reissued annual payments to the Sultan of 6000 pesos and 1800 pesos to Hadji Butu and 900 pesos to each of his 6 advisers. Carpenter Agreement abolished slavery. Prior to its abolition, the Sultan owned 500 slaves (Orosa, p. 114).
March 7, 1906 900 Moros killed in Bud Dajo. (Mark Twain wrote about it in his autobiography, later reprinted in Jim Zwick's Mark Twain's Weapons of Satire, Anti-Imperialist Writings on the Philippine American War)
Jan-June 1913 Battle of Bud Bagsak. 5000 Tausugs fortified themselves in a cotta in Mt. Bagsak. 300 were killed, 100 rifles captured by the Americans when General Pershing attacked from June 11-June 16. (Orosa, p. 37)
August 13, 1913 People in Talipao municipality on island of Jolo refused to pay road tax. They fortified themselves in Mt. Talipao. On Oct. 22, 1913, engagement ensued and the Moros were defeated. (Orosa)
July 24, 1913 Dept of Mindanao and Sulu created. (Orosa)
September 1, 1913 Moro Province becomes history. (Orosa)
December 16, 1913 Officially ended military rule and civilian rule begins. Frank Carpenter, a civilian governor of the Department of Mindanao and Sulu and Guy N. Roher was the governor of Sulu.
The American Occupation of Malolos (1899)
The descriptions are the original ones and show the American point of view 100 years ago
Army Suppy Train en Route to Malolos
General Wheaton and his Aids
"This is an army supply train en route to Malolos. The wagons are hauled by a species of buffalo peculiar to the Philippines. It is a patient animal somewhat livelier than the American ox. It does the hard labor of the islands." "General Wheaton and his aids at the suburbs of Malolos, preparing to enter after the retreating insurgents. This was the early seat of the Tagal government. The soldiers are at parade rest in the road awaiting orders to advance."
A Scene in Malolos on Entrance of Americans
Occupation of Malolos
"Chinese flags are everywhere flying for the protection of lives and porperty of Chinese residents and merchants. These flags were always respected as covering neutrals and non-combatans." "Distribution of troops in various portions of the town for preservation of lives and property of loyal natives, and to fortify against attacks of insurgents, as well as to insure the general safety."
American Troops Entering the Public Square
Destruction of Malolos Church
"The american troops are here entering the public square of Malolos. The church has just been set on fire by the retreating insurgents, ans was burned down nonwithstanding the efforts of the soldiers to save it." "The desperate character of the insurgents is shown in this wanton destruction of Malolos church. It was fired by them as they fled before the Americans just entering the town. It was done partly in revenge against the religious orders."
Congressional Hall
The Railroad Depot of Malolos
"Congressional hall and executive building occupied by Aguinaldo and his aids. Here Aguinaldo took the oath of office. After the Filipinos were driven away, Gen. McArthur made it his headquarters. Photograph taken on first day of occupation. " "The proclamation of General Luna is posted upon the wall near the door. The officers are Generals Otis, McArthur and Hale. Photograph was taken within half hour following evacuation of insurgents."
Tausug Resistance to American Occupation ( 1898 - 1913 )
by Madge Kho
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 22, 1878 Last treaty signed by the Sultan Jamlul Alam with Spain after another defeat by Spain in 1876. This treaty had the same translation flaws as the one entered into in 1851, where the Spanish version stated it had sovereignty over Sulu whereas the Tausug version had the description of the relationship as being a protectorate rather than a dependency and Sulu customs, laws, religion were not subject to Spanish jurisdiction.
The differences are material and would have repercussions in 1899 in the territories that Spain ceeded to the U.S. (Treaties and Other International Acts of USA, edited by Hunter Miller, Vol. 4, 1836-1846, p. 355; also History of Sulu by Najeeb Saleeby, pp.124-129 ) This treaty made Jolo a sort of protectorate of Spain (Muslim in the Philippines, Cesar Majul, p. 299) while retaining a great deal of autonomy. The Sultan didn't have much interest in Jolo at this point and relocated his seat to Maimbung.
Dec. 10, 1898 Treaty of Paris signed over Philippines to the U.S. for $20 million. Spain considered possibility of withholding Mindanao and Sulu from the treaty by arguing that it didn't have sovereignty over those territories. The Americans were also deciding whether to take only Luzon or the whole archipelago.
May 1, 1899 Spaniards departed Jolo and on same day Americans occupied Jolo.
August 20, 1899 Sultan Jamalul Kiram II hesitatingly signed treaty with Gen. J.C. Bates. (Bates Treaty or Senate Document No. 136, 56th Congress, lst Session, Serial 3851) (Bates Treaty text available at the http://www.phil-am-war.org site) Terms included:
Mutual respect
Americans not to interfere with religion, social and domestic customs or internal economic or political affairs of Moros unless requested to do so.
Americans not to give or sell Sulu or any part of it to any other nations
continuation of the money payments initiated by the Spaniards, a monthly allowance of $250.00.
Abolition of slavery through purchase of their freedom
Protection of Sulu from foreign interference
Suppression of piracy, fly American flag and stop rifle purchases.
It was obvious that the U.S. signed this peace treaty as a way of stemming any resistance to its occupation in the South while it was suppressing the resistance in the north.
According to Sixto Orosa, the District Health Officer in Sulu during the American occupation "The people did not wish to come under American sovereignty; but Hadji Butu, 'recognizing the folly of armed resistance,' exerted all his influence to prevent another useless and bloody war." (The Sulu Archipelago and Its People, Sixto Orosa, p. 108-109)
November 7, 1900 The U.S. pays Spain another $100,000 to incorporate the islands stretching as far as Sibutu to Cagayan de Sulu. (U.S. Statues at Large, 56th congress, 1899-1901, Vo. 31, U.S. Gov't Printing Office, 1901)
The southernmost outlying islands of the Philippines--Turtle Island and Taganak were incorporated at a much later time period. They were part of the territories originally "ceded" (leased according to Tausug translations of the documents) by the Sultan Jamalul Alam to the North Borneo Company since 1763.
1901 Policy of Disarmanent implemented by Gen. Pershing met with resistance that culminated in the Battle of Bud Dajo on March 7, 1906
June 1, 1903 Moro Province, of which Sulu was a part of, was created under Gen. Leonard Wood, the first governor of that province.
Gov. Gen. Wood imposed a head tax of P2 for each person. This created resentment and dissatisfaction among the Tausugs which led to a series of Cotta (trench) wars against the Americans led by Panglima Hassan. (Orosa, p. 37)
March 2, 1904 The Bates Treaty was unilaterally abrogated by the U.S. Payments to the Sultan stopped. (Orosa, p. 37)
Nov. 12, 1904 U.S. Philippine Commission reissued annual payments to the Sultan of 6000 pesos and 1800 pesos to Hadji Butu and 900 pesos to each of his 6 advisers. Carpenter Agreement abolished slavery. Prior to its abolition, the Sultan owned 500 slaves (Orosa, p. 114).
March 7, 1906 900 Moros killed in Bud Dajo. (Mark Twain wrote about it in his autobiography, later reprinted in Jim Zwick's Mark Twain's Weapons of Satire, Anti-Imperialist Writings on the Philippine American War)
Jan-June 1913 Battle of Bud Bagsak. 5000 Tausugs fortified themselves in a cotta in Mt. Bagsak. 300 were killed, 100 rifles captured by the Americans when General Pershing attacked from June 11-June 16. (Orosa, p. 37)
August 13, 1913 People in Talipao municipality on island of Jolo refused to pay road tax. They fortified themselves in Mt. Talipao. On Oct. 22, 1913, engagement ensued and the Moros were defeated. (Orosa)
July 24, 1913 Dept of Mindanao and Sulu created. (Orosa)
September 1, 1913 Moro Province becomes history. (Orosa)
December 16, 1913 Officially ended military rule and civilian rule begins. Frank Carpenter, a civilian governor of the Department of Mindanao and Sulu and Guy N. Roher was the governor of Sulu.
rachel madiam said...
COLONIAL OCCUPATIONS
Our early American colonists did not have quite the same employment opportunities as we do today. There were no TV producers, car salesmen, rocket scientists, and certainly no computer programmers. The first emigrants to America had occupations concerned primarily with simple, basic survival in the New World. They were, for the most part, skilled laborers, who could make things most of us now only dabble in as hobbies.
Some occupational names were self-explanatory such as a blacksmith, locksmith, and gunsmith. Of course there were also occupations with names that are recognizable today - coroner, bookkeeper, barber, cabinet-maker, weaver, baker, brick-layer, accountant, printer and musician.
american Occupied Japan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Have questions? Find out how to ask questions and get answers. •Jump to: navigation, search
Allied-Administered Japan
Military occupation
←
1945 – 1952 →
→
Flag Imperial Seal
Capital Tokyo
Language(s) Japanese
Political structure Military occupation
Military Governor
- 1945-1951 Douglas MacArthur
- 1951-1952 Matthew Ridgway
Emperor
- 1926-1989 Hirohito
Historical era Post-WWII
- Surrender of Japan August 15, 1945
- San Francisco Treaty April 28, 1952
At the end of the Second World War, Japan was occupied by the Allied Powers, led by the United States. This was the first time since the unification of Japan that the island nation had been occupied by a foreign power. The San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed on September 8, 1951, marked the end of the Allied occupation, and when it went into effect on April 28, 1952, Japan was once again an independent state.
Contents [hide]
1 Surrender
2 Accomplishments of the Occupation
2.1 Disarmament
2.2 Liberalization
2.3 Democratization
2.4 Education reform
2.5 Purging of war criminals
3 Politics
4 End of the occupation
5 Cultural reaction
6 Legacy
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
[edit] Surrender
One of the proposed divisions of Japan into occupation zones. For the other see hereJapan initially surrendered to the Allies on August 14, 1945, when Emperor Hirohito accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration. On the following day, Hirohito announced Japan's surrender on the radio. It was V-J Day, the end of World War II, and the beginning of a long road to recovery for a shattered Japan. The Soviet Union was responsible for North Korea, Sakhalin, and the Kuril Islands, while the United States and British Commonwealth forces were responsible for Japan, South Korea, and Japan's remaining possessions in Oceania. The Republic of China was given control over Taiwan and the Pescadores. The Far Eastern Commission and Allied Council For Japan were also established to supervise the occupation of Japan.[1] On V-J Day, United States President Harry Truman appointed General Douglas MacArthur as Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, to supervise the occupation of Japan. Japanese officials left for Manila on August 19 to meet MacArthur and to be briefed on his plans for the occupation. On August 28, 150 U.S. personnel flew to Atsugi, Kanagawa Prefecture. They were followed by USS Missouri, whose accompanying vessels landed the 4th Marine Division on the southern coast of Kanagawa. Other Allied personnel followed.
MacArthur arrived in Tokyo on August 30, and immediately decreed several laws: No Allied personnel were to assault Japanese people. No Allied personnel were to eat the scarce Japanese food.
Representatives of Japan stand aboard the USS Missouri prior to signing of the Instrument of Surrender.On September 2, Japan formally surrendered, signing the Japanese Instrument of Surrender, and the occupation began. Allied (primarily American) forces supervised the country. General MacArthur was technically supposed to defer to an advisory council set up by the Allied powers but in practice did everything himself. His first priority was to set up a food distribution network; following the collapse of the ruling government and the wholesale destruction of most major cities virtually everyone was starving.
Douglas MacArthur and Emperor Hirohito.Once the food network was in place, at a cost of up to US$1 million per day, MacArthur set out to win the support of Hirohito. The two men met for the first time on September 28; the photograph of the two together is one of the most famous in Japanese history. However, many were shocked that MacArthur wore his standard duty uniform with no tie instead of his dress uniform when meeting the emperor. MacArthur may have done this on purpose, to send a message as to what he considered the emperor's status to be.[1] With the sanction of Japan's reigning monarch, MacArthur had the ammunition he needed to begin the real work of the occupation. While other Allied political and military leaders pushed for Hirohito to be tried as a war criminal, MacArthur resisted such calls and rejected the claims of members of the imperial family such as Prince Mikasa and Prince Higashikuni and intellectuals like Tatsuji Miyoshi who asked for the emperor's abdication [2], arguing that any such prosecution would be overwhelmingly unpopular with the Japanese people.
By the end of 1945, more than 350,000 U.S. personnel were stationed throughout Japan. By the beginning of 1946, replacement troops began to arrive in the country in large numbers and were assigned to MacArthur's Eighth Army, headquartered in Tokyo's Dai-Ichi building. Of the main Japanese islands, Kyūshū was occupied by the 24th Infantry Division, with some responsibility for Shikoku. Honshū was occupied by the First Cavalry Division. Hokkaidō was occupied by the 11th Airborne Division.
The 2nd Battalion, 5th Royal Gurkha Rifles marching through Kure soon after their arrival in Japan. (May 1946)By June 1950, all of these army units had suffered extensive troop reductions, and their combat effectiveness was seriously weakened. When North Korea invaded South Korea, elements of the 24th Division were flown into South Korea to try to stem the massive invasion force there, but the green occupation troops, while acquitting themselves well when suddenly thrown into combat almost overnight, suffered heavy casualties and were forced into retreat until other Japan occupation troops could be sent to assist.
The official British Commonwealth Occupation Force (BCOF), composed of Australian, British, Indian and New Zealand personnel, was deployed on February 21, 1946. While U.S. forces were responsible for overall military government, BCOF was responsible for supervising demilitarization and the disposal of Japan's war industries.[2] BCOF was also responsible for occupation of several western prefectures and had its headquarters at Kure. At its peak, the force numbered about 40,000 personnel. During 1947, BCOF began to decrease its activities in Japan, and it was officially wound up in 1951.
[edit] Accomplishments of the Occupation
[edit] Disarmament
Japan's postwar constitution, adopted under Allied supervision, included a "Peace Clause" (Article 9), which renounced war and banned Japan from maintaining any armed forces. This was intended to prevent the country from ever becoming an aggressive military power again. However, within a decade, America was pressuring Japan to rebuild its army as a bulwark against Communism in Asia after the Chinese Revolution and the Korean War, and Japan established Self-Defense Forces. Traditionally, Japan's military spending has been restricted to about 1% of its GNP, though this is by popular practice, not law, and has fluctuated up and down from this figure. Recently, past Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, present Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and other politicians have tried to repeal or amend the clause.
[edit] Liberalization
The Allies attempted to dismantle the Japanese Zaibatsu. However, the Japanese resisted these attempts, claiming that the zaibatsu were required in order for Japan to compete internationally, and looser industrial groupings known as keiretsu evolved. A major land reform was also conducted, and five million acres (20,000 km²) of land were taken out of the hands of landlords and given to the farmers who worked them.
[edit] Democratization
In 1946, the Diet ratified a new Constitution of Japan which followed closely a 'model copy' prepared by the Occupational authorities, and was promulgated as an amendment to the old Prussian-style Meiji Constitution. The new constitution guaranteed basic freedoms and civil liberties, abolished nobility, and, perhaps most importantly, made the emperor the symbol of Japan, removing him from politics. Shinto was abolished as a state religion, and Christianity reappeared in the open for the first time in decades. Women gained the right to vote, and in April 1946, 14 million turned out for the election that gave Japan its first modern prime minister, Shigeru Yoshida.
[edit] Education reform
Before and during the war, Japanese education was based on the German system, with "Gymnasium" (English: High Schools) and universities to train students after primary school. During the occupation, Japan's secondary education system was changed to incorporate three-year junior high schools and senior high schools similar to those in the U.S.: junior high became compulsory but senior high remained optional. The Imperial Rescript on Education was repealed, and the Imperial University system reorganized. The longstanding issue of restricting Kanji usage, which had been planned for decades but continuously opposed by more conservative elements, was also resolved during this time. The Japanese written system was drastically reorganized to give the Toyo Kanji, predecessor of today's Jōyō kanji, and orthography was greatly altered to reflect spoken usage.
Hideki Tojo takes the stand at the Tokyo war crimes tribunal.
[edit] Purging of war criminals
While these other reforms were taking place, various military tribunals, most notably the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in Ichigaya, were trying Japan's war criminals and sentencing many to death and imprisonment. However, many suspects such as Tsuji Masanobu, Nobusuke Kishi, Yoshio Kodama and Ryoichi Sasakawa were never judged, while the Showa Emperor, all members of the imperial family implicated in the war such as Prince Chichibu, Prince Asaka, Prince Hiroyasu Fushimi, Prince Higashikuni and Prince Takeda, and all members of Unit 731 were exonerated from criminal prosecutions by MacArthur.
Before the war crimes trials actually convened, the SCAP, the IPS and Shōwa officials worked behind the scenes not only to prevent the imperial family from being indicted, but also to slant the testimony of the defendants to ensure that no one implicated the Emperor. High officials in court circles and the Shōwa government collaborated with Allied GHQ in compiling lists of prospective war criminals, while the individuals arrested as Class A suspects and incarcerated in Sugamo prison solemnly vowed to protect their sovereign against any possible taint of war responsibility.[3] Thus, "months before the Tokyo tribunal commenced, MacArthur's highest subordinates were working to attribute ultimate responsibility for Pearl Harbor to Hideki Tōjō"[4] by allowing "the major criminal suspects to coordinate their stories so that the Emperor would be spared from indictment."[5]
For historian John W. Dower,
“ Even Japanese peace activists who endorse the ideals of the Nuremberg and Tokyo charters, and who have labored to document and publicize Japanese atrocities, cannot defend the American decision to exonerate the emperor of war responsibility and then, in the chill of Cold war, release and soon afterwards openly embrace accused right-wing war criminals like the later prime minister Kishi Nobusuke. ”
(Dower, Ibid., p. 562)
[edit] Politics
Political parties had begun to revive almost immediately after the occupation began. Left-wing organizations, such as the Japan Socialist Party and the Japan Communist Party, quickly reestablished themselves, as did various conservative parties. The old Seiyukai and Rikken Minseito came back as, respectively, the Liberal Party (Nihon Jiyuto) and the Japan Progressive Party (Nihon Shimpoto). The first postwar elections were held in 1946 (women were given the franchise for the first time), and the Liberal Party's vice president, Yoshida Shigeru (1878-1967), became prime minister. For the 1947 elections, anti-Yoshida forces left the Liberal Party and joined forces with the Progressive Party to establish the new Democratic Party (Minshuto). This divisiveness in conservative ranks gave a plurality to the Japan Socialist Party, which was allowed to form a cabinet, which lasted less than a year. Thereafter, the socialist party steadily declined in its electoral successes. After a short period of Democratic Party administration, Yoshida returned in late 1948 and continued to serve as prime minister until 1954. However, because of a heart failure Yoshida was replaced by Shinto in 1955.
[edit] End of the occupation
In 1949, MacArthur rubber-stamped a sweeping change in the SCAP power structure that greatly increased the power of Japan's native rulers, and as his attention (and that of the White House) gradually diverted to the Korean War, the occupation began to draw to a close. The San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed on September 8, 1951, marked the end of the Allied occupation, and when it went into effect on April 28, 1952, Japan was once again an independent state (with the exceptions of Okinawa, which remained under U.S. control until 1972, and Iwo Jima, which remained under US control until 1968). Even though some 47,000 U.S. military personnel remain in Japan today, they are there at the invitation of the Japanese government under the terms of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan and not as an occupying force.
[edit] Cultural reaction
The phrase "shikata ga nai," or "nothing can be done about it," was commonly used in both Japanese and American press to encapsulate the Japanese public's resignation to the harsh conditions endured while under occupation.
The occupation was satirised in the 1956 American film The Teahouse of the August Moon.
[edit] Legacy
According to John W. Dower, «In retrospect, apart from the military officer corps, the purge of alleged militarists and ultranationalists that was conducted under the Occupation had relatively small impact on the long-term composition of men of influence in the public and private sectors. The purge initially brought new blood into the political parties, but this was offset by the return of huge numbers of formaly purged conservative politicians to national as well as local politics in the early 1950s. In the bureaucracy, the purge was negligible from the outset... In the economic sector, the purge similarly was only mildly disruptive, affecting less than sixteen hundred individuals spread among some four hundred companies. Everywhere one looks, the corridors of power in postwar Japan are crowded with men whose talents had already been recognized during the war years, and who found the same talents highly prized in the "new" Japan.» (J. W. Dower, Japan in War & Peace, New press, 1993, p.11)
The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.
The U.S. occupation left a lasting impact. The importance of democracy became better understood in Japan, and they had less respect for the proponents of a hierarchical society.[citation needed] Japanese democracy, freedom of the press, rejection of militarism and nationalism are all legacies of MacArthur's post-war policies.[citation needed] The nation has been secured within the U.S. sphere of influence and protection with the U.S. backed conservative Liberal Democratic Party ruling in perpetuity until today. The stability in Japan has contributed to the economic success of Japan.
[edit] See also
Far Eastern Commission
Japanese war crimes
World War II
Task Force 31
Military rule
1945 in Japan
History of Japan
Pacific War
[edit] References
John W. Dower, Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II. Norton, 1999. ISBN 0393046869
Robert Guillain, I saw Tokyo burning: An eyewitness narrative from Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima (J. Murray, 1981). ISBN 0385157010
Yoneyuki Sugita, Pitfall or Panacea - The Irony of US Power in Occupied Japan, 1945-1952 (Rutledge, 2003). ISBN 0-415-94752-9
[edit] External links
The U.S. Army in Post WWII Japan
The Road Ahead: Lessons in Nation Building from Japan, Germany, and Afghanistan for Postwar Iraq, by Ray Salvatore Jennings May 2003, Peaceworks No. 49, United States Institute of Peace (The PDF report contains an excellent chapter on the occupation policys.)
Memories of War: The Second World War and Japanese Historical Memory in Comparative Perspective
Kure Kids (The Hidden Legacy of War) - Legacy of mixed-blood children during Occupation. Foreign Correspondent, Australian Broadcasting Corporation
A sweet memory: My first encounter of an American soldier
Hirata Tetsuo and John W. Dower, "Japan's Red Purge: Lessons from a Saga of Suppression of Free Speech and Thought"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This period is part of the Shōwa period of Japanese History
< Expansionism | History of Japan | Post-Occupation >
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupied_Japan"
rachel madiam said...
United States occupation of Haiti
The first United States occupation of Haiti began on July 28, 1915 and ended in mid-August, 1934. Other occupations include ones that began in 1994 and 2004 (though these may have been partially under the UN banner, the US was the prime mover of the actions).
Causes
The instability in Haiti provided a potential opening for German influence during the ongoing World War I. In addition, it is alleged that a popular uprising against Haitian dictator Jean Vilbrun Guillaume Sam threatened American business interests in the country (such as HASCO). In response, American President Woodrow Wilson sent 330 U.S. Marines to Port-au-Prince on July 28, 1915. The specific order from the Secretary of the Navy to the invasion commander, Admiral William Deville Bundy, was to "protect American and foreign" interests. Within six weeks, representatives from the United States controlled Haitian customs houses and administrative institutions. For the next nineteen years, Haiti's powerful neighbor to the north guided and governed the country. During this period, the government of Haiti was effectively under the control of the U.S. Marines.
Government and opposition
Representatives from the United States wielded veto power over all governmental decisions in Haiti, and Marine Corps commanders served as administrators in the provinces. Local institutions, however, continued to be run by Haitians, as was required under policies put in place during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson.
Opposition to the Occupation began immediately after the Marines entered Haiti in 1915. The rebels (called "cacos" by the U.S. Marines) vehemently tried to resist American control of Haiti. In response, the Haitian and American governments began a vigorous campaign to disband the rebel armies. Perhaps the best-known account of this skirmishing comes from Marine Major Smedley Butler, who won a Medal of Honor for his exploits, and went on to serve as commanding officer of the Haitian Gendarmerie. (He later expressed his disapproval of the U.S. intervention in his book, "War Is a Racket".)
Philippe Sudré Dartiguenave, the mulatto president of the Senate, agreed to accept the presidency of Haiti after several other candidates had refused on principle. In 1917, President Dartiguenave dissolved the legislature after its members refused to approve a constitution written by Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt. However, a referendum subsequently approved the new constitution in 1918 (by a vote of 98,225 to 768). While generally a liberal document, the constitution allowed foreigners to purchase land. Jean-Jacques Dessalines had forbidden land ownership by foreigners, and since 1804, most Haitians had viewed foreign ownership as anathema.
Effects of the occupation on Haiti
The occupation by the United States had several significant effects on Haiti. An early period of unrest culminated in a 1918 rebellion by up to 40,000 former cacos and other disgruntled people. The scale of the uprising overwhelmed the Gendarmerie, but Marine reinforcements helped put down the revolt at an estimated cost of 2,000 Haitian lives.
Thereafter, order prevailed to a degree that most Haitians had never witnessed. The order, however, was imposed largely by white foreigners with deep-seated racial prejudices and disdain for the notion of self-determination by inhabitants of less-developed nations. Such attitudes particularly dismayed Haiti's mulatto elite, who had heretofore believed in their innate superiority over the black masses.
The white American occupiers, however, did not distinguish among Haitians, regardless of their skin tone, level of education, or sophistication. Their intolerance provoked indignation and resentment — and eventually a racial pride that was reflected in the work of a new generation of Haitian historians, ethnologists, writers, artists, and others, many of whom later became active in politics and government. Still, as Haitians united in their reaction to the racism of the occupying forces, the mulatto elite managed to dominate the country's bureaucracy and to strengthen its role in national affairs.
The occupation greatly improved some of Haiti's infrastructure. Roads were improved and expanded through the use of forced labor gangs. This violent form of "corvée labor" — with chain gangs, and armed guards permitted to shoot anyone who fled compulsory service — was widely regarded as tantamount to slavery.
The education system was re-designed from the ground up; however, this involved the destruction of the existing system of "Liberal Arts" education inherited (and adapted) from the French. Due to its emphasis on vocational training, the American system that replaced the French was despised by the elite. Thus, both of the major programs instituted by the government of occupation antagonized the Haitian populace: the use of forced labor enraged the lower classes of rural Haiti, and the educational "reforms" enraged the urban elite.
Effects of the occupation on U.S. politics
The occupation of Haiti continued after World War I, despite the embarrassment that it caused Woodrow Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and the scrutiny of a congressional inquiry in 1922. By 1930, President Herbert Hoover had become concerned about the effects of the occupation, particularly after a December 1929 incident in Les Cayes, in which Marines killed at least ten Haitian peasants during a march to protest local economic conditions. Hoover appointed two commissions to study the situation. A former governor general of the Philippines, William Cameron Forbes, headed the more prominent of the two.
The Forbes Commission praised the material improvements that the U.S. administration had wrought, but it criticized the exclusion of Haitians from positions of real authority in the government and the constabulary, which had come to be known as the Garde d'Haïti. In more general terms, the commission further asserted that "the social forces that created [instability] still remain — poverty, ignorance, and the lack of a tradition or desire for orderly free government."
The Hoover administration did not fully implement the recommendations of the Forbes Commission; but United States withdrawal was under way by 1932, when Hoover lost the presidency to Franklin Roosevelt, the presumed author of the most recent Haitian constitution. On a visit to Cap-Haïtien in July 1934, Roosevelt reaffirmed an August 1933 disengagement agreement. The last contingent of U.S. Marines departed in mid-August, after a formal transfer of authority to the Garde.
As in other countries occupied by the United States in the early 20th century, the local (U.S.-trained) military was often the only cohesive and effective institution left in the wake of withdrawal. This sowed the seeds for a sequence of military-backed dictatorships, all attached to American patronage, which would define the next 50 years of Haiti's history.
The American Occupation of Japan, 1945-1952
When the war ended, it was the common intent of all the Allied Powers to render Japan incapable of ever returning to the field of battle. "Demilitarization" was thus the first policy of the Occupation authorities and was accompanied by abolishing Japan's armed forces, dismantling its military industry, and eliminating the expression of patriotism from its schools and public life. But the American government, which had led the Allied war effort and whose representative, General Douglas MacArthur, was named the Supreme Commander of the Occupation forces, felt that only a democratic Japan would be truly peace-loving. It was assumed that democratic countries like the United States and Great Britain were more peaceful than nondemocratic countries such as Hitler's Germany and prewar Japan under the emperor. But what makes a country "democratic"? Is a country democratic simply because of certain political institutions, like free elections and free speech? Can these political institutions survive if economic power is concentrated in just a few hands, and social structures like the educational system and the family preach unlimited obedience to authority? The American government believed that establishing democracy in Japan involved change in all areas of Japanese life. Under MacArthur and with the cooperation of the Japanese, Japan undertook tremendous changes in just seven short years--the Occupation lasted from 1945 to 1952. The success of the Occupation can be judged by the fact that forty years later, Japan has not fought a war, is a close ally of the United States, and has not changed most of the important reforms made by the Occupation. Political Changes: The most obvious changes were political. During the Occupation, Japan adopted a new constitution (sometimes called the MacArthur Constitution because of the major role Americans played in its drafting). This constitution was completely different from the Meiji Constitution of 1889.
• The biggest change was that it declared that sovereignty rested with the people, not the emperor. This is the political basis of democracy.
• The emperor was to continue as a symbol of Japanese unity and culture, somewhat like the Queen of England in Britain's democracy, but without any political authority whatsoever.
• The supreme political institution was now to be Japan's parliament, the Diet, which was to be made up of freely elected representatives of the people.
• Women were given equal rights under the new constitution, including the right to vote.
• Local governments were strengthened to encourage "grass-roots level" political participation.
• The constitution established many new civil liberties, such as the right of free speech, and the powers of the police were weakened and carefully regulated.
• Finally, the military forces were completely abolished and Article 9 of the new constitution forbade Japan to maintain an army or go to war ever again.
Economic Changes: To support these political changes, the Americans instituted reforms to make economic power in Japan more "democratic." In prewar Japan, two-thirds of the agricultural land was rented, not owned, by the farmers who farmed it. The farmers, who made up over 50 percent of the labor force, often rented the land from landlords who lived in distant cities and paid them as much as half of the crops they grew. Since the average "farm" was little more than an acre, many farm families lived in poverty. The land reform took land away from big landlords and redistributed it to the farmers, so that farm families could own the land they worked. Because farm families became more independent economically, they could participate more freely in the new democracy.
The Americans also tried to make workers in the industrial sector more independent by changing the laws to allow free trade unions. Before the war there were only a few small unions; by 1949, about half of all industrial workers belonged to a union. To democratize economic power further and create competition, the Occupation intended to break up the giant business corporations, the zaibatsu, but this reform was not implemented, in part because it would have made Japan's economic recovery more difficult. Changes in Civic Values: Besides changing Japanese institutions, the Americans wanted the Japanese people to understand better the idea of democracy. To do this, the occupation government used it's control of newspapers and magazines to explain and popularize democracy. They used American democracy as a model to be copied. The complete defeat and devastation of Japan after the war had left many Japanese shocked and disillusioned with their own military leaders, and they were open to the new ways of their American conquerors.
To ensure that Japanese children learned democratic values, the Americans insisted that the education system and the laws regulating families be revised. "Moral training" in schools was abolished, and instruction in democratic ideas was begun. Control of education and censorship of textbooks were taken from the central government and given to local administrations. The laws giving the head of the household complete control of every family member (for example, he could withhold his consent when his children wished to be married) were changed to make each family member more equal and thereby more democratic.
Support for Change Within Japan: After the Americans left, the reforms that did not find strong support within the Japanese system were discontinued. The anti monopoly laws were weakened, and new giant businesses appeared. The central government assumed control of the schools, although the democratic school structure and curriculum remained. The ruling conservative party suggested other changes, including re-introduction of "moral training" in the schools and abolition of the "peace clause," Article 9 of the constitution, but these were not adopted. In sum, there was great popular support for most of the changes, and the changed system thus continues to the present.
preciosa ramos said...
After the War:
American Imperialism in the Philippines...
After a victorious effort against the Spanish in Manila, the United States turned its eyes to its newfound prize: the Philippines. Opinions differed as to what the United States should do. Imperialists such as then-President William McKinley believed the future of the islands was the responsibility of the United States, viewing the Americans as "emancipators" for whom the inhabitants of the Philippines should be fortunate. Rudyard Kipling's poem White Man's Burden (right) summed up the imperialist sentiment. Other prominent Americans, such as Mark Twain and former President Grover Cleveland, were against continued American involvement in the Philippines. Some believed that it was contrary to the Constitution to be a colonial power.
Inevitably, the U.S. did take control over the islands--to preserve the peace (it was not believed that the proposed Philippine government would be strong enough to maintain order) and to spread American ideals and philosophies. In response, the insurgents who previously fought alongside the Americans against the Spanish now fought against their allies.
White Man's Burden
by Rudyard Kipling
Take up the White Man's burden--
Send forth the best ye breed--
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait, in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild--
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.
Take up the White Man's burden--
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain,
To seek another's profit
And work another's gain.
Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine,
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
(The end for others sought)
Watch sloth and heathen folly
Bring all your hope to nought.
An illustration from the Detroit Journal, Feb. 1899, reprinted in Literary Digest (Feb. 18, 1899).
Fighting the Americans...
The Filipinos who fought with the Americans, members of the well-educated upperclass minority, had drawn up plans for a new government that they themselves would administer now that they had driven off the Spanish. The Americans had different plans, however. Expansionists in Washington viewed the Philippines as a stepping stone for American exporters with an eye on the "Great China Market." Filipino allies were now "rebels" from the U.S. perspective.
The tragedy of the period lies not only in the short-lived independence of the Philippines but in the class divisions that showed through. Mestizo hacienda owners and middle class ilustrados wanted America to fill the power vacuum that formed following the defeat of the Spanish instead of what they saw as an illiterate, rag-tag Filipino peasantry
First Battle Between Americans and Filipinos, February 4-5, 1899. When the smoke cleared, the Americans lost less than 50 men with 300 wounded, while the Filipinos lost over 3,000 killed and wounded.
Attempting to Burn Manila, February 22, 1899. Filipinos attempted to destroy parts of Manila, setting fire to three quarters of the City--Santa Cruz, San Nicolas, and Tondo. Nearly 1,000 houses were burned and the entire city might have been destroyed until American firemen extinguished the flames.
Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo,
First Leader of the Philippines...
For the Americans, the fighting did not stop with the Spanish; if America was to take control of the islands, the "insurgents" with whom they had fought alongside earlier had to be dealt with. The leader of these "insurgents" was General Emilio Aguinaldo.
Born of a well-to-do family in Cavite, near Manila, Aguinaldo possessed an intelligence beyond most Filipinos. He joined the rebellion in 1896, and it was not until the execution of Dr. Jose Rizal that he became one of the leaders. He was so notorious that the Spanish often placed large sums of money on his head; however, he escaped capture.
It was Aguinaldo who declared the Philippines' independence and who led the fight when it seemed apparent that America would not release its hold of the Philippines.
Premature Celebration...
On the 12th of June, 1898, the Republic of the Philippines was born: ". . .The 12th day of this month is fixed for the declaration of the independence of this our beloved country. . ." . Rule under native Filipinos was short-lived, if not non-existent, for American presence was too great. The atmosphere grew tense. Hostilities soon ensued, with the attack on Manila on February 5, 1899.
Despite a valiant effort, losses suffered by the Filipinos were too great and they had no choice but to surrender. Aguinaldo tried to motivate the others to continue fighting until the end: "Be not discouraged. Our independence was watered freely by the blood of martyrs, and more will be shed in the future to strengthen it. Remember, that efforts are not to be wasted that ends maybe gained. It is indispensable to adjust our actions to the rules of law and right, and to learn to triumph over our enemies."
The americanization Begins...
The effects of American imperialism on the Philippines are numerous. Some, however, stand out, most notably the installation of an American-style democracy and the prevalent attitude that anything American is "good". Many of those in lowland Philippines, and most of the Christian population, for that matter, grew up in an increasingly Americanized society. Education was carried out in English in addition to Spanish and the native language, Tagalog (in Luzon, anyway).
With U.S.-Philippine relations strengthening as time went on, Filipinos emigrated to the U.S. in search of a better life. The first to migrate were the farmers, the menial laborers; analogous to the influx of Chinese during the construction of the railroads. With the professional visa of the '50s, Filipino doctors and nurses began moving to the United States, and the population of Filipinos in the U.S. begain increasing significantly. Today, over 1.4 million Filipinos live in the U.S., and that number is expected to surpass that of the Chinese by 2000.
Filipinos in America...
The flow of immigrants from the Philippines has led to a steadily increasing Filipino population here in the United States. Currently, the number of Filipinos residing here is 1,406,770, second only to the Chinese as the largest Asian ethnic group. It is expected that by 2000, Filipinos will have succeeded the Chinese.
These 1.4 million have brought with them their traditions, their culture, their heritage, to share with us. Their culture is one of mixed influences. They have a rich religious heritage and a great culinary tradition; and as with many Asian cultures, deep-seated values and ethics that distinguishes Asians from the Western world.
One would think that, due to the extensive relationship the Philippines has with the U.S., adapting to life here in the States would not be much of a problem. However, the Filipino experience has not been without encounters of racism/racial prejudice or stereotyping. Notwithstanding, they have gone on to be quite successful. Asians, as a group, have a median family income of $44,460 (1990C).
Filipinos and Roman Catholicism in America...
One of the lasting Spanish influences on Philippine culture is religion. 85% of Filipinos today are Catholic, thanks to the efforts of friars who, for the most part, ran the country during the rule of the Spanish. The remote native tribespeople living in the Cordilleras escaped unscathed for the most part, as did the Moros of southern Philippines. The traditions of the Roman Catholic church have been continued up to today, with devotions to Mary (Our Lady of Antipolo and Our Lady of Manaoag, among others) and the recent (relatively) canonization of the first Filipino saint, San Lorenzo Ruiz.
Some of the Catholic traditions carried over to America by immigrants are, most notably, Simbang Gabi (a novena of nine masses at night leading up to Christmas), and a novena for San Lorenzo Ruiz yearly around November. This past January, the Archdiocese of Chicago opened the centennial year of the Philippines with a mass in honor of Santo Niño (the infant Jesus) that was attended by over 1,500 of the faithful.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
NO END IN SIGHT : THE AMERICAN OCCUPATION OF IRAQ
The first film of its kind to chronicle the reasons behind Iraq’s descent into guerrilla war, warlord rule, criminality and anarchy, NO END IN SIGHT is a jaw-dropping, insider’s tale of wholesale incompetence, recklessness and venality. Based on over 200 hours of footage, the film provides a candid retelling of the events following the fall of Baghdad in 2003 by high ranking officials such as former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, Ambassador Barbara Bodine (in charge of Baghdad during the Spring of 2003), Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell, and General Jay Garner (in charge of the occupation of Iraq through May 2003) as well as Iraqi civilians, American soldiers, and prominent analysts.
This haunting film examines the manner in which the principal errors of U.S. policy – the use of insufficient troop levels, allowing the looting of Baghdad, the purging of professionals from the Iraqi government, and the disbanding of the Iraqi military – largely created the insurgency and chaos that engulf Iraq today. How did a group of men with little or no military experience, knowledge of the Arab world or personal experience in Iraq come to make such flagrantly debilitating decisions?
It vividly dissects the people, issues and facts behind the Bush Administration’s decisions and their consequences on the ground to provide a powerful look into how arrogance and ignorance turned a military victory into a seemingly endless and deepening nightmare of a war.
“I think this decision to disband the [Iraqi] Army came as a surprise to most of us…”
Q: What was your reaction?
“I thought we had just created a problem. We had a lot of out of work
[Iraqi] soldiers.”
– our interview with Richard Armitage, former Deputy Secretary of State
NO END IN SIGHT alternates between U.S. policy decisions and Iraqi consequences, systematically dissecting the Bush Administration’s decisions. The consequences of those decisions now include 3,000 American deaths and 20,000 American wounded, Iraq on the brink of civil war, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths, the strengthening of Iran, the weakening of the U.S. military, and economic costs of over $2 trillion. It marks the first time Americans will be allowed inside the White House, Pentagon, and Baghdad’s Green Zone to understand for themselves what has become the disintegration of Iraq.
Posted by Editor at 6:45 PM
Labels: bush, documentary, iraq, propaganda, war
Published on Sunday, August 31, 2003 by the Baltimore Sun
Change Needed by U.S. in Iraq
Resistance to American Occupation is Growing, Thriving on the Country's Instability
by Scott Ritter
DELMAR, N.Y. - Nestled in the center of the Balidiyat district of Baghdad, Iraq, the Canal Hotel was a distinctive landmark for those who traveled on the major highway that swung through the eastern Baghdad suburbs.
A former tourist facility, the hotel was converted into a bustling home for numerous U.N. offices in the early 1990s, when that organization increased its operations in Iraq in the aftermath of the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
One of these U.N. operations was that of the weapons inspectors, with whom I served from 1991 to 1998. The Canal Hotel was our field operations headquarters; to many inspectors (including me), it was our home away from home while in Iraq.
Security was always a concern. Unarmed U.N. guards, recruited from the population, controlled the single entrance, making sure those who entered had permission. Armed Iraqi soldiers patrolled the periphery.
The hotel was adjoined by a complex that housed the Military Hospital for the Treatment of Spinal Injuries, and an aviation medicine unit of the Iraqi Air Force.
In January 1998, my team and I inspected the facilities, concerned that their proximity to our offices in the hotel posed a security risk. On Aug. 19, someone else apparently reached a similar conclusion, driving a construction vehicle filled with explosives into the parking lot of the Spinal Treatment Hospital, detonating it with devastating effect on the Canal Hotel and those inside.
The attack underscores the reality that resistance to the American-led occupation of Iraq is not diminishing, but growing. The resistance is nebulous, scattered and poorly defined, and yet seems to thrive on the instability that exists in Iraq.
For the enemies of the United States in Iraq, the key to creation of a sustainable popular-based resistance to the occupation rests in maintaining this instability. The key to getting the U.S. military out of Iraq rests in killing and wounding as many American soldiers as possible.
The attack on the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad demonstrates sophistication, not only in terms of ability to conduct a large terror operation, but also in regard to ability to pick the right target. Those who launched this attack appear not only to understand these two points, but also demonstrated through their actions the ability to combine what appears to be two disparate objectives into a single, horrible action.
In the aftermath, there is talk of increasing the U.S. military presence in Iraq to more robustly confront the growing resistance. This might be exactly what those who carried out the attack want.
The greatest recruiting tool for the Iraqi resistance effort is the presence of the American military. Holed up in Saddam Hussein's palaces, the U.S. military has, according to news reports, simply replaced one form of tyranny with another in the minds of many Iraqis.
Combined with an almost stunning inability to restore even the most basic of public services, the U.S. military has squandered its honeymoon phase, during which the goodwill of the Iraqi people would have tolerated almost anything as long as life got better.
But life hasn't gotten better. For many, it's gotten worse, creating a festering resentment from which those orchestrating anti-American activities can draw willing recruits to their cause. The aggressive tactics of the American occupiers in Iraq have backfired.
The American military presence in Iraq has, for the most part, become a "Fort Apache"-type environment, with soldiers barricading themselves in heavily fortified garrisons, emerging in heavily armed convoys to conduct their operations, only to return to the safety of their bases at mission's end.
The cordon and sweep operations that roust hundreds of men in the middle of the night, subjecting them to humiliation in front of their loved ones, has produced far more anti-American sentiment than captured anti-American fighters.
Confident-sounding American commanders speak of "owning the night," and having "freedom of operations," but they are only renting those times and spaces. Iraq belongs to those who occupy the turf on a continual basis, and that is not the U.S. military. The harsh calculus of the anti-American resistance is simple: Kill Americans.
For a few months, U.S. authorities in Baghdad have been trying to reduce the American military role in Iraq, pushing humanitarian and basic civil and economic administrative duties onto the shoulders of the United Nations and civilian contractors.
The attack on the hotel was not an attack against the United Nations as an organization. Rather, it was designed, along with recent attacks against foreign civilian targets, to paralyze the nonmilitary organizations. The longer civil operations are stopped, the more anti-American discontent will grow because America, as occupying authority, is responsible for these, and all, operations in Iraq.
To prevent this, the U.S. military will be forced to increase its presence by providing security for these nonmilitary operations, or by assuming responsibility for their work.
Either scenario results in the exposure of U.S. military personnel to attacks on terms more favorable to the Iraqi resistance. As casualties mount, American tactics will become more brutal in suppressing the resistance, increasing the level of anti-American hostility and creating a vicious cycle of violence from which the United States cannot hope to emerge victorious.
The struggle in Iraq centers on who can win the hearts and minds of the people. Instability has created an environment conducive for the resurrection of Hussein's Baath Party.
The American military confronts a small, growing, insurgency with unknown depth of popular support. If events do not change, it will soon face widespread resistance with support in the general population. Something must change.
The Bush administration must swallow its pride and acknowledge that an American-only solution in Iraq will not work. Political control of the occupation of Iraq must be transferred to the United Nations as soon as possible, and rapidly thereafter to the people of Iraq.
Isolation of the Baath Party must end. The net result of allowing the former Baathists a role in the formation of a new Iraq would be to undermine those who would resist the occupation by giving them a vested interest in cooperating.
Likewise, the U.S. administrators of Iraq should reverse their decision regarding the dissolution of the Iraqi Army, resurrecting the Ministry of Defense under the control of an interim Iraqi governing authority and reorganizing the military into a security force inside Iraq that has the trust and confidence of the majority of the Iraqi people. This would provide much-needed Iraqi muscle to the governing authority, whether U.N. or Iraqi, while removing a base of recruits from those who would resist change in Iraq.
Such policies do not represent a stepping away from democracy in Iraq, but rather a recognition that the path toward democracy might be different than the one now chosen.
American Occupation of Haiti
Date: 1915-1934
America Enters Haiti
On July 27 1915, Vilbrun Guillaume Sam the President of Haiti ordered 167 political prisoners killed. A mob then formed near the French Legation where Vilbrun Guillaume Sam was hiding. The mob broke in and mutilated his body in the street. The city of Port au Prince was in anarchy following the overthrow of the government of President Vilbrun Guillaume Sam. Rear Admiral William B. Caperton landed 340 sailors and Marines from the USS Washington. Also at Cap Haïtien more troops were landed from the USS Nashville, and USS Eagle. The landing parties from these two ships prevented the capture of Cap Haïtien. Soon after the Second Marine Regiment, First Brigade Headquarters and the First Marine Regiment arrived later in the month.
The Caco War
The Caco were a bandit organization in Haiti that , would fight for the highest bidder. When Vilbrun Guillaume Sam was assassinated a Caco army hired by Rosalvo Bobo was on the outskirts of the city. But the Marines landed by Caperton quickly forced the Cacos out of Port au Prince. A Campaign was then carried out by the First Marine Brigade to knock out the Cacos in the north and center of Haiti. The last major event of the campaign was the capture of the Caco strong hold at Fort Rivière, by Marines under the command of Major Smedley Butler. In this fight Sergeant Ross Iams, Private Samuel Gross, and Major Smedley Butler all received the Medal of Honor.
The Second Caco War
A second Caco outbreak began late in 1918. This second outbreak was in response to some Gendarmerie detachments using forced unpaid labor to build roads. The Haiti Gendarmerie were unable to contain the Cacos and the First Marine Brigade got the task of counter guerrilla fighting against the Cacos. In October 1919 the Caco attacked Port au Prince. Also in October of 1919 Caco leader Charlemagne Peralte was killed by a marine patrol. The Second Caco War ended in the mid 1920's due to the focussed attacks on Caco strongholds and leaders.
Between Saddam and the American Occupation: Iraq's Academic Community Struggles for Autonomy
The old regime was no friend to academic values. But Iraqi academics discover that life after liberation and occupation poses new threats to these same values.
By Keith Watenpaugh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a cheerless Friday afternoon in January 2003, shortly before the American-led invasion of Iraq, I strolled down Baghdad's al-Mutanabbi Street with the Iraqi architect Hussam al-Rawi al-Sayyad. The street, named for a tenth-century Arab poet, is home to the city's main used-book market. Al-Rawi took pride in pointing out the many titles published by Baghdad University and the Iraqi Academy of Sciences. Interspersed in and among the scholarly and popular books were state-produced tracts on Baathism, biographies of Saddam Hussein, standard anti-Israel screeds that often cross over into anti-Semitism, and a smattering of self-help books intended to aid one in overcoming wedding-night jitters. Many of the books and jour-nals represented years of careful collecting by Iraqis, who had been forced to sell them for cash. Arranged carefully along the curb, they spoke of a time when Baghdad, flush with oil wealth, competed with Cairo as the intellectual center of the Arab world.
In June 2003, shortly after the fall of the Baathist regime, and after the United States declared an end to major combat, I re-turned to Baghdad and al-Mutanabbi Street as the leader of a group of historians of the contemporary Arab Middle East from Germany, France, Jordan, and the United States. We had come to catalog the extent of the damage inflicted on institutions of higher learning and cultural production by the paroxysm of looting and aggravated mayhem of the previous few months. (We published our findings in a report, Opening the Doors: Intellectual Life and Academic Conditions in Post-War Baghdad, copies of which can be downloaded from H-Net, a Web-based consortium of scholars and teachers in the humanities and social sciences: http://www.hnet.org/about/press/opening_doors/.)
We discovered that the dour mood of the prewar period had been replaced by genuine excitement. The street was filled with Iraqis and others, poring over titles and buying armloads of books. Many, especially those on Shiite Islam, had been written by banned authors. This time, however, the titles also included books looted from Baghdad's public and university libraries. While some dealers tried to conceal the provenance of the books, others brazenly sold volumes still bearing call numbers on the spines.
The old Baathist tracts were gone, but book dealers had taken to selling artists' renderings of Imams Ali and Hussein, the Prophet Muhammad's son-in-law and grandson, who are the most revered figures in Shiite Islam. Next to them were photographs of bearded Islamic scholars like the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani and the murdered father of Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr. Even Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini could be seen.
The differences—and the stark continuities—between my two visits to al-Mutanabbi Street symbolize the larger problems facing Iraq's academic community in the aftermath of the war. Indeed, the troubles of Iraqi higher education in this hottest of all "hot spots" are the problems of Iraq as a whole. For higher education in Iraq, the fundamental challenge is to regain the intellectual integrity and professional autonomy lost during the brutish reign of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist apparatus. But also, and more fundamentally, Iraqi higher education faces unremitting civil strife, the infection of campuses with partisan and religious politics, and a heavy-handed and clumsy quasi-colonial U.S. policy that plans to continue to Americanize and "manage" Iraqi academic and intellectual life for the foreseeable future.
Ultimately, to help create a viable national community and open society, Iraqi higher education will first need to be restored to a firm and independent footing. And the country's vast reservoir of academics must be reintegrated into international networks of professional exchange as colleagues, friends, and equals. How institutions outside of Iraq—colleges, universities, professional societies, and donors—respond to those needs will contribute to the warp and weft of Iraqi society and to its relations with the rest of the world for generations to come.
Before the War
While we were in Baghdad, the co-authors of Opening the Doors conversed with Iraqi academics about life under the Baathist regime. Most notable was our discussion with Alya Sousa, a historian trained at the American University in Beirut, whose father, Ahmad Sousa, was among the leading historians of a previous generation. Alya Sousa, who wrote on the period between the world wars, left the history department at Baghdad University in the early 1990s. A grandmother, she later perished along with twenty-one others, including Sergio Vieira de Mello, the United Nations special envoy to Iraq, in an August 2003 car bombing of UN headquarters.
The architect Hussam al-Rawi contributed to our understanding as well. Trained in England, he is a champion of architectural regionalism and historic preservation, and he served in various administrative positions at Baghdad University. Because of his rank within the Baath Party structure, however, the urbane al-Rawi was expelled from the university in May 2003 by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), the U.S. military entity that governed the country until the handover of power to a transitional Iraqi government this past June. (This article goes to press just after the handover of sovereignty.) He has since left Iraq for exile in the Caribbean. One of al-Rawi's most recent and celebrated commissions is the mosque-tomb complex of Michel Aflaq, one of the three founders of the Baath Party, who died in Baghdad in 1989. Ironically, that complex served as a storage depot for the largest intact collection of Baath Party documents found to date. It was saved from demolition by the noted Iraqi architect and Brandeis University professor, Kanan Makiya.
Among our other interlocutors were two Iraqis who had returned to the country as advisers to the CPA's Ministry of Higher Education: Issam Khafaji and Farouq Darweesh. Khafaji is a leading Iraqi dissident who has taught in the United States and Europe, most recently at the University of Amsterdam. Darweesh, an engineer, was a former administrator at Baghdad University. Both have since left Iraq again. Khafaji claims that he did so to avoid becoming, in his words, "a collaborator."
All the people we interviewed emphasized a pattern of systematic abuse and corruption of higher education and scholarly re-search by the Baathist state apparatus; they also related anecdotes about acts of individual cronyism and the mental and physical abuse of professors by members of the ruling elite. At the same time, they conveyed the sense that the Iraqi system of higher education and professional development had no inherent flaws. Rather, social forces exterior to the universities had robbed the institutions of their prestige, vitality, rigor, and overall excellence.
Baathist policies toward higher education in Iraq changed dramatically over the thirty-two years preceding the U.S. occupation. Kamal Muzhar, a respected elderly historian, recalled that although the first systematic purges of communist faculty took place in 1968, until 1979 university professors elected their own directors, chairs, and deans. The exiles Khafaji and Darweesh concurred that the situation did not become truly unbearable until 1979.
Others point to the mid-1980s as the period that the system broke down altogether, with the near collapse of scholarly exchange after the state made travel abroad contingent upon ranking membership in the party. Before this time, Iraqi academics enjoyed the right to travel abroad to conferences and meetings; often, the state subsidized their expenses. Still, the security services considered those who spent time abroad suspect, and these academics could face harassment and interrogation on their return. Reduced freedom to travel had its cognate in the abandonment of the tradition of earning at least one higher degree at a school in Europe or North America. An older generation of Iraqi academics remembers a time when they could study freely in other Arab states, the United States, and Europe and when they enjoyed free tuition and liberal stipends from the government.
Although most Iraqis who completed graduate work before 1979 did so abroad, few studied overseas between 1980 and the outbreak of the Gulf War in 1991. After the war, almost no one did. The handful who traveled enjoyed close ties to the ruling elite. For the humanities and social sciences, this lack of mobility has been especially detrimental: foreign language ac-quisition has been poor and exposure to contemporary research almost nonexistent. An entire generation of junior professors has been unable to spend time abroad, attend international conferences, and build connections with colleagues outside of Iraq.
The state used rewards and punishments in the tenure-and-promotion process to induce and ensure loyalty. Iraqi universities employed, and still use, a tiered system of faculty advancement accompanied by a kind of tenure that guarantees employment but not necessarily rank. Ideally, movement from lecturer to assistant professor to professor is based on successful teaching and a review of research and publications by external evaluators.
But in the late 1980s and 1990s, the regime made it increasingly easy for party members to move through the ranks. Salaries, which were low even by academic standards, were tied to rank. When one became an administrator or a chair, one's salary increased steeply. Membership in institutions such as the Iraqi Academy of Sciences carried with it additional stipends, and opportunities to teach a heavier load for additional pay existed. Nevertheless, access to these upper ranks and perquisites often came at the price of party membership.
Sousa left the university out of frustration in the early 1990s to work with the United Nations. But she looked back fondly on her career in the academy. She said that women professors received support for their research and development until the mid-1980s, when the system became untenable. Her experience highlights the fact that state policy encouraged women's access to higher education and faculty positions. Not only was this policy in line with Baathist tenets of secular equality, but it was also a pragmatic response to the demographic realities created by the slaughter of many young Iraqi men in the Iran-Iraq war.
Setting issues of academic corruption aside, al-Rawi told me a story after the war that he had neglected to tell me earlier about the potential for arbitrary horror inherent in the old system. Luay Hussein, one of Saddam Hussein's most favored nephews, failed a required engineering course because of attendance problems. Al-Rawi, as head of the engineering section at the time, had to inform the nephew of this fact. In retribution, young toughs from Luay's entourage severely beat and maimed the professor who gave Luay the failing grade and later tried to ambush al-Rawi himself on the street. When the president's office learned of the occurrence, a staged, videotaped beating of Luay's accomplices was produced and shown to the faculty at Baghdad University as a kind of apology. Nevertheless, al-Rawi was not renewed as head of engineering.
The story underscores the vulnerable position of Iraqi academics in the prewar period. Those in the arts and humanities were especially at risk, because they did not have an obviously pragmatic value to the state, as did their colleagues in the sciences. Historians were in constant danger, as the state placed a premium on the maintenance of an ideologically "correct" portrayal of the past.
Most, if not all, Iraqi historians and other academics with international reputations left the country over the three decades preceding the war to assume better-paying or less-restrictive positions in the Arab Gulf, Jordan, Libya, Yemen, or the West. Prominent examples are the exiles Khafaji and Darweesh and the important historians of the Ottoman period, Sayyar Al-Jamil and Hala Fattah. This phenomenon is by no means limited to Iraq. It is an omnipresent fact of intellectual life in the Arab world.
"After" the War
The co-authors of Opening the Doors surveyed conditions at three campuses in the capital: Baghdad University, primarily the urban Bab al-Muazzam campus; al-Mustansiriyya University; and al-Nahrayn (Two Rivers) University, formerly Saddam University. All these universities shared problems brought by the war and its aftermath, namely, lack of public safety and unreliable availability of water, electricity, and transportation. Moreover, these institutions are still cut off from all substantive international contact. In real terms, this means a suspension of subscriptions to academic journals, library acquisitions, and travel abroad for faculty members and students.
Postwar looting harmed all state institutions, universities, libraries, and research centers, although some looting and destruction was limited to the theft of computers and other easily replaceable items. Vandals damaged classrooms and research spaces; even in places they did not physically destroy, they stole chairs, tables, blackboards, windows, and doors. Objects of unique value are gone. And missing items extend beyond old Ottoman archives, historic manuscripts, books, and documents. Student records and transcripts—the mundane trappings of everyday life in a modern educational system—also disappeared.
Of more pressing concern is the overt politicization of campuses that threatens to suppress open exchange and freedom of thought. Incidents involving harassment of nonveiled women students and teachers, student-on-student violence, and assassinations of administrators occur often.
Conservative estimates place at thirteen the number of academics murdered in Iraq since the start of the U.S. occupation. The most gruesome killing was the June 2004 beheading of Layla Abdullah Said, dean of the College of Law at Mosul University and one of the few women in positions of academic leadership. Her murder highlights the fact that Iraqi intellectuals who work with the United States or Western nongovernmental organizations have been increasingly targeted for death by the guerilla insurgency.
Women faculty note that their position in higher education has changed for the worse over the past decade, and they worry that it will continue to decline despite the fact that, historically, women have held positions of prominence in Iraqi higher education and female students make up at least 50 percent of the student population.
In spite of the onerous circumstances, including a lack of tables, chairs, examination booklets, and even chalk, by June 2003 the normal rhythm of the academic year had begun to return to the city's campuses. Students, excited and happy to be at school, had set up makeshift cafeterias, where they enjoyed each other's company. They were all well dressed—a major accomplishment given the heat and lack of running water. Their professors complained about them in ways comparable to what we say about our own undergraduates, suggesting a certain return to normalcy. The resourcefulness and adaptability of Iraqi faculty and students were readily in evidence.
The Occupation
In the middle of the 2002-03 academic year, the occupation authorities had forced sweeping administrative changes at all Iraqi universities: CPA officials dismissed the presidents of universities and deans of faculties as well as most department heads. Where CPA influence was minimal, faculty elections proceeded smoothly on a consensual basis. At that time, the heart of discontent at universities, as in other sectors of society, stemmed from the CPA's ham-fisted purges of ranking Baathists. Although the CPA subsequently abandoned this policy, it left a bitter residue in the relations between the CPA and the academy.
By the time my colleagues and I arrived, the CPA had lost much of the support and goodwill it enjoyed after the overthrow of the old regime. Its perceived inability to manage the basic needs of everyday life in the capital—for public safety, electricity, water, telephone communication, and gasoline—was the main cause of that loss. Few of our contacts then expressed virulent anti-Americanism, but that has begun to change.
We noticed a mounting frustration, even among members of the large educated Iraqi middle class who had been willing to give the Americans the benefit of the doubt, and who saw the occupation as a tremendous opportunity. For some, this frustration has turned into radical antipathy toward the American presence and assistance efforts. Those who are disaffected in this way make easy recruits for the increasingly organized paramilitary resistance.
Adding to the general sense of disempowerment was the perception that the CPA was institutionally indifferent to the needs of Iraqis. The CPA's choice of Saddam Hussein's former palace, for example, as the base of its operations and the future site of the U.S. Embassy, sent confusing and mixed signals to the Iraqi people. CPA officials themselves seemed in a permanent state of lockdown in the so-called Green Zone, the high-security cantonment where U.S. officials and contractors are headquartered. Because the Americans can rarely move about the city without armed guards, Iraqis hoping to meet them must do so in the cavernous Iraqi national conference center after passing through several checkpoints.
Although this article goes to press just after the June 2004 handover of sovereignty to an Iraqi government, it is already clear that the United States plans to maintain a large role in the civil administration of Iraq. Many of the CPA's functions have simply been incorporated into the massive U.S. diplomatic mission to Iraq, which will involve some nine hundred government employees and contractors. American diplomats will still control the bulk of redevelopment aid allocated to Iraq, as well as the proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil.
Universities, without independent budgets or endowments and with U.S. military personnel and weapons on their campuses, will continue to be in a subordinate position, underscoring the limits to Iraqi sovereignty. The same holds true for other research and cultural institutions.
The United States plans to continue to deploy U.S. Agency for International Development grants to link the United States and Iraqi institutions. (The first round of agency subcontracts awarded $5.1 million to five American universities and consortia.) Such programs have the potential to help Iraqis rebuild their educational system. But if Iraqis see the programs as part of an American agenda, their role is doubtful in the creation of permanent, collegial, and productive relations between the U.S. and Iraqi academic communities. The ultimate cost of failing to create such relationships may be the dismissal of core academic values—open scholarly exchange, freedom of inquiry, women's participation in higher education, and faculty self-management—as "American" and anti-Muslim.
The appointment by the CPA of John Agresto as senior adviser to the Ministry of Higher Education is one example of how U.S. political interests can taint Iraqi higher education. In the 1980s, Agresto was one of the leading right-wing figures in the "culture wars." Later, he was president of St. John's College in Santa Fe, New Mexico, an institution known for its Eurocentric "great books" curriculum. He now runs his own educational consulting firm, Agresto Consultants. He has no training in Middle Eastern society or culture, and he had no experience in the region before his arrival in Iraq. He was ap-pointed directly by U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whose wife, Joyce, served on St. John's board of trustees during Agresto's presidency.
His appointment signaled that the CPA intended to staff its bureaucracy with politically loyal agents, rather than with those most objectively qualified to assist Iraq. The clearly political na-ture of Agresto's position sent a chilling signal to academic in-stitutions interested in working in Iraq: their efforts would be part and parcel of the administration's current policy objectives.
Agresto's last day in Iraq was June 18, 2004. Before leaving, he admitted that Iraq's universities and colleges had not been rebuilt. He laid the blame primarily on a lack of international aid and support from the U.S. academy. He also faulted the Iraqis themselves. While still in Baghdad, and despite ample evidence to the contrary, he told a reporter for the Washington Post that Iraqis "don't know how to be a community. . . . [T]hey put their individual interests first. They only look out for themselves."
Beyond an ugly ethnocentrism and an unwillingness to shoulder any responsibility for American failures in Iraq, Agresto's comments signal a growing belief in Washington policy circles that Iraqis are unable to achieve modernity or democracy and thus are entitled to neither. This attitude can only hurt the chances for higher education to contribute to building a civil society in Iraq.
Despite Agresto's bleak assessment, the Iraqi interim government took the bold move of appointing a university professional, Tahir al-Bakaa', as minister of higher education in June 2004. A historian of the modern Middle East, al-Bakaa' had been elect-ed president of al-Mustansiriyya University by his peers in the immediate postwar period. A ranking Baathist, he escaped de-Baathification through sheer force of his personality and kept his university open and functioning through much of last year. He recently announced that he would keep the ministry out of local university administration. And, in a decision that may return to haunt him, he rejected a new education law drafted by Agresto's office at the CPA. It is an open question whether al-Bakaa' will succeed in navigating between the extremes of a new Iraqi government that hints that it will impose martial law and a U.S. government unwilling to give up real control.
Among the many papers I brought back with me from Iraq is a simple letter in Arabic from the president of the Iraqi Academy of Sciences, Hayawi Hammash. The letter invites members of the Middle East Studies Association to hold a conference in Baghdad at some point in the future. As an attenuated form of Iraqi sovereignty resumes, and as a low-grade but increasingly vicious civil war grips the country, the guarded optimism with which I left Baghdad has all but vanished. But the implicit obligation symbolized by that invitation has not.
Keith Watenpaugh is assistant professor of Islamic and Middle Eastern history at Le Moyne College and associate director of peace and global studies. This fall, he is a visiting scholar at Harvard's Center for Middle Eastern Studies. His book, Being Modern in the Middle East: Modernity, Colonialism, and the Emergence of the Middle Class, is under contract with Princeton University Press.
The American Occupation of Haiti
The causes of Intervention
© Ben Struck
Mar 11, 2007
In 1915 the United States Marines invaded the Republic of Haiti. This invasion resulted in an occupation that lasted until 1935.
In 1804, after years of harsh rule, the slaves of Haiti overthrew their French oppressors, and Haiti became the first black republic. The United States looked unfavorably upon this fledgling republic, for fear that it may lead to domestic unrest amongst its own slaves. Haiti and the United States had a strained relationship for many years, and the constant political turmoil in Haiti led to more disdain from the United States.
In 1915, an angry Haitian mob attacked their current President, and in a scene of unimaginable violence, they literally tore him to shreds. This event, along with the history of deposed presidents, led the United States to deem Haiti unfit to be self-governed. The Marine Corps landed and seized control of the country with relatively little resistance.
Keeping in line with the current progressivism and "good neighbor policy", the United States genuinely tried to rebuild the country. However, there may have been more motives than one might suspect.
America was becoming concerned with the increasing German presence in Haiti. German businessmen had attained many positions of power in the country. The United States, with one eye already focused on the situation in Europe, did not want to worry about a possible German naval base in the Caribbean.
Although America did contribute much to the health and education of the country, the racism of the Marines offset these gains. The Marines were hand-selected, and many came from the South. Those in the south treated the Haitians as if they were inferior to whites. Jim Crow Laws and other racial barriers were established in Haiti. Many of the government posts were taken from black Haitians and given to White or mixed-race Haitians. This racism established a rigid caste system that favored the minority population.
This intervention happened during a time when the idea of social Darwinism was gaining popularity, and the African-American population in the United States wanted Haiti to prove that Africans are equally capable of self-government. The Haitians saw American blacks as inferior, because they did not rise up in rebellion against their oppressors.
The American intervention, whether its intentions were true or self-serving, was often seen as Imperialism and racism. After the withdrawal in 1934, the country, now disarmed, was ready for a strong centralized government that could rule by force, not the desired intention.
Squandered Victory : The American Occupation and the Bungled Effort to Bring Democracy to Iraq
« H E » email
posted Tuesday, 31 January 2006
Squandered Victory : The American Occupation and the Bungled Effort to Bring Democracy to Iraq
Larry Diamond
Date: 26 May, 2005 — $16.50 — Book
product page
Rating:
In late 2003, Condoleezza Rice sent Larry Diamond to Iraq as part of L. Paul Bremmer's Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) to help the Iraqis create a democracy. His book clearly and concisely details the failure of the Bush administration to create a free-market liberal democracy in Iraq, describing the process as a downward-spiraling chain of cause and effect, "One damn thing follows another."
Diamond tells the story of his experience in Iraq, and follows the chain of failure and dwindling options through the election of Iraq's transitional assembly in January, 2005, asserting, "The first step the United States took made it difficult to bring democracy to Iraq, because it brought a military and political occupation as the instrument of liberation." The invasion and occupation of Iraq without any international legitimacy was the "original sin," but Diamond contends that alone wasn't enough to doom our efforts.
The second fundamental mistake was our inability to secure Iraq, "...we cannot get to Jefferson and Madison without going through Thomas Hobbes. You can't build a democratic state unless you first have a state, and the essential condition for a state is that it must have an effective monopoly over the means of violence."
Peppered throughout the book are first-hand accounts of soldiers, high-ranking officers, CPA officials, the author, and even L. Paul Bremmer himself and Gen. James Garner before him asking President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for more troops to seal Iraq's borders and stabilize the country -- all requests were denied
Gas War: The Truth Behind the American Occupation of Afghanistan
Book Description
At first glance, the United States invasion of Afghanistan seemed like an obvious response to the horrifying attacks of September 11th, 2001. Now, as America remains threatened by Al Qaeda and Afghanistan has disintegrated into the bloodshed of renewed civil war, the occupation looks like a disaster. But fighting terrorism wasnÂ’t the real goal of the Afghan war. Picking up where his groundbreaking travelogue To Afghanistan and Back left off, Ted RallÂ’s extensive research reveals the truth behind the spin and the new dangers we face as a result.
From the Author
Soon after I returned from covering the war in Afghanistan in late 2001, it became obvious that the Bush Administration had made next to no effort to capture Osama bin Laden. It had made next to no effort to bring democracy to Afghanistan. And it had made next to no effort to rebuild that war-torn country.
That left only one reason for the U.S. to invade Afghanistan: the country's position between the Indian Ocean and the landlocked Caspian Sea nation of Kazakhstan, which lucked into the biggest oil strike in world history in 1999.
The story of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline has been reported in countless fragmentary reports, but no one had ever brought together all the loose threads into a coherent piece. Given the complexities of Central Asian politics and the energy business, it wasn't surprising that the average American was not aware of the scandalous origins of the U.S. invasion and occupation.
I decided to try to change that. GAS WAR tells the whole story of the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline from its start in the mid 1990s to the recent agreement signed by Hamid Karzai authorizing its construction. It aptly demonstrates that there is no "war on terrorism," but rather a wholesale attempt to colonize oil-producing states. This is, of course, precisely the kind of resentment-causing policy that will lead to future acts of terrorism against innocent Americans. If you care about America, you need to know about the crimes that your President is committing in your name.
Prof. Dr. Klaus SchwabeAmerican Occupation Experiences in Aachen before Germany's Surrender
Universitätsprofessor, Dr. phil Klaus Schwabe
Special publication of the Aachener Geschichtsvereins (Aachen Historical Society) Aachen 2000
Introductory note:
As early as September 2, 1944, the first American units crossed the city limits of Aachen and thereby also the German national border. The city was encircled in a wide pincer-like movement and captured on October 21. For nearly half a year Aachen was the only large German city to be controlled by the victorious powers. Having gradually liberated Western Europe and forced the Nazi-aggression back to the territory of its origin, the Americans were confronted for the first time with the task of bringing freedom and democracy to the Germans themselves. Professor Schwabe's successful accomplishment is an analysis of the American “experiment” in Aachen, the historical and political significance of which goes far beyond mere local or military history. He is commended for having based his account on unpublished American sources. It is highly appropiate that this abriged version of Professor Schwabe's essay, available as a special edition on paper and in the internet, should be presented to the American public in their own language in the year which the American President is awarded the “Karlspreis”.
Not far away from Aachen in the military cemetries of Henri-Chapelle and Margraten, tens of thousands of graves bear whitness to the enormous human sacrifice the American people made, in order to bring peace and democracy not only to liberated Europe, but also to conquered Germany. It seems fitting that Aachen, the place where Americans had their first experience of a population exposed to criminal dictatorship for a long time, pay a special tribute to America's ongoing commitment to Europe.
Dr. Jürgen Linden, Lord Mayor (Oberbürgermeister)
Dr. Thomas R. Kraus, Chairman (Vorsitzender)
“Setting up the Right Kind of Government”
American Occupation Experiences in Aachen before Germany' s Surrender
For a long time it had been an integral part of America's political tradition to believe that American institutions had the character of a model and that peace in the world would be assured if this American model was copied by the less enlightened rest of mankind. To be sure, Vietnam has undermined this confidence to an extent, but still has not really invalidated it. Witness the Western world's hope for democracy in Russia as a guarantee for future peaceful East-West relations. [1]
It was this conviction that inspired American troops reaching France's shores in June 1944 and fighting against Nazi Germany's troops; it was the hope that world peace would be assured once the Nazi dictatorship had been destroyed and Western style democracy was introduced to Germany; it was this belief that gave meaning to the Allied sacrifices, the conquest and the ultimate administration of Nazi Germany. The first place where this experiment of transfering the American model to the German field was carried out was Aachen, internationally known as Aix-la-Chapelle, Germany's Western most city - three miles away from the Dutch, four miles away from the Belgian borders, - and still a place deeply rooted in German history. Aachen, where once upon a time Charlemagne had resided, had for hundreds of years been the site where German emperors were crowned; it had been an imperial free city (freie Reichsstadt) like Frankfurt (not unlike Washington, D.C.). Later on it became a center of German catholicism, loyal to the German Republic even in the dark hours after World War One, when it looked as if the Rhineland would be incorporated into France.
In mid-September 1944, when American troops reached Germany's border, Aachen assumed symbolic value in a twofold manner: To the Nazis the imperial city became the first German stronghold, the place where the Allied offensive would definitely be halted - a German Stalingrad for the Americans.
To the Americans Aachen was the first larger German community where American occupation policies as planned to the whole of Germany could be tried out. Aachen was to demonstrate to what extent it was possible to re-educate the Nazi-infested Germans, to what extent their thinking and their political behavior could be transformed in a way that assured a future peaceful attitude of the German people. In Aachen it could be found out to what extent American concepts for a civil-military administration of Germany were suitable for use for the rest of the former Reich.
In part, the success of this American experiment in re-educating the Germans depended, of course, on the attitude of the German population submitted to it. This will be the first issue to be addressed in the present essay; the reader’s attention will have then be directed to the first impressions the American authorities gained in dealing with a conquered German population, and the first steps they took to ”reconstruct” them; thirdly and finally, an attempt will be made to show to what extent the Aachen experiment reflected and/ or influenced American occupation policies at large on a higher level.
I.
Firstly, the German perspective should be mentioned- the feelings of the German population of Aachen, that witnessed the end of the Nazi rule in September/October 1944 , that is more than half a year before Germany's final surrender. Taken all in all, the Hitler regime had left a rather unfavorable impression with those Germans who, despite of rigorous evacuation measures taken by the Nazis, managed to stay in Aachen during the battle raging around and in the city from mid-September until October 21, 1944. No other than Heinrich Himmler, who had visited Aachen briefly a few days before the battle began, had boastfully discarded any idea of clearing the city from its inhabitants, as the Americans would never show up within its confines. Only two days afterwards Aachen was shelled by US artillery, American troops were expected in hours, and Hitler ordered the total evacuation. The first to obey this order using the few cars that still were available, were the Nazi brasshats (”Goldfasane”). Meanwhile, the rank and file population was left behind, sometimes panicking. However, as the American forces did not enter the city immediately, the SS and the police returned. The Nazi officials tried hard to force every civilian out of the city, at times at gun point, until Aachen was encircled by US troops and this was no longer possible. In the end 18 ooo ”Aacheners” were evacuated, only 6000 managed to stay on in hiding. (More than 15o ooo inhabitants had left earlier on account of the allied bombings).
The Nazi authorities proved not only unable to evacuate the city in an orderly manner, they also refused even to consider the idea of an orderly transfer to the American authorities of the city administration. All representations by some courageous “Aacheners” to ensure this were in vain. When the military situation had become hopeless, their pleadings to give up fighting, remained unheard. Unmoved, Hitler himself ordered the defense of the city to the last ruin.
No wonder then that the 6000 “Aacheners”, who survived bombings and street fighting, sensed a feeling of deep relief when the German troops finally gave up on October 21, 1944, leaving behind them the ruins and the rubble of a settlement of which about 70 % was destroyed. Only the more than a thousand years old.cathedral miraculously escaped major damage. The “Aacheners” felt relieved because for them the war, the daily danger of being killed, was over. But it was not only that - they no longer had to fear reprisals by their own Nazi fellow men, whose orders to leave the embattled city they had defied.
In the eyes of the secret Nazi police,the GESTAPO those “Aacheners” who had stayed behind were, of course, a bunch of criminal traitors. To their disgust no one less than the catholic bishop of Aachen belonged to that “scum” of society. Staying in Aachen the bishop Johannes van der Velden had remained faithful to an agreement the Catholic church in the Rhineland had secretly concluded in August 1944. This agreement instructed all church leaders to remain with their congregation when the Allies arrived.
By and large, the surviving Aachen population was thus thoroughly fed up with the Nazi regime, and some of them did not hesitate to sincerely welcome the American conquerors as liberators, even more so as they seemed, by and large and despite some looting, to behave correctly, sometimes even courteously.
Thus the cooperation between victors and vanquished - or rather liberated -began quite auspiciously. It is true that the American military had cleared the city of Aachen of the remaining civilians , who were interned nearby, while the battle was raging and Nazi underground activities were suspected. But soon after Aachen’s surrender and after having been individually questioned by the CIC the “Aacheners” were permitted back to what was left of their home town. At the end of the year the Aachen population had grown to about 12 000 persons. Assisted by the Bishop of Aachen American occupation officers quickly managed to establish contact with a group of “Aachener” business people, one of whom was willing to become the first German city mayor under American rule. This was a lawyer, named Franz Oppenhoff, 42 years old. When he was sworn into office no press photos were permitted. His name was not divulged for the obvious reason that he had relatives in Nazi Germany, who had to fear reprisals, at the very least confinement in a concentration camp, if it became known that one of their family collaborated with the enemy. He and his American superiors were aware that in accepting this position he took a personal risk, as Nazi guerrilla activities were announced by the Hitler regime and the death sentence was threatened to any German who collaborated with the enemy in any way.
As far as Oppenhoff was concerned he proved to be no stooge of the American occupation authorities. He tenaciously defended the interests of the Aachen population, whether the opening of roads for revictualling the city was at stake or the reopening of banks or the introduction of taxes. A sort of solidarity in practice grew between American authorities and the German population of Aachen. This was confirmed when Aachen was threatened to be retaken by German troops during the Battle of the Bulge in late December 1944. In this tense situation, in which many ”Aacheners” feared the return of their fellow countrymen, the American authorities assured the mayor that he would get a seat in one of the trucks that were scheduled to evacuate American troops from Aachen, if necessary. Christmas was celebrated in common by vanquished and victors in the venerable Aachen cathedral.
II.
Around about the same time the climate between American occupiers and the German population began strangely to deteriorate. American officers watched ever more closely over a strict implementation of the antifraternization orders. There were no more handshakes between American officers and German officials, Oppenhoff included. Then on February 2, 1945, the Aachener Nachrichten - the first German language paper to be issued under American rule - published 27 names of city employees who had been fired, because they were pronounced to have been more or less active members of the Nazi party. In the following weeks this purge continued. Nearly all of the people affected by it had only been nominal card-bearing party members, as those who had exposed themselves as Nazis had, of course, left the city. Oppenhoff himself sensed that the Americans no longer really trusted him, although he could not explain why.
What had happened? How could this more rigid American attitude be explained in face of the fact that the Aachen population had proved "docile" and friendly vis-à-vis the American authorities? Had this new hard line something to do with the Battle of the Bulge or the bitter trench fighting that was going on in the hills (Hürtgenwald)some15 miles to the South of Aachen ? Was it related to the discoveries of German concentration camps ? All these guesses were wrong. There was much more behind the Aachen purge - in fact, its background reached all the way to the American capital.
III.
This brings us to the American perspective of the American experiment , their attempts to introduce democratic behavior to the Aachen Germans. Two preliminary points will have to be made in advance: First, there was a whole hodgepodge of administrative institutions that claimed to be responsible for how conquered Germany would be administered: In the first instance, of course, there was the Supreme Allied Headquarters (SHAEF) under Eisenhower`s orders, and under SHAEF the division G-5 (civil administration) and the Division for Psychological Warfare; then there was the State Department represented by the career diplomat Robert Murphy, Eisenhower's political advisor. Furthermore, there was the Treasury which was in charge of all financial questions. Finally, Congress and the American Press felt a sense of responsibility, and both were keenly interested in what was happening in Germany under American occupation. Some later celebrities like Henry Kissinger and the German emigrant novelist Stefan Heym passed through Aachen.
The second preliminary point that has to be made is that, when the first American troops set foot on German soil, only an interim directive existed for the administration of a conquered Germany during the period of hostilities. Of course, the American.administration in Germany had to do everything to support the military operations; but it had also the assignmment to eradicate all traces of Nazism, intern all representatives of the Nazi regime, abolish all specifically Nazi legislation, and facilitate the return of law and order among the German populace by resorting, wherever feasible, to German officials. All adults had to fill out questonnaires, in order to document their political past. The American troops were admonished that ” the German people are engaged in a total war against you and are individually and collectively your enemy. Conduct yourself in their presence with such military bearing ... and soldierly efficiency, that they will appreciate at once the power that is within our army. Germany has long been a nation of military tradition; her people will ...be impressed with these outward demonstrations of genuine soldierly qualities ”(15.9.).
The Germans were told in Eisenhower's Proclamation Nr.1 that ”the Allied forces serving under my command have now entered Germany. We come as conquerors but not as oppressors. In the area of Germany occupied by the forces under my command, we shall obliterate Naziism and German Militarism ” (Nov.1944).
American plans for the occupation of Germany were based on two premises: first on the expectation that the Germans were on the whole Nazi-infected and hostile towards the American conquerors, secondly on the assumption that a more or less functioning German administration could be taken over by and serve under the direction of the military government.
Both premises, as the Americans at once discovered in Aachen, were quite off the mark. Actually, the civilian population in Aachen proved to be docile and cooperative, and every German claimed to have had nothing to do with the Nazi regime. It was only the fear of Nazi reprisals against relatives in Germany that held some Germans in reserve vis-à-vis their new masters. Contrary to what one had expected there was no trace of underground activities. A few weeks after the city had been captured, the security situation in Aachen was judged to be excellent. One officer summed up his experiences as follows :[Compared with Germany] "We find it [our task] much more difficult in Belgium, because, thanks to the training of German people by the German army, they do what we tell them to do. The Belgians do not.”
As we will see , this picture was just a touch too rosy.
Of course, the Americans basically distrusted the German population that met them in such a surprisingly forthcoming way. Long black lists ( identifying Nazis) and much shorter white ones (showing anti-Nazis) had been provided by the intelligence services, in order to help select the right kind of Germans for administrative positions. In Aachen these list were not yet available. Instead, the bishop came to the Americans’ assistance by recommending Oppenhoff and his crew for the city administration..Robert Murphy, Eisenhower's top political adviser, who visited Aachen in late November, highly praised Oppenhoff for having the courage to accept this difficult job despite of the threat of Nazi reprisals. About the same time, however, the spirit of mutual cooperativeness suffered some set-backs. The "Stars and Stripes" came out with an editorial that sharply criticized the friendly attitude some American soldiers displayed to people in occupied Germany. "Don't get chummy with Jerry ", it advised these overly gullible American G.I.’ s .(20.10.44).
But this was only the beginning. What later came to be called the "Aachen scandal" actually occurred through the activities of some civilian members of the Psychological Warfare Division (PWD). It was their job to sound out the German population for their political views, their attitude to the Nazis, to the German soldiers and even to the local situation. They had, in other words, to gather intelligence that could be fed into the war propaganda. In addition to this, the Psychological Warfare Division was responsible for informing the Germans themselves both within and outside of the zone controlled by American troops.
Entrusted with these duties a group of P.W.D. officers descended on Aachen in December 1944 for the first time. Their work was coordinated by a young historian by the name of Saul Padover. Padover had left Vienna with his parents in the early twenties and had emigrated to the U.S. He had taught at some smaller university and had published a few popular books on 18th century history. Compared to other officers, he held one precious advantage: He was fluent in German, and could thus get first hand information by interviewing Germans.
This he did getting results that he found quite remarkable. [2] Above all, the ”Aacheners” he talked to, showed hardly any sign of moral contrition, as they disclaimed any involvement with the Nazi rule. Oppenhoff seemed to behave like the citizen of a victorious, and not a vanquished country. All of them professed to a fear of communism, some advocated German-American cooperation in fending off that danger.
Not all of the Germans Padover interviewed shared this somewhat smug, self-complacent attitude. There were a few among them, Padover reported, who were prepared to admit a general guilt of the German people - with the exception of themselves, of course, for they had actually never conceded anything to the Nazis. These, Padover stated, were the members of the German Left, Social Democrats and the few Communists he met. This impression coincided with what Padover always had believed, as he wrote in retrospect:” I felt that despite their disastrous and morally criminal passivity, the Left workers, being the only non-militaristic and non-fascist elements in the [German] Reich, were the sole hope of Germany's future...If ever Germany was to be rendered decent and harmless, it must be done through the Left.” [3]
It should be stressed that Padover thus expressed a conviction that was widely shared in the American government - all the way up to the head of the OSS William Donovan, who advised President Truman in a similar vein, although he himself certainly did not display a trace of “leftishness”. But these political preferences also seemed to be justified by the first political opinion polls that were taken among the Aachen population - polls that confirmed a nearly exclusive trend to the Left among the Germans. Armed with this conviction Padover was all the more struck to find out that the Aachen city administration included hardly any representative of the Left within its ranks - be it Social Democrats, Trade Unionists, or Communists. How could this be explained? Was there something rotten in the city of Aachen? Critical German leaflets circulated; rumors flared up. An investigation seemed necessary. Padover was appointed to do the job - to investigate the Aachen city administration and, by implication, the American officers who had created it.
Padover lost no time in starting. While the Battle of the Bulge was still on, he interrogated a whole range of German and American witnesses in Aachen. The final result he arrived at in January 1945 was altogther alarming. He felt he had uncovered a wholesale political conspiracy in Aachen - the conspiracy of diehard rightists who under American eyes had formed the Aachen city administration, guided by the single purpose of keeping the Left out. This conspiracy, Padover believed, centered around the mayor Oppenhoff. Padover reported to his superiors that the Aachen city administration consisted of technicians, lawyers, engineers, businessmen, manufacturers, and churchmen."This elite", he continued," is shrewd, strongwilled, and aggressive..Its leader is Oberbürgermeister Oppenhoff...behind Oppenhoff is the bishop of Aachen, a powerful figure with a subtlety of his own... All of these men managed to stay out of the Nazi party, most of them were directly connected with the town's leading war industries, [Veltrup and Talbot ]..These men are not democratically minded... They are planning the future in terms of an authoritarian highly bureaucratic state...Politically it is conceived as small-state Clericalism...".
To make matters worse this clerical-semi fascist clique had displayed a telling leniency in accepting ex-Nazis for jobs in the city administration. Was this to be a model for Germany as a whole ? Were not the Germans in the first German city conquered by American troops totally deprived of the chances of the democratic revival that Roosevelt and Churchill had promised them?
At this point the historian feels called to intervene. There is no doubt that Padover was grossly unfair in denigrating the character of Oppenhoff who, after all, was risking his life in the service of his ruined city and who certainly had no fascist leanings and was no conspirator.
It must be added, however, that there was more than a grain of truth in what Padover reported of Oppenhoff's general political orientation. It was true that Oppenhoff openly despised the miscarried experience of the Weimar Republic, and it was equally true that he did not limit Left- wing participation in his administration to a minimum by accident, while at the same time tolerating some nominal Nazis. Whatever the truth may have been, what counted in the winter of 1945 was that Padover's version of the Aachen scandal was widely believed within the higher ranks of the American Military Command. Above all, Padover saw to it that his story was leaked to the press so as to create sufficient uproar in the American public. As for Aachen, there can be no doubt that the purge of the city administration, the purge that had puzzled the Germans so much, went back to Padover's activities. In fact, as Padover strongly demanded Oppenhoff`s dismissal, even the mayor`s days seemed to be numbered.
Therefore, it was historic irony how the case of Oppenhoff was finally disposed of - not by any action on the part of American authorities in Aachen , but by an act of vengeance of which the dying Nazi regime was guilty. On March 20, 1945, a terrorist squad parachuted on the forests near Aachen. Five days afterwards, at 11 o`clock in the evening, a member of this group shot and killed Oppenhoff in his own premises. Himmler himself had given the order to "execute the traitor". In Himmler’s eyes it was evident that Oppenhoff had no Nazi leanings... Oppenhoff's successor in Aachen belonged to the people (Padover’s ”clique”) from which the former mayor’s own administration had been recruited. So, ultimately Padover only partly saw his policy implemented in Aachen.
IV.
This brings up our third point - the question as to what extent the events in Aachen both reflected and influenced top governmental occupation policies of the United States in Germany. Did, in other words, the local events in Aachen reverberate outside Aachen and did they have any bearing that reached beyond the confines of the old free city? How did the locally responsible American military authorities react to the unsolicited activities of the Psychological War Division in Aachen, to begin with these activities had touched upon three fundamental issues: First, there was the problem regarding the degree to which the Military Government should get involved with German affairs at all; secondly, it had to be decided what was more important: The efficiency or the political spotlessness of a given German administration acting under American rule. In other words,the question that had to be solved was whether - under wartime conditions- primary emphasis was to be put on expertise, using nominal Nazis, if unavoidable, or whether some administrative and technical inefficiency on the.German side had to be allowed for in the name of political correctness. Thirdly, Padover had confronted the military with the question of the general political orientation that was to be fostered by the Americans in defeated Germany. Was it advisable to copy Padover’s example who, as we have seen, had squarely opted for the Left ? The American local military administration in Aachen, naturally, responded to Padover's investigations with some irritation and a good deal of uneasiness, and it was with a clear sigh of relief that one of the officers noted that the "tenor" of Padover's report was "better than might have been expected". In any case, these American officers were hardly prepared for dealing with any such critical political options. In reacting to Padover's challenge they, characteristically, split into two "camps". One group stuck to the decision made right after Aachen's surrender, that is they defended Oppenhoff and his collaborators, regardless of their seemingly reactionary leanings and regardless of the fact that Oppenhoff had employed some nominal Nazis. Another group took Padover more seriuly. One officer succinctly pinned down the alternatives, writing:..."Efficiency [of a German Administration], as far as our concern goes, is not nearly as important as integrity... It seems to me that we must keep a long range point of view in mind , that the work of this [Aachen] detachment will be judged not on whether shoes were made available for sale this month rather than the next or even whether we can get 100 labor[er]s to work today instead of 5o, but whether we are setting up the right kind of Government with the right men in it... A new Germany has got to be built free from all the evil influences of her past. If we lose sight of our principles, gloss over shady backgrounds of civilian appointees, put in backsliders and turncoats, if we hold out the true fighters of Naziism -those who had the courage of their convictions - if we give no representation to the workers, to the small people who are Germany, we are not carrying our cause forward... If we have allowed a clique to get in power we must break it... We should constantly try to free this government of every Nazi trait and any other aspect that militates against the democratic ideals we are fighting for...". [4]
As we have seen, this group prevailed as far as the purge of the Aachen administration of formal Ex-Nazis was concerned, but, for reasons that are not altogether clear, did not get its way when Oppenhoff's successor was appointed. At any event, the Aachen scandal helped to sensitize the upper echelons of the American Army command as to the real problems American Military government in Germany would have to face. It was not only the question of the degree of American involvement in German politics, not only the question of sorting former minor Nazis out of responsible administrative positions; it was the crucial question as to what kind of Germans were initialy to be selected to assume political reponsibility. Obviously, this process had not worked to full satisfaction in the case of Aachen. It was necessary to do better. Referring to the Aachen scandal a high ranking officer in SHAEF summed up the problem in the following way:”The clarification of de-Nazification instructions does not solve the problem. ...We are going to be criticized for the way the political situation develops [in Germany] even when the question of Naziism is not involved... If we allow right-wing figures to dominate a civil administration we will be criticized by the left wing and vice versa ..".
This was a real predicament, a dilemma, behind which loomed a problem that had not really been solved even by highest authorities in Washington: The question as to whether a positive, constructive, political program would have to be pursued by the United States in defeated Germany, and what this program would look like. Asking for guidance in this respect, SHAEF touched upon a controversy that had been raging in Washington since the summer of 1944. Put briefly, it revolved around making a choice, the alternative being either a more ideologically or a more pragmatically oriented American occupation policy in Germany. The ideologues had their stronghold in the Treasury. Henry Morgenthau not only advocated the “pastoralization” of Germany, but, more importantly, a decided policy of hands-off as far as any German politics were concerned. Morgenthau's adversaries were concentrated in the Pentagon (but also in the State Department). Here, pragmatic aspects always had to be taken into consideration - pragmatic aspects that really ruled out the kind of wholly destructive policy which Morgenthau and his supporters advocated. Psychological warfare required that the Germans were offered somewhat more than the wholesale destruction of their heavy industries, unless one wanted them to fight to the very last ditch. Administratively, it was necessary to establish a certain degree of civil order in the German areas behind the front lines; cooperation with some Germans, therefore, was unavoidable. As soon as this was acknowledged, the question of some political guidance for this cooperation came up.
In Washington the conflict between ideologues and pragmatists continued until March 23, 1945. This was the date when the ever vacillating FDR could be persuaded to put his initials under a compromise that left all options open to the pragmatists. It was this compromise that paved the way for a preliminary guideline for the political reconstruction of occupied Germany. Robert Murphy, the State Department representative at SHAEF and Eisenhower's most prominent political adviser, who had visited Aachen three weeks after its surrender, assumed the responsibility for issuing the guidelines the military officers had asked for in preparation for their occupation duties in Germany. It is a key document of the early history of America's occupation of Germany. Explaining the interdepartmental compromise initialled by Roosevelt of March 23, 1945 Murphy wrote:
”The new policy...draws a distinction between active and nominal members of the Nazi Party...in the direction of permitting the use, through retention or appointment, of.persons who were only nominal members of the Nazi Party.... The denazification directive, however complete and detailed..., is essentially negative in its approach to the problem of governing Germany. It gives no positive guidance for the Military Government officer who not only wants to know whom he should not appoint, but whom he should appoint, ...in order to promote and encourage a regrowth of democratic forces...Old [German] political labels are indicative though not decisive. Thus, it is a presumption that former trade unionists, Social Democrats, and many of the Center Party are reasonably pro-democratic and anti-Nazi. Parties to the right of the former Center Party ... may have been anti-Nazi; but they were so generally imbued with German nationalism...as to make their members unsuitable for all purposes... Stress must be laid on considering carefully the background of each individual... Appointments should especially avoid giving too much prominence to elements of the extreme left or the extreme right of the Anti-Nazi section of the population. This is important in order to avoid charges of favoring a too radical or too conservative policy and also in order to lessen the chances of appointing persons who are not genuinely pro-democratic..." (May 7,1945)
V.
Murphy's advice was not only remarkable in that it excluded communists for the first time from the reservoir of potential German democrats thus foreshadowing the Cold War; it was also indicative of a new United States policy which henceforth was to govern its occupation: What Murphy recommended to the top of America's future administrators in Germany was not a policy of abstaining from German political affairs as recommended by Morgenthau, nor was it a policy of purposely promoting the radical German Left, the way Padover had advocated it -it was rather a policy that was at the same time pragmatic as well as centrist , a policy of promoting the vital center of the body politic in Germany, in other words a policy that included moderate left-wing as well as moderate right-wing elements for the job of reconstructing Germany. In this sense, Murphy became a godfather to the future Federal Republic. The insights Americans had in Aachen contributed to the formulation of this new policy. So in the last analysis, the Aachen scandal was all for the good. At any event, what happened in Aachen more than fifty years ago, was more than mere parochial politics.
The American Occupation of Malolos (1899)
The descriptions are the original ones and show the American point of view 100 years ago
Army Suppy Train en Route to Malolos
General Wheaton and his Aids
"This is an army supply train en route to Malolos. The wagons are hauled by a species of buffalo peculiar to the Philippines. It is a patient animal somewhat livelier than the American ox. It does the hard labor of the islands." "General Wheaton and his aids at the suburbs of Malolos, preparing to enter after the retreating insurgents. This was the early seat of the Tagal government. The soldiers are at parade rest in the road awaiting orders to advance."
A Scene in Malolos on Entrance of Americans
Occupation of Malolos
"Chinese flags are everywhere flying for the protection of lives and porperty of Chinese residents and merchants. These flags were always respected as covering neutrals and non-combatans." "Distribution of troops in various portions of the town for preservation of lives and property of loyal natives, and to fortify against attacks of insurgents, as well as to insure the general safety."
American Troops Entering the Public Square
Destruction of Malolos Church
"The american troops are here entering the public square of Malolos. The church has just been set on fire by the retreating insurgents, ans was burned down nonwithstanding the efforts of the soldiers to save it." "The desperate character of the insurgents is shown in this wanton destruction of Malolos church. It was fired by them as they fled before the Americans just entering the town. It was done partly in revenge against the religious orders."
Congressional Hall
The Railroad Depot of Malolos
"Congressional hall and executive building occupied by Aguinaldo and his aids. Here Aguinaldo took the oath of office. After the Filipinos were driven away, Gen. McArthur made it his headquarters. Photograph taken on first day of occupation. " "The proclamation of General Luna is posted upon the wall near the door. The officers are Generals Otis, McArthur and Hale. Photograph was taken within half hour following evacuation of insurgents."
Source: A Wonderful Reproduction of LIVING SCENES In Natural Color Photos fo America's New Posssessions. F. Tennyson Neely. New York, Chicago, London: 1899.
See:
"The First President of the Republic" (by Younghusband, 1899)
[Austrian-Philippine Home Page] [Culture and History] [Picturesque Old Philippines]
created: November 25, 1997
updated: February 8, 1999
APSIS Editor Johann Stockinger
On January 16, 1893, United States diplomatic and military personnel conspired with a small group of individuals to overthrow the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom and prepared to provide for annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States of America, under a treaty of annexation submitted to the United States Senate, on February 15, 1893. Newly elected U.S. President Grover Cleveland, having received notice that the cause of the so-called revolution derived from illegal intervention by U.S. diplomatic and military personnel, withdrew the treaty of annexation and appointed James H. Blount, as Special Commissioner, to investigate the terms of the so-called revolution and to report his findings.
The report concluded that the United States legation assigned to the Hawaiian Kingdom, together with United States Marines and Naval personnel, were directly responsible for the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government. The report details the culpability of the United States government in violating international laws and the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Kingdom, but the United States Government fails to follow through in its commitment to assist in reinstating the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Instead, the United States allows five years to lapse and a new United States President, William McKinley, enters into a second treaty of annexation with the same individuals who participated in the illegal overthrow with the U.S. legation in 1893 on June 16, 1897, but the treaty was unable to be ratified by the United States Senate due to protests that were submitted by Her Majesty Queen Lili‘uokalani and signature petitions against annexation by 21,169 Hawaiian nationals.
As a result of the Spanish-American War, the United States opted to unilaterally annex the Hawaiian Islands by enacting a congressional joint resolution on July 7, 1898, in order to utilize the Hawaiian Islands as a military base to fight the Spanish in Guam and the Philippines. The United States has remained in the Hawaiian Islands and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation to the present, but its continuity as an independent State remains intact under international law.
The main documents surrounding United States intervention and subsequent occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom are recorded in the following.
The American Occupation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
or go to the photo album
Also in History of the Philippines:
Pre-Spanish Period
The Spanish Colonial Period
The Heroic Filipinos
Important Events in Philippine HistoryWith the assurance of the Americans’ promise to free the country, General Aguinaldo, a municipal mayor and the commander of the Philippine forces, declared the Philippine independence on June 12, 1898. He confirmed the establishment of Philippine Republic on January 23, 1899 with himself as president.
The Spanish rule in the islands ended when Spain and the United States signed the treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898. It was an agreement between the two countries to pass the possession of the Philippines to the United States in exchange of $20 million. Not being able to consult the Filipinos, this arrogant settlement resulted to a new resistance and battle for freedom.
By the time the treaty of Paris was ratified, conflict between Filipino forces and Americans had broken out due to strong resistance of the Filipinos against the US sovereignty over the islands and the uncertain grant of independence. Aguinaldo led the revolutionary movement and fought the Americans for two years. His capture in March 1901 ended the resistance and gave the US a clear course on setting out their colonial establishment in the country. William Howard Taft was the one chosen to handle the position of presidency and at the same time as chief justice.
The invasion of the Americans moved the Filipinos to a more unfamiliar authority. English was chosen to be the official language of instruction in businesses and schools, the economy flourished and the country’s economy begun relying on the US. Under the supremacy of Governor Taft, systems were regulated in most districts. New government organizations were established along with the general establishments of schools and other related institutions. Construction of roads, highways, and ports were prioritized to consolidate more business all over the country.
Despite the growth of industrialization, the Filipinos never gave up their desire for independence. In early 1900’s Filipinos were given the opportunity to participate in politics. This gave them the chance to hold positions in the government and express themselves more liberally. It was during the proclamation of Manuel L. Quezon in 1935 as the president of the Philippine Commonwealth under the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 that assured the Filipinos of freedom and self reliance. This act however, didn’t fully grant the country of complete autonomy. The US, under what they called the transition period, retained power on national defense and foreign affairs before granting the Philippines its absolute independence. This transition period took ten years more.
THE AMERICAN OCCUPATION
On January 16, 1893, United States diplomatic and military personnel conspired with a small group of individuals to overthrow the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom and prepared to provide for annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States of America, under a treaty of annexation submitted to the United States Senate, on February 15, 1893. Newly elected U.S. President Grover Cleveland, having received notice that the cause of the so-called revolution derived from illegal intervention by U.S. diplomatic and military personnel, withdrew the treaty of annexation and appointed James H. Blount, as Special Commissioner, to investigate the terms of the so-called revolution and to report his findings.
The report concluded that the United States legation assigned to the Hawaiian Kingdom, together with United States Marines and Naval personnel, were directly responsible for the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government. The report details the culpability of the United States government in violating international laws and the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Kingdom, but the United States Government fails to follow through in its commitment to assist in reinstating the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Instead, the United States allows five years to lapse and a new United States President, William McKinley, enters into a second treaty of annexation with the same individuals who participated in the illegal overthrow with the U.S. legation in 1893 on June 16, 1897, but the treaty was unable to be ratified by the United States Senate due to protests that were submitted by Her Majesty Queen Lili‘uokalani and signature petitions against annexation by 21,169 Hawaiian nationals.
As a result of the Spanish-American War, the United States opted to unilaterally annex the Hawaiian Islands by enacting a congressional joint resolution on July 7, 1898, in order to utilize the Hawaiian Islands as a military base to fight the Spanish in Guam and the Philippines. The United States has remained in the Hawaiian Islands and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation to the present, but its continuity as an independent State remains intact under international law.
The main documents surrounding United States intervention and subsequent occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom are recorded in the following.
The Executive Documents of the United States House of Representatives, 53rd Congress, 1894-95, Appendix II, Foreign Relations, 1894, Affairs in Hawai‘i, volumes 1 and 2:
Report of U.S. Special Commissioner James H. Blount to U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham concerning the Hawaiian Kingdom Investigation, July 17, 1893
Petition filed with U.S. Special Commissioner James Blount by the Hawaiian Patriotic League, March 2, 1893
Dispatch from U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham to U.S. President Grover Cleveland concerning the Hawaiian Kingdom Investigation, October 18, 1893
Dispatch from U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham to U.S. Minister Albert S. Willis, assigned to the Hawaiian Islands, concerning the Hawaiian Kingdom Investigation, October 18, 1893
U.S. President Cleveland's Message to the U.S. Congress concerning the conclusion of the Hawaiian Kingdom investigation, December 18, 1893
Dispatch from U.S. Minister Albert S. Willis to U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham concerning the consent of Queen Lili‘uokalani to the Condition of Restoration of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government, December 20, 1893
Dispatch from U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham to U.S. Minister Albert S. Willis concerning U.S. Senate resolution warning Foreign Governments not to interfere in Hawaiian Political Affairs, June 2, 1894
Dispatch from U.S. Minister Albert S. Willis to U.S. Secretary of State Walter Q. Gresham concerning the delivery of the U.S. Senate Resolution to the provisional government, June 23, 1894
Congressional Record: containing the Proceedings and Debates, 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, volume 26:
Resolution of U.S. House of Representatives condemning U.S. Minister Stevens for his role in aiding the illegal overthrow of Hawai'i's legitimate government and also instituting the hands-off policy of noninterference to the U.S. President, Feb. 7, 1894
Resolution of U.S. Senate instituting the hands-off policy of noninterference but also warning other Governments not to interfere with Hawaiian political affairs, May 31, 1894
U.S. Senate Secret Debate concerning Hawai`i, May 31, 1898
Hawai'i National Archives in Honolulu, and the United States National Archives in Washington, D.C.:
Protest filed with the United States Legation by the Governor for the Island of O'ahu against the unauthorized landing a U.S. troops from the U.S.S. Boston, January 16, 1893.
Protest filed with the United States Legation by the Minister of Foreign Affairs against the unauthorized landing a U.S. troops from the U.S.S. Boston, January 16, 1893.
Protest filed with the United States Legation by Her Majesty Queen Lili'uokalani against the U.S. Minister's recognition of the provisional government and calling for an investigation by the U.S. President into the actions of its representative and to reinstate the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, January 17, 1893.
Protest filed with U.S. Minister Albert Willis by Her Majesty Queen Lili'uokalani against the formation of the Republic of Hawai'i, June 20, 1894.
Protest filed with the British Legation by Her Majesty Queen Lili'uokalani against the formation of the Republic of Hawai'i, June 20, 1894.
Protest filed with the U.S. State Department by Her Majesty Queen Lili'uokalani against the Treaty of Annexation signed by the United States of America and the Republic of Hawai'i, June 17, 1897
Petitions filed with the U.S. State Department by Joseph Heleluhe, commissioner for the Men and Women's Hawaiian Patriotic League and the Hui Kalaiaina, on July 24, 1897
Petition against the Annexation of Hawaii Submitted to the U.S. Senate in 1897 by the Hawaiian Patriotic League
Protest filed with U.S. Minister Harold Sewall on August 6, 1898, by the Hawaiian Patriotic League (Hui Aloha 'Aina) and the Hawaiian Political Association (Hui Kalai'aina) against the Joint Resolution purporting to annex the Hawaiian Islands
United States Department of Justice, Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation to Extend the Territorial Sea, Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel, vol. 12, p. 238-263, October 4, 1988, commenting on the annexation of Hawai‘i
pp. 250-252, "Congress' Power to Assert Sovereignty over the Territorial Sea"
United States Statutes at Large:
Joint Resolution no. 55, To provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States, July 7, 1898
Chapter 339., An Act to Provide a Government for the Territory of Hawai'i, April 30, 1900
Chapter 42., An Act To amend an Act entitled "An Act to provide a government for the Territory of Hawaii," approved April 30, 1900, as amended, to establish an Hawaiian Homes Commission, granting certain powers to the board of harbor commissioners of the Territory of Hawaii, and for other purposes, July 9, 1921
U.S. Public Law 86-3, An Act to Provide for the admission of the State of Hawai'i into the Union, March 18, 1959
U.S. Public Law 103-150, To acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai‘i, Nov. 23, 1993
HomeNewsSportRadioTVWeatherLanguages
UK versionInternational version|About the versions Low graphics|Accessibility help One-Minute World News
News services
Your news when you want it
News Front Page
Africa
Americas
Asia-Pacific
Europe
Middle East
South Asia
UK
Business
Health
Science/Nature
Technology
Entertainment
Also in the news
-----------------
Video and Audio
-----------------
Have Your Say
In Pictures
Country Profiles
Special Reports RELATED BBC SITES
SPORT
WEATHER
ON THIS DAY
EDITORS' BLOG
LANGUAGES
Arabic
Persian
Pashto
Turkish
French
More
Last Updated: Thursday, 29 March 2007, 09:26 GMT 10:26 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Saudi: US Iraq presence illegal
King Abdullah said blame lay with Arab leaders themselves
The Saudi monarch has made a forceful appeal for Arab unity, denouncing US policy in Iraq and the embargo imposed by western nations on the Palestinians.
At the Arab League summit in Riyadh, King Abdullah described the US presence in Iraq as an illegitimate occupation.
Correspondents say he is seeking to show a measure of independence from Saudi Arabia's ally, the United States.
Arab leaders are meeting to relaunch a plan for peace with Israel that they first endorsed five years ago.
SAUDI MIDDLE EAST PLAN
Also known as Beirut Declaration
Adopted by Arab League in 2002
Calls for "full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967"
Calls for Israel's "acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital"
All Arab states would establish "normal relations... with Israel" and "consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended"
Calls for a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem"
The plan offers Israel normal relations with Arab states if it withdraws from land occupied in 1967, and accepts a Palestinian state.
Arab hard-liners have accused Riyadh of being ready to water down the "land for peace" deal to gain Israeli acceptance.
Israel's western allies have withheld recognition from a new Palestinian unity government, including members of the Islamist group Hamas which they consider a terrorist organisation.
Abhorrent
The Saudi monarch insisted said the "real blame" for Arab woes lay with squabbling Arab rulers, who could only prevent "foreign powers from drawing the region's future" if they united.
"In beloved Iraq, blood is flowing between brothers, in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and abhorrent sectarianism threatens a civil war," said the king.
"In wounded Palestine, the mighty people suffer from oppression and occupation," he said.
Summits are often platforms for Arab discord not Arab unity
"It has become vital that the oppressive blockade imposed on the Palestinians end as soon as possible so the peace process will get to move in an atmosphere without oppression."
"Our constant disagreements and rejection of unity have made the Arab nation lose confidence in our sincerity and lose hope."
A US official has insisted King Abdullah was wrong to criticise the US military presence in Iraq.
"The United States is in Iraq at the request of the Iraqis and under a United Nations mandate. Any suggestion to the contrary is wrong," said National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe.
Guarded welcome
Separately, Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres said it refused to accept the revived Arab peace plan as it stood and further discussions were needed.
"There is only one way to overcome our differences, and that is negotiation," Mr Peres told Israeli public radio. "It's impossible to say: you must take what we offer you as is."
Under the plan, Arab nations would recognise Israel if Israel withdrew from land occupied in the 1967 war, accepted a Palestinian state, and agreed a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem".
Israel rejected the 2002 plan outright after it was first proposed at an Arab summit in Beirut, but Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is now giving it a guarded welcome, albeit with reservations linked to the issue of refugees.
There are more than four million Palestinian refugees registered with the UN, most of them descendants of people living in British-administered Palestine, before Israel was created in 1948.
Israel opposes allowing them to exercise any right to return to their original homes or land, because it could erase its current Jewish majority.
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
MIDDLE EAST CRISIS
LATEST NEWS
Red Cross builds Shalit pressure
Israel to accept Darfur refugees
Israel plans to curb Gaza rockets
W Bank barrier change ordered
FEATURES AND ANALYSIS
Bilin party
West Bank villagers celebrate the Israeli court decision to move the barrier.
Mid-East diary: Blair's intentions
Israel town anger at school attack
Return to Gaza
VOICES
Gaza fuel shortage
Ramallah worried
PROFILES
Salam Fayyad Hezbollah Sheikh Nasrallah Ehud Olmert Mahmoud Abbas Ismail Haniya Fouad Siniora Mahmoud Zahhar Amir Peretz Shimon Peres Khaled Meshaal Hamas Islamic Jihad Gaza Strip Al-Aqsa Brigade Ariel Sharon
RELATED INTERNET LINKS
US state department
Israeli foreign ministry
Palestinian National Authority
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
TOP MIDDLE EAST STORIES
US air strike in Baghdad kills 14
Syria 'fires on Israel warplanes'
Israel accused over Lebanon war
| News feeds
MOST POPULAR STORIES NOW
MOST E-MAILED MOST READ Swiss row over black sheep poster
Facebook opens profiles to public
Syria 'fires on Israel warplanes'
Police to quiz Madeleine's mother
Secondary schools in Hounslow
Most popular now, in detail MOST E-MAILED MOST READ Syria 'fires on Israel warplanes'
Police to quiz Madeleine's mother
Opera legend Pavarotti dies at 71
Mind games
Swiss row over black sheep poster
Most popular now, in detail-
The American Occupation of Japan, 1945-1952
When the war ended, it was the common intent of all the Allied Powers to render Japan incapable of ever returning to the field of battle. "Demilitarization" was thus the first policy of the Occupation authorities and was accompanied by abolishing Japan's armed forces, dismantling its military industry, and eliminating the expression of patriotism from its schools and public life. But the American government, which had led the Allied war effort and whose representative, General Douglas MacArthur, was named the Supreme Commander of the Occupation forces, felt that only a democratic Japan would be truly peace-loving. It was assumed that democratic countries like the United States and Great Britain were more peaceful than nondemocratic countries such as Hitler's Germany and prewar Japan under the emperor. But what makes a country "democratic"? Is a country democratic simply because of certain political institutions, like free elections and free speech? Can these political institutions survive if economic power is concentrated in just a few hands, and social structures like the educational system and the family preach unlimited obedience to authority? The American government believed that establishing democracy in Japan involved change in all areas of Japanese life. Under MacArthur and with the cooperation of the Japanese, Japan undertook tremendous changes in just seven short years--the Occupation lasted from 1945 to 1952. The success of the Occupation can be judged by the fact that forty years later, Japan has not fought a war, is a close ally of the United States, and has not changed most of the important reforms made by the Occupation. Political Changes: The most obvious changes were political. During the Occupation, Japan adopted a new constitution (sometimes called the MacArthur Constitution because of the major role Americans played in its drafting). This constitution was completely different from the Meiji Constitution of 1889.
• The biggest change was that it declared that sovereignty rested with the people, not the emperor. This is the political basis of democracy.
• The emperor was to continue as a symbol of Japanese unity and culture, somewhat like the Queen of England in Britain's democracy, but without any political authority whatsoever.
• The supreme political institution was now to be Japan's parliament, the Diet, which was to be made up of freely elected representatives of the people.
• Women were given equal rights under the new constitution, including the right to vote.
• Local governments were strengthened to encourage "grass-roots level" political participation.
• The constitution established many new civil liberties, such as the right of free speech, and the powers of the police were weakened and carefully regulated.
• Finally, the military forces were completely abolished and Article 9 of the new constitution forbade Japan to maintain an army or go to war ever again.
Economic Changes: To support these political changes, the Americans instituted reforms to make economic power in Japan more "democratic." In prewar Japan, two-thirds of the agricultural land was rented, not owned, by the farmers who farmed it. The farmers, who made up over 50 percent of the labor force, often rented the land from landlords who lived in distant cities and paid them as much as half of the crops they grew. Since the average "farm" was little more than an acre, many farm families lived in poverty. The land reform took land away from big landlords and redistributed it to the farmers, so that farm families could own the land they worked. Because farm families became more independent economically, they could participate more freely in the new democracy.
The Americans also tried to make workers in the industrial sector more independent by changing the laws to allow free trade unions. Before the war there were only a few small unions; by 1949, about half of all industrial workers belonged to a union. To democratize economic power further and create competition, the Occupation intended to break up the giant business corporations, the zaibatsu, but this reform was not implemented, in part because it would have made Japan's economic recovery more difficult. Changes in Civic Values: Besides changing Japanese institutions, the Americans wanted the Japanese people to understand better the idea of democracy. To do this, the occupation government used it's control of newspapers and magazines to explain and popularize democracy. They used American democracy as a model to be copied. The complete defeat and devastation of Japan after the war had left many Japanese shocked and disillusioned with their own military leaders, and they were open to the new ways of their American conquerors.
To ensure that Japanese children learned democratic values, the Americans insisted that the education system and the laws regulating families be revised. "Moral training" in schools was abolished, and instruction in democratic ideas was begun. Control of education and censorship of textbooks were taken from the central government and given to local administrations. The laws giving the head of the household complete control of every family member (for example, he could withhold his consent when his children wished to be married) were changed to make each family member more equal and thereby more democratic.
Support for Change Within Japan: After the Americans left, the reforms that did not find strong support within the Japanese system were discontinued. The anti monopoly laws were weakened, and new giant businesses appeared. The central government assumed control of the schools, although the democratic school structure and curriculum remained. The ruling conservative party suggested other changes, including re-introduction of "moral training" in the schools and abolition of the "peace clause," Article 9 of the constitution, but these were not adopted. In sum, there was great popular support for most of the changes, and the changed system thus continues to the present.
Between Saddam and the American Occupation: Iraq's Academic Community Struggles for Autonomy
Academe, Sep/Oct 2004 by Watenpaugh, Keith
The old regime was no friend to academic values. But Iraqi academics discover that life after liberation and occupation poses new threats to these same values.
On a cheerless Friday afternoon in January 2003, shortly before the American-led invasion of Iraq, I strolled down Baghdad's al-Mutanabbi Street with the Iraqi architect Hussam al-Rawi al-Sayyad. The street, named for a tenth-century Arab poet, is home to the city's main used-book market. Al-Rawi took pride in pointing out the many titles published by Baghdad University and the Iraqi Academy of Sciences. Interspersed in and among the scholarly and popular books were state-produced tracts on Baathism, biographies of Saddam Hussein, standard anti-Israel screeds that often cross over into anti-Semitism, and a smattering of self-help books intended to aid one in overcoming wedding-night jitters. Many of the books and journals represented years of careful collecting by Iraqis, who had been forced to sell them for cash. Arranged carefully along the curb, they spoke of a time when Baghdad, flush with oil wealth, competed with Cairo as the intellectual center of the Arab world.
In June 2003, shortly after the fall of the Baathist regime, and after the United States declared an end to major combat, I returned to Baghdad and al-Mutanabbi Street as the leader of a group of historians of the contemporary Arab Middle East from Germany, France, Jordan, and the United States. We had come to catalog the extent of the damage inflicted on institutions of higher learning and cultural production by the paroxysm of looting and aggravated mayhem of the previous few months. (We published our findings in a report, Opening the Doors: Intellectual Life and Academic Conditions in Post-War Baghdad, copies of which can be downloaded from H-Net, a Web-based consortium of scholars and teachers in the humanities and social sciences: http://www.hnct.org/about/press/opening_doors/.)
Occupation, legitimacy and democracy
Thomas Lifson
The lessons of the occupation of Iraq will be debated far into the future. One theory is that it was mistake to disband the army and destroy the corrupt Baathist infrastructure which had kept a semblance of peace among the divisive factions, albeit at a huge cost in blood and tyranny. With 20-20 hindsight, we see that an utter lack of any indigenous intact power structure or source of legitimization has had bloody consequences.
Things were done differently when America occupied Japan in 1945. The American Occupation of Japan is seen by many as a model of a successful conquest and orderly social revolution from above, imposing democracy by military conquest, and succeeding beyond anyone's wildest dreams in fostering a democratic and prosperous society. Yet even today, the lessons of the Japanese Occupation are fiercely debated. Particularly the question of whether or not the Emperor should have been regarded as a war criminal.
Following Japan's defeat, General MacArthur's Occupation made a clear decision to use the Emperor as a tool to ensure Japanese compliance with the massive changes to be ordered. It was therefore important to avoid discrediting him as a war criminal. Accordingly, the image was created of a shy, unassuming man more interested in his hobby of marine biology than in statecraft or warcraft. He was exonerated, and the question of his responsibilities dismissed.
Edwin O. Reischauer, JFK's Ambassador to Japan and professor of Japanese history at Harvard, embodied this pragmatic consensus. Reischauer maintained that Hirohito was indeed powerless to stop the militarists, and was personally a gentle and scholarly man. Since he knew the Emperor personally and was deeply immersed in the conduct of the war as an advisor on Japanese affairs, his words carried a lot of weight, albeit not enough to discourage one of his students from pursuing a counter-thesis.
Several years ago, my friend from graduate school days Herbert Bix received the Pulitzer Prize in history for his book, Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. Professor Bix argued that, although not a driving force behind Japanese militarism, Hirohito played a strategist's role, and had far more control than the consensus view of postwar Japanese and Americans. Professor Bix faulted him for doing nothing to stop the war and for being more interested in the throne than in democracy.
The research underlying Bix's conclusions consisted of painstaking examination of diaries, memoranda, and other documents that had been declassified starting around 1989, and all but ignored by Japanese historians, wary of the deep reverence accorded the Imperial Family. He convincingly showed that Hirohito was indeed conversant with the details of war strategy, and that he did not try to stop the war.
However, there is new evidence just revealed which at least softens somewhat the appearance of guilt of the wartime Emperor, while reinforcing the conclusion that he was kept quite well informed and did offer his opinions. The diaries of Kuraji Ogura, Hirohito's Chamberlain, have been discovered, and excerpts are being published by the prestigious Japanese magazine Bungei Shunju, in its April issue, hitting the newsstands in Japan today. Via an account in today's Japan Times:
Ogura wrote 600 pages of words uttered by Emperor Hirohito, posthumously called Emperor Showa, between May 1939 and June 1945.
He was quoted as saying on Oct. 12, 1940: "Shina (China) is stronger than expected. Everybody made mistakes in war projections. Notably, the army of war specialists was wrong in observing the situation."
On Jan. 9, 1941: he said, "Japan had underestimated China. It is much wiser to cease the war as early as possible and to cultivate (Japan's) national power for some 10 years." [....]
The Emperor went on to say: "What is important is when to end the war.
"I did not want to see the Sino-Japanese War break out. Because, I am scared of the Soviet Union.... We must be very careful in starting a war and fight to the last after the start."
These are not exactly the words of a pacifist, but rather of a pragmatist who thinks that the time is not yet ripe for military conquest. Other excerpts indicate that the Emperor was ignored on military personnel decisions.
There will no doubt much further discussion in Japan of the new evidence, and perhaps we will be treated to a review of it by Professor Bix.
It is clear in retrospect that Japan managed to avoid a reversion to militarism, despite the continuity of Imperial leadership, and that the legitimacy for the Occupation provided by the Emperor's open acceptance was a critical factor. This famous picture said it all: the towering figure of MacArthur relaxed in an informal pose and uniform, next to the rigid Emperor in formal dress.
Saddam was too wily and too obviously guilty to have served in such a role for the American occupiers And Iraq, unlike Japan, has porous borders and numerous groups including al Qaeda anxious to undermine the new democracy, so the situations are not at all comparable.
"AMERICAN OCCUPATION IN THE PHILIPPINES DURING 1890'S"
The Philippine-American War
100 years ago, the United States was ceded the Philippine Islands after a "Splendid Little War" with Spain. The United States saw the economic and military importance of the islands, but they had trouble convincing their "Little Brown Brothers" of the benefits of annexation. On February 4, 1899, the first shots of the Philippine-American War were fired. It was a war that would drag on for over three years and cost unknown thousands of lives. It was one of the bloodiest conflicts in American history, and the country has tried hard to forget it. Our mission was to create a webpage which provides a clear explanation of the war.
The Philippine conflict was a new kind of war for Americans. It has been called the first Vietnam, a guerrilla war fought on distant soil against a foreign people, over the right to self government. Against these "savages", frustrated American troops often abandoned civilized warfare, and brutality rose to the level of the contemporary conflicts in Cuba and South Africa.
All you say about the Philippines, the conflict there between the Americans, military and civil, and the pig headedness of the military and their habits of setting "bulldogs to catch rabbits" is immensely cheering to me, because it is precisely what we are doing in South Africa.
--Rudyard Kipling
In the 1890's, America was a country looking to test its might against the imperial powers of Europe. The spirit of Manifest Destiny lived on, and many were looking to expand the nation's influence overseas. Many Americans saw it as their duty to carry the "White Man's Burden" to the far shores of less civilized nations. In 1898, the United States annexed Hawaii after several years of occupation. Unfortunately, annexing the Philippines guaranteed the occupants no part in United States government -- America had no wish to acquire another state, but a colony.
Not all Americans supported the war in the Philippines. While the Anti-Imperialists were a small group, they were both vocal and distinguished. Their reasons for opposing the annexation ranged everywhere from belief in the higher ideals of liberty and democracy, to fear that "lesser races" would further pollute their country. Unfortunately, the voices against imperialist policies went largely unheard, lost amidst cries of expansion and war.
Take up the White Man's burden
Send forth the best ye breed
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need:
To wait, in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.
--Rudyard Kipling
The war marked a major turning point in American foreign policy. While the country still claimed to be isolationist, its sphere of influence expanded to include all of Asia. The Philippines opened the door to China and the enormous economic opportunities therein. It brought the United States into direct competition with the imperialistic Japanese, who were also looking to expand their empire into China. Decades later, the islands played a key role in the Pacific theater during WWII. The island of Luzon was the site of the infamous Bataan death march of 1942, in which as many as 10,000 Americans and Filipinos died. After the war, the Philippines were finally granted their independence, and remain America's allies and trading partners today.
America had no right to occupy the Philippines in the first place, and its actions there were beyond inexcusable. Americans slaughtered Filipino soldiers and civilians for seeking liberty, supposedly the basis of their own nation. The United States would not even negotiate with the Filipinos, but demanded immediate and unconditional surrender. Once their arrogant demands had been met, they turned around and gave the Filipinos exactly what Aguinaldo had been asking for all along; limited autonomy and self-rule as a U.S. possession. While we, the creators of this page, are flaming liberals and anti-imperialists, we have tried to present a factual and accurate account of the war, restricting our editorialization to this page alone. We hope that this site can bring an understanding of the war to a broad audience, and that this era in history will never be repeated.
During the Spanish-American War in the late 1890's, US Commodore George Dewey descended upon the shores of the Philippines and destroyed the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay. Americans had a number of goals for occupying the Philippines. One was to create a military presence to then access the markets of China. The second was to utilize the Philippine raw materials for US industry. US President William McKinley described the third. After praying to "Almighty God", McKinley said that a message came to him that Americans were in the Philippines to "uplift and civilize and christianize" Filipinos. He was obviously not aware of the fact that the Filipinos had been "christianized" for 400 years by Spanish colonizers, against whom they had consistently rebelled.
As Howard Zinn notes in his People's History of the United States, the "Filipinos did not get the same message from God" and the resistance to US military intervention began in 1899 in what has remained, up to the present time, organized efforts by Filipinos in opposition to US interference.
Initially, Filipinos thought that the Americans were there to help them kick out the Spanish and end 400 years of repression. After fruitless attempts to negotiate, however, the reality of the US intention became clear. The Filipinos were forced to acknowledge that the Americans intended to replace the Spanish as the colonial rulers. In The Philippines Reader, Daniel Schirmer and Stephen Shalom provide first hand accounts of this period. On February 5, 1899 Philippine President Emilio Aguinaldo urged his people to fight in response to the "outbreak of hostilities between the Philippine forces and the American forces of occupation, (which were) unjustly and unexpectedly provoked by the latter.... The constant outrages and taunts, which have caused the misery of the people...and finally the useless conferences and contempt shown the Philippine government prove the premeditated transgression of justice and liberty."
The American reaction was swift and the slaughter by US forces is legendary. Philippine scholar Luziminda Francisco refers to that brutal imperial American war that launched the 20th century as the "first Vietnam War" in which estimates of from 600,000 to a million Filipinos died. She states that the estimate of up to a million deaths might "err on the side of understatement" as one US congressman, who visited the Philippines at the time, was quoted as saying "They never rebel in Luzon (Philippines) anymore because there isn't anybody left to rebel...our soldiers took no prisoners, they kept no records, they simply swept the country and wherever and whenever they could get hold of a Filipino they killed him."
In response to a massacre of 54 Americans by the Filipino resistance in Samar, Francisco describes how US General "Howling Jake" Smith launched a "reign of terror" on the island. "Kill and burn..." Smith said "the more you kill and burn the more you'll please me." When asked the age limit for killing, he said, "Everything over ten." The order from Smith was that Samar becomes a "howling wilderness" so that "even the birds could not live there." The Americans had begun to utilize the deadly "water torture" against Filipinos - forcing huge amounts of water into their stomachs to then gather information - and Smith insisted on its use in Samar.
There were four US regiments of Black soldiers in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. Many were outraged at the abuses and attitude of the white soldiers toward the Filipinos. Zinn refers to a letter from a volunteer from the state of Washington who wrote: "Our fighting blood was up, and we all wanted to kill 'niggers'.... this shooting human beings beats rabbit hunting all to pieces." David Fagan, one of the Black soldiers, left the US ranks to fight along side Filipinos and "for two years wreaked havoc upon the American forces."
The Philippine resistance fought valiantly against the well-armed Americans. Francisco states that the "Filipinos had to adapt to their limitations as best they could...with darts, the ubiquitous bolo, and even stones, prompting (US) General Lawton to remark, 'they are the bravest men I have ever seen'...."
It is also noteworthy that once the Americans captured Aguinaldo in April 1901 they expected hostilities to cease and were "dismayed" that this was not the case. As the movement against the American presence had massive support, the fighting continued "unabated." This revelation led the leader of the US campaign, General Arthur MacArthur, to resign.
The American policy was so brutal that even American personnel were skeptical. Francisco quotes a US civil servant in the Philippines at the time who said that because of the "burning, torture and other harsh treatments" the Americans were "sowing the seeds for a perpetual revolution. If these things need to be done, they had best be done by native troops so that the people of the U.S. will not be credited therewith." Obviously this warning was heeded, as in 1901 the Americans created the Philippine Constabulary, comprised of Filipinos, who would work at the behest of and ruthlessly serve US interests during the U.S. colonization of the Philippines.
With its creation of the Philippine Constabulary (PC), the United States launched its "low
work." So while it might be "low" intensity for the United States, it is exceptionally "high" intensity for its victims. The PC is still in existence today, and its reactionary and mercenary origins have remained in tact. Throughout the 20th century it has played a key role in suppressing peasant revolts and anti-US intervention movements.
At the end of World War II the Americans claim to have given the Philippines its independence. The US, however, insisted on maintaining a military presence in the country, with its major bases being Subic Naval Base and Clark Air Force Base. In return for these bases the US offered the Filipino elite the creation of the "Joint US Military Advisory Group" (JUSMAG) to help reassert its authority over the peasant movements for land reform and other issues objectionable to them.
The resistance to the US interference has always been intense in the Philippines. Nationalist movements and armed struggle from the early occupation period to the Hukbalahap guerrilla movement after World War II to the New People's Army in the 1960's through to the present, including, of course, peasant movements for land reform, factory workers rights, on and on. In every instance the US administration and US military have worked in tandem with their Filipino government and military counterparts in an attempt to ruthlessly quell these movements.
American Occupation of Japan
The occupation of Japan was, from start to finish, an American
operation. General Douglans MacArthur, sole supreme commander of the
Allied Power was in charge. The Americans had insufficient men to make
a military government of Japan possible; so they decided to act
through the existing Japanese gobernment. General MacArthur became,
except in name, dictator of Japan. He imposed his will on Japan.
Demilitarization was speedily carried out, demobilization of the
former imperial forces was completed by early 1946.
Japan was extensively fire bomded during the second world war.
The stench of sewer gas, rotting garbage, and the acrid smell of ashes
and scorched debris pervaded the air. The Japanese people had to live
in the damp, and cold of the concrete buildings, because they were the
only ones left. Little remained of the vulnerable wooden frame, tile
roof dwelling lived in by most Japanese. When the first signs of
winter set in, the occupation forces immediately took over all the
steam-heated buildings. The Japanese were out in the cold in the first
post war winter fuel was very hard to find, a family was considered
lucky if they had a small barely glowing charcoal brazier to huddle
around. That next summer in random spots new ho uses were built, each
house was standardized at 216 square feet, and required 2400 board
feet of material in order to be built. A master plan for a modernistic
city had been drafted, but it was cast aside because of the lack of
time before the next winter. The thousands of people who lived in
railroad stations and public parks needed housing.
All the Japanese heard was democracy from the Americans. All
they cared about was food. General MacArthur asked the government to
send food, when they refus ed he sent another telegram that said,
"Send me food, or send me bullets." American troops were forbidden to
eat local food, as to keep from cutting from cutting into the sparse
local supply.
No food was was brought in expressly for the Japanese durning
the first six months after the American presence there. Herbert
Hoover, serving as chairman of a special presidential advisory
committee, recommended minimum imports to Japan of 870,000 tons of
food to be distributed in different urban areas. Fish, the source of
so much of the protein in the Japanese diet, were no longer available
in adequate quantities because the fishing fleet, particularly the
large vessels, had been badly decimated by the war and because the
U.S.S.R. closed off the fishing grounds in the north.
The most important aspect of the democratization policy was the
adoption of a new constitution and its supporting legislation. When
the Japanese government proved too confused or too reluctant to come
up with a constitutional reform that satisfied MacArthur, he had his
own staff draft a new constitution in February 1946. This, with only
minor changes, was then adopted by the Japanese government in the form
of an imperial amendment to the 1889 constitution and went into effect
on May 3, 1947. The new Constitution was a perfection of the British
parliamentary form of government that the Japanese had been moving
toward in the 1920s. Supreme political power was assigned to the Diet.
Cabinets were made responsible to the Diet by having the prime
minister elected by the lower house. The House of Peers was replaced
by an elected House of Councillors. The judicial system was made as
independent of executive interference as possible, and a newly created
supreme court was given the power to review the constitutionality of
laws. Local governments were given greatly increased powers.
The Emperor was reduced to being a symbol of the unity of the
nation. Japanese began to see him in person. He went to hospitals,
schools, mines, industrial plants; he broke ground for public
buildings and snipped tape at the opening of gates and highways. He
was steered here and there, shown things, and kept muttering, "Ah so,
ah so." People started to call him "Ah-so-san." Suddenly the puyblic
began to take this shy, ill-at-ease man to their hearts. They saw in
him something of their own conqured selves, force to do what was alien
to them. In 1948, in a newspaper poll, Emperior Hirohito was voted the
most popular man in Japan.
Civil liberties were emphasized, women were given full equality
with men. Article 13 and 19 in the new Constitution, prohibits
discrimination in political, economic, and social relations because of
race, creed, sex, social status, or family origen. This is one of the
most explicitly progressive statements on human rights anywhere in
law. Gerneral Douglas MacArthur emerged as a radical feminist because
he was "convinced that the place of women in Japan must be brought to
a level consistent with that of women in the western democracies." So
the Japanese women got their equal rights amendment long before a
concerted effort was made to obtain one in America.
Compulsory education was extened to nine years, efforts were
made to make education more a traning in thinking than in rote memory,
and the school system above the six elementary grades was revised to
conform to the American pattern. This last mechanical change produced
great confusion and dissatisfaction but became so entrenched that it
could not be revised even after the Americans departed.
Japan's agriculture was the quickest of national activities to
recover because of land reform. The Australians came up with the best
plan. It was basis was this: There were to be no absentee landlards.
A person who actually worked the land could own up to 7.5 arcers.
Anyone living in a village near by could keep 2.5 acres. Larger plots
of land, exceeding these limits, were bought up by the government and
sold on easy terms to former tenants. Within two years 2 million
tenants became landowners. The American occupation immediately gained
not only a large constituency, for the new owners had a vested
interest in preserving the change, but also a psychological momentum
for other changes they wanted to initiate.
The American labor policy in Japan had a double goal: to
encourage the growth of democratic unions while keeping them free of
communists. Union organization was used as a balance to the power of
management. To the surprise of the American authorties, this movement
took a decidedly more radical turn. In the desperate economic
conditions of early postwar Japan, there was little room for
successful bargaining over wages, and many labor unions instead made a
bid to take over industry and operate it in their own behalf. Moreover
large numbers of workers in Japan were government employees, such as
railroad workers and teachers, whose wages were set not by management
but by the government. Direct political action therefore seemed more
meani ngful to these people than wage bargaining. The Japanese unions
called for a general strike on February 1, 1947. MacArthur warned the
union leadership that he would not countenace a nationwide strike. The
strike leaders yieled to MacArthur's will. The reafter the political
appeal of radical labor action appeared to wane.
The Americans wanted to disband the great Zaibatsu trust as a
means of reducing Japan's war-making potential. There were about 15
Zaibatsu families such as - Mitsui, Mitsubishi, Yasuda, and Sumitomo.
The Zaibatsu controled the industry of Japan. MacArthur's liaison men
pressured the Diet into passing the Deconcentration Law in December
1947. In the eyes of most Japanese this law was designed to cripple
Japanese business and industry forever. The first step in breaking up
the Zaibatsu was to spread their ownership out among the people and to
prevent the old owners from ever again exercising control. The stocks
of all the key holding companies were to be sold to the public.
Friends of the old Zaibatsu bought the stock. In the long run the
Zaibatsu were not exactly destroyed, but a few were weakened and
others underwent a considerable shuffle.
The initial period of the occupation from 1945 to 1948 was
marked by reform, the second phase was one of stabilization. Greater
attention was given to improvement of the economy. Japan was a heavy
expense to the United States. The ordered breakup of the Zaibatsu was
slowed down. The union movement continued to grow, to the ult imate
benefit of the worker. Unremitting pressure on employers brought
swelling wages, which meant the steady expansion of Japan domestic
consumer market. This market was a major reason for Japan's subsequent
economic boom. Another boom to the economy was the Korean War which
proved to be a blessing in disguise. Japan became the main staging
area for military action in Korea and went on a war boom economy with
out having to fight in or pay for a war.
The treaty of peace with Japan was signed at San Francisco in
September 1951 by Japan, the United States, and forty-seven other
nations. The Soviet Union refused to sign it. The treaty went into
effect in April 1952, officially terminating the United States
military occupation and restoring full independence.
What is extraordinary in the Occupation and its aftermath was
the insignificance of the unpleasant. For the Japanese, the nobility
of American ideals and the essential benignity of the American
presence assuaged much of the bitterness and anguish of defeat. For
the Americans, the joys of promoting peace and democracy triumphed
over the attendant fustrations and grievances. Consequently, the
Occupation served to lay down a substantial capital of good will on
which both America and Japan would draw in the years ahead.
Dave Angelo D. Ignacio MW-8:30 to 10am Rizal
1.
Rizal`s Impression of America
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impression were ;
1)the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; 2) the drive and energy of the American people; 3) the natural beauty of the land; 4) the high standard of living; and 5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America has lack of racial equality. There existed racial
prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which
the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being disliked, too”.
In 1980, two years after Rizal's visit to the United States, Jose Alejandro, who was then studying engineering in Belgium, roomed with him on 38 Rue Philippe Champagne, Brussels. Alejandro had never been in America , so that one day he asked Rizal: “What impressions do you have of America?”
“America,” answered Rizal, “is the land par excellence of freedom but only for the whites”.
2
After visiting the United States, Rizal lived in London from May, 1888 to March, 1889. He chose this English cite to be his new home for three reasons: 1) to improve his knowledge of English Language, 2) to study and annotate Morga's Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and 3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London he engaged in Filipiniana studies, completed annotating Morga's book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics; penned a famous letter to the young women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertude Beckett.
3
Romance with Gertude Beckett
Rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of three Beckett sisters – Gertude, Gettie, as she was affectionately called, was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. She fell in love. On cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for him, gaily like a humming bird. During the family picnics, she was particularly very happy because Rizal was with them and she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days when Rizal stayed at home, she helped him by mixing his color for painting and assisted for sculpturing.
Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gertude's company. Their friendship drifted towards romance. Rizal affectionately called her “Gettie”, in reciprocation, she fondly called him “Pettie”. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life.
4
Life in London
On May 25, 1888, a day after docking at Liver pool, Rizal went to London. For a short time, he stayed as guest at the home of Dr. Antonio Ma. Regidor, an exile of 1872 and a practicing lawyer in London. He was a boarder of the Beckett Family. The Beckett home was to Rizal comveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an Authority on Malay languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal's learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre). Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga's Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discussed with him problems pertaining to Philippine Affairs.
5
Annotating Morga's Book
The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga's book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands) which was published in Mexico, 1609. He spent days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines, such as those written by Fr. Chirino, Fr.Colin, Fr.Argensola, Fr.Plasencia. Of all written histories published during the early years of the spanish regime, that of Dr. Morga was, in his considered opinion, the best.
6
Annotated Edition of Morga Published
Rizal's outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga's Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. It was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the requestt of rizal. In his Prologue, Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. However, he frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal's error, namely: 1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and 2) Rizal's attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abusers of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad. Thus Blumentritt said: {The high estimation of your notes (Rizal's annotations) does not prevent me from confessing that more than once, I observed that your participate in the error of many modern historians, who judge events of centuring past, in the light of concepts that correspond to contemporary ideas. This should not be. The historian should not impute to the men of the 16th century the wide horizon of ideas that move the 19th century. The second point with which I am not in agreement has to do with some of your fulminations against Catholicism. I believe that not in religion but in the cruel method and the abuses of many priests should we look for the origin of many events lamentable for religion, for spain, and for the good name of the European race.
7
In this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. They had clothes, government, laws, writing, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. Rizal thus blasted dreams are fading: if it is impossible for me to give freedom to my country, at least I should like to give it to these noble compatriots in other lands”.
8
Short Visit to Paris and Spain
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luiling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London. On Dec. 11, 1888, he went to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms. Christmas in London(1888) – Rizal returned to London on Dec. 24 and spent Christmas and New Year's Day with the Becketts. He experienced a delightful Christmas Eve.
9
Rizal Becomes Leader of Filipinos in Europe
While busy in his historical studies in London, Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
10
Writings in London
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez' unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision Alang. This opus is satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he (St. Augustine) was commissioned by God to tell him (Fr. Rodriguez) of his stupidity and inform him of his penance on earth that he (Fr. Rodriguez) shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “ Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (Feb. 22,1889) in Tagalog. He penned it, upon the request of M.H del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanis parish priest of Malolos. The main point of this letter were: 1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; 2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spartan mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherlang; 3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; 4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside form retaining her good racial virtues; 5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way with good moral and good manners.
Dave Angelo D. Ignacio MW-8:30 to 10am Rizal
1.
Rizal`s Impression of America
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impression were ;
1)the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; 2) the drive and energy of the American people; 3) the natural beauty of the land; 4) the high standard of living; and 5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America has lack of racial equality. There existed racial
prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which
the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being disliked, too”.
In 1980, two years after Rizal's visit to the United States, Jose Alejandro, who was then studying engineering in Belgium, roomed with him on 38 Rue Philippe Champagne, Brussels. Alejandro had never been in America , so that one day he asked Rizal: “What impressions do you have of America?”
“America,” answered Rizal, “is the land par excellence of freedom but only for the whites”.
2
After visiting the United States, Rizal lived in London from May, 1888 to March, 1889. He chose this English cite to be his new home for three reasons: 1) to improve his knowledge of English Language, 2) to study and annotate Morga's Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and 3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London he engaged in Filipiniana studies, completed annotating Morga's book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics; penned a famous letter to the young women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertude Beckett.
3
Romance with Gertude Beckett
Rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of three Beckett sisters – Gertude, Gettie, as she was affectionately called, was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. She fell in love. On cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for him, gaily like a humming bird. During the family picnics, she was particularly very happy because Rizal was with them and she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days when Rizal stayed at home, she helped him by mixing his color for painting and assisted for sculpturing.
Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gertude's company. Their friendship drifted towards romance. Rizal affectionately called her “Gettie”, in reciprocation, she fondly called him “Pettie”. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life.
4
Life in London
On May 25, 1888, a day after docking at Liver pool, Rizal went to London. For a short time, he stayed as guest at the home of Dr. Antonio Ma. Regidor, an exile of 1872 and a practicing lawyer in London. He was a boarder of the Beckett Family. The Beckett home was to Rizal comveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an Authority on Malay languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal's learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre). Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga's Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discussed with him problems pertaining to Philippine Affairs.
5
Annotating Morga's Book
The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga's book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands) which was published in Mexico, 1609. He spent days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines, such as those written by Fr. Chirino, Fr.Colin, Fr.Argensola, Fr.Plasencia. Of all written histories published during the early years of the spanish regime, that of Dr. Morga was, in his considered opinion, the best.
6
Annotated Edition of Morga Published
Rizal's outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga's Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. It was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the requestt of rizal. In his Prologue, Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. However, he frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal's error, namely: 1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and 2) Rizal's attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abusers of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad. Thus Blumentritt said: {The high estimation of your notes (Rizal's annotations) does not prevent me from confessing that more than once, I observed that your participate in the error of many modern historians, who judge events of centuring past, in the light of concepts that correspond to contemporary ideas. This should not be. The historian should not impute to the men of the 16th century the wide horizon of ideas that move the 19th century. The second point with which I am not in agreement has to do with some of your fulminations against Catholicism. I believe that not in religion but in the cruel method and the abuses of many priests should we look for the origin of many events lamentable for religion, for spain, and for the good name of the European race.
7
In this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. They had clothes, government, laws, writing, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. Rizal thus blasted dreams are fading: if it is impossible for me to give freedom to my country, at least I should like to give it to these noble compatriots in other lands”.
8
Short Visit to Paris and Spain
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luiling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London. On Dec. 11, 1888, he went to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms. Christmas in London(1888) – Rizal returned to London on Dec. 24 and spent Christmas and New Year's Day with the Becketts. He experienced a delightful Christmas Eve.
9
Rizal Becomes Leader of Filipinos in Europe
While busy in his historical studies in London, Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
10
Writings in London
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez' unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision Alang. This opus is satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he (St. Augustine) was commissioned by God to tell him (Fr. Rodriguez) of his stupidity and inform him of his penance on earth that he (Fr. Rodriguez) shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “ Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (Feb. 22,1889) in Tagalog. He penned it, upon the request of M.H del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanis parish priest of Malolos. The main point of this letter were: 1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; 2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spartan mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherlang; 3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; 4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside form retaining her good racial virtues; 5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way with good moral and good manners.
The American Occupation
From the earliest period Spain had discouraged foreign immigration into California. Her object was neither to attract settlers nor to develop the country, but to retain political control of it, and to make of it a possible asylum for her own people. Fifty years after the founding of the first mission at San Diego, California had only thirteen inhabitants of foreign birth. Most of these had become naturalized citizens, and so were in name Spanish. Of these but three were American!
Subsequent to 1822, however, the number of foreign residents rapidly increased. These people were mainly of substantial character, possessing a real interest in the country and an intention of permanent settlement. Most of them became naturalized, married Spanish women, acquired property, and became trusted citizens. In marked contrast to their neighbors, they invariably displayed the greatest energy and enterprise. They were generally liked by the natives, and such men as Hartnell, Richardson, David Spence, Nicholas Den, and many others, lived lives and left reputations to be envied.
Between 1830 and 1840, however, Americans of a different type began to present themselves. Southwest of the Missouri River the ancient town of Santa Fe attracted trappers and traders of all nations and from all parts of the great West. There they met to exchange their wares and to organize new expeditions into the remote territories. Some of them naturally found their way across the western mountains into California. One of the most notable was James Pattie, whose personal narrative is well worth reading. These men were bold, hardy, rough, energetic, with little patience for the refinements of life--in fact, diametrically opposed in character to the easy-going inhabitants of California. Contempt on the one side and distrust on the other were inevitable. The trappers and traders, together with the deserters from whalers and other ships, banded together in small communities of the rough type familiar to any observer of our frontier communities. They looked down upon and despised the "greasers," who in turn did everything in their power to harass them by political and other means.
At first isolated parties, such as those of Jedediah Smith, the Patties, and some others, had been imprisoned or banished eastward over the Rockies. The pressure of increasing numbers, combined with the rather idle carelessness into which all California-Spanish regulations seemed at length to fall, later nullified this drastic policy. Notorious among these men was one Isaac Graham, an American trapper, who had become weary of wandering and had settled near Natividad. There he established a small distillery, and in consequence drew about him all the rough and idle characters of the country. Some were trappers, some sailors; a few were Mexicans and renegade Indians. Over all of these Graham obtained an absolute control. They were most of them of a belligerent nature and expert shots, accustomed to taking care of themselves in the wilds. This little band, though it consisted of only thirty-nine members, was therefore considered formidable.
A rumor that these people were plotting an uprising for the purpose of overturning the government aroused Governor Alvarado to action. It is probable that the rumors in question were merely the reports of boastful drunken vaporings and would better have been ignored. However, at this time Alvarado, recently arisen to power through the usual revolutionary tactics, felt himself not entirely secure in his new position. He needed some distraction, and he therefore seized upon the rumor of Graham's uprising as a means of solidifying his influence--an expedient not unknown to modern rulers. He therefore ordered the prefect Castro to arrest the party. This was done by surprise. Graham and his companions were taken from their beds, placed upon a ship at Monterey, and exiled to San Blas, to be eventually delivered to the Mexican authorities. There they were held in prison for some months, but being at last released through the efforts of an American lawyer, most of them returned to California rather better off than before their arrest. It is typical of the vacillating Californian policy of the day that, on their return, Graham and his riflemen were at once made use of by one of the revolutionary parties as a reinforcement to their military power!
By 1840 the foreign population had by these rather desultory methods been increased to a few over four hundred souls. The majority could not be described as welcome guests. They had rarely come into the country with the deliberate intention of settling but rather as a traveler's chance. In November, 1841, however, two parties of quite a different character arrived. They were the first true immigrants into California, and their advent is significant as marking the beginning of the end of the old order. One of these parties entered by the Salt Lake Trail, and was the forerunner of the many pioneers over that great central route. The other came by Santa Fe, over the trail that had by now become so well marked that they hardly suffered even inconvenience on their journey. The first party arrived at Monte Diablo in the north, the other at San Gabriel Mission in the south. Many brought their families with them, and they came with the evident intention of settling in California.
The arrival of these two parties presented to the Mexican Government a problem that required immediate solution. Already in anticipation of such an event it had been provided that nobody who had not obtained a legal passport should be permitted to remain in the country; and that even old settlers, unless naturalized, should be required to depart unless they procured official permission to remain. Naturally none of the new arrivals had received notice of this law, and they were in consequence unprovided with the proper passports. Legally they should have been forced at once to turn about and return by the way they came. Actually it would have been inhuman, if not impossible, to have forced them at that season of the year to attempt the mountains. General Vallejo, always broad-minded in his policies, used discretion in the matter and provided those in his district with temporary permits to remain. He required only a bond signed by other Americans who had been longer in the country.
Alvarado and Vallejo at once notified the Mexican Government of the arrival of these strangers, and both expressed fear that other and larger parties would follow. These fears were very soon realized. Succeeding expeditions settled in the State with the evident intention of remaining. No serious effort was made by the California authorities to keep them out. From time to time, to be sure, formal objection was raised and regulations were passed. However, as a matter of plain practicability, it was manifestly impossible to prevent parties from starting across the plains, or to inform the people living in the Eastern States of the regulations adopted by California. It must be remembered that communication at that time was extraordinarily slow and broken. It would have been cruel and unwarranted to drive away those who had already arrived. And even were such a course to be contemplated, a garrison would have been necessary at every mountain pass on the East and North, and at every crossing of the Colorado River, as well as at every port along the coast. The government in California had not men sufficient to handle its own few antique guns in its few coastwise forts, let alone a surplus for the purpose just described. And to cap all, provided the garrisons had been available and could have been placed, it would have been physically impossible to have supplied them with provisions for even a single month.
Truth to tell, the newcomers of this last class were not personally objectionable to the Californians. The Spanish considered them no different from those of their own blood. Had it not been for an uneasiness lest the enterprise of the American settlers should in time overcome Californian interests, had it not been for repeated orders from Mexico itself, and had it not been for reports that ten thousand Mormons had recently left Illinois for California, it is doubtful if much attention would have been paid to the first immigrants.
Westward migration at this time was given an added impetus by the Oregon question. The status of Oregon had long been in doubt. Both England and the United States were inclined to claim priority of occupation. The boundary between Canada and the United States had not yet been decided upon between the two countries. Though they had agreed upon the compromise of joint occupation of the disputed land, this arrangement did not meet with public approval. The land-hungry took a particular interest in the question and joined their voices with those of men actuated by more patriotic motives. In public meetings which were held throughout the country this joint occupation convention was explained and discussed, and its abrogation was demanded. These meetings helped to form the patriotic desire. Senator Tappan once said that thirty thousand settlers with their thirty thousand rifles in the valley of the Columbia would quickly settle all questions of title to the country. This saying was adopted as the slogan for a campaign in the West. It had the same inspiring effect as the later famous "54-40 or fight." People were aroused as in the olden times they had been aroused to the crusades. It became a form of mental contagion to talk of, and finally to accomplish, the journey to the Northwest. Though no accurate records were kept, it is estimated that in 1843 over 800 people crossed to Willamette Valley. By 1845 this immigration had increased to fully 3000 within the year.
Because of these conditions the Oregon Trail had become a national highway. Starting at Independence, which is a suburb of the present Kansas City, it set out over the rolling prairie. At that time the wide plains were bright with wild flowers and teeming with game. Elk, antelope, wild turkeys, buffalo, deer, and a great variety of smaller creatures supplied sport and food in plenty. Wood and water were in every ravine; the abundant grass was sufficient to maintain the swarming hordes of wild animals and to give rich pasture to horses and oxen. The journey across these prairies, while long and hard, could rarely have been tedious. Tremendous thunderstorms succeeded the sultry heat of the West, an occasional cyclone added excitement; the cattle were apt to stampede senselessly; and, while the Indian had not yet developed the hostility that later made a journey across the plains so dangerous, nevertheless the possibilities of theft were always near enough at hand to keep the traveler alert and interested. Then there was the sandy country of the Platte River with its buffalo--buffalo by the hundreds of thousands, as far as the eye could reach--a marvelous sight: and beyond that again the Rockies, by way of Fort Laramie and South Pass.
Beyond Fort Hall the Oregon Trail and the trail for California divided. And at this point there began the terrible part of the journey--the arid, alkaline, thirsty desert, short of game, horrible in its monotony, deadly with its thirst. It is no wonder that, weakened by their sufferings in this inferno, so many of the immigrants looked upon the towering walls of the Sierras with a sinking of the heart.
While at first most of the influx of settlers was by way of Oregon, later the stories of the new country that made their way eastward induced travelers to go direct to California itself. The immigration, both from Oregon in the North and by the route over the Sierras, increased so rapidly that in 1845 there were probably about 700 Americans in the district. Those coming over the Sierras by the Carson Sink and Salt Lake trails arrived first of all at the fort built by Captain Sutter at the junction of the American and Sacramento rivers.
Captain Sutter was a man of Swiss parentage who had arrived in San Francisco in 1839 without much capital and with only the assets of considerable ability and great driving force. From the Governor he obtained grant of a large tract of land "somewhere in the interior" for the purposes of colonization. His colonists consisted of one German, four other white men, and eight Kanakas. The then Governor, Alvarado, thought this rather a small beginning, but advised him to take out naturalization papers and to select a location. Sutter set out on his somewhat vague quest with a four-oared boat and two small schooners, loaded with provisions, implements, ammunition, and three small cannon. Besides his original party he took an Indian boy and a dog, the latter proving by no means the least useful member of the company. He found at the junction of the American and Sacramento rivers the location that appealed to him, and there he established himself. His knack with the Indians soon enlisted their services. He seems to have been able to keep his agreements with them and at the same time to maintain rigid discipline and control.
Within an incredibly short time he had established a feudal barony at his fort. He owned eleven square leagues of land, four thousand two hundred cattle, two thousand horses, and about as many sheep. His trade in beaver skins was most profitable. He maintained a force of trappers who were always welcome at his fort, and whom he generously kept without cost to themselves. He taught the Indians blanket-weaving, hat-making, and other trades, and he even organized them into military companies. The fort which he built was enclosed on four sides and of imposing dimensions and convenience. It mounted twelve pieces of artillery, supported a regular garrison of forty in uniform, and contained within its walls a blacksmith shop, a distillery, a flour mill, a cannery, and space for other necessary industries. Outside the walls of the fort Captain Sutter raised wheat, oats, and barley in quantity, and even established an excellent fruit and vegetable garden.
Indeed, in every way Captain Sutter's environment and the results of his enterprises were in significant contrast to the inactivity and backwardness of his neighbors. He showed what an energetic man could accomplish with exactly the same human powers and material tools as had always been available to the Californians. Sutter himself was a rather short, thick-set man, exquisitely neat, of military bearing, carrying himself with what is called the true old-fashioned courtesy. He was a man of great generosity and of high spirit. His defect was an excess of ambition which in the end o'erleaped itself. There is no doubt that his first expectation was to found an independent state within the borders of California. His loyalty to the Americans was, however, never questioned, and the fact that his lands were gradually taken from him, and that he died finally in comparative poverty, is a striking comment on human injustice.
The important point for us at present is that Sutter's Fort happened to be exactly on the line of the overland immigration. For the trail-weary traveler it was the first stopping-place after crossing the high Sierras to the promised land. Sutter's natural generosity of character induced him always to treat these men with the greatest kindness. He made his profits from such as wished to get rid of their oxen and wagons in exchange for the commodities which he had to offer. But there is no doubt that the worthy captain displayed the utmost liberality in dealing with those whom poverty had overtaken. On several occasions he sent out expeditions at his personal cost to rescue parties caught in the mountains by early snows or other misfortunes along the road, Especially did he go to great expense in the matter of the ill-fated Donner party, who, it will be remembered, spent the winter near Truckee, and were reduced to cannibalism to avoid starvation.[1]
[1: See The Passing of the Frontier, in "The Chronicles of America."]
Now Sutter had, of course, been naturalized in order to obtain his grant of land. He had also been appointed an official of the California-Mexican Government. Taking advantage of this fact, he was accustomed to issue permits or passports to the immigrants, permitting them to remain in the country. This gave the immigrants a certain limited standing, but, as they were not Mexican citizens, they were disqualified from holding land. Nevertheless Sutter used his good offices in showing desirable locations to the would-be settlers.[2]
[2: It is to be remarked that, prior to the gold rush, American settlements did not take place in the Spanish South but in the unoccupied North. In 1845 Castro and Castillero made a tour through the Sacramento Valley and the northern regions to inquire about the new arrivals. Castro displayed no personal uneasiness at their presence and made no attempt or threat to deport them.]
As far as the Californians were concerned, there was little rivalry or interference between the immigrants and the natives. Their interests did not as yet conflict. Nevertheless the central Mexican Government continued its commands to prevent any and all immigration. It was rather well justified by its experience in Texas, where settlement had ended by final absorption. The local Californian authorities were thus thrust between the devil and the deep blue sea. They were constrained by the very positive and repeated orders from their home government to keep out all immigration and to eject those already on the ground. On the other hand, the means for doing so were entirely lacking, and the present situation did not seem to them alarming.
Thus matters drifted along until the Mexican War. For a considerable time before actual hostilities broke out, it was well known throughout the country that they were imminent. Every naval and military commander was perfectly aware that, sooner or later, war was inevitable. Many had received their instructions in case of that eventuality, and most of the others had individual plans to be put into execution at the earliest possible moment. Indeed, as early as 1842 Commodore Jones, being misinformed of a state of war, raced with what he supposed to be English war-vessels from South America, entered the port of Monterey hastily, captured the fort, and raised the American flag. The next day he discovered that not only was there no state of war, but that he had not even raced British ships! The flag was thereupon hauled down, the Mexican emblem substituted, appropriate apologies and salutes were rendered, and the incident was considered closed. The easy-going Californians accepted the apology promptly and cherished no rancor for the mistake.
In the meantime Thomas O. Larkin, a very substantial citizen of long standing in the country, had been appointed consul, and in addition received a sum of six dollars a day to act as secret agent. It was hoped that his great influence would avail to inspire the Californians with a desire for peaceful annexation to the United States. In case that policy failed, he was to use all means to separate them from Mexico, and so isolate them from their natural alliances. He was furthermore to persuade them that England, France, and Russia had sinister designs on their liberty. It was hoped that his good offices would slowly influence public opinion, and that, on the declaration of open war with Mexico, the United States flag could be hoisted in California not only without opposition but with the consent and approval of the inhabitants. This type of peaceful conquest had a very good chance of success. Larkin possessed the confidence of the better class of Californians and he did his duty faithfully.
Just at this moment a picturesque, gallant, ambitious, dashing, and rather unscrupulous character appeared inopportunely on the horizon. His name was John C. Fremont. He was the son of a French father and a Virginia mother. He was thirty-two years old, and was married to the daughter of Thomas H. Benton, United States Senator from Missouri and a man of great influence in the country. Possessed of an adventurous spirit, considerable initiative, and great persistence Fremont had already performed the feat of crossing the Sierra Nevadas by way of Carson River and Johnson Pass, and had also explored the Columbia River and various parts of the Northwest. Fremont now entered California by way of Walker Lake and the Truckee, and reached Sutter's Fort in 1845. He then turned southward to meet a division of his party under Joseph Walker.
His expedition was friendly in character, with the object of surveying a route westward to the Pacific, and then northward to Oregon. It supposedly possessed no military importance whatever. But his turning south to meet Walker instead of north, where ostensibly his duty called him, immediately aroused the suspicions of the Californians. Though ordered to leave the district, he refused compliance, and retired to a place called Gavilan Peak, where he erected fortifications and raised the United States flag. Probably Fremont's intentions were perfectly friendly and peaceful. He made, however, a serious blunder in withdrawing within fortifications. After various threats by the Californians but no performance in the way of attack, he withdrew and proceeded by slow marches to Sutter's Fort and thence towards the north. Near Klamath Lake he was overtaken by Lieutenant Gillespie, who delivered to him certain letters and papers. Fremont thereupon calmly turned south with the pick of his men.
In the meantime the Spanish sub-prefect, Guerrero, had sent word to Larkin that "a multitude of foreigners, having come into California and bought property, a right of naturalized foreigners only, he was under necessity of notifying the authorities in each town to inform such purchasers that the transactions were invalid, and that they themselves were subject to be expelled." This action at once caused widespread consternation among the settlers. They remembered the deportation of Graham and his party some years before, and were both alarmed and thoroughly convinced that defensive measures were necessary. Fremont's return at precisely this moment seemed to them very significant. He was a United States army officer at the head of a government expedition. When on his way to the North he had been overtaken by Gillespie, an officer of the United States Navy. Gillespie had delivered to him certain papers, whereupon he had immediately returned. There seemed no other interpretation of these facts than that the Government at Washington was prepared to uphold by force the American settlers in California.
This reasoning, logical as it seems, proves mistaken in the perspective of the years. Gillespie, it is true, delivered some letters to Fremont, but it is extremely unlikely they contained instructions having to do with interference in Californian affairs. Gillespie, at the same time that he brought these dispatches to Fremont, brought also instructions to Larkin creating the confidential agency above described, and these instructions specifically forbade interference with Californian affairs. It is unreasonable to suppose that contradictory dispatches were sent to one or another of these two men. Many years later Fremont admitted that the dispatch to Larkin was what had been communicated to him by Gillespie. His words are: "This officer [Gillespie] informed me also that he was directed by the Secretary of State to acquaint me with his instructions to the consular agent, Mr. Larkin." Reading Fremont's character, understanding his ambitions, interpreting his later lawless actions that resulted in his court-martial, realizing the recklessness of his spirit, and his instinct to take chances, one comes to the conclusion that it is more than likely that his move was a gamble on probabilities rather than a result of direct orders.
Be this as it may, the mere fact of Fremont's turning south decided the alarmed settlers, and led to the so-called "Bear Flag Revolution." A number of settlers decided that it would be expedient to capture Sonoma, where under Vallejo were nine cannon and some two hundred muskets. It was, in fact, a sort of military station. The capture proved to be a very simple matter. Thirty-two or thirty-three men appeared at dawn, before Vallejo's house, under Merritt and Semple. They entered the house suddenly, called upon Jacob Leese, Vallejo's son-in-law, to interpret, and demanded immediate surrender. Richman says "Leese was surprised at the 'rough looks' of the Americans. Semple he describes as 'six feet six inches tall, and about fifteen inches in diameter, dressed in greasy buckskin from neck to foot, and with a fox-skin cap.'" The prisoners were at once sent by these raiders to Fremont, who was at that time on the American River. He immediately disclaimed any part in the affair. However, instead of remaining entirely aloof, he gave further orders that Leese, who was still in attendance as interpreter, should be arrested, and also that the prisoners should be confined in Sutter's Fort. He thus definitely and officially entered the movement. Soon thereafter Fremont started south through Sonoma, collecting men as he went.
The following quotation from a contemporary writer is interesting and illuminating. "A vast cloud of dust appeared at first, and thence in long files emerged this wildest of wild parties. Fremont rode ahead, a spare active looking man, with such an eye! He was dressed in a blouse and leggings, and wore a felt hat. After him came five Delaware Indians who were his bodyguard. They had charge of two baggage-horses. The rest, many of them blacker than Indians, rode two and two, the rifle held by one hand across the pummel of the saddle. The dress of these men was principally a long loose coat of deerskin tied with thongs in front, trousers of the same. The saddles were of various fashions, though these and a large drove of horses and a brass field gun were things they had picked up in California."
Meantime, the Americans who had collected in Sonoma, under the lead of William B. Ide, raised the flag of revolution--"a standard of somewhat uncertain origin as regards the cotton cloth whereof it was made," writes Royce. On this, they painted with berry juice "something that they called a Bear." By this capture of Sonoma, and its subsequent endorsement by Fremont, Larkin's instructions--that is, to secure California by quiet diplomatic means--were absolutely nullified. A second result was that Englishmen in California were much encouraged to hope for English intervention and protection. The Vallejo circle had always been strongly favorable to the United States. The effect of this raid and capture by United States citizens, with a United States officer endorsing the action, may well be guessed.
Inquiries and protests were lodged by the California authorities with Sloat and Lieutenant Montgomery of the United States naval forces. Just what effect these protests would have had, and just the temperature of the hot water in which the dashing Fremont would have found himself, is a matter of surmise. He had gambled strongly--on his own responsibility or at least at the unofficial suggestion of Benton--on an early declaration of war with Mexico. Failing such a declaration, he would be in a precarious diplomatic position, and must by mere force of automatic discipline have been heavily punished. However the dice fell for him. War with Mexico was almost immediately an actual fact. Fremont's injection into the revolution had been timed at the happiest possible moment for him.
The Bear Flag Revolution took place on June 14,1846. On July 7 the American flag was hoisted over the post at Monterey by Commodore Sloat. Though he had knowledge from June 5 of a state of war, this knowledge, apparently, he had shared neither with his officers nor with the public, and he exhibited a want of initiative and vigor which is in striking contrast to Fremont's ambition and overzeal.
Shortly after this incident Commodore Sloat was allowed to return "by reason of ill health," as has been heretofore published in most histories. His undoubted recall gave room to Commodore Robert Stockton, to whom Sloat not only turned over the command of the naval forces, but whom he also directed to "assume command of the forces and operations on shore."
Stockton at once invited Fremont to enlist under his command, and the invitation was accepted. The entire forces moved south by sea and land for the purpose of subduing southern California. This end was temporarily accomplished with almost ridiculous ease. At this distance of time, allowing all obvious explanations of lack of training, meager equipment, and internal dissension, we find it a little difficult to understand why the Californians did not make a better stand. Most of the so-called battles were a sort of opera bouffe. Californians entrenched with cannon were driven contemptuously forth, without casualties, by a very few men. For example, a lieutenant and nine men were sufficient to hold Santa Barbara in subjection. Indeed, the conquest was too easy, for, lulled into false security, Stockton departed, leaving as he supposed sufficient men to hold the country. The Californians managed to get some coherence into their councils, attacked the Americans, and drove them forth from their garrisons.
Stockton and Fremont immediately started south. In the meantime an overland party under General Kearny had been dispatched from the East. His instructions were rather broad. He was to take in such small sections of the country as New Mexico and Arizona, leaving sufficient garrisons on his way to California. As a result, though his command at first numbered 1657 men, he arrived in the latter state with only about 100. From Warner's Ranch in the mountains he sent word to Stockton that he had arrived. Gillespie, whom the Commodore at once dispatched with thirty-nine men to meet and conduct him to San Diego, joined Kearny near San Luis Rey Mission.
A force of Californians, however, under command of one Andres Pico had been hovering about the hills watching the Americans. It was decided to attack this force. Twenty men were detailed under Captain Johnston for the purpose. At dawn on the morning of the 6th of December the Americans charged upon the Californian camp. The Californians promptly decamped after having delivered a volley which resulted in killing Johnston. The Americans at once pursued them hotly, became much scattered, and were turned upon by the fleeing enemy. The Americans were poorly mounted after their journey, their weapons were now empty, and they were unable to give mutual aid. The Spanish were armed with lances, pistols, and the deadly riata. Before the rearguard could come up, sixteen of the total American force were killed and nineteen badly wounded. This battle of San Pascual, as it was called, is interesting as being the only engagement in which the Californians got the upper hand. Whether their Parthian tactics were the result of a preconceived policy or were merely an expedient of the moment, it is impossible to say. The battle is also notable because the well-known scout, Kit Carson, took part in it.
The forces of Stockton and Kearny joined a few days later, and very soon a conflict of authority arose between the leaders. It was a childish affair throughout, and probably at bottom arose from Fremont's usual over-ambitious designs. To Kearny had undoubtedly been given, by the properly constituted authorities, the command of all the land operations. Stockton, however, claimed to hold supreme land command by instructions from Commodore Sloat already quoted. Through the internal evidence of Stockton's letters and proclamations, it seems he was a trifle inclined to be bombastic and high-flown, to usurp authority, and perhaps to consider himself and his operations of more importance than they actually were. However, he was an officer disciplined and trained to obedience, and his absurd contention is not in character. It may be significant that he had promised to appoint Fremont Governor of California, a promise that naturally could not be fulfilled if Kearny's authority were fully recognized.
Furthermore, at this moment Fremont was at the zenith of his career, and his influence in such matters was considerable. As Hittell says, "At this time and for some time afterwards, Fremont was represented as a sort of young lion. The several trips he had made across the continent, and the several able and interesting reports he had published over his name attracted great public attention. He was hardly ever mentioned except in a high-flown hyperbolical phrase. Benton was one of the most influential men of his day, and it soon became well understood that the surest way of reaching the father-in-law's favor was by furthering the son-in-law's prospects; everybody that wished to court Benton praised Fremont. Besides this political influence Benton exerted in Fremont's behalf, there was an almost equally strong social influence." It might be added that the nature of his public service had been such as to throw him on his own responsibility, and that he had always gambled with fortune, as in the Bear Flag Revolution already mentioned. His star had ever been in the ascendant. He was a spoiled child of fortune at this time, and bitterly and haughtily resented any check to his ambition. The mixture of his blood gave him that fine sense of the dramatic which so easily descends to posing. His actual accomplishment was without doubt great; but his own appreciation of that accomplishment was also undoubtedly great. He was one of those interesting characters whose activities are so near the line between great deeds and charlatanism that it is sometimes difficult to segregate the pose from the performance.
The end of this row for precedence did not come until after the so-called battles at the San Gabriel River and on the Mesa on January 8 and 9, 1847. The first of these conflicts is so typical that it is worth a paragraph of description.
The Californians were posted on the opposite bank of the river. They had about five hundred men, and two pieces of artillery well placed. The bank was elevated some forty feet above the stream and possibly four or six hundred back from the water. The American forces, all told, consisted of about five hundred men, but most of them were dismounted. The tactics were exceedingly simple. The Americans merely forded the river, dragged their guns across, put them in position, and calmly commenced a vigorous bombardment. After about an hour and a half of circling about and futile half-attacks, the Californians withdrew. The total American loss in this and the succeeding "battle," called that of the Mesa, was three killed and twelve wounded.
After this latter battle, the Californians broke completely and hurtled toward the North. Beyond Los Angeles, near San Fernando, they ran head-on into Fremont and his California battalion marching overland from the North. Fremont had just learned of Stockton's defeat of the Californians and, as usual, he seized the happy chance the gods had offered him. He made haste to assure the Californians through a messenger that they would do well to negotiate with him rather than with Stockton. To these suggestions the Californians yielded. Commissioners appointed by both sides then met at Cahuenga on January 13, and elaborated a treaty by which the Californians agreed to surrender their arms and not to serve again during the war, whereupon the victors allowed them to leave the country. Fremont at once proceeded to Los Angeles, where he reported to Kearny and Stockton what had happened.
In accordance with his foolish determination, Stockton still refused to acknowledge Kearny's direct authority. He appointed Fremont Governor of California, which was one mistake; and Fremont accepted, which was another. Undoubtedly the latter thought that his pretensions would be supported by personal influence in Washington. From former experience he had every reason to believe so. In this case, however, he reckoned beyond the resources of even his powerful father-in-law. Kearny, who seems to have been a direct old war-dog, resolved at once to test his authority. He ordered Fremont to muster the California battalion into the regular service, under his (Kearny's) command; or, if the men did not wish to do this, to discharge them. This order did not in the least please Fremont. He attempted to open negotiations, but Kearny was in no manner disposed to talk. He said curtly that he had given his orders, and merely wished to know whether or not they would be obeyed. To this, and from one army officer to another, there could be but one answer, and that was in the affirmative.
Colonel Mason opportunely arrived from Washington with instructions to Fremont either to join his regiment or to resume the explorations on which he had originally been sent to this country. Fremont was still pretending to be Governor, but with nothing to govern. His game was losing at Washington. He could not know this, however, and for some time continued to persist in his absurd claims to governorship. Finally he begged permission of Kearny to form an expedition against Mexico. But it was rather late in the day for the spoiled child to ask for favors, and the permission was refused. Upon his return to Washington under further orders, Fremont was court-martialed, and was found guilty of mutiny, disobedience, and misconduct. He was ordered dismissed from the service, but was pardoned by President Polk in view of his past services. He refused this pardon and resigned.
Fremont was a picturesque figure with a great deal of personal magnetism and dash. The halo of romance has been fitted to his head. There is no doubt that he was a good wilderness traveler, a keen lover of adventure, and a likable personality. He was, however, over-ambitious; he advertised himself altogether too well; and he presumed on the undoubtedly great personal influence he possessed. He has been nicknamed the Pathfinder, but a better title would be the Pathfollower. He found no paths that had not already been traversed by men before him. Unless the silly sentiment that persistently glorifies such despicable characters as the English Stuarts continues to surround this interesting character with fallacious romance, Fremont will undoubtedly take his place in history below men now more obscure but more solid than he was. His services and his ability were both great. If he, his friends, and historians had been content to rest his fame on actualities, his position would be high and honorable. The presumption of so much more than the man actually did or was has the unfortunate effect of minimizing his real accomplishment.
The American Occupation
From the earliest period Spain had discouraged foreign immigration into California. Her object was neither to attract settlers nor to develop the country, but to retain political control of it, and to make of it a possible asylum for her own people. Fifty years after the founding of the first mission at San Diego, California had only thirteen inhabitants of foreign birth. Most of these had become naturalized citizens, and so were in name Spanish. Of these but three were American!
Subsequent to 1822, however, the number of foreign residents rapidly increased. These people were mainly of substantial character, possessing a real interest in the country and an intention of permanent settlement. Most of them became naturalized, married Spanish women, acquired property, and became trusted citizens. In marked contrast to their neighbors, they invariably displayed the greatest energy and enterprise. They were generally liked by the natives, and such men as Hartnell, Richardson, David Spence, Nicholas Den, and many others, lived lives and left reputations to be envied.
Between 1830 and 1840, however, Americans of a different type began to present themselves. Southwest of the Missouri River the ancient town of Santa Fe attracted trappers and traders of all nations and from all parts of the great West. There they met to exchange their wares and to organize new expeditions into the remote territories. Some of them naturally found their way across the western mountains into California. One of the most notable was James Pattie, whose personal narrative is well worth reading. These men were bold, hardy, rough, energetic, with little patience for the refinements of life--in fact, diametrically opposed in character to the easy-going inhabitants of California. Contempt on the one side and distrust on the other were inevitable. The trappers and traders, together with the deserters from whalers and other ships, banded together in small communities of the rough type familiar to any observer of our frontier communities. They looked down upon and despised the "greasers," who in turn did everything in their power to harass them by political and other means.
At first isolated parties, such as those of Jedediah Smith, the Patties, and some others, had been imprisoned or banished eastward over the Rockies. The pressure of increasing numbers, combined with the rather idle carelessness into which all California-Spanish regulations seemed at length to fall, later nullified this drastic policy. Notorious among these men was one Isaac Graham, an American trapper, who had become weary of wandering and had settled near Natividad. There he established a small distillery, and in consequence drew about him all the rough and idle characters of the country. Some were trappers, some sailors; a few were Mexicans and renegade Indians. Over all of these Graham obtained an absolute control. They were most of them of a belligerent nature and expert shots, accustomed to taking care of themselves in the wilds. This little band, though it consisted of only thirty-nine members, was therefore considered formidable.
A rumor that these people were plotting an uprising for the purpose of overturning the government aroused Governor Alvarado to action. It is probable that the rumors in question were merely the reports of boastful drunken vaporings and would better have been ignored. However, at this time Alvarado, recently arisen to power through the usual revolutionary tactics, felt himself not entirely secure in his new position. He needed some distraction, and he therefore seized upon the rumor of Graham's uprising as a means of solidifying his influence--an expedient not unknown to modern rulers. He therefore ordered the prefect Castro to arrest the party. This was done by surprise. Graham and his companions were taken from their beds, placed upon a ship at Monterey, and exiled to San Blas, to be eventually delivered to the Mexican authorities. There they were held in prison for some months, but being at last released through the efforts of an American lawyer, most of them returned to California rather better off than before their arrest. It is typical of the vacillating Californian policy of the day that, on their return, Graham and his riflemen were at once made use of by one of the revolutionary parties as a reinforcement to their military power!
By 1840 the foreign population had by these rather desultory methods been increased to a few over four hundred souls. The majority could not be described as welcome guests. They had rarely come into the country with the deliberate intention of settling but rather as a traveler's chance. In November, 1841, however, two parties of quite a different character arrived. They were the first true immigrants into California, and their advent is significant as marking the beginning of the end of the old order. One of these parties entered by the Salt Lake Trail, and was the forerunner of the many pioneers over that great central route. The other came by Santa Fe, over the trail that had by now become so well marked that they hardly suffered even inconvenience on their journey. The first party arrived at Monte Diablo in the north, the other at San Gabriel Mission in the south. Many brought their families with them, and they came with the evident intention of settling in California.
The arrival of these two parties presented to the Mexican Government a problem that required immediate solution. Already in anticipation of such an event it had been provided that nobody who had not obtained a legal passport should be permitted to remain in the country; and that even old settlers, unless naturalized, should be required to depart unless they procured official permission to remain. Naturally none of the new arrivals had received notice of this law, and they were in consequence unprovided with the proper passports. Legally they should have been forced at once to turn about and return by the way they came. Actually it would have been inhuman, if not impossible, to have forced them at that season of the year to attempt the mountains. General Vallejo, always broad-minded in his policies, used discretion in the matter and provided those in his district with temporary permits to remain. He required only a bond signed by other Americans who had been longer in the country.
Alvarado and Vallejo at once notified the Mexican Government of the arrival of these strangers, and both expressed fear that other and larger parties would follow. These fears were very soon realized. Succeeding expeditions settled in the State with the evident intention of remaining. No serious effort was made by the California authorities to keep them out. From time to time, to be sure, formal objection was raised and regulations were passed. However, as a matter of plain practicability, it was manifestly impossible to prevent parties from starting across the plains, or to inform the people living in the Eastern States of the regulations adopted by California. It must be remembered that communication at that time was extraordinarily slow and broken. It would have been cruel and unwarranted to drive away those who had already arrived. And even were such a course to be contemplated, a garrison would have been necessary at every mountain pass on the East and North, and at every crossing of the Colorado River, as well as at every port along the coast. The government in California had not men sufficient to handle its own few antique guns in its few coastwise forts, let alone a surplus for the purpose just described. And to cap all, provided the garrisons had been available and could have been placed, it would have been physically impossible to have supplied them with provisions for even a single month.
Truth to tell, the newcomers of this last class were not personally objectionable to the Californians. The Spanish considered them no different from those of their own blood. Had it not been for an uneasiness lest the enterprise of the American settlers should in time overcome Californian interests, had it not been for repeated orders from Mexico itself, and had it not been for reports that ten thousand Mormons had recently left Illinois for California, it is doubtful if much attention would have been paid to the first immigrants.
Westward migration at this time was given an added impetus by the Oregon question. The status of Oregon had long been in doubt. Both England and the United States were inclined to claim priority of occupation. The boundary between Canada and the United States had not yet been decided upon between the two countries. Though they had agreed upon the compromise of joint occupation of the disputed land, this arrangement did not meet with public approval. The land-hungry took a particular interest in the question and joined their voices with those of men actuated by more patriotic motives. In public meetings which were held throughout the country this joint occupation convention was explained and discussed, and its abrogation was demanded. These meetings helped to form the patriotic desire. Senator Tappan once said that thirty thousand settlers with their thirty thousand rifles in the valley of the Columbia would quickly settle all questions of title to the country. This saying was adopted as the slogan for a campaign in the West. It had the same inspiring effect as the later famous "54-40 or fight." People were aroused as in the olden times they had been aroused to the crusades. It became a form of mental contagion to talk of, and finally to accomplish, the journey to the Northwest. Though no accurate records were kept, it is estimated that in 1843 over 800 people crossed to Willamette Valley. By 1845 this immigration had increased to fully 3000 within the year.
Because of these conditions the Oregon Trail had become a national highway. Starting at Independence, which is a suburb of the present Kansas City, it set out over the rolling prairie. At that time the wide plains were bright with wild flowers and teeming with game. Elk, antelope, wild turkeys, buffalo, deer, and a great variety of smaller creatures supplied sport and food in plenty. Wood and water were in every ravine; the abundant grass was sufficient to maintain the swarming hordes of wild animals and to give rich pasture to horses and oxen. The journey across these prairies, while long and hard, could rarely have been tedious. Tremendous thunderstorms succeeded the sultry heat of the West, an occasional cyclone added excitement; the cattle were apt to stampede senselessly; and, while the Indian had not yet developed the hostility that later made a journey across the plains so dangerous, nevertheless the possibilities of theft were always near enough at hand to keep the traveler alert and interested. Then there was the sandy country of the Platte River with its buffalo--buffalo by the hundreds of thousands, as far as the eye could reach--a marvelous sight: and beyond that again the Rockies, by way of Fort Laramie and South Pass.
Beyond Fort Hall the Oregon Trail and the trail for California divided. And at this point there began the terrible part of the journey--the arid, alkaline, thirsty desert, short of game, horrible in its monotony, deadly with its thirst. It is no wonder that, weakened by their sufferings in this inferno, so many of the immigrants looked upon the towering walls of the Sierras with a sinking of the heart.
While at first most of the influx of settlers was by way of Oregon, later the stories of the new country that made their way eastward induced travelers to go direct to California itself. The immigration, both from Oregon in the North and by the route over the Sierras, increased so rapidly that in 1845 there were probably about 700 Americans in the district. Those coming over the Sierras by the Carson Sink and Salt Lake trails arrived first of all at the fort built by Captain Sutter at the junction of the American and Sacramento rivers.
Captain Sutter was a man of Swiss parentage who had arrived in San Francisco in 1839 without much capital and with only the assets of considerable ability and great driving force. From the Governor he obtained grant of a large tract of land "somewhere in the interior" for the purposes of colonization. His colonists consisted of one German, four other white men, and eight Kanakas. The then Governor, Alvarado, thought this rather a small beginning, but advised him to take out naturalization papers and to select a location. Sutter set out on his somewhat vague quest with a four-oared boat and two small schooners, loaded with provisions, implements, ammunition, and three small cannon. Besides his original party he took an Indian boy and a dog, the latter proving by no means the least useful member of the company. He found at the junction of the American and Sacramento rivers the location that appealed to him, and there he established himself. His knack with the Indians soon enlisted their services. He seems to have been able to keep his agreements with them and at the same time to maintain rigid discipline and control.
Within an incredibly short time he had established a feudal barony at his fort. He owned eleven square leagues of land, four thousand two hundred cattle, two thousand horses, and about as many sheep. His trade in beaver skins was most profitable. He maintained a force of trappers who were always welcome at his fort, and whom he generously kept without cost to themselves. He taught the Indians blanket-weaving, hat-making, and other trades, and he even organized them into military companies. The fort which he built was enclosed on four sides and of imposing dimensions and convenience. It mounted twelve pieces of artillery, supported a regular garrison of forty in uniform, and contained within its walls a blacksmith shop, a distillery, a flour mill, a cannery, and space for other necessary industries. Outside the walls of the fort Captain Sutter raised wheat, oats, and barley in quantity, and even established an excellent fruit and vegetable garden.
Indeed, in every way Captain Sutter's environment and the results of his enterprises were in significant contrast to the inactivity and backwardness of his neighbors. He showed what an energetic man could accomplish with exactly the same human powers and material tools as had always been available to the Californians. Sutter himself was a rather short, thick-set man, exquisitely neat, of military bearing, carrying himself with what is called the true old-fashioned courtesy. He was a man of great generosity and of high spirit. His defect was an excess of ambition which in the end o'erleaped itself. There is no doubt that his first expectation was to found an independent state within the borders of California. His loyalty to the Americans was, however, never questioned, and the fact that his lands were gradually taken from him, and that he died finally in comparative poverty, is a striking comment on human injustice.
The important point for us at present is that Sutter's Fort happened to be exactly on the line of the overland immigration. For the trail-weary traveler it was the first stopping-place after crossing the high Sierras to the promised land. Sutter's natural generosity of character induced him always to treat these men with the greatest kindness. He made his profits from such as wished to get rid of their oxen and wagons in exchange for the commodities which he had to offer. But there is no doubt that the worthy captain displayed the utmost liberality in dealing with those whom poverty had overtaken. On several occasions he sent out expeditions at his personal cost to rescue parties caught in the mountains by early snows or other misfortunes along the road, Especially did he go to great expense in the matter of the ill-fated Donner party, who, it will be remembered, spent the winter near Truckee, and were reduced to cannibalism to avoid starvation.[1]
[1: See The Passing of the Frontier, in "The Chronicles of America."]
Now Sutter had, of course, been naturalized in order to obtain his grant of land. He had also been appointed an official of the California-Mexican Government. Taking advantage of this fact, he was accustomed to issue permits or passports to the immigrants, permitting them to remain in the country. This gave the immigrants a certain limited standing, but, as they were not Mexican citizens, they were disqualified from holding land. Nevertheless Sutter used his good offices in showing desirable locations to the would-be settlers.[2]
[2: It is to be remarked that, prior to the gold rush, American settlements did not take place in the Spanish South but in the unoccupied North. In 1845 Castro and Castillero made a tour through the Sacramento Valley and the northern regions to inquire about the new arrivals. Castro displayed no personal uneasiness at their presence and made no attempt or threat to deport them.]
As far as the Californians were concerned, there was little rivalry or interference between the immigrants and the natives. Their interests did not as yet conflict. Nevertheless the central Mexican Government continued its commands to prevent any and all immigration. It was rather well justified by its experience in Texas, where settlement had ended by final absorption. The local Californian authorities were thus thrust between the devil and the deep blue sea. They were constrained by the very positive and repeated orders from their home government to keep out all immigration and to eject those already on the ground. On the other hand, the means for doing so were entirely lacking, and the present situation did not seem to them alarming.
Thus matters drifted along until the Mexican War. For a considerable time before actual hostilities broke out, it was well known throughout the country that they were imminent. Every naval and military commander was perfectly aware that, sooner or later, war was inevitable. Many had received their instructions in case of that eventuality, and most of the others had individual plans to be put into execution at the earliest possible moment. Indeed, as early as 1842 Commodore Jones, being misinformed of a state of war, raced with what he supposed to be English war-vessels from South America, entered the port of Monterey hastily, captured the fort, and raised the American flag. The next day he discovered that not only was there no state of war, but that he had not even raced British ships! The flag was thereupon hauled down, the Mexican emblem substituted, appropriate apologies and salutes were rendered, and the incident was considered closed. The easy-going Californians accepted the apology promptly and cherished no rancor for the mistake.
In the meantime Thomas O. Larkin, a very substantial citizen of long standing in the country, had been appointed consul, and in addition received a sum of six dollars a day to act as secret agent. It was hoped that his great influence would avail to inspire the Californians with a desire for peaceful annexation to the United States. In case that policy failed, he was to use all means to separate them from Mexico, and so isolate them from their natural alliances. He was furthermore to persuade them that England, France, and Russia had sinister designs on their liberty. It was hoped that his good offices would slowly influence public opinion, and that, on the declaration of open war with Mexico, the United States flag could be hoisted in California not only without opposition but with the consent and approval of the inhabitants. This type of peaceful conquest had a very good chance of success. Larkin possessed the confidence of the better class of Californians and he did his duty faithfully.
Just at this moment a picturesque, gallant, ambitious, dashing, and rather unscrupulous character appeared inopportunely on the horizon. His name was John C. Fremont. He was the son of a French father and a Virginia mother. He was thirty-two years old, and was married to the daughter of Thomas H. Benton, United States Senator from Missouri and a man of great influence in the country. Possessed of an adventurous spirit, considerable initiative, and great persistence Fremont had already performed the feat of crossing the Sierra Nevadas by way of Carson River and Johnson Pass, and had also explored the Columbia River and various parts of the Northwest. Fremont now entered California by way of Walker Lake and the Truckee, and reached Sutter's Fort in 1845. He then turned southward to meet a division of his party under Joseph Walker.
His expedition was friendly in character, with the object of surveying a route westward to the Pacific, and then northward to Oregon. It supposedly possessed no military importance whatever. But his turning south to meet Walker instead of north, where ostensibly his duty called him, immediately aroused the suspicions of the Californians. Though ordered to leave the district, he refused compliance, and retired to a place called Gavilan Peak, where he erected fortifications and raised the United States flag. Probably Fremont's intentions were perfectly friendly and peaceful. He made, however, a serious blunder in withdrawing within fortifications. After various threats by the Californians but no performance in the way of attack, he withdrew and proceeded by slow marches to Sutter's Fort and thence towards the north. Near Klamath Lake he was overtaken by Lieutenant Gillespie, who delivered to him certain letters and papers. Fremont thereupon calmly turned south with the pick of his men.
In the meantime the Spanish sub-prefect, Guerrero, had sent word to Larkin that "a multitude of foreigners, having come into California and bought property, a right of naturalized foreigners only, he was under necessity of notifying the authorities in each town to inform such purchasers that the transactions were invalid, and that they themselves were subject to be expelled." This action at once caused widespread consternation among the settlers. They remembered the deportation of Graham and his party some years before, and were both alarmed and thoroughly convinced that defensive measures were necessary. Fremont's return at precisely this moment seemed to them very significant. He was a United States army officer at the head of a government expedition. When on his way to the North he had been overtaken by Gillespie, an officer of the United States Navy. Gillespie had delivered to him certain papers, whereupon he had immediately returned. There seemed no other interpretation of these facts than that the Government at Washington was prepared to uphold by force the American settlers in California.
This reasoning, logical as it seems, proves mistaken in the perspective of the years. Gillespie, it is true, delivered some letters to Fremont, but it is extremely unlikely they contained instructions having to do with interference in Californian affairs. Gillespie, at the same time that he brought these dispatches to Fremont, brought also instructions to Larkin creating the confidential agency above described, and these instructions specifically forbade interference with Californian affairs. It is unreasonable to suppose that contradictory dispatches were sent to one or another of these two men. Many years later Fremont admitted that the dispatch to Larkin was what had been communicated to him by Gillespie. His words are: "This officer [Gillespie] informed me also that he was directed by the Secretary of State to acquaint me with his instructions to the consular agent, Mr. Larkin." Reading Fremont's character, understanding his ambitions, interpreting his later lawless actions that resulted in his court-martial, realizing the recklessness of his spirit, and his instinct to take chances, one comes to the conclusion that it is more than likely that his move was a gamble on probabilities rather than a result of direct orders.
Be this as it may, the mere fact of Fremont's turning south decided the alarmed settlers, and led to the so-called "Bear Flag Revolution." A number of settlers decided that it would be expedient to capture Sonoma, where under Vallejo were nine cannon and some two hundred muskets. It was, in fact, a sort of military station. The capture proved to be a very simple matter. Thirty-two or thirty-three men appeared at dawn, before Vallejo's house, under Merritt and Semple. They entered the house suddenly, called upon Jacob Leese, Vallejo's son-in-law, to interpret, and demanded immediate surrender. Richman says "Leese was surprised at the 'rough looks' of the Americans. Semple he describes as 'six feet six inches tall, and about fifteen inches in diameter, dressed in greasy buckskin from neck to foot, and with a fox-skin cap.'" The prisoners were at once sent by these raiders to Fremont, who was at that time on the American River. He immediately disclaimed any part in the affair. However, instead of remaining entirely aloof, he gave further orders that Leese, who was still in attendance as interpreter, should be arrested, and also that the prisoners should be confined in Sutter's Fort. He thus definitely and officially entered the movement. Soon thereafter Fremont started south through Sonoma, collecting men as he went.
The following quotation from a contemporary writer is interesting and illuminating. "A vast cloud of dust appeared at first, and thence in long files emerged this wildest of wild parties. Fremont rode ahead, a spare active looking man, with such an eye! He was dressed in a blouse and leggings, and wore a felt hat. After him came five Delaware Indians who were his bodyguard. They had charge of two baggage-horses. The rest, many of them blacker than Indians, rode two and two, the rifle held by one hand across the pummel of the saddle. The dress of these men was principally a long loose coat of deerskin tied with thongs in front, trousers of the same. The saddles were of various fashions, though these and a large drove of horses and a brass field gun were things they had picked up in California."
Meantime, the Americans who had collected in Sonoma, under the lead of William B. Ide, raised the flag of revolution--"a standard of somewhat uncertain origin as regards the cotton cloth whereof it was made," writes Royce. On this, they painted with berry juice "something that they called a Bear." By this capture of Sonoma, and its subsequent endorsement by Fremont, Larkin's instructions--that is, to secure California by quiet diplomatic means--were absolutely nullified. A second result was that Englishmen in California were much encouraged to hope for English intervention and protection. The Vallejo circle had always been strongly favorable to the United States. The effect of this raid and capture by United States citizens, with a United States officer endorsing the action, may well be guessed.
Inquiries and protests were lodged by the California authorities with Sloat and Lieutenant Montgomery of the United States naval forces. Just what effect these protests would have had, and just the temperature of the hot water in which the dashing Fremont would have found himself, is a matter of surmise. He had gambled strongly--on his own responsibility or at least at the unofficial suggestion of Benton--on an early declaration of war with Mexico. Failing such a declaration, he would be in a precarious diplomatic position, and must by mere force of automatic discipline have been heavily punished. However the dice fell for him. War with Mexico was almost immediately an actual fact. Fremont's injection into the revolution had been timed at the happiest possible moment for him.
The Bear Flag Revolution took place on June 14,1846. On July 7 the American flag was hoisted over the post at Monterey by Commodore Sloat. Though he had knowledge from June 5 of a state of war, this knowledge, apparently, he had shared neither with his officers nor with the public, and he exhibited a want of initiative and vigor which is in striking contrast to Fremont's ambition and overzeal.
Shortly after this incident Commodore Sloat was allowed to return "by reason of ill health," as has been heretofore published in most histories. His undoubted recall gave room to Commodore Robert Stockton, to whom Sloat not only turned over the command of the naval forces, but whom he also directed to "assume command of the forces and operations on shore."
Stockton at once invited Fremont to enlist under his command, and the invitation was accepted. The entire forces moved south by sea and land for the purpose of subduing southern California. This end was temporarily accomplished with almost ridiculous ease. At this distance of time, allowing all obvious explanations of lack of training, meager equipment, and internal dissension, we find it a little difficult to understand why the Californians did not make a better stand. Most of the so-called battles were a sort of opera bouffe. Californians entrenched with cannon were driven contemptuously forth, without casualties, by a very few men. For example, a lieutenant and nine men were sufficient to hold Santa Barbara in subjection. Indeed, the conquest was too easy, for, lulled into false security, Stockton departed, leaving as he supposed sufficient men to hold the country. The Californians managed to get some coherence into their councils, attacked the Americans, and drove them forth from their garrisons.
Stockton and Fremont immediately started south. In the meantime an overland party under General Kearny had been dispatched from the East. His instructions were rather broad. He was to take in such small sections of the country as New Mexico and Arizona, leaving sufficient garrisons on his way to California. As a result, though his command at first numbered 1657 men, he arrived in the latter state with only about 100. From Warner's Ranch in the mountains he sent word to Stockton that he had arrived. Gillespie, whom the Commodore at once dispatched with thirty-nine men to meet and conduct him to San Diego, joined Kearny near San Luis Rey Mission.
A force of Californians, however, under command of one Andres Pico had been hovering about the hills watching the Americans. It was decided to attack this force. Twenty men were detailed under Captain Johnston for the purpose. At dawn on the morning of the 6th of December the Americans charged upon the Californian camp. The Californians promptly decamped after having delivered a volley which resulted in killing Johnston. The Americans at once pursued them hotly, became much scattered, and were turned upon by the fleeing enemy. The Americans were poorly mounted after their journey, their weapons were now empty, and they were unable to give mutual aid. The Spanish were armed with lances, pistols, and the deadly riata. Before the rearguard could come up, sixteen of the total American force were killed and nineteen badly wounded. This battle of San Pascual, as it was called, is interesting as being the only engagement in which the Californians got the upper hand. Whether their Parthian tactics were the result of a preconceived policy or were merely an expedient of the moment, it is impossible to say. The battle is also notable because the well-known scout, Kit Carson, took part in it.
The forces of Stockton and Kearny joined a few days later, and very soon a conflict of authority arose between the leaders. It was a childish affair throughout, and probably at bottom arose from Fremont's usual over-ambitious designs. To Kearny had undoubtedly been given, by the properly constituted authorities, the command of all the land operations. Stockton, however, claimed to hold supreme land command by instructions from Commodore Sloat already quoted. Through the internal evidence of Stockton's letters and proclamations, it seems he was a trifle inclined to be bombastic and high-flown, to usurp authority, and perhaps to consider himself and his operations of more importance than they actually were. However, he was an officer disciplined and trained to obedience, and his absurd contention is not in character. It may be significant that he had promised to appoint Fremont Governor of California, a promise that naturally could not be fulfilled if Kearny's authority were fully recognized.
Furthermore, at this moment Fremont was at the zenith of his career, and his influence in such matters was considerable. As Hittell says, "At this time and for some time afterwards, Fremont was represented as a sort of young lion. The several trips he had made across the continent, and the several able and interesting reports he had published over his name attracted great public attention. He was hardly ever mentioned except in a high-flown hyperbolical phrase. Benton was one of the most influential men of his day, and it soon became well understood that the surest way of reaching the father-in-law's favor was by furthering the son-in-law's prospects; everybody that wished to court Benton praised Fremont. Besides this political influence Benton exerted in Fremont's behalf, there was an almost equally strong social influence." It might be added that the nature of his public service had been such as to throw him on his own responsibility, and that he had always gambled with fortune, as in the Bear Flag Revolution already mentioned. His star had ever been in the ascendant. He was a spoiled child of fortune at this time, and bitterly and haughtily resented any check to his ambition. The mixture of his blood gave him that fine sense of the dramatic which so easily descends to posing. His actual accomplishment was without doubt great; but his own appreciation of that accomplishment was also undoubtedly great. He was one of those interesting characters whose activities are so near the line between great deeds and charlatanism that it is sometimes difficult to segregate the pose from the performance.
The end of this row for precedence did not come until after the so-called battles at the San Gabriel River and on the Mesa on January 8 and 9, 1847. The first of these conflicts is so typical that it is worth a paragraph of description.
The Californians were posted on the opposite bank of the river. They had about five hundred men, and two pieces of artillery well placed. The bank was elevated some forty feet above the stream and possibly four or six hundred back from the water. The American forces, all told, consisted of about five hundred men, but most of them were dismounted. The tactics were exceedingly simple. The Americans merely forded the river, dragged their guns across, put them in position, and calmly commenced a vigorous bombardment. After about an hour and a half of circling about and futile half-attacks, the Californians withdrew. The total American loss in this and the succeeding "battle," called that of the Mesa, was three killed and twelve wounded.
After this latter battle, the Californians broke completely and hurtled toward the North. Beyond Los Angeles, near San Fernando, they ran head-on into Fremont and his California battalion marching overland from the North. Fremont had just learned of Stockton's defeat of the Californians and, as usual, he seized the happy chance the gods had offered him. He made haste to assure the Californians through a messenger that they would do well to negotiate with him rather than with Stockton. To these suggestions the Californians yielded. Commissioners appointed by both sides then met at Cahuenga on January 13, and elaborated a treaty by which the Californians agreed to surrender their arms and not to serve again during the war, whereupon the victors allowed them to leave the country. Fremont at once proceeded to Los Angeles, where he reported to Kearny and Stockton what had happened.
In accordance with his foolish determination, Stockton still refused to acknowledge Kearny's direct authority. He appointed Fremont Governor of California, which was one mistake; and Fremont accepted, which was another. Undoubtedly the latter thought that his pretensions would be supported by personal influence in Washington. From former experience he had every reason to believe so. In this case, however, he reckoned beyond the resources of even his powerful father-in-law. Kearny, who seems to have been a direct old war-dog, resolved at once to test his authority. He ordered Fremont to muster the California battalion into the regular service, under his (Kearny's) command; or, if the men did not wish to do this, to discharge them. This order did not in the least please Fremont. He attempted to open negotiations, but Kearny was in no manner disposed to talk. He said curtly that he had given his orders, and merely wished to know whether or not they would be obeyed. To this, and from one army officer to another, there could be but one answer, and that was in the affirmative.
Colonel Mason opportunely arrived from Washington with instructions to Fremont either to join his regiment or to resume the explorations on which he had originally been sent to this country. Fremont was still pretending to be Governor, but with nothing to govern. His game was losing at Washington. He could not know this, however, and for some time continued to persist in his absurd claims to governorship. Finally he begged permission of Kearny to form an expedition against Mexico. But it was rather late in the day for the spoiled child to ask for favors, and the permission was refused. Upon his return to Washington under further orders, Fremont was court-martialed, and was found guilty of mutiny, disobedience, and misconduct. He was ordered dismissed from the service, but was pardoned by President Polk in view of his past services. He refused this pardon and resigned.
Fremont was a picturesque figure with a great deal of personal magnetism and dash. The halo of romance has been fitted to his head. There is no doubt that he was a good wilderness traveler, a keen lover of adventure, and a likable personality. He was, however, over-ambitious; he advertised himself altogether too well; and he presumed on the undoubtedly great personal influence he possessed. He has been nicknamed the Pathfinder, but a better title would be the Pathfollower. He found no paths that had not already been traversed by men before him. Unless the silly sentiment that persistently glorifies such despicable characters as the English Stuarts continues to surround this interesting character with fallacious romance, Fremont will undoubtedly take his place in history below men now more obscure but more solid than he was. His services and his ability were both great. If he, his friends, and historians had been content to rest his fame on actualities, his position would be high and honorable. The presumption of so much more than the man actually did or was has the unfortunate effect of minimizing his real accomplishment.
The American Occupation in Japan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undoubtedly, the American Occupation in Japan was a historical success story. During the seven year occupation from 1945 until 1952, the Americans restructured the Japanese government and gave Japan the footing after its post WWII demise. The Occupation provided the groundwork from which one of the strongest nations of the 20th century emerged by laying the foundation for democracy and successful capitalism. On a ideological level, the American occupation was intended to instill democratic values and eradicate imperialist ways. On a practical level, the American occupation was intended to disarm the military, break up the zaibatsu businesses, reform the educational system, give power to the local level, and give women suffrage.
First of all, the biggest success of the Occupation was the constitution. JapanÍs constitution was written during the Occupation, and that has remained wholly unchanged until today. This was the OccupationÍs first step in democratizing Japan. One of the largest problems with the Meiji constitution was that it did not have a system of checks and balances, as every part of the government would act in the name of the emperor. So the Constitution had to define the roles of each branch of government with clear lines of responsibility. Thus, the House of Chancellors, the House of Representatives, the Cabinet, and the Judiciary were created with established purposes and responsibilities. Also, the emperor lost any political status he had previously and was only allowed to remain on as a symbol of the state and the unity of the people. Since the emperor was reduced to a status of common citizenship, in theory the Japanese people would cease to be submissive to him -- this too was a method of democratization. Most importantly though, the Occupation established in the constitution the idea of popular sovereignty ¿ the idea that the government is an entity of the people, and dictated by the people.
From the onset, the Occupation primary goals was to disarm the military. Article 9 of the constitution claims that Japan ñrenounces war as its sovereign right ƒî and that Japan will never maintain any sort of military. Even today, there has been little to no opposition of this idea save a few right-wing militarists that are ostracized and ridiculed by the Japanese people. The Occupation set the precedent for JapanÍs foreign policy. Because the occupation was such a positive campaign, even today, Japan maintains an overall friendly relationship with the US. Generally, the US and Japan have similar viewpoints of global issues, except, of course, US-Japan trade issues. However, usually, Japanese foreign policy is consistent with American foreign policy.
The Occupation also attempted to restructured the power relationships in Japan, both economically and politically. The Americans tried to break up the bureaucracy, establish a strong labor movement and unions (although, as the labor sector became more radical, the Americans retrenched this plan) , and redistribute resources around the economy. The Occupation philosophy dictated that local politics become more powerful over time, as that is an essential element of grassroots democracy. However, this was never achieved as many national institutions and bureaucracies today still maintain most of the power. Financially, the local level could not support an overwhelming amount of responsibilities, and so the bureaucracy remained intact even though the Americans tried to disband their agencies.
The Americans also tried to break up the zaibatsu and strengthen Japanese unions because it was felt that there was an disproportionate concentration of economic power. The zaibatsu had become an important part of the Japanese economy in the 1920Ís and the 1930Ís. This is a concrete example of democratization because it was designed to allocate wealth and resources more evenly throughout the economy. However, the zaibatsu was replaced by the keiretsu, or ñJapan, Inc.î (as the West calls it). This is the idea that the Japanese companies are all interconnected and they present a unitary front to the government. Big business is still highly influential in Japanese politics, more so that the Americans would have liked.
Also, the land reform too can be seen as an attempt at democratizing Japan in the same sense, as it was intended to redistribute resources more equally throughout the economy. Before the land reform, many farmers did not own their own land and had to pay rent to wealthy land owners. The land reform succeeded in reallocating land, and the credit for this is attributed only to American initiation. Today, the thankful agricultural community is still a loyal supporter of the LDP party.
Another Occupation goal was social liberalization -- the Americans tried to instill the values of human rights and civil liberties into Japanese politics and social ideas. The Japanese people had until this point a rather vague idea of human rights, but the Americans defined them in terms of freedom of speech and political freedom. The media was given a legal wide-range of freedoms. Whether or not today these rights are exercised to their potential is difficult to judge although it seems that they are not. But the reasons why it would not be exercised to its fullest are social, and not legal. Where these progresses are best seen is in the context of feminism, and rights for women. Most importantly, women were given the suffrage. Although the rights of women in Japan are far from progressive, legally, women do have some power. This all stems from the Occupation.
Also included in this social agenda was education reform. The education reform was intended to deconstruct the emperor in the eyes of the Japanese people, and to provide more social and economic opportunities for the average Japanese. The syllabuses were modified to eliminate the importance of nationalist mythology, and the idea that the emperor was a demigod of sorts, and to replace it with a more international perspective. The new public education system aimed at providing equal educational opportunities to every Japanese. These reforms have remained intact today, as an education is available to all Japanese. Also, the Occupation tried to transfer most of the educational responsibilities from the central government to the local level, but they were not successful at this. Even today, the monbusho, or the Ministry of Education, is a powerful national organization that sponsors foreign exchange programs, creates the national entry exams, and dictates the national syllabus.
In conclusion, the Occupation set up an American democratic model for Japan and laid the foundation for many of its institutions. It was a successful occupation, and it ensured a good relationship between Japan and the US indefinitely. However, it is important to realize that the American Occupation did not completely ñAmericanizeî Japan, nor did it completely ñwesternizeî its social system. As the Occupation becomes more distant past, it becomes apparent that Japan is still fundamentally dictated by its own unique origins and culture. Although, probably the most significant offspring of the occupation reform is the legal rights that the Japanese people are ensured, regardless of whether or not they are fully exercised. With time, Japan is becoming more and more democratic, and the American influence during the Occupation is to thank for that.
Danielle Costa
April, 1997
Tufts University: Chinese and Japanese Politics
What we can learn from America's first "low intensity conflict."
It is baffling that any American might not understand the Iraqi disdain of a U.S. military occupation. How would Americans like being accosted by another country’s military…being arrested by them, controlled by them, dictated to by them, tortured by them, killed by them…. exploited by its corporate entities and losing sovereignty? Americans should look at the Philippines’ century long struggle for some answers to that question.
Bush referred to the Philippines as a model for the U.S. relationship with Iraq and I would like to briefly describe that model. It was and remains a fiasco and tragedy. After being occupied directly or indirectly by the United States since the Philippine-American War (1899-1902), the Philippines has been victimized in this relationship. While the Filipino elite have always benefited from U.S. interference in their country, the masses have suffered indignities, violence, extreme poverty, racism and no substantive reforms.
It is particularly important to highlight the initiation of “low intensity conflict” policies by the United States against Filipinos in 1901 – a practice the U.S. continued to implement throughout the 20th century in Vietnam, Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Columbia and elsewhere.
During the Spanish-American War in the late 1890’s, U.S. Commodore George Dewey descended upon the shores of the Philippines and destroyed the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay. Americans had a number of goals for occupying the Philippines. One was to create a military presence to then access the markets of China. The second was to utilize the Philippine raw materials for U.S. industry. U.S. President William McKinley described the third. After praying to “Almighty God,” McKinley said that a message came to him that Americans were in the Philippines to “uplift and civilize and christianize” Filipinos. He was obviously not aware of the fact that the Filipinos had been “christianized” for 400 years by Spanish colonizers, against whom they had consistently rebelled.
As Howard Zinn notes in his “People’s History of the United States,” the “Filipinos did not get the same message from God” and the resistance to U.S. military intervention began in 1899 in what has remained, up to the present time, organized efforts by Filipinos in opposition to U.S. interference.
Initially, Filipinos thought that the Americans were there to help them kick out the Spanish and end 400 years of repression. After fruitless attempts to negotiate, however, the reality of the U.S. intention became clear. The Filipinos were forced to acknowledge that the Americans intended to replace the Spanish as the colonial rulers. In The Philippines Reader, Daniel Schirmer and Stephen Shalom provide first hand accounts of this period. On February 5, 1899 Philippine President Emilio Aguinaldo urged his people to fight in response to the “outbreak of hostilities between the Philippine forces and the American forces of occupation, (which were) unjustly and unexpectedly provoked by the latter…. The constant outrages and taunts, which have caused the misery of the people…and finally the useless conferences and contempt shown the Philippine government prove the premeditated transgression of justice and liberty.”
The American reaction was swift and the slaughter by U.S. forces is legendary. Philippine scholar Luziminda Francisco refers to that brutal imperial American war that launched the 20th century as the “first Vietnam War” in which estimates of from 600,000 to a million Filipinos died. She states that the estimate of up to a million deaths might “err on the side of understatement” as one U.S. congressman, who visited the Philippines at the time, was quoted as saying “They never rebel in Luzon (Philippines) anymore because there isn’t anybody left to rebel…our soldiers took no prisoners, they kept no records, they simply swept the country and wherever and whenever they could get hold of a Filipino they killed him.”
In response to a massacre of 54 Americans by the Filipino resistance in Samar, Francisco describes how U.S. General “Howling Jake” Smith launched a “reign of terror” on the island. “Kill and burn…” Smith said “the more you kill and burn the more you’ll please me.” When asked the age limit for killing, he said, “Everything over ten.” The order from Smith was that Samar becomes a “howling wilderness” so that “even the birds could not live there.” The Americans had begun to utilize the deadly “water torture” against Filipinos – forcing huge amounts of water into their stomachs to then gather information – and Smith insisted on its use in Samar.
There were four U.S. regiments of Black soldiers in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. Many were outraged at the abuses and attitude of the white soldiers toward the Filipinos. Zinn refers to a letter from a volunteer from the state of Washington who wrote: “Our fighting blood was up, and we all wanted to kill ‘niggers’.... this shooting human beings beats rabbit hunting all to pieces.” David Fagan, one of the Black soldiers, left the U.S. ranks to fight along side Filipinos and “for two years wreaked havoc upon the American forces.”
The Philippine resistance fought valiantly against the well-armed Americans. Francisco states that the “Filipinos had to adapt to their limitations as best they could…with darts, the ubiquitous bolo, and even stones, prompting (U.S.) General Lawton to remark, ‘they are the bravest men I have ever seen’....”
It is also noteworthy that once the Americans captured Aguinaldo in April 1901 they expected hostilities to cease and were “dismayed” that this was not the case. As the movement against the American presence had massive support, the fighting continued “unabated.” This revelation led the leader of the U.S. campaign, General Arthur MacArthur, to resign.
The American policy was so brutal that even American personnel were skeptical. Francisco quotes a U.S. civil servant in the Philippines at the time who said that because of the “burning, torture and other harsh treatments” the Americans were “sowing the seeds for a perpetual revolution. If these things need to be done, they had best be done by native troops so that the people of the U.S. will not be credited therewith.” Obviously this warning was heeded, as in 1901 the Americans created the Philippine Constabulary, comprised of Filipinos, who would work at the behest of and ruthlessly serve U.S. interests during the U.S. colonization of the Philippines.
With its creation of the Philippine Constabulary (PC), the United States launched its “low intensity conflict” (LIC) strategy in the Philippines – in other words “don’t get the U.S. hands dirty, let someone else do the brutal work.” So while it might be “low” intensity for the United States, it is exceptionally “high” intensity for its victims. The PC is still in existence today, and its reactionary and mercenary origins have remained in tact. Throughout the 20th century it has played a key role in suppressing peasant revolts and anti-U.S. intervention movements.
At the end of World War II the Americans claim to have given the Philippines its independence. The U.S., however, insisted on maintaining a military presence in the country, with its major bases being Subic Naval Base and Clark Air Force Base. In return for these bases the US offered the Filipino elite the creation of the “Joint U.S. Military Advisory Group” (JUSMAG) to help reassert its authority over the peasant movements for land reform and other issues objectionable to them. The resistance to the US interference has always been intense in the Philippines. Nationalist movements and armed struggle from the early occupation period to the Hukbalahap guerrilla movement after World War II to the New People’s Army in the 1960’s through to the present, including, of course, peasant movements for land reform, factory workers rights, on and on. In every instance the U.S. administration and U.S. military have worked in tandem with their Filipino government and military counterparts in an attempt to ruthlessly quell these movements.
After Filipinos had successfully ousted the dictator and American puppet Ferdinand Marcos in 1986, the goal of many was to continue on that wave of success by attempting to end U.S. interference altogether – particularly by ousting the U.S. military bases. While many Filipinos demanded countless reforms from the new government of President Corie Aquino, they recognized that the American military presence and CIA involvement made their reform efforts next to impossible.
The Military Bases Agreement (MBA) that allowed the U.S. bases to stay in the Philippines was to expire in 1991 and the Philippine Senate, to the dismay of the Americans, did vote against the extension of the agreement, which finally closed that disastrous chapter in Philippine history. Prior to that vote, however, violence raged in the Philippines.
To organize against the extension of the MBA, a broad based anti-bases and nationalist movement developed in the Philippines in the 1980’s. The U.S. intention, however, was to maintain its bases, and to accomplish that the CIA hired retired US General John Singlaub (head of the World Anti-Communist League) to launch a relentless and cruel LIC campaign (1987-1989). President Aquino assisted in this effort in what the Filipinos refer to as “Total War” against the people. The result was a rise of death squads, vigilante violence, human rights abuses and massive numbers of refugees from evacuated areas. Assassinations and harassments of church workers, labor leaders, peasant leaders and others became a daily occurrence. In 1989, US Colonel James Rowe of JUSMAG, who had been training the Philippine military in LIC strategies, was assassinated in Manila. While the Filipinos have had brief respite, since 1991, of living without the presence of the huge U.S. military bases, JUSMAG has remained in tact and the Bush administration is attempting to reverse some of that victory.
Today, in violation of the Philippine constitution, which does not allow foreign troops on Philippine soil, the Bush administration successfully lobbied Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to send U.S. troops into the Philippine hinterlands.
The goal, according to Bush, is to destroy Muslim terrorists. Once again, in the Philippines, there is a growing movement to oust the U.S. military (see www.nispop.org). The United States began the last century with an imperial war in Asia. It now is repeating the process at the beginning of the 21st century with an intensive imperial reach into the Middle East and the parallels are striking.
The invasion of the Philippines by the U.S. was a preemptive, unprovoked war against a sovereign nation, as was the case in Iraq. As the Americans chose to occupy the Philippines for access to its raw materials and other markets, so too are they wanting access to Iraqi oil resources, markets and other resources of the Middle East. As Filipinos immediately began a resistance campaign against the Americans, so too are the Iraqis. McKinley launched an LIC policy in the Philippines, and George Bush is about to utilize the same policy in Iraq through what he is referring to as “Iraqification.” “Iraqification” calls for the selection of former Iraqi military and/or police to serve at the behest of the Americans. Iraqi’s hired by the U.S. will strike against those reacting against the U.S. military occupation and as a consequence will suffer the blows. It will be Iraqi’s against Iraqi’s with the United States pulling the strings.
Throughout the past century, the low intensity conflict policy implemented by the United States in Asia, Africa and Latin America has wreaked havoc, death and destruction and the Filipinos have experienced more than 100 years of these policies. It is important to note, however, that despite the violent attempts by the United States to pacify the Filipinos, it has never been successful in ending the opposition to U.S. interference in Philippine affairs or in stopping the Filipino struggles for the creation of a sovereign and free nation.
As was the case at the very beginning of the 20th century when the masses in the Philippines continued their battle against the Americans after the capture of Aguinaldo, at every juncture, the Filipinos have continued to organize against the American presence. It is highly unlikely that opposition to U.S. interference in Iraq or in the Philippines will end now or any time in the future.
History is not on the side of the occupiers. No one wants them.
For 12 years Ms. Gray has produced “Just Peace” on WRFG-Atlanta 89.3 FM covering local, regional, national and international news. In 1989 she visited the Philippines. She lives in Atlanta and can be reached at justpeacewrfg@aol.com. Note: The opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of Radio Free Georgia Foundation, Inc. its staff or volunteers.
1. Rizal`s Impression of America (The positive and Negative Impressions of Rizal of the United States.)
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impression were;
1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; 2) the drive and energy of the American people; 3) the natural beauty of the land; 4) the high standard of living; and 5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America has lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which
the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being disliked, too”.
In 1980, two years after Rizal's visit to the United States, Jose Alejandro, who was then studying engineering in Belgium, roomed with him on 38 Rue Philippe Champagne, Brussels. Alejandro had never been in America, so that one-day he asked Rizal: “What impressions do you have of America?”
“America,” answered Rizal, “is the land par excellence of freedom but only for the whites”.
2. Rizal’s second home. After visiting the United States, Rizal lived in London from May, 1888 to March, 1889. He chose this English cite to be his new home for three reasons: 1) to improve his knowledge of English Language, 2) to study and annotate Morga's Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and 3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London he engaged in Filipiniana studies, completed annotating Morga's book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics; penned a famous letter to the young women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertude Beckett.
3. Romance with Gertrude Beckett
Rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of three Beckett sisters – Gertrude, Gettie, as she was affectionately called, was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. She fell in love. On cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for him, gaily like a humming bird. During the family picnics, she was particularly very happy because Rizal was with them and she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days when Rizal stayed at home, she helped him by mixing his color for painting and assisted for sculpturing.
Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gertrude’s company. Their friendship drifted towards romance. Rizal affectionately called her “Gettie”, in reciprocation; she fondly called him “Pettie”. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life.
4. On May 25, 1888, a day after docking at Liver pool, Rizal went to London. For a short time, he stayed as guest at the home of Dr. Antonio Ma. Regidor, an exile of 1872 and a practicing lawyer in London. He was a boarder of the Beckett Family. The Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an Authority on Malay languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal's learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre). Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga's Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discussed with him problems pertaining to Philippine Affairs.
5. Annotating Morga’s Book
To prove his point and refute the accusations of prejudiced Spanish writers against his race, Rizal annotated the book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, written by the Spaniard Antonio Morga. The book was an unbiased presentation of 16th century Filipino culture. Rizal through his annotation showed that Filipinos had developed culture even before the coming of the Spaniards.
6. Short Visit to Paris and Spain
December 11, 1888, he went to Spain visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contracted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the propaganda movement. He exchanged ideas wit h this new friends and promise to cooperate in the fight for reforms.
7. Annotated Edition of Morga Published
Rizal's outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga's Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. It was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the requestt of rizal. In his Prologue, Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. However, he frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal's error, namely: 1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and 2) Rizal's attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abusers of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad. Thus Blumentritt said: {The high estimation of your notes (Rizal's annotations) does not prevent me from confessing that more than once, I observed that your participate in the error of many modern historians, who judge events of censuring past, in the light of concepts that correspond to contemporary ideas. This should not be. The historian should not impute to the men of the 16th century the wide horizon of ideas that move the 19th century. The second point with which I am not in agreement has to do with some of your fulminations against Catholicism. I believe that not in religion but in the cruel method and the abuses of many priests should we look for the origin of many events lamentable for religion, for Spain, and for the good name of the European race.
8. 19 March 1889
Rizal arrived at Paris and immediately founded the Kidlat Club. Since he had no time to publish immediately the annota-tions to the Morgans Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, he planned to edit the Ethnography of Mindanao together with Blumentritt Defense.
On the same day, Rizal, in Paris, permitted Mariano Ponce to publishthe poem "En Bosque" advising the latter pay attention to the signature Laong Laan. Likewise, advised Ponce to buy Filipino books and to mention its authors from time to time.
9. While busy in his historical studies in London, Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
10. Writings in London
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez' unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision Alang. This opus is satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he (St. Augustine) was commissioned by God to tell him (Fr. Rodriguez) of his stupidity and inform him of his penance on earth that he (Fr. Rodriguez) shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “ Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (Feb. 22,1889) in Tagalog. He penned it, upon the request of M.H del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanis parish priest of Malolos. The main point of this letter were: 1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; 2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spartan mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherlang; 3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; 4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside form retaining her good racial virtues; 5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way with good moral and good manners.
A.J.T. QUINTERO (MW 11:30-1:00)
Rizal’s life from America to London
Rizal arrived in America on April 28, 1888. He had good and bad impressions of the United States. Among these good impressions are (1) the maternal progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; (2) the drive and energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; and (5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. However, Rizal had also bad impression of America. He had seen the racial prejudice. Chinese and Negroes suffered from the discriminatory treatment of the Americans, in fact, they hold the passengers including Rizal because of politics. This was to impede the entry of Chinese coolies for the election was near. There existed the racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much but do not practice.
After visiting United States, Rizal then migrated to London where he chooses this country to be his second home. The reasons were: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. While in London he boarded at No. 37 Chalcot Crescent, Primson Hill. This was owned by the Beckett family. He become close to them particularly to the eldest among the Beckett sisters, Gertrude. She fell in love with Rizal. On cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for him, chattering gaily like a humming bird. During the family picnics, she was particularly very happy because Rizal was with them and she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days when Rizal stayed at home, she helped him by mixing his colors for painting or assisted in preparing the clay for sculpturing. Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gettie’s company as he called her. Their friendship drifted towards romance. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life.
Still in London, Rizal came to know Dr. Reihold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. That is why he was able to have an access to the historical materials and documents at the British museum.
Given the chance, Rizal annotates Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas. Rizal spent many days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this books and labourisly reading the old histories of the Philippines. For him, this was his greatest achievement in London, for he believed that Morga’s work is an excellent one, Morga was modern scholarly explorer, and he also does not have the superficiality and exaggeration which are found amongst the Spaniards.
When Rizal finished his annotated edition of Morga, he let Blumentritt to write the prologue. In his Prologue, Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. However, he frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal's error, namely: 1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and 2) Rizal's attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abusers of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad. This should not be. Blumentritt believe that not in religion but in the cruel method and the abuses of many priests should we look for the origin of many events lamentable for religion, for Spain, and for the good name of the European race.
Notwithstanding the two blemishes of Rizal’s work, it is a splendid piece of historiography. Rizal annotated and published Morga’s Sucesos because it was the best of the many histories of the Philippines written by the early Spanish writers, being accurate in the narration of events, unbiased in judgment, and unmarred by childish fantasies. In this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. They had clothes, government, laws, writing, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. Rizal thus blasted the historical heresies of the Spanish writers who claimed that the early Filipinos were savages and was of low mentality.
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in array to explore for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who pompously showed him their little son Andres. After poring over the old books and document in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London. On Dec. 11, 1888, he departs to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He gets in touch with his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the disturbance for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged thoughts with these new friends and promised to collaborate in the fight for reforms.
Despite the fact that Rizal was eventful in his historical studies in London, he erudite that the Filipinos in Barcelona were preparing to ascertain a patriotic society which would cooperate in the battle for reforms. They called this society Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), which was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Maria Panganiban, accountant. By undivided vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
While in London, Rizal wrote many literary works. In defense on Fray Rodriguez' unabated attack on his Noli, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez which was published in Barcelona. This opus is satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he (St. Augustine) was commissioned by God to tell him (Fr. Rodriguez) of his stupidity and inform him of his penance on earth that he (Fr. Rodriguez) shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him. He also wrote the famous “ Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (Feb. 22,1889) in Tagalog. He penned it, upon the request of M.H del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanis parish priest of Malolos. The main point of this letter were: 1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; 2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spartan mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherland; 3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; 4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside form retaining her good racial virtues; 5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way with good moral and good manners. The other literary works were his two articles which was requested by Dr. Rost entitled “Specimens of Tagalog Folklore” which is consisted of Filipino proverbs and puzzles and the “Two Eastern fables” which was published inTrubner’s record.
Rizal`s Impression of America.
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impression were ;
1)the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; 2) the drive and energy of the American people; 3) the natural beauty of the land; 4) the high standard of living; and 5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America has lack of racial equality. There existed racial
prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which
the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being disliked, too”.
In 1980, two years after Rizal's visit to the United States, Jose Alejandro, who was then studying engineering in Belgium, roomed with him on 38 Rue Philippe Champagne, Brussels. Alejandro had never been in America , so that one day he asked Rizal: “What impressions do you have of America?”
“America,” answered Rizal, “is the land par excellence of freedom but only for the whites”.
Rizal in London.
After visiting the United States, Rizal lived in London from May, 1888 to March, 1889. He chose this English cite to be his new home for three reasons: 1) to improve his knowledge of English Language, 2) to study and annotate Morga's Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and 3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London he engaged in Filipiniana studies, completed annotating Morga's book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics; penned a famous letter to the young women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertude Beckett.
Romance with Gertude Beckett.
Rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of three Beckett sisters – Gertude, Gettie, as she was affectionately called, was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. She fell in love. On cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for him, gaily like a humming bird. During the family picnics, she was particularly very happy because Rizal was with them and she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days when Rizal stayed at home, she helped him by mixing his color for painting and assisted for sculpturing.
Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gertude's company. Their friendship drifted towards romance. Rizal affectionately called her “Gettie”, in reciprocation, she fondly called him “Pettie”. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life. With iron will, he suppressed
the passionate yearning of his heart, and decided to go away so that "Gettie" may forget him.
Life in London
On May 25, 1888, a day after docking at Liver pool, Rizal went to London. For a short time, he stayed as guest at the home of Dr. Antonio Ma. Regidor, an exile of 1872 and a practicing lawyer in London. He was a boarder of the Beckett Family. The Beckett home was to Rizal comveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an Authority on Malay languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal's learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre). Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga's Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discussed with him problems pertaining to Philippine Affairs.
Annotating Morga's Book
The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga's book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands) which was published in Mexico, 1609. He spent days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines, such as those written by Fr. Chirino, Fr.Colin, Fr.Argensola, Fr.Plasencia. Of all written histories published during the early years of the spanish regime, that of Dr. Morga was, in his considered opinion, the best.
Annotated Edition of Morga Published.
Rizal's outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga's Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. It was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the requestt of rizal. In his Prologue, Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. However, he frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal's error, namely: 1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and 2) Rizal's attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abusers of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad. Thus Blumentritt said: {The high estimation of your notes (Rizal's annotations) does not prevent me from confessing that more than once, I observed that your participate in the error of many modern historians, who judge events of centuring past, in the light of concepts that correspond to contemporary ideas. This should not be. The historian should not impute to the men of the 16th century the wide horizon of ideas that move the 19th century. The second point with which I am not in agreement has to do with some of your fulminations against Catholicism. I believe that not in religion but in the cruel method and the abuses of many priests should we look for the origin of many events lamentable for religion, for spain, and for the good name of the European race.
Rizal visit Paris and Madrid.
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luiling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London. On Dec. 11, 1888, he went to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms. Christmas in London(1888) – Rizal returned to London on Dec. 24 and spent Christmas and New Year's Day with the Becketts. He experienced a delightful Christmas Eve.
Asociacion La Solidaridad.
Rizal Becomes Leader of Filipinos in Europe. While busy in his historical studies in London,Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
Writings in London.
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez' unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision Alang. This opus is satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he (St. Augustine) was commissioned by God to tell him (Fr. Rodriguez) of his stupidity and inform him of his penance on earth that he (Fr. Rodriguez) shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “ Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (Feb. 22,1889) in Tagalog. He penned it, upon the request of M.H del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanis parish priest of Malolos. The main point of this letter were: 1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; 2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spartan mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherlang; 3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; 4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside form retaining her good racial virtues; 5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way with good moral and good manners.
Rizal had a good and bad impression of the united states.the impression were 1. the materials progress of the country as shown in the great cities,huge farms,flourising industries,and busy factories;2. the drive and energy of the american people;3. the natural beauty of the land;4. the high standard of living; and 5. yhe opportunities for better life offerd to poor immigrants.one bad impression rizal haveof america was the lack of racial equality
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J. Olandria.)
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J. Olandria.)
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J. Olandria.)
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J. martinez)
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J.A Ramos)
rizal lived in london from may,1888 to march 1889.he chose this english city to be his new home for three reason 1.to improve his knowledge of the enghlish language 2.to study and annotate morga's sucesos delas islas filipinas,a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the british museum,and 3.london was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against spanish tyranny.rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of the three sisters beckett called gettie or tottie,as she was affectionately called,was a buxom enghlish girl with brown hair,blue eyes,and rosy cheeks.on cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for rizal,chattering gail like a huymming bird. during the family picnics,she was particular very happy beacause rizal was with them and she gave all her attention to rizal.rizal,being a man of normal emotion,found exhilarating joy in gertude's company.rizal research to study in the british museum (london) and in the bibliotheque nationale (paris) enriched his historical knowledge. he spendid annotations to the morga's book showed his familiarity with the basic principle of histiriography. his knowledge of foriegn languagea in which they were originally written,rizal read difference kinds of books like piga fetta's famous first voyage around the world in italian; the histoprcal work of masden,raffles lord stanley and wallace in english; the writtings of blumentritt,jagor ang virchow in german; the books of m.jacquet,l mallat,and a. marche in french; and he works of t.h pardo de tavera,pedro a paterno,miguel morayta,and pi y margall in spanish by his extensive reading of archival sources of books in foreign countries he acquired wide knowledge not only on the philippines history,but also the history of the european colonization in asia
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(V. Abarka)
Rizal’s Life from America to London
At the year 1888, Rizal visited the United States. And it is normal for him to have his impression to the state. His positive impression are, the high standard of living; the natural beauty of land; the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants; the drive and energy of the American people and the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge forms, flourishing industries and busy factories. And there is only one bad impression Rizal had in America, that was the racial discrimination to the Chinese and Negroes by the white Americans.
English City as Rizal’s second home, there are some reason why he choose this city as his second home. To improve his knowledge of English Language; to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas ( a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum); London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny.
Rizal annotated and published Morga’s Sucesos because it was the best of the many histories of the Philippines written by the early Spanish writers, being accurate in the narration of events, unbiased in judgement, and unmarred by childish fantasies. And it was printed by Garnier Freres. The prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the request of Rizal. Rizal dedicated his new edition of Morga’s to the Filipino people so that they would know of their glorious past. And the main proposition of this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of the Spain. They had clothes, governments, laws, writings, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. Blumentritt, commented on Rizal’s new that it was magnificent and with his erudite notes will glorify his name.
Early in September, 1888, he had short visit in Paris, for he able to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, on December at the same year he went to Spain to visit Madrid and Barcelona. For the first time, he met M.H del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms.
While he was busy in his historical studies in London, Rizal found that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which cooperate in the crusade for reforms. The society calld Asociacion La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on December 31, 1888. the officer are: Galiano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president; Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant. Rizal was chosen honorary president. The aim were as follows: to work peacefully for political and social reforms; to portray the deploreable conditions of the Philippines so that Spain may remedy them; to oppose the evil forces of reaction and medievalism; to advocate liberal ideas and progress; and to champion the legitimate aspirations of the Filipino people to life, democracy,a nd happiness.
Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez’ unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez ( The Vision of Fray Rodriguez) he demonstrated here two things, his profound knowledge of religion and his biting satire. Rizal also wrote the famous “Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” in Tagalog. The main points of this letter were: mother should give knowledge to their child to love GOD, fatherland and mankind. And like the Spartans, should offer his son to defense the fatherland; should educate herself aside from retaining her good racial virtues.
Talking about women, Rizal met Gertrude “Gettie” Beckett the eldest from Beckett sister, daughter of the owner of his boarding house. She was affectionately called buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes and rosy cheeks. Rizal enjoy gettie’s company, and that friendship drifted towards romance. But he realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life and decided to go away so that Gettie may forget him.
“Rizal’s life from America to London”
The positive impression of the United State (1st ) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories; (2nd) the drive and energy of the American people;( 3rd ) the natural beauty of the land;(4th ) the high standard of living; (5th ) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. The negative impressions of Rizal were the lack of racial equality which was inconsistent talk so much but do not practice. And the white American is so unfair to the Negro or black Americans, because they do not have true civil liberty. Negro cannot marry a white woman or white man a Negros. He choose London to be his 2nd home they are reasons; (1st) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2nd) to study and annotate morga’s sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and the last is, (3rd) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. Attracted to Gertrude Beckett home was to Rizal conveniently located. It was near the public parks and was within easy walking distance to the British Museum where he expected to do much research work. Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines. He frequently visited Dr. Regidor and discovered w/ him problems pertaining to Philippines affairs. The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos De Las Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippines Islands) which was in Mexico; 1609.Rizal’s outstanding achievement in Paris was the publication in 1890 of his annotated edition of Morga’s Sucesos, which he wrote in the British Museum. Early in Sep.1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay French metropolis by Juan Luna & his wife (Pas Pardo De Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, be returned to London. This society, called Asociacio La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) was in augurated on Dec. 31, 1888 w/ the following officers:* President: Galicano Apacible* Vice- President: Graciano Lopez Jaena* Secretary: Manuel Santa Maria* Treasurer: Mariano Ponce* Accountant: Jose Maria Panganiban. His knowledge of foreign languages enabled Rizal to read historical documents & books in the languages in which they were originally written. For instance, he read Pigafetta’s famous 1st Voyage Around the world in Italian, the historical works of Marsden, Raffles, Lord Stanley, & Wallace in English; the writings of Blumentritt, Jagor, and Virchow in German; the books of M. Jacquet, J. Mallat, and A. Marche in French: and the world of T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Pedro A. Paterno, Miguel Morayta, and Pi y Margall in Spanish. Among them were the two historical commentaries written in London, Ma-yi (Dec. 6, 1888) & Tawalisi of IBn Batuta (Jan. 7, 1889); Filipinas dentro de Cien Anos (The Philippines within century), published in La Solidaridad in four issues on Sep.30, Dec. 15, 1889 & Feb. 15, 1890; Sobre la Indonesia de los Filipinos (The Indolence of the Filipinos), published in La Solidaridad in five successive issues on July 15, July 31, Aug. 31, & Sep. 1, 1890; La Politica Colonial on Filipinas( Colonial Policy in the Philippines), no date, Manila en el mes de December, 1872 ( Manila in the Mouth of Dec. , 1872), no date; Historia de la Famalia Rizal de Calamba (History of the Rizal family of Calamba); no date and Los Pueblos del Archipelago Indico. (The Peoples of the Indian Archipelago), no date.
(J. S. Eduyan)
"rizal lifes in america and london"
Rizal had a good and bad impression of the united states.the impression were(1.) the materials progress of the country as shown in the great cities,huge farms,flourising industries,and busy factories;(2.) the drive and energy of the american people;(3.) the natural beauty of the land;(4.)the high standard of living; and (5.)the opportunities for better life offerd to poor immigrants.one bad impression rizal have of america was the lack of racial equality.
prove his point and refute the accusations of prejudiced Spanish writers against his race, Rizal lived in london from may,1888 to march 1889.he chose this english city to be his new home for three reason (1.)to improve his knowledge of the enghlish language (2.)to study and annotate morga's sucesos delas islas filipinas,a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the british museum,and (3.)london was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against spanish tyranny.rizal had a romantic interlude with the oldest of the three sisters beckett called gettie or tottie,as she was affectionately called,was a buxom enghlish girl with brown hair,blue eyes,and rosy cheeks.on cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for rizal,chattering gail like a huymming bird.during the family picnics,she was particular very happy beacause rizal was with them and she gave all her attention to rizal.rizal,being a man of normal emotion,found exhilarating joy in gertude's company.rizal research to study in the british museum (london) and in the bibliotheque nationale (paris) enriched his historical knowledge. he spendid annotations to the morga's book showed his familiarity with the basic principle of histiriography. his knowledge of foriegn languagea in which they were originally written,rizal read difference kinds of books like piga fetta's famous first voyage around the world in italian; the histoprcal work of masden,raffles lord stanley and wallace in english; the writtings of blumentritt,jagor ang virchow in german; the books of m.jacquet,l mallat,and a. marche in french; and he works of t.h pardo de tavera,pedro a paterno,miguel morayta,and pi y margall in spanish by his extensive reading of archival sources of books in foreign countries he acquired wide knowledge not only on the philippines history,but also the history of the european colonization in asia.
annotated the book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, written by the Spaniard Antonio Morga. The book was an unbiased presentation of 16th century Filipino culture. Rizal through his annotation showed that Filipinos had developed culture even before the coming of the Spaniards.he annonate and published morga's sucecos because it was the best of the many history of the philippine written by the early spanish writers, being accurate in the narration of the events,unbiased in the judgement,and unmarred by childish fantasies. he spent many day in the readinf room the british museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously readfing the old history of the philippines such as those written by fr.chirino,fr.colin,fr.argensola,fr.flasensia etd. of all written histories published during the early years of the spanish regime,that of dr.morga was,in his considered opinion,the best.
bluementritt commended rizal for his find historical scholarship.however,he frankly censured rizal for two things which revealead rizal's errors,namely; 1.rizal commits the errors of many historians in appraisings the events of the past in the light of presents and;2.rizal attacks on the church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that catholism is bad.
in september,1888 he visited paris for four weeks, in order to search for more historical materials in the bibliotheque nationale he was entertained in this gay french metropolish by juan luna and his wife(PAZ PARDO DE TAVERA) after poring over the old books and manuscript in the bibliotheque nationale.one dec.11,1888 he went to spain,visiting madrid and barcelona. he contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with the regards to the agitation for pilippines reforms.rizal learned that the filipinos in barcelona were planning to stablish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms.this society calledASOCIACION LA SOLIDARIDADsolidaridad association was inagurated on december 31,1888 with the following officerspresidentgalicano apaciblev-pres. graciano lopez jaena secretarymanuel santa maria treasurymariano ponceaccountantjose ma.panganiban...by unanimous vote of all the members,rizal was chosen honorary president this was a recognition of his leadership among all filipino patriots in europe.rizal wrote the famous"letter to the young women of malolos"(feb.22,1889)in tagalog he penned it,upon the requuest of M.H.del pilar to praise the young ladies of malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn spanish, despite the opposition of fr.felipe garcia spanish parish priest of malolos.the main points of this letterwere.1. a filipino mother should teach her children love of god,fatherland,and amnkind;2. the filipino mother should be glad,like the spartan mother,to offer the sons in the defense of the fatherland;3.a filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor;4. a filipino woman should educate herselfd,aside for retaining her good recial virtues;and5. faith is not merely reciting long prayers and wearing religious pictures,but rather it is living the real christian way,with good morals and good manmners.
(M.PARAISO M-W 11:30-1:00pm)
Rizal’s Life from America to London
(S. NAVIA)
1. What were the positives and negatives impression Rizal had on US?
The positive impression of Rizal had on US were (1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and the busy factories; (2) the drive and the energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; (5) the opportunities for better life offered to the poor immigrants.
The negative impression of Rizal had on United State the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principle of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce: “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman, nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese lead to difficulty for other Asiatic who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being dislike, too”.
2. Why did he chosen London to be second home during his second journey to Europe?
He chosen this English city to be his new home for three reason: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spaniard tyranny.
3. Why did Rizal become attracted to Gertrude Beckett?
Gertrude Beckett. Was affectionately called, was a buxom English girl with brown eyes, and rosy check.
4. How Rizal was become able to help access to the historical materials and document of the British Museum?
It because Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and authority on Malayan languages and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre).
5. Why did annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas? What preparation did he undertake to this?
Rizal considered opinion of Dr. Morga, the best among others that he also read. Rizal said, it can be said that Morga is a modern scholarly explorer.
6. What sight about Spain and the Philippines were drawn by Ferdinand Blumentritt for Rizal new edition of success?
In a letter of Rizal to Blumentritt, Rizal was immersed in his historical studies in London. During which time his compatriots in Spain were waging the crusade for Philippines reforms.
7. Describe briefly Rizal new edition of Morga’s in term of the following.
Category of notes included à he write very simple.
Main proposition à : “Morga’s work is an excellent book.
8. Why did Rizal visit Paris and roadbed while was in London?
Early in September, 1888 he visit Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Biblioteque Nationale, he returned to London.
9. Why was Asociacion La Solidaridad established in Barcelona by Filipino expatriates? Who are the officials of La Solidaridad?
While busy in his historical studies in Londo, Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad, was inaugurated on December31, 1888, with the following officers, Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president; Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
10. What were the other literary works written by Rizal while he was in London? Describe each briefly.
La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Fray Rodriguez unabated attacked the Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Rizal demonstrated two things: (1) his profound knowledge of religion and (2) his biting satire.
Rizal wrote the famous ”Letter to the Young Woman of Malolos”, the main point of this letter were: (1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; (2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spaniard mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherland; (3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; (4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside from retaining her good racial virtues; and (5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayer and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way, with good morals and good manners.
Rizal’s Life from America to London
(j. de jesus)
1. What were the positives and negatives impression Rizal had on US?
The good impression of Rizal had on US were: the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and the busy factories; the drive and the energy of the American people; the natural beauty of the land; the high standard of living; the opportunities for better life offered to the poor immigrants.
The bad impression of Rizal had on United State the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principle of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much but do not practice. Thus he wrote to Ponce: “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman, nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese lead to difficulty for other Asiatic who, like the Japanese, are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being dislike, too”.
2. Why did he chosen London to be second home during his second journey to Europe?
He chosen this English city to be his new home for three reason: to improve his knowledge of the English language, to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spaniard tyranny.
3. Why did Rizal become attracted to Gertrude Beckett?
Gettie was a buxom English girl with brown eyes, and rosy check.
4. How Rizal was become able to help access to the historical materials and document of the British Museum?
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and authority on Malayan languages and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum. He called Rizal “a pearl of a man” (una perla de hombre).
5. Why did annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas? What preparation did he undertake to this?
Rizal considered opinion of Dr. Morga, the best because he also read other but Morga who impressed to Rizal. He said, it can be said that Morga is a modern scholarly explorer for him.
6. What sight about Spain and the Philippines were drawn by Ferdinand Blumentritt for Rizal new edition of success?
Rizal was immersed in his historical studies in London. During which time his compatriots in Spain were waging the crusade for Philippines reforms that he wrote Blumentritt.
7. Describe briefly Rizal new edition of Morga’s in term of the following.
Category of notes included Morga's write simple.
Main proposition “Morga’s work is an excellent book.
8. Why did Rizal visit Paris and roadbed while was in London?
He visit Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Biblioteque Nationale, he returned to London.
9. Why was Asociacion La Solidaridad established in Barcelona by Filipino expatriates? Who are the officials of La Solidaridad?
While busy in his historical studies in Londo, Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad, was inaugurated on December31, 1888, with the following officers, Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president; Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
10. What were the other literary works written by Rizal while he was in London? Describe each briefly.
La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Fray Rodriguez unabated attacked the Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Rizal demonstrated two things: his profound knowledge of religion and his biting satire.
Rizal wrote the famous ”Letter to the Young Woman of Malolos”, the main point of this letter were: a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spaniard mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherland; a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside from retaining her good racial virtues; and Faith is not merely reciting long prayer and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way, with good morals and good manners.
Rizal's life from America to London (ced.bustarga)
Rizal’s life ought to become a treasured possession not only of one nation, but of the human race. From his day to the present time, many men were captured by his high clean soul. Amazed with his character, the quality of his intellect, and the beauty of his sacrifice.
At the year 1888, Rizal visited the United States. The good impressions were the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries and busy factories, the drive and energy of the American people, the natural beauty of the land, the high standard of living and the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. One bad impression Rizal had of America, was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much but do not practice.
Rizal chose London to be his second home because of three reasons this are the following. (1)To improve his knowledge of the English language, (2)to study and annotate the Morgas’s Sucesos De Las Islas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum and (3)the London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny.
Rizal annotate Morga’s Sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas because it would depend the Pilipino interests from the scurrilous attacks of their Spanish detractors. The preparation he undertake for this is that he always do a certain studies day and night. He spent that in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of the Morga Sucesos and the other old histories of the Philippines.
While Rizal was in London annotating the Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, he boarded in the house of the Beckett family, within walking distance of the British Museum. Gertrude, a blue-eyed and buxom girl was the oldest of the three Beckett daughters. She fell in love with Rizal. Tottie helped him in his painting and sculpture. But Rizal suddenly left London for Paris to avoid Gertrude, who was seriously in love with him. Before leaving London, he was able to finish the group carving of the Beckett sisters. He gave the group carving to Gertrude as a sign of their brief relationship. Rizal, being a man of normal emotions, found exhilarating joy in Gettie’s company as he called her. Their friendship drifted towards romance. As their flirtation was fast approaching the point of no return, Rizal suddenly realized that he could not marry Gettie for he had a mission to fulfill in life.
In London he prepared his annotated edition of Morga's "Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas" which he completed in Paris (1890).
In the new edition of Morga’s Sucesos, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. Rizal thus blasted the historical heresies of the Spanish writers who claimed that the early Filipinos were savages and were low of mentality.
Asociacion La Solidaridad.Rizal Becomes Leader of Filipinos in Europe. While busy in his historical studies in London,Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad ( Solidaridad Association), was inaugurated on Dec. 31, 1888, with the followng officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president;Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Fray Rodriguez unabated attacked the Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez, Rizal demonstrated two things: (1) his profound knowledge of religion and (2) his biting satire.
Rizal wrote the famous ”Letter to the Young Woman of Malolos”, the main point of this letter were: (1) a Filipino mother should teach her children love of God, fatherland, and mankind; (2) the Filipino mother should be glad, like the Spaniard mother, to offer her sons in the defense of the fatherland; (3) a Filipino woman should know how to preserve her dignity and honor; (4) a Filipino woman should educate herself, aside from retaining her good racial virtues; and (5) Faith is not merely reciting long prayer and wearing religious pictures, but rather it is living the real Christian way, with good morals and good manners.
DIGO. MELLANIE M. RIZAL (MW/8:30-10:00)
BS ECE Mrs. DELIA MAGLAQUI
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impressions were:
1. The material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories;
2. The drive and energy of the American people;
3. The natural beauty of the land;
4. The high standard of living;
5. The opportunities of better life offered to book immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of the democracy and freedom which the Americans talk so much but do not practice.
He chose London to be his second home for three reasons:
1. To improve his knowledge of the English language
2. To study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de Las Islas Filipinas a rare copy of which he heard to be available in British Museum and;
3. London is a safe place for him to carry his fight against Spanish tyranny.
Rizal got attracted to Gertrude Beckett because he found exhilarating joy in her company. There friendship drifted towards romance. As said in the book Gertrude was a thoughtful and caring person that’s why Rizal got attracted in her. Rizal used to call her “Gettie” as Gertrude call him “Pettie”.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinholdrost, the librarian of the ministry of foreign affairs and an authority on Malayan Languages and Custom. Dr. Reinholdrost was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum.
Rizal was impressed about Morga’s book. He used to praise Morga’s work as an excellent book. He also praises Morga. Rizal said that Morga is a modern scholarly explorer. In his preparation for annotating Morga’s book, he used to read and study the old history of the Philippines. Rizal said that Morga’s work was considered to have the best opinion about the Spanish regime on our country.
Blumentrit commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. He frankly censured Rizal for two things which he revealed Rizal’s errors, namely:
1. Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events on the past in the light of present standards and;
2. Rizal’s attacks on the church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be constructed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
The content of Morga’s Sucesos is said to be the best of the many histories of the Philippines written by the early Spanish writers, it has accurate narration of events, unbias in judgement and unmarred by childish fantasies. In this book Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain.
Rizal visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the bibliotheque nationale. He went to Spain, visiting in Madrid and Barcelona; he contracted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms.
February 15, 1889, Graciano Lopez Jaena founded the patriotic newspaper called La Solidaridad in Barcelona, where he was then residing; this was a fortnightly periodical which served as the organ of the propaganda movement. It aims were:
1. to work peacefully for political and social reforms;
2. to portray the deplorable conditions of the Philippines so that Spain may remedy them.
3. to oppose the evil forces of reaction and medievalism;
4. to advocate liberal ideas and progress and;
5. to champion the legitimate aspirations of the Filipino people to the democracy and happiness.
When Rizal was in London, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez which was published in Barcelona under his nom-de-plume Dimas Alang. Rizal demonstrated two things in this pamphlet:
1. his profound knowledge of religion and;
2. His biting sattre.
Rizal also wrote the famous ”Letter To The Young Women Of Malolos” in Tagalog upon the request of M.H. del Pilar to praise women of Malolos.
DIGO. MELLANIE M. RIZAL (MW/8:30-10:00)
BS ECE Mrs. DELIA MAGLAQUI
Rizal had good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impressions were:
1. The material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories;
2. The drive and energy of the American people;
3. The natural beauty of the land;
4. The high standard of living;
5. The opportunities of better life offered to book immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of the democracy and freedom which the Americans talk so much but do not practice.
He chose London to be his second home for three reasons:
1. To improve his knowledge of the English language
2. To study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de Las Islas Filipinas a rare copy of which he heard to be available in British Museum and;
3. London is a safe place for him to carry his fight against Spanish tyranny.
Rizal got attracted to Gertrude Beckett because he found exhilarating joy in her company. There friendship drifted towards romance. As said in the book Gertrude was a thoughtful and caring person that’s why Rizal got attracted in her. Rizal used to call her “Gettie” as Gertrude call him “Pettie”.
Rizal came to know Dr. Reinholdrost, the librarian of the ministry of foreign affairs and an authority on Malayan Languages and Custom. Dr. Reinholdrost was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum.
Rizal was impressed about Morga’s book. He used to praise Morga’s work as an excellent book. He also praises Morga. Rizal said that Morga is a modern scholarly explorer. In his preparation for annotating Morga’s book, he used to read and study the old history of the Philippines. Rizal said that Morga’s work was considered to have the best opinion about the Spanish regime on our country.
Blumentrit commended Rizal for his fine historical scholarship. He frankly censured Rizal for two things which he revealed Rizal’s errors, namely:
1. Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events on the past in the light of present standards and;
2. Rizal’s attacks on the church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be constructed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
The content of Morga’s Sucesos is said to be the best of the many histories of the Philippines written by the early Spanish writers, it has accurate narration of events, unbias in judgement and unmarred by childish fantasies. In this book Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain.
Rizal visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the bibliotheque nationale. He went to Spain, visiting in Madrid and Barcelona; he contracted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms.
February 15, 1889, Graciano Lopez Jaena founded the patriotic newspaper called La Solidaridad in Barcelona, where he was then residing; this was a fortnightly periodical which served as the organ of the propaganda movement. It aims were:
1. to work peacefully for political and social reforms;
2. to portray the deplorable conditions of the Philippines so that Spain may remedy them.
3. to oppose the evil forces of reaction and medievalism;
4. to advocate liberal ideas and progress and;
5. to champion the legitimate aspirations of the Filipino people to the democracy and happiness.
When Rizal was in London, he wrote a pamphlet entitled La Vision del Fray Rodriguez which was published in Barcelona under his nom-de-plume Dimas Alang. Rizal demonstrated two things in this pamphlet:
1. his profound knowledge of religion and;
2. His biting sattre.
Rizal also wrote the famous ”Letter To The Young Women Of Malolos” in Tagalog upon the request of M.H. del Pilar to praise women of Malolos.
Lady Lou Aquino T/F 1:00-2:30pm
1. What is the significant proclamation on the Philippines Independence 1898?
>The most significant achievement of Aguinaldo's Dictatorial Government was the proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite, on June 12, 1898. The day was declared a national holiday. Thousands of people from the provinces gathered in Kawit to witness the historic event. The ceremony was solemnly held at the balcony of General Emilio Aguinaldo's residence. The military and civil officials of the government were in attendance.
2)Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution? Depend your answer
>yes, because Article 5 said that the State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3)Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino American War.
>The Philippine-American War was an armed military conflict between the United States and the Philippines , fought between 1899 to 1901, which occured from a Filipino political struggle against U.S. annexation of the islands.Fighting continued between American colonial troops and remnants of the Philippine Army until 1913, and some historians consider these unofficial extensions part of the war.
4)What were the cultural changes brought about the Americans to the Filipinos?
>The very high educational attainments of Asian-Americans have roots in the pre-World War II era. Native-born Chinese- and Japanese-Americans reached educational parity with majority whites in the early decades of the twentieth century. In this paper, we present an analysis and interpretation of the structural conditions that may have favored the educational progress of Asian-Americans in spite of considerable societal discrimination. Changes in the occupational structure of the Asian-American population and a somewhat positive rate of occupational returns to education appear to be plausible explanations for Asian-American educational gains. Our interpretation is consistent with the middleman minority thesis.
5) A long process of free-market reforms and gradual democratization seems to be dismantling Mexico's corporatist system of labor representation. A thorough analysis of the country's corporatist institutions yields theoretical reasons to believe that Mexico's practice of labor relations is indeed changing. An empirical examination of the nation's labor congress and ruling party during the two previous presidential administrations (1988-2000) demonstrates that corporatism is being transformed at a practical level, although the process of reform has been complex and uneven at best. The continuing strength of an officialist labor sector will complicate the task of establishing a new system of labor representation, a problem that may have important implications for future democratic consolidation.
6)How did resident Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administrations?
> because for taking executive and legislative action
7) Discuss the gruesome picture during the World War II?
>The Second World War was the most deadly, destructrive, and consequential war in history.
> very frightful and shocking event
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?
Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?
Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898?Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. It merited the establishment of American civil government all over the islands, beginning on July 4, 1901.As the guns fell silent, American troops initiated their mission of educating the Filipinos. Soon, hundreds of American civilians arrived in Manila as teachers. The United States established an efficient public school system all over the archipelago. Schools were built and the training of Filipinos as teachers and government employees ensued with intensity. Health and sanitation facilities were rushed. Hospitals, clinics, and medical services mushroomed. The construction of roads, bridges and seaports began in earnest. American tutored and guided Filipino leaders in the art and technique of modem government and elections from the local levels to the national echelons of service. The Legislature was formed and it soon passed into Filipino hands. The Supreme Court, the general judiciary system, police and executive bureaus were largely Filipinized.Stage presentations dealing with nationalism and independence, as well as newspapers, was closed down by the police. Authors were hunted, arrested and jailed.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos Constitution?Yes. The separation of the church and state is necessary as mentioned in Malolos Constitution because The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war
The American insistence on the evacuation by Aguinaldo’s army the strategic points along the Manila Bay area, the refusal to enter the city after its surrender, and the American limitation of the areas to be occupied by the Filipino troops after the mock battle of manila, led progressively to the deterioration of Filipino-American relations. The misunderstandings that followed these incidences climaxed in the signing of the treaty of Paris without consultation with the Filipinos.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
-Progress in Education
-Public Health and Welfare
-Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
-Transportation and communication
-Individual Freedoms.
-Political Consciousness
-Language and Literature.
5 How did President Manuel L Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
Quezon had to commit himself and his Nationalista Party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
1. What is the significance of the proclamation of independence in 1898.
The significance of independence in 1898 is that it helps the Filipinos to realize how much sacrifices they have done at that time, for us to be free and to have a good nation. The Act of Declaration could have been written by any lawyer, the music composed by any musician, and the flag sewn by any dressmaker, but the significance of Philippine independence proclaimed 108 years ago today could not have been less.
With a government in operation, Aguinaldo thought that it was necessary to declare the independence of Philippines . He believed that such a move would inspire the people to fight more eagerly against the Spaniards and at the same lead the foreign countries to recognize the independence of the country.
What is remarkable every time the declaration of independence is read, the music played, and the flag unfurled in the air is the fact that all these were made by Filipinos whose hearts longed for the best of this nation.
2. Is the separation of the church and states necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution? Defend your answer.
Yes, because as the Representatives of the Filipino people, we lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and to secure for ourselves the blessings of liberty, imploring the aid of the Supreme Legislator of the Universe to help us attain these objectives.
The protracted discussions that characterized the Congress sessions on the subject of whether or not Church and State should be united showed, first, that the Filipinos as a people, though up in arms against Catholic Spain, were not anti-Catholic but merely anti-clerical, and second, that many of the delegates learned from the bitter lesson of Philippine history in voting the fundamental basis of Spanish colonial system; that decision became the cornerstone of Philippine democracy and showed not only the nationalism and democratic orientation of those who voted for the separation of Church and State, but also their keen sense of history.
The Malolos Constitution (TITLE III) states that:
RELIGION
Article 5. The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Fil-Am War.
On July 1, 1898, American forces engaged in a fierce battle with the Spaniards at El Caney and San Juan Hill in Cuba . After the skirmishes, they occupied the high ground overlooking Santiago . On July 3, Admiral Pascual Cervera y Topete ordered his squadron to leave the harbor. The Spaniards attempted to escape toward the west along the coast. Then a running battle took place. All the Spanish ships either burned or sank. >From there, American troops invaded and captured Puerto Rico , another Spanish possession.
As a result of these defeats, Spain sued for peace. On August 12, 1898, the day before the fall of Manila , Spain and the United States signed a peace agreement. Spain agreed to evacuate all her troops from and give up control over Cuba , cede Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States , which was also allowed to occupy Manila . The last condition was temporary while what was to be done with the Philippines was being determined.
In October 1898, representatives of Spain and the United States met in Paris to draft a peace treaty. One of the vital issues to be discussed was the status of the Philippines . Spain wanted the United States to return the Philippines to Spain because Manila had been occupied by the Americans only after the armistice had been signed on August 12, 1898, but to no avail. The United States insisted on obtaining the Philippines .
Treaty of Paris . On December 10. 1898, the Treaty of Paris, was signed in Paris , France , by both Spain and the United States . It formally ended the war between them. Under this treaty, Spain recognized the independence of Cuba ; ceded Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines to the United States ; and received a $20 million payment from the United States for giving up the Philippines .
The treaty had to be ratified by the U.S. Senate before it could take effect. It, however, met opposition, mainly against the annexation of the Philippines . An Anti-Imperialist League was formed to rally American public opinion against the annexation. Some prominent Americans, such as former President Grover Cleveland, Andrew Carnegie, and Mark Twain, also opposed the ratification.
One of the reasons why the United States should not acquire the Philippines was that the Filipinos themselves were fighting the Americans in the Philippines . Such an act, they said, showed that the Filipinos did not want to be under American rule. They also reasoned that it was inconsistent for the United States to disclaim—through the so-called Teller Amendment—any intention of annexing Cuba and then annex the other Spanish colonies, such as the Philippines .
Annexation Fever. There were also many in the United States who saw the advantages of taking over the Philippines . Many missionaries, for instance, favored annexation. So did people who feared that Germany might get the Philippines if the United States did not. Some favored annexation to give America a “foothold” in the populous markets of Asia .
On February 6, 1899, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 57 to 27, ratified the Treaty of Paris. The American people, in effect, also endorsed the treaty when they reelected President McKinley in the 1900 U.S. presidential elections. Thus, the Philippines formally came under the rule of the United States .
I. THE PHILIPPINE-AMERICAN WAR
The Filipinos had become suspicious of the true motives of the United States in going to the Philippines . In fact, they were prevented by the Americans from entering Manila after its fall. Their suspicions were confirmed by the Treaty of Paris under which Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States . Neither Spain nor the United States gave Felipe Agoncillo, Aguinaldo’s special envoy, a chance to present the wishes of the Filipinos in the Paris peace talks. Suspicion turned to hostility, and war between the two sides became inevitable. The Filipinos were outraged when they learned that Spain , which no longer controlled the Philippines , had ceded the country to the United States .
Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation. On December 21, 1898, President William Mckinley announced his decision to keep the Philippines as an American colonial possession.
Entitled “Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation,” the McKinley proclamation was announced in the Philippines on January 4, 1899. It stated clearly the intention of the United States to stay permanently in the Philippines . The mission of the United States was described by McKinley as one of “benevolent assimilation.” In the same proclamation, General Elwell Otis was named the commander of American ground forces in the Philippines , which was to “extend by force American sovereignty over this country.”
On January 5, 1899, Aguinaldo issued a counter-proclamation. He warned that his government was prepared to fight any American attempt to forcibly take over the country. This sounded like a declaration of war to the American military although Aguinaldo had no wish to get into a war with the United States . He knew that war would only cause untold suffering to the Filipino people. He was still hopeful that the situation could be saved by peaceful negotiations between him and the American military leaders in the Philippines . Aguinaldo wrote General Elwell S. Otis calling for peaceful negotiations.
On January 9, 1899, Otis appointed three American officers to meet with three Filipino military officials appointed by Aguinaldo. However, they didn’t accomplish anything.
“Halt!” Then Bang! Bang! Bang! The tension between the Americans and the Filipinos was so great that it was easy to precipitate a war. On the night of February 4, 1899, as described in Aguinaldo: A Narrative of Filipino Ambitions, (E. Wildman 1901, Norwood Press, Norwood, MA) an American sentry, Private William W. Grayson, with another soldier, encountered three armed Filipinos on a bridge in San Juan del Monte near Manila.
Recalling the incident, Grayson said:
About eight o’clock, Miller and I were cautiously pacing our district. We came to a fence and were trying to see what the Filipinos were up to. Suddenly, near at hand, on our left, there was a low but unmistakable Filipino outpost signal whistle. It was immediately answered by a similar whistle about twenty-five yards to the right. Then a red lantern flashed a signal from blockhouse number 7. We had never seen such a sign used before. In a moment, something rose up slowly in front of us. It was a Filipino. I yelled “Halt!” and made it pretty loud, for I was accustomed to challenging the officer of the guard in approved military style. I challenged him with another loud “halt!” Then he shouted “halto!” to me. Well, I thought the best thing to do was to shoot him. He dropped. If I didn’t kill him, I guess he died of fright. Two Filipinos sprang out of the gateway about 15 feet from us. I called “halt!” and Miller fired and dropped one. I saw that another was left. Well, I think I got my second Filipino that time....
The Filipino troops fired back at the American lines and before the night was over, fighting had broken out between Filipino and American forces. Most of the Filipino commanders at that time were attending a dance in Malolos, Bulacan Province . When told of the outbreak of hostilities, they rushed back to their units, which were already shooting it out with American troops.
When war finally came, Aguinaldo still tried to stop it by sending an emissary to General Otis to appeal for an end to the fighting. But Otis responded, “fighting, having begun, must go on to the grim end.”
II. IN THE UNITED STATES
The American people, however, received a different version of how the war started. Newspaper reports made it appear that the Filipinos had started the fighting. This was the time when the Treaty of Paris was pending ratification in the U.S. Senate. Previously, because of strong public opinion against the U.S. annexation of the Philippines , ratification of the treaty was uncertain. But the distorted news that reached the United States , specifically that the Filipinos were the ones who started hostilities, changed the minds of several U.S. senators to vote for ratification. On February 6, 1899, the U.S. Senate ratified the Treaty of Paris.
Philippine Insurrection? Ouuuccccch. The Americans viewed the fighting as an insurrection, not a war. Hence, Americans refer to this episode as the Philippine Insurrection, not the Philippine-American War. The Spanish-American conflict that lasted only three months, is referred to as the Spanish-American War. But the Philippine-American conflict officially lasted three years and is known only as the Philippine Insurrection by America . Actually the fighting between American and the remaining armed groups of Filipinos, whom Americans branded as “bandits,” lasted 16 years (1899-1914).
James Loewen, a Washington, D.C.,-based scholar and author of a forthcoming book titled Lies Across the Landscape: What Our Historical Markers and Monuments Get Wrong, said, “What we call the Philippine Insurrection should be called the Philippine War. We had never conquered the Philippines , so you can’t call it a revolt.”
Loewen’s comment was mentioned in an article published in the Star Tribune in Minnesota , in its issue of November 15, 1997.
III. THE WAR GOES ON
After the refusal of General Otis to end hostilities following the San Juan bridge incident, General Arthur MacArthur ordered the advance of American troops toward Filipino positions in Manila and the suburbs. Regiments from Kansas and California captured Santa Ana and Makati . Troops from Nebraska and Utah occupied the San Juan Bridge . On the other hand, volunteers from Idaho and Washington massacred hundreds of Filipinos who were then trying to cross the Pasig River . The coastlines were pounded continuously by Admiral Dewey’s naval guns.
Capturing Manila and the Suburbs. Several American soldiers who took part in the battles in Manila and the suburbs wrote letters telling about those battles to their relatives in the United States . These letters were published in local and national press in the United States by the Anti-Imperialist League in 1899 in the United States .
Source: Soldiers’ Letters: Being Materials for the History of a War of Criminal Aggression. (N. p.: Anti-Imperialist League, 1899). In Jim Zwick, ed., Anti-Imperialism in the United States , 1898-1935. (December 12, 1996.)
From Manila , wrote Private Fred B. Hinchman, Company A, United States Engineers:
At 1:30 o’clock, the general gave me a memorandum with regard to sending out a Tennessee battalion to the line. He tersely put it that “they were looking for a fight.” At Puente Colgante (suspension bridge) I met one of our company, who told me that the Fourteenth and Washingtons were driving all before them, and taking no prisoners. This is now our rule of procedure for cause. After delivering my message I had not walked a block when I heard shots down the street. Hurrying forward, I found a group of four men taking pot-shots across the river, into a bamboo thicket, at about 1,200 yards....
Narrating his exploits in Santa Ana , Manila , Captain Albert Otis, wrote:
I have six horses and three carriages in my yard, and enough small plunger for a family of six. The house I had at Santa Ana had five pianos. I couldn’t take them, so I put a big grand piano out of a second-story window. You can guess its finish. Everything is pretty quiet about here now. I expect we will not be kept here very long now. Give my love to all.
On to Marikina . The Americans pushed towards the suburbs, including Marikina .
Thinking of the impending Marikina fight, James A. Reid, a Colorado volunteer, had this to say:
Maybe you think this isn’t a fine country—to keep away from. In fact, all of the country around here is just “lousy” with “niggers.” To the right of us is the lake. About seven miles away, to the north and east, is the little town of Marquina , which will soon have to be taken. As it is the birthplace of Pio del Pilar, one of “Aggie’s” great generals, we expect quite a fight. Malabon and Malolos have not as yet been taken. Don’t know about Malolos, but Malabon can be taken any time, as it is next to the bay....We are not nearly as anxious to fight these people as some of people may think we are, and we do not enter any of the fights with the same spirit we did when fighting the Spaniards. If a vote was taken to take us home now or wait six months and discharge us here with our travel pay and finals, which would amount to nearly five hundred dollars, I do not believe that ten percent would be willing to stay, so you see how the men look at this addition to the United States....There have been about one hundred and twenty-five killed and three hundred wounded all together, and, when you consider that these beastly islands are not worth one American life, you can see what they are costing.
La Loma Fight. Major Jose Torres Bugallon, one of the bravest Filipino officers, was killed in the battle of La Loma, near the Chinese cemetery. After capturing La Loma, General MacArthur pushed toward Caloocan . General Antonio Luna and his brave troops were there to fight the Americans.
Caloocan Battle . Describing the Caloocan battle, Charles Bremer, of Minneapolis , Kansas , wrote:
Company I had taken a few prisoners, and stopped. The colonel ordered them up in to line time after time, and finally sent Captain Bishop back to start them. There occurred the hardest sight I ever saw. They had four prisoners, and didn’t know what to do with them. They asked Captain Bishop what to do, and he said: “You know the orders, and four natives fell dead.”
Writing his own version of the Caloocan fight, Captain Elliot, of the Kansas Regiment said:
Talk about war being “hell,” this war beats the hottest estimate ever made of that locality. Caloocan was supposed to contain seventeen thousand inhabitants. The Twentieth Kansas swept through it, and now Caloocan contains not one living native. Of the buildings, the battered walls of the great church and dismal prison alone remain. The village of Maypaja , where our first fight occurred on the night of the fourth, had five thousand people on that day—now not one stone remains upon top of another. You can only faintly imagine this terrible scene of desolation. War is worse than hell.
Due to the Americans’ superiority in arms, Caloocan fell. But General Luna didn’t give up.
On February 22, Luna marched towards Manila to try to capture it. He even ordered the burning of houses in the suburbs to create confusion to the American troops. Afterwards he fought the enemy on Azcarraga. General Luna and his troops suffered heavy losses so he then retreated to Polo, Bulacan.
Malabon, Here we Come! The Americans advanced towards Malabon (near Caloocan ), as if saying, “Here we come!”
Cavite Fight. Burr Ellis, of Frazier, Valley, California , narrated what he did in Cavite .
Help! Help! Help! Reinforcements from the U.S. American reinforces arrived from the United States in late February and early March 1899. Then Americans advanced towards Polo, Bulacan, capturing other towns along the Manila-Dagupan Railway.
Battles in the Visayas. The Americans then decided to invade the Visayan provinces. In particular, General Otis directed General Miller to invade and capture Iloilo Province . The Filipinos, headed by General Martin Delgado, did not surrender as demanded by Miller. Instead, he decided to fight the Americans. The Filipino soldiers burned Iloilo City to prevent the Americans from making it as the enemy’s base of operations.
On to Malolos. In central Luzon , by March 30, the Americans were already near Malolos, Bulacan, where the Philippine government was headquartered. General Aguinaldo evacuated Malolos and moved his headquarters to San Isidro , Nueva Ecija.
At that time, General Otis ordered General MacArthur not to pursue Aguinaldo, but to temporarily stay in Malolos. Meanwhile, the Americans immediately captured Bacoor, Zapote, and Dasmarinas, all in Cavite ; Paranaque and Las Pinas, in Morong, and Paete, Santa Cruz , and other towns in Laguna.
On April 23, the same year, General Gregorio del Pilar, known as the “boy general,” defeated the American cavalry under Major Bell in a stiff battle in Quinqua (now Plaridel), Bulacan. The enemy suffered heavy losses, including Colonel Stotsenberg who was killed in action. On the other hand, General Licerio Geronimo overpowered the Americans under General Lawton in San Mateo , Morong, in which battle Lawton was killed.
General MacArthur moved towards Kalumpit, Bulacan, where General Luna was waiting for him. According to Teodoro Agoncillo (History of the Filipino People,) when the Americans were about to attack, Luna, together with his foot soldiers, cavalry, and artillery left Kalumpit to punish General Tomas Mascardo for his insubordination. Mascardo was then in Pampanga Province . General del Pilar was left to fight and repulse the enemy, which the “boy general” was not able to do. It was too late when Luna and his soldiers came back at nightfall. The Americans had already broken through the Filipino defensive lines. Thus they lost the fight, The Filipinos sustained other battle losses.
OTHER HAPPENINGS
As early as March 6, 1899, Apolinario Mabini, in his capacity as premier and minister of foreign affairs, met with the Schurman Commission. The commission had offered the Filipinos some form of autonomous government. Mabini’s request for time to consult the people on the offer and a ceasefire in the meantime was refused. Mabini made another attempt, which turned to be futile, to seek an armistice on April 28. He later issued a manifesto criticizing the Americans, whom he described as a free people trying to rob others of their liberty. He then rallied the Filipino people to go on with the fight against the Americans.
When Mabini resigned from his post on May 7, 1899, President Aguinaldo named Pedro A. Paterno to head a new cabinet. It was Biak-na-Bato all over again. Notified of his replacement by Paterno, Mabini scoffed at the negotiations of the new cabinet on the basis of autonomy, calling it a desire for “independence without any struggle.” As expected, nothing came out of the Paterno peace efforts because the U.S. insisted that the Filipinos lay down their arms first.
Disunity Among the Filipinos. Among the military and political leaders, disunity again caused divisions. Although they were in a war against a common enemy, many of their leaders in the government and in the army sadly still found time to engage in personal, and often bitter quarrels, with disastrous and tragic consequences to the First Philippine Republic. The power struggle served to weaken Filipino unity at a time of great peril to the nation.
However, he had a volatile temper and sharp tongue. He was very vocal against entering into any deal with the Americans; he opposed autonomy and strongly advocated a fight for independence. He even arrested members of the Paterno cabinet after he learned that they were planning to negotiate with the Americans, calling them traitors. Turned over to Aguinaldo, the Cabinet members were turned loose as soon as Luna left. These men then poisoned the mind of Aguinaldo against Luna, saying the hot-headed general was eyeing the presidency. In reality, Luna was only trying to get popular support for his arrest of the Paterno cabinet and to drum up opposition to autonomy.
Here’s how Luna was killed as narrated in the book History of the Filipino People by Teodoro Agoncillo and Milagros C. Guerrero:
Upon Aguinaldo’s invitation, General Luna on June 5, 1899, went to a convent in Cabanatuan , Nueva Ecija, which served as Aguinaldo’s headquarters. When he arrived, Aguinaldo had already left for San Isidro , Nueva Ecija. Luna slapped the sentry at the convent as he went upstairs. There, he saw Felipe Buencamino, whom he despised, and they exchanged heated words. A rifle shot was heard from downstairs. He rushed downstairs, and there, members of the Kawit Company, one of whom he had recommended for punishment, mobbed him. Several stabbed him with daggers; others shot at him. He was able to run to the street. He fired his pistol, but he didn’t hit anybody. Colonel Francisco Roman, his aide-de-camp, came to his defense, but he was shot to death. As he fell on the convent yard, all Luna could say was, “Cow....ards! As...sas...sins!” The next day, he was buried with military honors. However, no soldiers were investigated for the killing.
The killing of Luna was a big blow to the cause of the Filipinos. It was, as Constantino puts it, “Bonifacio’s fate repeated.” His death deprived the nation of an able militarist. After Luna’s death, Aguinaldo ordered all chiefs of brigades under Luna arrested. He also ordered the disarming of two companies suspected of being pro-Luna. Such acts, especially the slaying of Luna, led to the demoralization of the army, as he had had a wide following.
VI. BACK TO THE BATTLEFIELDS
The Filipino army gradually broke up with one defeat after another on the battlefields. By the closing months of 1899, the army of the Philippine Republic was no longer a regular fighting force, and on November 12, 1899, the army was dissolved by Aguinaldo. It was formed into guerrilla units that would carry on the war.
One by one, towns and provinces throughout the archipelago fell to the U.S. forces. Many of his civilian and military officials surrendered to or were captured by the Americans. Many of them, including Mabini, who was captured in December 1899, were deported to Guam in January 1901.
The Capture of Aguinaldo. The capture of Aguinaldo was placed by the Americans as one of their priorities. He was able to avoid capture for quite sometime, though. That was due to the loyalty of many townspeople in the different provinces, who warned his party whenever American troops were closing in.
He was also able to win some more time because of the heroic sacrifice of General Gregorio del Pilar, the “boy general” in the famous Battle of Tirad Pass on December 2, 1900, in Mountain Province . In this narrow 2,800-meter-high pass, General del Pilar, with a handpicked force of only 60 men, held off for more than five hours a battalion of Texans of the U.S. 33rd Volunteers led by Major Peyton C. March. They had been pursuing Aguinaldo and his party. Of the 60, 52 were killed and wounded; one of the last to be killed was General del Pilar.
Aguinaldo was finally captured on March 23, 1901, in Palanan, Isabela Province , by means of a trick planned by Brigadier General Frederick Funston. A party of pro-American Macabebe scouts marched into Palanan pretending to be the reinforcements that Aguinaldo was waiting for. With the Macabebes were two former Filipino army officers, Tal Placido and Lazaro Segovia, who had surrendered to the Americans, and five Americans, including General Funston, who pretended to be captives. Caught by surprise, Aguinaldo’s guards were easily overpowered by the Macabebes after a brief exchange of shots. Aguinaldo was seized by Tal Placido and placed under arrest by General Funston.
He was brought to Manila to be kept a prisoner at Malacañang. There he was treated by General MacArthur more as a guest than as a prisoner. On April 1, 1901, convinced of the futility of continuing the war, the ambivalent Aguinaldo swore allegiance to the United States . On April 19,1901, Aguinaldo issued a proclamation calling on the Filipino people to lay down their arms and accept American rule. His capture signalled the death of the First Philippine Republic. But the war continued.
Dragged by Galloping Horses. During the war, torture was resorted to by American troops to obtain information and confessions. The water cure was given to those merely suspected of being rebels. Some were hanged by the thumbs, others were dragged by galloping horses, or fires lit beneath others while they were hanging.
Another form of torture was tying to a tree and then shooting the suspect through the legs. If a confession was not obtained, he was again shot, the day after. This went on until he confessed or eventually died.
On the other hand, Filipino guerrillas chopped off the noses and ears of captured Americans in violation of Aguinaldo’s orders. There were reports that some Americans were buried alive by angry Filipino guerrillas. In other words, brutalities were perpetrated by both sides.
The Balangiga, Samar , Massacre. The so-called Balangiga Massacre happened in 1901, a few weeks after a company of American soldiers arrived in Balangiga, Samar , upon the request of the town mayor to protect the inhabitants from the raids of Muslims and rebels. How the massacre took place is best described in Joseph Schott’s book, The Ordeal of Samar (The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc./Howard W. Sams & Co., Inc., Publishers, Indianapolis, Indiana, Copyright 1964). Here’s an excerpt from the book:
On the night of September 27, the sentries on the guard posts about the plaza were surprised by the unusual number of women hurrying to church. They were all heavily clothed, which was unusual, and many carried small coffins. Sergeant Scharer, sergeant of the guard vaguely suspicious, stopped one woman and pried open her coffin with his bayonet. Inside he found the body of a dead child.
“El calenturon! El colera!” the woman said.
The sergeant, slightly abashed by the sight of the dead child, nailed down the coffin lid again with the butt of his revolver and let the woman pass on. He concluded that cholera and fever were in epidemic stage and carrying off children in great numbers. But it was strange that no news of any such epidemic had reached the garrison.
If the guard sergeant had been less abashed and had searched beneath the child’s body, he would have found the keen blades of cane-cutting knives. All the coffins were loaded with them.
The night passed and morning came. At about 6:20 a.m. a sergeant was in the door of his squad hut. At that time, the unarmed Americans were going to breakfast. Some of them, of course, had finished their breakfast.
The sergeant saw Pedro Sanchez, chief of police of the town, line up prisoners for work. Then Sanchez sent all the workers to work in the plaza and in the streets. After that, Sanchez went to a hut and even talked with a corporal who knew pidgin Spanish and Visayan.
After speaking with the corporal, Sanchez walked behind Private Adolph Gamlin, the sentry on the area. All of a sudden, Sanchez grabbed the Gamlin’s rifle, and he smashed the rifle’s butt on the American soldier’s head. The Filipino fired a shot and shouted a signal. Then pandemonium broke loose.
Members of C Company were almost all massacred during the first few minutes of attack. The main action took place around the plaza and tribunal building. There, Filipino bolomen attacked the soldiers. They boloed to death the Americans who tried to escape; other soldiers were hacked from nose to throat.
About 250 Filipinos were reported to have been killed by a number of American troops who were able to get rifles from the rack and shoot at the bolomen. (However, first-hand Filipino accounts put the dead at less than 40.) On the other hand, the Americans suffered 78 casualties: 48 killed and 22 wounded. Only 4 were not injured. (Gamlin survived the massacre. He died at age 92 in the U.S. in 1969.)
(In 1995, Philippine President Fidel V. Ramos, issued Proclamation No. 674 declaring November 15, as “Don Eugenio Daza Day” in eastern Samar . November 15, 1995, marked the 125th birthday anniversary of Daza. Daza, being the overall commander of the revolutionary forces in the east coast of Samar during the Philippine Revolution, was reported to be one of those who have masterminded the Balangiga massacre. Daza, besides being a revolutionary leader, was also a member of the First Philippine Assembly in 1907.)
The Pacification of Samar . Due to the public demand in the U.S. for retaliation, President Theodore Roosevelt ordered the pacification of Samar . And in six months, General “Jake” Smith transformed Balangiga into a “howling wilderness.” He ordered his men to kill anybody capable of carrying arms, including ten-year old boys.
Smith particularly ordered Major Littleton Waller to punish the people of Samar for the deaths of the American troops. His exact orders were: “I want no prisoners. I wish you to kill and burn, the more you kill and burn, the better you will please me.”
‘The Americans Are Coming! The Americans Are Coming!’ Maybe these shouts were heard while the Americans were chasing and shooting the guerrillas and their sympathizers. And maybe, too, some U.S. troops might have uttered: “So there you are! You’ve no where to go!” And the shots were heard as burning houses lighted the night.
When the campaign was over, the U. S. army court-martialed and retired General Smith from the service. There were reports that about one third of the entire population of Samar was annihilated during the campaign.
Moreover, when members of the U.S. Army 11th Infantry Regiment left Balangiga, Samar , they took with them two church bells from the Balangiga Catholic Church. They were placed in a brick display museum in their home base Fort Russell , Wyoming , where they still remain today.
Concentration Camps. General Miguel Malvar of Batangas, who took over the leadership of the fallen Aguinaldo, continued the fight. He was the commanding general of all forces south of the Pasig River . The Americans committed barbaric acts because of the population’s support to the guerrillas.
For instance, by December 25, 1901, all men, women, and children of the towns of Batangas and Laguna, were herded into small areas within the poblacion of their respective towns. The American troops burned their houses, carts, poultry, animals, etc. The people were prisoners for months.
Those acts were considered by many as an early version of the concentration camps used by American soldiers in the Vietnam War.
The same tactics were perpetrated by the American army against non-combatants from March to October 1903 in the province of Albay and in 1905 in the provinces of Cavite and Batangas.
Enough Is Enough. Many Filipino soldiers and military officers surrendered to the Americans, but there were some who refused to give up. On February 27, 1902, General Vicente Lukban, who resorted to ambushing American troops in Samar, was captured in Samar . General Malvar surrendered to General J. Franklin Bell in Lipa, Batangas, on April 16, 1902.
“Official” End of the Philippine-American War. On July 4, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt declared that the Philippine-American War, which Americans called the Philippine Insurrection, was over. He made the declaration after the Philippine Commission reported to Roosevelt that the recent “insurrection” in the Philippines was over and a general and complete state of peace existed.
Sporadic Fighting Continues. Official history proclaims Filipino struggle against the Americans as a short one and honors those who connived with the Americans. But little importance has been given to those who stood by the original goals of the Katipunan.
However, according to author Constantino, peace in the Philippines was merely propaganda. He said, in reality, the reports of the American commanding general and several governors showed that numerous towns and villages remained in a state of constant rebellion. They themselves recognized that this could not have continued without the people’s support. Many collaborators were killed by resistance forces.
The civil government, composed of 6,000 men, was established. It was, however, led by American officers and former members of the Spanish civil guards.
The Katipunan Becomes Alive. Many resistance groups under different leaders had emerged during the war years. Luciano San Miguel, who joined the Katipunan in 1886 revived the Katipunan in his command in Zambales Province . He was a colonel when the Philippine-American War broke out. As a commander, he participated in the battles of 1899 in central and western Luzon , including Morong and Bulacan.
In 1902, he was elected national head of the revived Katipunan. He continued the guerrilla war. He died in a battle with Philippine Constabulary and Philippine Scouts in the district of Pugad-Baboy, in Morong, now Metro Manila.
Faustino Guillermo, assumed the leadership of the new Katipunan movement when San Miguel was killed. Others who took part in the guerrilla warfare were Macario Sakay, who had been with Bonifacio and Jacinto during the initial struggles of the Katipunan, and Julian Montalan and Cornelio Felizardo.
Sakay, leader of a band of patriotic Filipinos and whom the Americans branded as a bandit, continued to fight. He even established the Tagalog “Republic.” He surrendered on July 14, 1906. Sakay and his men were tried and convicted as bandits. Sakay was hanged on September 13, 1907.
EPILOGUE
It took the United States more than three years to defeat the army of the first Philippine Republic. However, the outcome of the war was never in doubt, mainly because the United States enjoyed tremendous military advantages.
In numbers alone, the U.S. was superior. Although there were only 20,032 enlisted men and 819 officers in the U.S. Expeditionary Force in the Philippines as of January 31, 1899, more troops arrived in subsequent months. By April 16, 1902, more than 120,000 American soldiers had fought or served in the Philippines . Even more superior were the arms used by the Americans, who were well-equipped. U.S. warships were on the coast, ready to fire their big guns when needed.
In contrast, the Filipino arms were a motley of rifles. Some had been supplied by the Americans during the Spanish-American War, others smuggled in by Filipino patriots, seized from the Spanish army, or taken from American soldiers. Artillery was likewise limited. Most of their cannons were captured from the Spaniards. Many Filipino soldiers did not even have guns, but used spears, lances and bolos (big knives) in fighting. Filipino soldiers also lacked military training. They did manage to win some small battlefield encounters, but these only delayed the ultimate victory for the Americans. Their resistance did not arouse public opinion in America against the U.S. military campaigns in the Philippines to the same degree that American public opinion forced the United States to withdraw from the Vietnam War more than 70 years later.
Nevertheless, the United States had to pay a very high price, more than 4,000 American soldiers’ lives. One of them was Major General Henry C. Lawton, who was killed in the Battle of San Mateo on December 23, 1899. He was the highest-ranking U.S. military officer to be killed in action in the Philippine-American War. The U.S. government also spent about $600 million in all.
4. What are the cultural changes brought about by the American to the Philippines .
The culture of the Philippines reflects the complexity of the History of the Philippines through the blending of pre-Hispanic indigenous Austronesian civilizations and the culture of Spain, imparted during Spain's 377 year colonial rule of the islands.
American influence are evident in the use of English language and contemporary pop culture such as fast-food, music, movies and basketball. Most especially public mass education which actually the major change that happened to the Philippines .
Other cultural changes brought about by Americans to Filipinos:
Wealth and beauty
The belief that "white is beautiful" is held by Filipino women and practiced by staying out of the sun to keep one from getting dark. Even at a young age, children are taught and practice this belief. Furthermore, many of these women use bleaching or whitening skin products to keep skin white, and they also use anti pimple or anti blackhead products. Bias towards favoring white skin came from influential occupations of the Spanish and Americans which many Filipinos still continue to believe today.
Death customs in the Philippines
Relatives that are closer to the deceased are customarily dressed in black, while women use black veils, similar to their Latin American counterparts
Architecture
Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. American style suburban gated communities are popular in the cities, especially Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces.
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American Administration?
The militant group operates during the American administration by engaging in kidnappings, bombings, assassinations and extortion from businesses and wealthy businessmen. Most of its activities are centered in the southern island of Mindanao , but in recent years, the group has broadened its reach. In April 2000, ASG kidnapped 21 people,including 10 foreign tourists, from a resort in Malaysia and in a separate incident, abducted several foreign journalists and an American citizen
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
According to former president Manuel L. Quezon, he said that:
I prefer a country run like hell by Filipinos to a country run like heaven by Americans. Because, however bad a Filipino government might be, we can always change it."
"My loyalty to my party ends where my loyalty to my country begins."
"Social Justice is far more beneficial when applied as a matter of sentiment, and not of law.
He made this not only for the benefit of himself, but also to the benefit of the country as well.
7. Discuss the Gruesome picture during the World War II
Manila: December 1941
BOMBS FIRST FELL INSIDE MANILA ON THE twenty third of December. In the previous days since Purisima Concepcion, only the whir of high- flying aircrafts, usually in the early mornings and late afternoons, drove the city residents to scamper into air raid shelters and dugouts. And during those two weeks of fearing and trembling many of the city folks somehow got inured to the routine and often were reluctant to crawl into the dark and dank caverns. It seemed that the city was spared from air attacks even as Camp Nichols was just off the southern outskirts. And since the Christmas Holiday season was just days away, people hoped that they could at least go to the churches as had been customary. Radio broadcasts told that the invading ground troops were being challenged in both the Lingayen Gulf area and the Mauban sector in Tayabas province.
And so it was quite unexpected when scarcely an hour before noon of December 23 a horde of Jap aircrafts swooped down unopposed toward the center of the city targeting the ships in the bay and in the Pasig River and the port facilities of Port Area. Intramuros which adjoins the target areas was mercilessly strafed and several government buildings and installations including the treasury building were hits by the bombs.
The harrowing experience of some people who happened to be in the vicinities of points where the bombs fell were recounted over and over afterwards, especially the rumored kuwentong kutsero. This particular story was however not the usual idle narration by a kutsero but of a kutsero who, unfortunately and fortunately, was cruising his calesa just past the Anda Monument along Malecon Drive when the air raid sirens started to sound the alarm signals. As he steered his horse toward the tree-shaded Plaza de la Reina, the bombs started falling and among the first buildings hit in Intramuros was the Intendencia which was just off the south bank of the Pasig River . People in that building streamed out in panic and when a second wave of planes started strafing the area, the people were out of the streets in no time.
The poor kutsero who had been dragged by his frightened horse into the dim-lit vestibule of the bombed building noticed some paper money flapping on the cobblestone pavement. And picking up a few despite his terror of the moment came upon several bundles of newly minted bills which he shakingly stowed under the seat of his calesa.
There were many versions of this yarn about a calesa driver who chanced upon big money during the first bombing of Manila . Whether the story is true or just ordinary kuwentong kutsero, it was not verified. However, it had also been bruited about that an untutored provinciano of a kutsero in Gagalangin suddenly moved his family out of their lowly lodgings to a pretentious house in Grace Park. And that this same provinciano has been seen afterwards to be better dressed and was smoking Tabacalera cigars instead of his usual La Insular itim.
From Guerrilla Memoirs - A Novel by Dominador Ilio. Quezon City 1993. Reprinted with permission.
1995: Year of Remembering: Deaths During World War II
This year (1995) marks the 50th anniversary of the end of WWII. Filipinos seem not to remember what that war did to us. Among Asian countries, we had the highest death toll - about a million - after China and Japan , and the brutality was, in large part, due to our being so closely identified with the United States .
Memories are short, because we do not want to remember. We must forgive, but not forget.
1. What is the significance of the proclamation of independence on 1898?
The proclamation of independence in 1898 was very significance in the sense that it aimed to let the world know the filipinos are capable of self government that they can led there own nation towards freedom, peace and progress.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution. Depend your answer.
The separation of church and state in the Malolos constitution is a necessary provision because it prohibited both the church and the government from interfering in the affairs of each other. The church is concerned with temporal affairs so that they should not be mixed.
3. Discuss the reason behind the Filipino-American War.
The American insistence on interfering and directly mediating in the affairs of the Filipinos was the primary reason for the Filipino-American War. After the Spanish colonizers Filipinos aspired for genuine independence and it seemed difficult to achieve with the Americans telling them what to do and acting as if they are colonizers once again. Filipinos thus fought the Americans even if they are inferior in arms and in training.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
Mass public education was a majoral cultural change brought by the Americans to the Filipinos. The thomasites or the American teacher fought and spread quality education to many parts of the country. Another contribution of the Americans was the exposure of the Filipinos to a culture Americans which was considered one of the best in the world. Literature movies and theatre are some of these cultural changes.
5.How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American administration.
The militant groups in the country operated guerilla style during the American administration. They operated very secretly and in the small pocket groups which made it possible for them to be detected by the Americans.
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
The social justice program was implemented by President Manuel Quezon during his administration by giving more opportunities for the poor to enjoy the benefits of social services. Quezon make sure that the poor have more access in law.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture of the Philippine during the World War.
Houses burning, building collapsing, people dying including children from gunfire and hunger. These are some of the gruesome pictures of the Philippines during world war.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898??...
--> the significance of the proclamation of independence ON June 12, 1898, Filipinos got what they had hoped for a long time—Philippine independence. The declaration of independence asserting the rights of Filipinos to manage their own affairs was read; the flag that embodied their aspirations was unfurled, and the music that carried their hopes was played. On July 4 masked the significance of a June day in Kawit, Cavite, in 1898, when a crowd gathered before the house of General Emilio Aguinaldo to hear him proclaim the independence of the Republic of the Philippines from Spain. As an afterthought, and no doubt to appease Filipino nationalists, June 12 was kept in the calendar of national events as Flag Day.
2. Is the separation of the church and states necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution??... Defend your answer.
--> yes, because it mentioned in theMalolos Constitution...
Title (III)
RELIGION..
article 5...
Article 5. The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
--> Because it followed the declaration of independence from Spain by the Revolutionary Government, a congress was held in Malolos, Bulacan in 1899 to draw up a constitution for the First Philippine Republic. It was the first republican constitution in Asia. The document states that the people have exclusive sovereignty. It states basic civil rights, separated the church from the state, and called for the creation of an Assembly of Representatives which would act as the legislative body. It also calls for a Presidential form of government with the president elected for a term of four years by a majority of the Assembly.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Fil-Am War...
--> The Philippine-American War was an armed military conflict between the United States and the Philippines, fought between 1899 to 1901, which occured from a Filipino political struggle against U.S. annexation of the islands.
Fighting continued between American colonial troops and remnants of the Philippine Army until 1913, and some historians consider these unofficial extensions part of the war.
In December 1898, the U.S. purchased the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam from Spain as part of the Treaty of Paris for the sum of US $20 million, after the U.S. defeated Spain in the Spanish-American War. The U.S. government made plans to make the Philippines an American territory. However, the Filipinos, fighting for independence from Spain since 1896, had already declared independence on June 12, 1898, and had considered the Americans allies.
Tensions between the Philippine and the American governments existed because of the conflicting movements for independence not movements for colonization, aggravated by the feelings of betrayal on the part of Aguinaldo, who had been brought to the islands by the United States Navy on the understanding that the Americans would help his cause.
4. What are the cultural changes brought about by the American to the Philippines??...
CULTURE
--> In areas with sparse Filipino populations, they often form loosely-knit social organizations aimed at maintaining a sense of "family", a key feature of Filipino culture. Such organizations generally arrange social events, especially of a charitable nature, and keep members up-to-date to local events. While these events are well-attended, the associations are otherwise a small part of the Filipino American life.
There are also instances where Filipino Americans form close-knit neighborhoods of their own, especially in California and Hawaiʻi. A few townships in these parts of the country have established "Little Manilas", civic and business districts tailored for the Filipino American community.
LANGUAGE
--> Filipinos speak Tagalog, Bikol, Visayan languages, Ilokano, Kapampangan and other Philippine languages at home. However, an overwhelming majority of Filipinos are fluent in English since it is one of the official languages in the Philippines and many Filipino American parents urge their children to enhance their English-language skills.
RELIGION
-->Filipino American religious beliefs and values are rooted in their Christian heritage. This is caused by the introduction, and subsequent adoption, of Catholicism and Christian values by Filipinos as a result of nearly 400 years of Spanish colonial rule.
EDUCATION
--> Filipino Americans have some of the highest educational attainment rates in the United States with 47.9% of all Filipino Americans over the age of 25 having a Bachelor's degree, which correlates with rates observed in other Asian American subgroups.[9]fig.11 The recent wave of Filipino professionals filling the education, healthcare, and information technology shortages in the United States also accounts for the high educational attainment rates.
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American Administration??...
--> The militant group operates during the American administration by engaging in kidnappings, bombings, assassinations and extortion from businesses and wealthy businessmen...
For decades, especially since the end of the Vietnam War, the US military has
been wrestling with aggressive sects of doomsday Christians demanding control and
conversions of those of other faiths as well as nonbelievers within the armed forces.
Even beyond this high-pressure hard sell, those Judgment Day, apocalyptic Christian leaders, with followings estimated at 40 million parishioners, have urged public officials on all levels to wage war with Israel's enemies. Sometimes they and
others even send their followers into dangerous war zones to preach their faith and risk lives. In at least one case, the Pentagon is supporting a Christian evangelistic group's efforts to promote itself inside the Muslim-dominated Iraq war zone.
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration??...
--> President Quezon sought to achieve social justice by protecting the rights of laborers through legislation and personal projects, and by creating more jobs for the common man. He believed that work is the measure of a man therefore man must be allowed to improve his lot and the government must help him. He empowered the disenfranchised: women were given the right to vote, tenants a chance to own land, laborers protection from ill working conditions. He put in place an effective educational system and provided the poor with knowledge and skills to better themselves.
He strove to protect our country from dangerous class wars, a danger that persists to this day. He envisioned a country united despite diferences in social class and creed, and a time when this campaign for social justice would no loger be necessary. He appealed to each Filipino’s moral impulse to protect his fellowman.
7. Discuss the Gruesome picture during the World War II...
--> Bataan Death March - A Soldier’s Story
This is a chilling eyewitness account of this gruesome chapter of World War II history. Captured when America surrendered the Philippines’ Bataan peninsula, James Bolich survived three and a half years’ emprisonment by the Japanese. From the horrors of the Death March to the cruel deprivations of prison life, he maintained his will to survive, even as his comrades fell beside him and his body wasted to fewer than one hundred pounds. Every soldier who made the tortuous march out of Bataan and survived unbelievable treatment and conditions in prisoner of war camps has a different story to tell and this is the author’s story, so that whoever is interested may have some idea of the part one soldier played in this catastrophic episode.
Surviving Bataan and Beyond
Colonel Irvin Alexander's Odyssey as a Japanese Prisoner of War
Few American prisoners of war during World War II suffered more than the group that was captured on the Bataan Peninsula in the Philippines. The men were forced to endure the infamous Death March, a series of overcrowded prison camps, and the 'hell ships' transporting them to Japan and Korea. Among them was Colonel Irvin Alexander, who recounts his harrowing experience as a captive of the Japanese. As a midlevel commander, he knew the politics behind the surrender in April 1942, but he also suffered with the rest of the men through a horrific confinement. This is the story of one man's struggle to survive a brutal, often unfathomable captivity.
The series of pictures show prisoners, both men and teenagers, with injuries which appear to have been caused by beatings. One man's leg appears to have been beaten to such an extent that his upper leg is just a mass of black and blue.
*it's me.. Bevz*
Rizal’s life from America to London (Vanessa G. Labastida)
Rizal had a good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impressions were (1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; (2) the drive and energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; and (5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much that do not practise. Thus, he wrote to Ponce: “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman, nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to the difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being dislike, too”.
Rizal chose London to be his new home for three particular reasons: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language; (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London, he engaged in Filipiana studies, completed annotating Morga’s book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics, penned a famous letter to the Young Women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertrude Beckett.
Rizal become attracted to Gertrude Beckett because she was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. He found exhilarating joy in Gertrude’s company.
He was able to have access to the historical materials and documents of the British Museum because he came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, who was the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan languages and customs. He was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum.
Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines.
The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands) which was published in Mexico, 1609. He spent many days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines. Of all written histories published during the early years of the Spanish regime, that of Morga was, in his considered opinion, the best.
Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine scholarship. He frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal’s errors, namely: (1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the life of present standards and (2) Rizal’s attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay Frech metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London.
Rizal’s new edition of Morga’s Sucesos which he wrote in the British Museum was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the request of Rizal.
On December 11, 1888, he went to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms.
Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) , was inaugurated on December 31, 1888, with the following officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president; Manuel Sta. Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez’ unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitle La Vision del Fray Rodrigeuz (The Vision of Fray Rodriguez) which was published in Barcelona under his nom-de-plume Dimas Alang.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (February 22, 1889) in Tagalog.
Dr. Rost, editor of Trubner’s Record, a journal devoted to Asian studies, requested Rizal to contribute some articles. In response to his request, the latter prepared two articles (1) “Specimens of Tagal Folklore” which was published in the journal in May, 1889; and (2) “Two Eastern Fables”, published in June, 1889.
Rizal’s life from America to London (Melanie R. Landicho)
Rizal had a good and bad impressions of the United States. The good impressions were (1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; (2) the drive and energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; and (5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
One bad impression Rizal had of America was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much that do not practise. Thus, he wrote to Ponce: “They do not have true civil liberty. In some states the Negro cannot marry a White woman, nor a White man a Negress. Hatred against the Chinese leads to the difficulty for other Asiatics who, like the Japanese are mistaken for Chinese by the ignorant, and therefore being dislike, too”.
Rizal chose London to be his new home for three particular reasons: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language; (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the British Museum, and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish tyranny. In London, he engaged in Filipiana studies, completed annotating Morga’s book, wrote many articles for La Solidaridad in defense of his people against Spanish critics, penned a famous letter to the Young Women of Malolos, carried on his voluminous correspondence with Blumentritt and relatives, and had a romance with Gertrude Beckett.
Rizal become attracted to Gertrude Beckett because she was a buxom English girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. He found exhilarating joy in Gertrude’s company.
He was able to have access to the historical materials and documents of the British Museum because he came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, who was the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan languages and customs. He was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character, and he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British Museum.
Rizal spent much of his time in the British Museum poring over the pages of Morga’s Sucesos and other rare historical works on the Philippines.
The greatest achievement of Rizal in London was the annotating of Morga’s book, Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Historical Events of the Philippine Islands) which was published in Mexico, 1609. He spent many days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines. Of all written histories published during the early years of the Spanish regime, that of Morga was, in his considered opinion, the best.
Blumentritt commended Rizal for his fine scholarship. He frankly censured Rizal for two things which revealed Rizal’s errors, namely: (1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the life of present standards and (2) Rizal’s attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
Early in September, 1888, he visited Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale. He was entertained in this gay Frech metropolis by Juan Luna and his wife (Paz Pardo de Tavera), who proudly showed him their little son Andres (nickname Luling). After poring over the old books and manuscript in the Bibliotheque Nationale, he returned to London.
Rizal’s new edition of Morga’s Sucesos which he wrote in the British Museum was printed by Garnier Freres. The Prologue was written by Professor Blumentritt, upon the request of Rizal.
On December 11, 1888, he went to Spain, visiting Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms. For the first time, he met Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Mariano Ponce, two titans of the Propaganda Movement. He exchanged ideas with these new friends and promised to cooperate in the fight for reforms.
Rizal learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusade for reforms. This society, called Asociacion La Solidaridad (Solidaridad Association) , was inaugurated on December 31, 1888, with the following officers: Galicano Apacible, president; Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice-president; Manuel Sta. Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
By unanimous vote of all the members, Rizal was chosen honorary president. This was a recognition of his leadership among all Filipino patriots in Europe.
While busy in research studies at the British Museum, Rizal received news on Fray Rodriguez’ unabated attack on his Noli. In defense, he wrote a pamphlet entitle La Vision del Fray Rodrigeuz (The Vision of Fray Rodriguez) which was published in Barcelona under his nom-de-plume Dimas Alang.
In London, Rizal wrote the famous “Letter to the Young Women of Malolos” (February 22, 1889) in Tagalog.
Dr. Rost, editor of Trubner’s Record, a journal devoted to Asian studies, requested Rizal to contribute some articles. In response to his request, the latter prepared two articles (1) “Specimens of Tagal Folklore” which was published in the journal in May, 1889; and (2) “Two Eastern Fables”, published in June, 1889.
George B. Perez
tf/ 11:30-1:00
Rizal's life from America to London
1. The positive impressions of Rizal to the U.S were the ff:
a. the material process of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories.
b. the drive and energy of the American people.
c. the natural beauty of the land.
d. the high standard of living.
e. the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants.
- the negative impression of Rizal had of America was the lack of racial equality. There existed racial prejudice which was inconsistent with the principles of democracy and freedom of which the Americans talk so much but do not practise. Americans doesn't have true civil liberty. Another impression of Rizal in some States the Negro cannot marry a woman white, nor a white man a Negress.
2. Rizal chose London to be his second home during his second journey to europe in order to improve his knowledge of English Language, to study and annotate Morga's Sucesos de Las Islas Filipinas, a rare copy of which he heard to be available in the british museum and london was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against spanish tyranny.
3. Because she was affectionate, a buxom english girl with brown hair, blue eyes, and rosy cheeks. on cold winter mornings she had a sunny smile for Rizal, chaltering like a humming bird. That's why rizal become attracted to Gertrude Beckett.
4. Rizal came to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan Languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal's learning and character, and he gladly recommend him to the authorities of the british museum.
5. Rizal annotated Morga's Sucesos de Las Islas Filipinas because he was truly impressed and appreciated of morga's work for him is an excellent book, it can be said that Morga is a modern scholarly explorer. He does not have the superficiality and exageration which are found among spaniards and simple but one has to read between the lines.
- he spernt many days in the reading room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the book.
6. Ferdinand Blumentit insights from Rizal's new edition of Morga's Sucesos namely;
-Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and,
-Rizal's attack on the church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
7.Rizal's new edition of Morga's Sucesos;
7.1 content- Rizal fulmination against catholicism. He believed that the religion is the origin of many events lamentable for mant religion, for Spain, and for the good name of the European race.
7.2 Categories of notes included- he had high estimation of notes. he participate in the error of many historians, he judge events of centuring past in light of concepts taht corresponds to contemporary ideas.
7.3 Main preposition- his appraisal of Morga's work which revealed the Spanish colonization of the philippines.
8. Rizal visit to Paris while in London in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibliotheque Nationale and he also visit to Madrid because he contracted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms.
9. Assusacion La Solidaridad established in Barcelona by the Filipino expatriates so that Filipino in Barcelona would cooperate in the crusade for reforms and it will protect the welfare of the Filipinos in Barcelona. Among the officers are:
President- Galicano Apacible
V-president- Graciano Lopez Jaena
Secretary- Manuel Santa Maria
Treasurer- Mariano Ponce
Accountant- Jose Ma. Panganiban
10. Other literary works of Rizal while ha was in London are the ff:
a. La Vision del Fray Rodriguez- this opus is a satire depicting a spirited dialogue between St. Augustine and Fr. Rodriguez. St. Augustine told Fr. Rodriguez that he was commissioned by God to tell him of his penance on earth that he shall continue to write more stupidity so that all men may laugh at him.
b. "Letter to the Young Women in Malolos"- he penned it upon the request of M.H. del Pilar to praise the young ladies of Malolos for their courage to establish a school where they could learn Spanish.
c. "Specimens of Tagal Folklore"- this was published in the Journal devoted to Asian studies upon the request of Dr. Rost, editor of trubner's record. This ARTICLE is a proverbial saying. This was publish on May, 1889.
d."Two Eastern Fables"- this was also published in the Journal devoted to Asian studies ipon the request of Dr. Rost, this article is like a puzzle and published on June,1889.
History I
1:00-2:30p(TF)
Zara Mei D. Zarate
I-A6
1. What is the significant proclamation on the Philippines Independence 1898?
The significance of the proclamation of independence of the Philippines on 1898 are- one, it would inspire the Filipinos more to fight for their freedom. On the same manner, the declaration would also encourage other countries to recognized Philippines as an independent country.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution? Defend your answer.
According to Malolos Constitution:
TITLE III
RELIGION
Article 5. The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
In my own opinion, I do believed that the seperation of state and church is not necessary nstead these two must be united, for it is afact that these two consist of the same- us. Although these two were diffrent when it come to perspective and the way they materialized it, I think what is needed is to consider both ideas
to be able to construct a better one, wherein, if not all, most would be benifited. On the other hand, we know that still these two belong to opposite sides, and to avoid conflict, I think what is necessary is to establish limitations on the church-state union.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Filipino-American war.
The reasons behind the Philippine-American War were- one, it started when Filipinos became suspicious of the true motive of United states in coming to the Philippines. And this suspicions were then confirmed by the treaty by the Treaty of Paris, under which Spain ceded the Philippines to Americans. Thats when the we realized that US came here not to help us free from Spaniards but to take over and to become the new colonial master. Finally on December 12, 1898, official confirmation of American's true intention came when President William McKinly announced US decision to keep Philippines as American colony. On January 4, 1899, there was a proclamation announced which entitled as "Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation," wherein it stated that US true intetion is to stay permanently in the Philippines. On the following day, General Emilio Aguinaldo issued a counter proclamation, which warned the US troops that the Philippine government is ready to fight. Aguinaldo's proclamation seemed already a declaration of war.
4. What were the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to the Filipinos?
The cultural changes or influences brought about by the Americans are- one, is the English language, wherein US made iot a policy to propagate the English Language must be the medium of communication. In addition, as their desire to train Filipinos on the science of governance, they have also propagated the idea of democracy. More so, Filipinos also came to immitate some American custom and tradition, such as halloween's and Christmas. On the same manner adopting and blindly imtating almost everything that was America's, many Filipinos acquired colonial mentality, which then materialized through patronizing imported goods. On the other hand, it has an adverse effect on Filipinos way of life . Many Filipino customs and tradition were discarded, such as the praying of Angelus, and kissing
of the hands of elders as a sign of respect. Among educated Filipinos it was no longer fashionable to be named as Pedro, Juan and Jose, they rather preferred to be called as Pete, Johnny and Joe.
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American Administration?
When the Filipinos found out the true intention of US, they urge more for freedom, but it is still a fact that we cannot defeat US, so when World War II started, we came to support the US by providing Philippine military troops, hust to gain loyalty and trust from US. This was the Strategy they used to attain freedom.
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
The promotion of social justice was championed during President Manuel Quezon regime. Several laws were enacted by the National assembly to breathe life to the constitutional provision to ensure the well-being and the economic security of all the people, should be concerned of the state.
7. Discuss the Gruesome picture during the World War II.
Life of the Filipinos during World War II was then miserable, under which we are trapped out from the conflict of the major countries involve in the war- US and Japan. Wherein many of the Filipinos, civilian and militar died directly caused by war, other died of hunger, disease-ridden and killed brutally by Japanese, one was the famous Bataan Death March.
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898??...
=the significance of the proclamation of independence ON June 12, 1898, Filipinos got what they had hoped for a long time—Philippine independence. The declaration of independence asserting the rights of Filipinos to manage their own affairs was read; the flag that embodied their aspirations was unfurled, and the music that carried their hopes was played. On July 4 masked the significance of a June day in Kawit, Cavite, in 1898, when a crowd gathered before the house of General Emilio Aguinaldo to hear him proclaim the independence of the Republic of the Philippines from Spain. As an afterthought, and no doubt to appease Filipino nationalists, June 12 was kept in the calendar of national events as Flag Day. and also it helps the Filipinos to realize how much sacrifices they have done at that time, for us to be free and to have a good nation. The Act of Declaration could have been written by any lawyer, the music composed by any musician, and the flag sewn by any dressmaker, but the significance of Philippine independence proclaimed 108 years ago today could not have been less.
With a government in operation, Aguinaldo thought that it was necessary to declare the independence of Philippines . He believed that such a move would inspire the people to fight more eagerly against the Spaniards and at the same lead the foreign countries to recognize the independence of the country.
What is remarkable every time the declaration of independence is read, the music played, and the flag unfurled in the air is the fact that all these were made by Filipinos whose hearts longed for the best of this nation.
2. Is the separation of the church and states necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution??... Defend your answer.
=Yes, because as the Representatives of the Filipino people, we lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and to secure for ourselves the blessings of liberty, imploring the aid of the Supreme Legislator of the Universe to help us attain these objectives.
The protracted discussions that characterized the Congress sessions on the subject of whether or not Church and State should be united showed, first, that the Filipinos as a people, though up in arms against Catholic Spain, were not anti-Catholic but merely anti-clerical, and second, that many of the delegates learned from the bitter lesson of Philippine history in voting the fundamental basis of Spanish colonial system; that decision became the cornerstone of Philippine democracy and showed not only the nationalism and democratic orientation of those who voted for the separation of Church and State, but also their keen sense of history.
=The Malolos Constitution (TITLE III) states that:
=RELIGION
"Article 5". The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Fil-Am War.
=On July 1, 1898, American forces engaged in a fierce battle with the Spaniards at El Caney and San Juan Hill in Cuba . After the skirmishes, they occupied the high ground overlooking Santiago . On July 3, Admiral Pascual Cervera y Topete ordered his squadron to leave the harbor. The Spaniards attempted to escape toward the west along the coast. Then a running battle took place. All the Spanish ships either burned or sank. >From there, American troops invaded and captured Puerto Rico , another Spanish possession.
As a result of these defeats, Spain sued for peace. On August 12, 1898, the day before the fall of Manila , Spain and the United States signed a peace agreement. Spain agreed to evacuate all her troops from and give up control over Cuba , cede Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States , which was also allowed to occupy Manila . The last condition was temporary while what was to be done with the Philippines was being determined.
In October 1898, representatives of Spain and the United States met in Paris to draft a peace treaty. One of the vital issues to be discussed was the status of the Philippines . Spain wanted the United States to return the Philippines to Spain because Manila had been occupied by the Americans only after the armistice had been signed on August 12, 1898, but to no avail. The United States insisted on obtaining the Philippines .
Treaty of Paris . On December 10. 1898, the Treaty of Paris, was signed in Paris , France , by both Spain and the United States . It formally ended the war between them. Under this treaty, Spain recognized the independence of Cuba ; ceded Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines to the United States ; and received a $20 million payment from the United States for giving up the Philippines .
The treaty had to be ratified by the U.S. Senate before it could take effect. It, however, met opposition, mainly against the annexation of the Philippines . An Anti-Imperialist League was formed to rally American public opinion against the annexation. Some prominent Americans, such as former President Grover Cleveland, Andrew Carnegie, and Mark Twain, also opposed the ratification.
One of the reasons why the United States should not acquire the Philippines was that the Filipinos themselves were fighting the Americans in the Philippines . Such an act, they said, showed that the Filipinos did not want to be under American rule. They also reasoned that it was inconsistent for the United States to disclaim—through the so-called Teller Amendment—any intention of annexing Cuba and then annex the other Spanish colonies, such as the Philippines .
Annexation Fever. There were also many in the United States who saw the advantages of taking over the Philippines . Many missionaries, for instance, favored annexation. So did people who feared that Germany might get the Philippines if the United States did not. Some favored annexation to give America a “foothold” in the populous markets of Asia .
On February 6, 1899, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 57 to 27, ratified the Treaty of Paris. The American people, in effect, also endorsed the treaty when they reelected President McKinley in the 1900 U.S. presidential elections. Thus, the Philippines formally came under the rule of the United States .
4.What are the cultural changes brought about by the American to the Philippines .
=The culture of the Philippines reflects the complexity of the History of the Philippines through the blending of pre-Hispanic indigenous Austronesian civilizations and the culture of Spain, imparted during Spain's 377 year colonial rule of the islands.
American influence are evident in the use of English language and contemporary pop culture such as fast-food, music, movies and basketball. Most especially public mass education which actually the major change that happened to the Philippines .
Other cultural changes brought about by Americans to Filipinos:
Wealth and beauty
The belief that "white is beautiful" is held by Filipino women and practiced by staying out of the sun to keep one from getting dark. Even at a young age, children are taught and practice this belief. Furthermore, many of these women use bleaching or whitening skin products to keep skin white, and they also use anti pimple or anti blackhead products. Bias towards favoring white skin came from influential occupations of the Spanish and Americans which many Filipinos still continue to believe today.
Death customs in the Philippines
Relatives that are closer to the deceased are customarily dressed in black, while women use black veils, similar to their Latin American counterparts
Architecture
Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. American style suburban gated communities are popular in the cities, especially Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces.
Cultural Changes
*Progress in Education
*Public Health and Welfare
*Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
*Transportation and communication
*Individual Freedoms.
*Political Consciousness
*Language and Literature
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American Administration?
The militant group operates during the American administration by engaging in kidnappings, bombings, assassinations and extortion from businesses and wealthy businessmen. Most of its activities are centered in the southern island of Mindanao , but in recent years, the group has broadened its reach. In April 2000, ASG kidnapped 21 people,including 10 foreign tourists, from a resort in Malaysia and in a separate incident, abducted several foreign journalists and an American citizen
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
According to former president Manuel L. Quezon, he said that:
I prefer a country run like hell by Filipinos to a country run like heaven by Americans. Because, however bad a Filipino government might be, we can always change it."
"My loyalty to my party ends where my loyalty to my country begins."
"Social Justice is far more beneficial when applied as a matter of sentiment, and not of law.
He made this not only for the benefit of himself, but also to the benefit of the country as well.
7. Discuss the Gruesome picture during the World War II
Manila: December 1941
BOMBS FIRST FELL INSIDE MANILA ON THE twenty third of December. In the previous days since Purisima Concepcion, only the whir of high- flying aircrafts, usually in the early mornings and late afternoons, drove the city residents to scamper into air raid shelters and dugouts. And during those two weeks of fearing and trembling many of the city folks somehow got inured to the routine and often were reluctant to crawl into the dark and dank caverns. It seemed that the city was spared from air attacks even as Camp Nichols was just off the southern outskirts. And since the Christmas Holiday season was just days away, people hoped that they could at least go to the churches as had been customary. Radio broadcasts told that the invading ground troops were being challenged in both the Lingayen Gulf area and the Mauban sector in Tayabas province.
And so it was quite unexpected when scarcely an hour before noon of December 23 a horde of Jap aircrafts swooped down unopposed toward the center of the city targeting the ships in the bay and in the Pasig River and the port facilities of Port Area. Intramuros which adjoins the target areas was mercilessly strafed and several government buildings and installations including the treasury building were hits by the bombs.
The harrowing experience of some people who happened to be in the vicinities of points where the bombs fell were recounted over and over afterwards, especially the rumored kuwentong kutsero. This particular story was however not the usual idle narration by a kutsero but of a kutsero who, unfortunately and fortunately, was cruising his calesa just past the Anda Monument along Malecon Drive when the air raid sirens started to sound the alarm signals. As he steered his horse toward the tree-shaded Plaza de la Reina, the bombs started falling and among the first buildings hit in Intramuros was the Intendencia which was just off the south bank of the Pasig River . People in that building streamed out in panic and when a second wave of planes started strafing the area, the people were out of the streets in no time.
The poor kutsero who had been dragged by his frightened horse into the dim-lit vestibule of the bombed building noticed some paper money flapping on the cobblestone pavement. And picking up a few despite his terror of the moment came upon several bundles of newly minted bills which he shakingly stowed under the seat of his calesa.
There were many versions of this yarn about a calesa driver who chanced upon big money during the first bombing of Manila . Whether the story is true or just ordinary kuwentong kutsero, it was not verified. However, it had also been bruited about that an untutored provinciano of a kutsero in Gagalangin suddenly moved his family out of their lowly lodgings to a pretentious house in Grace Park. And that this same provinciano has been seen afterwards to be better dressed and was smoking Tabacalera cigars instead of his usual La Insular itim.
From Guerrilla Memoirs - A Novel by Dominador Ilio. Quezon City 1993. Reprinted with permission
1. What is the significance of proclamation of the independence of the Philippines in 1898??...
=the significance of the proclamation of independence ON June 12, 1898, Filipinos got what they had hoped for a long time—Philippine independence. The declaration of independence asserting the rights of Filipinos to manage their own affairs was read; the flag that embodied their aspirations was unfurled, and the music that carried their hopes was played. On July 4 masked the significance of a June day in Kawit, Cavite, in 1898, when a crowd gathered before the house of General Emilio Aguinaldo to hear him proclaim the independence of the Republic of the Philippines from Spain. As an afterthought, and no doubt to appease Filipino nationalists, June 12 was kept in the calendar of national events as Flag Day. and also it helps the Filipinos to realize how much sacrifices they have done at that time, for us to be free and to have a good nation. The Act of Declaration could have been written by any lawyer, the music composed by any musician, and the flag sewn by any dressmaker, but the significance of Philippine independence proclaimed 108 years ago today could not have been less.
With a government in operation, Aguinaldo thought that it was necessary to declare the independence of Philippines . He believed that such a move would inspire the people to fight more eagerly against the Spaniards and at the same lead the foreign countries to recognize the independence of the country.
What is remarkable every time the declaration of independence is read, the music played, and the flag unfurled in the air is the fact that all these were made by Filipinos whose hearts longed for the best of this nation.
2. Is the separation of the church and states necessary as mentioned in the Malolos constitution??... Defend your answer.
=Yes, because as the Representatives of the Filipino people, we lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and to secure for ourselves the blessings of liberty, imploring the aid of the Supreme Legislator of the Universe to help us attain these objectives.
The protracted discussions that characterized the Congress sessions on the subject of whether or not Church and State should be united showed, first, that the Filipinos as a people, though up in arms against Catholic Spain, were not anti-Catholic but merely anti-clerical, and second, that many of the delegates learned from the bitter lesson of Philippine history in voting the fundamental basis of Spanish colonial system; that decision became the cornerstone of Philippine democracy and showed not only the nationalism and democratic orientation of those who voted for the separation of Church and State, but also their keen sense of history.
=The Malolos Constitution (TITLE III) states that:
=RELIGION
"Article 5". The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
3. Discuss the reasons behind the Fil-Am War.
=On July 1, 1898, American forces engaged in a fierce battle with the Spaniards at El Caney and San Juan Hill in Cuba . After the skirmishes, they occupied the high ground overlooking Santiago . On July 3, Admiral Pascual Cervera y Topete ordered his squadron to leave the harbor. The Spaniards attempted to escape toward the west along the coast. Then a running battle took place. All the Spanish ships either burned or sank. >From there, American troops invaded and captured Puerto Rico , another Spanish possession.
As a result of these defeats, Spain sued for peace. On August 12, 1898, the day before the fall of Manila , Spain and the United States signed a peace agreement. Spain agreed to evacuate all her troops from and give up control over Cuba , cede Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States , which was also allowed to occupy Manila . The last condition was temporary while what was to be done with the Philippines was being determined.
In October 1898, representatives of Spain and the United States met in Paris to draft a peace treaty. One of the vital issues to be discussed was the status of the Philippines . Spain wanted the United States to return the Philippines to Spain because Manila had been occupied by the Americans only after the armistice had been signed on August 12, 1898, but to no avail. The United States insisted on obtaining the Philippines .
Treaty of Paris . On December 10. 1898, the Treaty of Paris, was signed in Paris , France , by both Spain and the United States . It formally ended the war between them. Under this treaty, Spain recognized the independence of Cuba ; ceded Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines to the United States ; and received a $20 million payment from the United States for giving up the Philippines .
The treaty had to be ratified by the U.S. Senate before it could take effect. It, however, met opposition, mainly against the annexation of the Philippines . An Anti-Imperialist League was formed to rally American public opinion against the annexation. Some prominent Americans, such as former President Grover Cleveland, Andrew Carnegie, and Mark Twain, also opposed the ratification.
One of the reasons why the United States should not acquire the Philippines was that the Filipinos themselves were fighting the Americans in the Philippines . Such an act, they said, showed that the Filipinos did not want to be under American rule. They also reasoned that it was inconsistent for the United States to disclaim—through the so-called Teller Amendment—any intention of annexing Cuba and then annex the other Spanish colonies, such as the Philippines .
Annexation Fever. There were also many in the United States who saw the advantages of taking over the Philippines . Many missionaries, for instance, favored annexation. So did people who feared that Germany might get the Philippines if the United States did not. Some favored annexation to give America a “foothold” in the populous markets of Asia .
On February 6, 1899, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 57 to 27, ratified the Treaty of Paris. The American people, in effect, also endorsed the treaty when they reelected President McKinley in the 1900 U.S. presidential elections. Thus, the Philippines formally came under the rule of the United States .
4.What are the cultural changes brought about by the American to the Philippines .
=The culture of the Philippines reflects the complexity of the History of the Philippines through the blending of pre-Hispanic indigenous Austronesian civilizations and the culture of Spain, imparted during Spain's 377 year colonial rule of the islands.
American influence are evident in the use of English language and contemporary pop culture such as fast-food, music, movies and basketball. Most especially public mass education which actually the major change that happened to the Philippines .
Other cultural changes brought about by Americans to Filipinos:
Wealth and beauty
The belief that "white is beautiful" is held by Filipino women and practiced by staying out of the sun to keep one from getting dark. Even at a young age, children are taught and practice this belief. Furthermore, many of these women use bleaching or whitening skin products to keep skin white, and they also use anti pimple or anti blackhead products. Bias towards favoring white skin came from influential occupations of the Spanish and Americans which many Filipinos still continue to believe today.
Death customs in the Philippines
Relatives that are closer to the deceased are customarily dressed in black, while women use black veils, similar to their Latin American counterparts
Architecture
Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. Contemporary architecture usually favors western style structures although pre-Hispanic housing is still largely common in rural areas. American style suburban gated communities are popular in the cities, especially Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces.
Cultural Changes
*Progress in Education
*Public Health and Welfare
*Trade, Commerce, and Industry.
*Transportation and communication
*Individual Freedoms.
*Political Consciousness
*Language and Literature
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American Administration?
The militant group operates during the American administration by engaging in kidnappings, bombings, assassinations and extortion from businesses and wealthy businessmen. Most of its activities are centered in the southern island of Mindanao , but in recent years, the group has broadened its reach. In April 2000, ASG kidnapped 21 people,including 10 foreign tourists, from a resort in Malaysia and in a separate incident, abducted several foreign journalists and an American citizen
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration?
According to former president Manuel L. Quezon, he said that:
I prefer a country run like hell by Filipinos to a country run like heaven by Americans. Because, however bad a Filipino government might be, we can always change it."
"My loyalty to my party ends where my loyalty to my country begins."
"Social Justice is far more beneficial when applied as a matter of sentiment, and not of law.
He made this not only for the benefit of himself, but also to the benefit of the country as well.
7. Discuss the Gruesome picture during the World War II
Manila: December 1941
BOMBS FIRST FELL INSIDE MANILA ON THE twenty third of December. In the previous days since Purisima Concepcion, only the whir of high- flying aircrafts, usually in the early mornings and late afternoons, drove the city residents to scamper into air raid shelters and dugouts. And during those two weeks of fearing and trembling many of the city folks somehow got inured to the routine and often were reluctant to crawl into the dark and dank caverns. It seemed that the city was spared from air attacks even as Camp Nichols was just off the southern outskirts. And since the Christmas Holiday season was just days away, people hoped that they could at least go to the churches as had been customary. Radio broadcasts told that the invading ground troops were being challenged in both the Lingayen Gulf area and the Mauban sector in Tayabas province.
And so it was quite unexpected when scarcely an hour before noon of December 23 a horde of Jap aircrafts swooped down unopposed toward the center of the city targeting the ships in the bay and in the Pasig River and the port facilities of Port Area. Intramuros which adjoins the target areas was mercilessly strafed and several government buildings and installations including the treasury building were hits by the bombs.
The harrowing experience of some people who happened to be in the vicinities of points where the bombs fell were recounted over and over afterwards, especially the rumored kuwentong kutsero. This particular story was however not the usual idle narration by a kutsero but of a kutsero who, unfortunately and fortunately, was cruising his calesa just past the Anda Monument along Malecon Drive when the air raid sirens started to sound the alarm signals. As he steered his horse toward the tree-shaded Plaza de la Reina, the bombs started falling and among the first buildings hit in Intramuros was the Intendencia which was just off the south bank of the Pasig River . People in that building streamed out in panic and when a second wave of planes started strafing the area, the people were out of the streets in no time.
The poor kutsero who had been dragged by his frightened horse into the dim-lit vestibule of the bombed building noticed some paper money flapping on the cobblestone pavement. And picking up a few despite his terror of the moment came upon several bundles of newly minted bills which he shakingly stowed under the seat of his calesa.
There were many versions of this yarn about a calesa driver who chanced upon big money during the first bombing of Manila . Whether the story is true or just ordinary kuwentong kutsero, it was not verified. However, it had also been bruited about that an untutored provinciano of a kutsero in Gagalangin suddenly moved his family out of their lowly lodgings to a pretentious house in Grace Park. And that this same provinciano has been seen afterwards to be better dressed and was smoking Tabacalera cigars instead of his usual La Insular itim.
From Guerrilla Memoirs - A Novel by Dominador Ilio. Quezon City 1993. Reprinted with permission
Preciosa Annalou M. Cenaon
BSBA Marketing
TF 1pm-2:30pm
I-A6
1. Whatv is the Significant of prodomination of the philippine independence on 1898?
Answer: When Aguinaldo declare the independence.The most significant achievement of Aguinaldo's Dictatorial Government was the proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite, on June 12, 1898. To show the capacity of self-goverment that the filipino was can make there own power. To be filipino independence to the other country.Aguinaldo's capitulation and oath of allegiance to the U.S. in April, 1901, brought peace. Because filipino really don't make other country to take over control the filipino.
2. Each the seperation of the church and state that necessary meantion of malolos institutes?
Answer: The spain was teach of the filipino to how we faith to our god.But spain was so cruel they teach filipino people with a power of law of spaniards. They take all land, respect, knowladge and law of goverment.Yes in Malolos constitution declare there freedom.When church and state seperation. The church said there are not anti-catholic but hummanly anti clierical.
3.Discuss the reasons behind the filipino-american war?
Answer: The reason behind the filipino american war was american want to take over the philippines. The american take care of aguinaldo. American treats aguinaldo as ally to the fight the common enemy. The american wear a mask to aguinaldo as a freind. Aguinaldo do not know the hidden agenda of american. Aguinaldo doesn't know what the true interest of americans. Americans wanted that the philippines was the first defense if there was a war filipino-spain.
American assume toi control the philippines.
4. What where the cultural changes brought about by the american to filipino?
Answer: American gave to filipino full support to against spaniards. But gave a hidden agenda to destroy also the philippines. American brought battle on the filipino.Visayas, laguna,cebu,mindanao. there must communicate to the muslim. american give study, education and so on. American succesful in cooping of american rule.American gave to filipino an individual freesom, health and welfare, comerce, transfortation and comunication, languege and literature and most important is politica consciuosness. Opened the path to an understandiong of american benovelent policy through schools, religios missions and medical works.
5. How did the militants group in the country operate during the american administration?
Answer:Aguinaldo tried his best to relax the american-filipino tension. He tried to conversation on america. But american backfight to aguinaldo.Under general luna good position to give bsttle to enemy. aguinaldo did not agree to luna. Luna showed his terrible temper.He ordered that the house of american burned.General Gregorio Del pilar defend the filipino lines.
6. Hoe did President Manuel L. Quezon impliments the social justice program under his administration?
Answer: Manuel L. Quezon did the social justice duringhis administration because to ensure the well beaing and economic security of all the people to be cncern of the state. To improve of alot of people to make is imposible for the rich and powerful. To achieved by protecting the tao' from exploitation seeing to it that he got what was rightly due him, fair treatment, proper living and working condistions and just compensation for his labor.
7. Discuss the grousome picture of the filipino during the 2nd world war?
Answer; I thankful that i am not born during that time. Its horrible, fearful, frighful because there so many americans millitary there anti-tank crew fires, machined-gunned there atomic bomb.Shocks Maybe end of the world. If i thre i must go die living in scary. there so many people died.There so many heared bomb and gun.You dont know how the end of this war.
Jemelyn Buyan
BSBA Marketing
TF- 1:00pm-2:30pm
I-A6
1. What is the significant of the proclamation of the philippines independents 1898?
Answer:
To inspire the people to fight more eagerly against the spaniards and at the same time, lead the foreign countries to recognize the independence of the country.
2. Is the seperation of church and state is necessary as mention in malolos constitution? Defend your answer.
Answer:
Yes, Because the state recognize the freedom and equality of all religions, as well the separation of the church and state.
3. Discuss the reason behind the filipino-american war.
Answer:
The filipino-american war was not an exception, particularly because the combants belonged to two different races and civilization. In judging filipino brutality, however, one must remember that the filipinos having the victims of american apostacy and imperialistic.
4. What where the cultural changes wrote about the american to filipino?
Answer:
The cultural changes was the adoption of american words and phrases in the national language.
5. How did the militants group in the country operate during the american aministration?
Answer:
Otis regarded the 2 aguinaldo proclamation as tantamount to war. He quietly strengthened the american observation post and alerted his troops.
6.How did president Manuel L. Quezonm impliment the social justice program under this administration?
Answer:
Quezon had to commit himself and his nacianalista party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture during the world war II?
Anwer:
During the war, the filipino was waiting for the hour he would be arrested and tortured. There was no safety, There were only fears.
KEVIN L. TALABOC
American colonial period (1898–1943, 1945–1946)
Little was known by the United States of the existence of the Philippine archipelago, and it was not until Cuba appeared on the scene in 1895 that the islands came to the attention of the U.S. The Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam were dragged along into the conflicts of independence, since these colonies also began to rebel at the same time. The U.S. at that time was an emerging nation and looking for ways to compete as one of the world powers. Cuba's War of Independence with Spain was the perfect solution for the Americans. While the U.S. wanted to help these people fight for independence, they also took a serious interest in occupying and controlling these colonies and making them their own.
Conquest by U.S. (1898)
In November 1897, William McKinley demanded that Cuba be granted independence, and pressured and abused Spain for its wrongdoings. On January 25, 1898, U.S. forces began arriving in Cuba and on February 15, 1898 the American battleship USS Maine exploded, killing 269. The Americans blamed the Spanish for the incident, when in fact it was later discovered to have been an accidental malfunction of the gas generators inside the battleship which caused the explosion.[citation needed] The Americans retaliated and went to war with the Spanish in Cuba, and then moved on to the Philippines on May 1 in the same year, where they fought both the Spaniards and Filipinos.
As war between the United States and Spain became a distinct possibility, the commander of the U.S. Asiatic Squadron, Commodore George Dewey, had discussions with some in Emilio Aguinaldo's government in exile in Singapore and Hong Kong.
On April 25, 1898, the United States declared war on Spain and the Secretary of the Navy, Theodore Roosevelt, ordered Dewey to attack the Spanish fleet in the Philippines. The Battle of Manila Bay was one of the first hostile engagements of the Spanish-American War. In the darkness before dawn, Commodore Dewey's ships passed under the siege guns on the island of Corregidor at the entrance to Manila Bay and by noon on May 1, 1898 had destroyed the Spanish fleet.
On May 1, 1898 the United States of America went to the Pacific and fought the Spaniards in the Spanish colony of the Philippines. (see: Spanish-American War). The U.S. Navy under Admiral George Dewey attacked the Spanish Navy by sea in Manila Bay while the Filipino forces, led by General Emilio Aguinaldo allied with the U.S., who convinced the Filipinos they were there to help them fight for independence, also attacked by land, which resulted in a Spanish surrender.
After the Spanish fleet was destroyed Aguinaldo arrived back in the Philippines on May 19, 1898 and resumed command of his rebel forces. The Filipino rebels routed the demoralized Spanish forces in the provinces and laid siege to Manila. From the balcony of his house in Cavite, Emilio Aguinaldo proclaimed the independence of the Philippines on June 12, 1898.
Faced with inevitable defeat, Spain was forced to cede the Philippines to the United States in exchange for 20 million United States dollars with the Treaty of Paris in 1898.
The Filipinos, under General Aguinaldo, declared victory and proclaimed their independence on June 12, 1898 in Cavite. Aguinaldo was elected by the Filipino people and became the first President of the Philippines. This act was opposed by the United States, which had plans to take over the country.
Whatever understanding Dewey and Aguinaldo may have reached in Hong Kong prior to the war, neither could have appreciated the full extent of the geopolitical forces at play. By late May, the newly appointed Admiral Dewey had received instructions to distance himself from Aguinaldo and his independence cause.
Bonghanoy,Jessica Ann T.
1:00-2:30 pm (TF)
Prof. Delia
1.What is the significance of the proclamationof the Philippine Indipendence in 1898.?
~The significanceof proclamation of the Philippine Indipendence in 1898 was to get the freedomthey need into American.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessarymentioned in Malolos Constition.
~The separation begin begin when Filipino againts in the Christianity brought by the american's it simply that Filipino was in state that time.
3. Discuss the reason behind the Filipino-American War.
~The reason behind in Filipino-American War is to the Filipino by the American after they helped Filipino fight to Kastila they is the one who fight to them.
4. What were the cultural chages brought about by the American's to the Filipino.?
~The cultural changes brought by the american is the Christianity to believe the Filipino that there is the Lord who guide us.
5. How didi the Militant Groups in the country operate during the American Administration.?
~They operate only ripple and canyons and the American Administration teach them.
6. How did Pres. Manuel Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration.?
~He teach the social justice program under his administration how to be a former social justice.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture of the Philippines during the World War II...
~The Philippines during the World War II was very ridiculous in my imagination because there so many people died in war also many places were crashed.
thank you
Bonghanoy,Jessica Ann T.
1:00-2:30 pm (TF)
Prof. Delia
1.What is the significance of the proclamationof the Philippine Indipendence in 1898.?
~The significanceof proclamation of the Philippine Indipendence in 1898 was to get the freedomthey need into American.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessarymentioned in Malolos Constition.
~The separation begin begin when Filipino againts in the Christianity brought by the american's it simply that Filipino was in state that time.
3. Discuss the reason behind the Filipino-American War.
~The reason behind in Filipino-American War is to the Filipino by the American after they helped Filipino fight to Kastila they is the one who fight to them.
4. What were the cultural chages brought about by the American's to the Filipino.?
~The cultural changes brought by the american is the Christianity to believe the Filipino that there is the Lord who guide us.
5. How didi the Militant Groups in the country operate during the American Administration.?
~They operate only ripple and canyons and the American Administration teach them.
6. How did Pres. Manuel Quezon implement the social justice program under his administration.?
~He teach the social justice program under his administration how to be a former social justice.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture of the Philippines during the World War II...
~The Philippines during the World War II was very ridiculous in my imagination because there so many people died in war also many places were crashed.
thank you
HISTORY 1
JINKY LEI BABAS TF- 1:00-2:30 PM
PROF. DELIA MAGLAQUI
1. What is the significant of the Philippines independence in 1898?
Proclamation of Philippine Independence. June 12, 1898.
General Emilio Aguinaldo proclaimed Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite. During the event, Marcha Nacional Filipina, which what would become the National Anthem composed by Julian Felipe, was played by the band of San Francisco de Malabon and the Philippine national flag was hoisted in public.
2. Is the separation of the church and state necessary as mentioned in the Malolos institution? Depend your answer.
No. The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines declares: The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable. (Article II, Section 6), and, No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights. (Article III, Section 5).
3. Discuss the reason behind the Filipino-American war.
Some American interests had reason to fear that leaving the Philippines to the mercy of other foreign powers might not be in the best interests of the United States.By late July, 12,000 American troops had arrived from San Francisco. The Spanish governor, Fermin Jaudenes, negotiated the surrender of Manila with an arranged show of resistance that preserved Spanish sensibilities of honour and excluded Aguinaldo's Filipinos. The Americans took possession of Manila on August 13, 1898.As it became apparent that the United States did not intend to recognize Philippine independence, Aguinaldo moved his capital in September from Cavite to the more defensible Malolos in Bulacan. That same month, the United States and Spain began their peace negotiations in Paris.The Treaty of Paris was signed on December 10, 1898. By the Treaty, Cuba gained its independence and Spain ceded the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States for the sum of US$20 million.Disappointed at having lost the opportunity to acquire the Philippines as a colony, Germany applied diplomatic pressure during the Paris negotiations to block the American request for the Caroline Islands. Spain subsequently sold the Caroline and Marianas Islands (less Guam) to Germany.The Treaty of Paris was not well received by some in the Philippines. Filipino nationalists were incensed at the United States bargaining away control of the Philippines for a price of US$20 million without consulting the Filipinos. Without any government it is unclear who the United States should have consulted with.Given its own history of colonial revolution, some American public opinion was uncomfortable and divided on the moral principle of owning colonial dependencies. Having acquired the Philippines almost by accident, the United States was not sure what to do with them. On January 20, 1899, President McKinley appointed the First Philippine Commission (Schurman Commission) to make recommendations.Aguinaldo, seeking Philippine independence and a presidency, did not need recommendations to decide what he would do. On January 23, 1899 he proclaimed the Malolos Constitution and the First Philippine Republic.Heated tensions between some Filipinos and Americans began to mount rapidly when locals found that the U.S. were there to control and occupy the archipelago and not turn it over to Aguinaldo's provisional government. On the night of February 4, 1899 a provisional Filipino soldier was shot dead by a U.S. soldier at a U.S. military checkpoint on San Juan Bridge. The Filipino soldier was trying to cross a ceasefire line in what is now Sociego Street in San Juan, Manila. Though Aguinaldo initially had asked for a ceasefire with the Americans, this was the incident that they were waiting for to try taking over the Philippines by force. Word of events that happened in the Philippines did not reach the ears of the American people because there was little or no intereset or United States newspaper coverage of the Philippines.
4. What where the cultural changes brought about the American to the Filipinos?
In December 10, 1898, the Treaty of Paris was signed between Spain and the United States. The Philippines was sold for the the sum of $20,000,000 to the United States. This started another three year period of struggle, this time against America. In Philippine history, this was called the Philippine-American war, but in American history, this was called the Philippine Insurrection. This was America's first war outside of the United States. Roughly 700,000 Filipinos lost their lives versus America's 10,000 dead. Villages were massacred, sometimes to include 10 year old children because they were thought old enough to bear arms. However bad America started, it made up for it later. It built the Philippines slowly, bringing education to the masses, the protestant religion and a different way of life. American influence brought a new language, food, music, religion and dance patterns. For example, it brought the Fox Trot tempo to Filipino music as in the song "Meandering Juaning".
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American administration?
The First Philippine Republic, which was the rightful goal of the Revolution against Spain, was inaugurated in January 23, 1899. Less than two weeks later, the infant Republic became involved in the Filipino-American War. America, which came projecting itself as an ally was exposed in the Treaty of Paris for having entered into an agreement with Spain that nullified the gains of the Filipinos. This treaty became America's legal claim for sovereignty in the islands.
A longer and bloodier war ensued for more than three years. This is glaring evidence that the infant Republic enjoyed the full support of the populace. The invaders minimized this into a Philippine Insurrection against the United States. Part of the strategy to minimize Filipino resistance was the establishment of a civil government in the pacified areas. Positions in the provincial and municipal government lured many of the leaders to collaborate with the Americans. The Philippine Commission, established by the Americans as the civil counterpart of the invading military, legislated the Sedition Law in 1901. This prohibited the advocacy of independence in the occupied areas. Superior forces and discipline of the enemy led to the surrender of Aguinaldo two years later. Some Filipino generals continued the fight but by May of the next year, Miguel Malvar who was the last leader with official links to the Republic also surrendered.
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement social justice program under his administration?
His main concerns were directed at bringing about political stability, and strengthening an economy extremely dependent upon the United States. His presidency was notable for taking executive and legislative action to implement his "social justice" program aimed at the underprivileged. Quezon promoted the settlement and development of the large southern island of Mindanao, and fought graft and corruption in the government.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture during the Second World War.
"The gun crews of a Navy cruiser covering American landing on the island of Mindoro, Dec. 15, 1944, scan the skies in an effort to identify a plane overhead. Two 5'' (127mm) guns are ready while inboard 20mm anti-aircraft crews are ready to act." "A line of Coast Guard landing barges, sweeping through the waters of Lingayen Gulf, carries the first wave of invaders to the beaches of Luzon, after a terrific naval bombardment of Jap shore positions on Jan. 9, 1945." PhoM1c. Ted Needham. "Gen. Douglas MacArthur wades ashore during initial landings at Leyte, P.I." October 1944. "Two Coast Guard-manned LST's open their great jaws in the surf that washes on Leyte Island beach, as soldiers strip down and build sandbag piers out to the ramps to speed up unloading operations." "Veteran Artillery men of the `C' Battery, 90th Field Artillery, lay down a murderous barrage on troublesome Jap artillery positions in Balete Pass, Luzon, P.I." Morton, April 19, 1945.
The Second World War was documented on a huge scale by thousands of photographers and artists who created millions of pictures. American military photographers representing all of the armed services covered the battlefronts around the world. Every activity of the war was depicted--training, combat, support services, and much more. On the home front, the many federal war agencies produced and collected pictures, posters, and cartoons on such subjects as war production, rationing, and civilian relocation.
CHRISTIAN JOY AGCAOILI
1. WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANT OF THE PROCLAMATION OF PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE 1898?
*Proclamation of Philippine Independence
The most significant achievement of Aguinaldo's Dictatorial Government was the proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite, on June 12, 1898. The day was declared a national holiday. Thousands of people from the provinces gathered in Kawit to witness the historic event. The ceremony was solemnly held at the balcony of General Emilio Aguinaldo's residence. The military and civil officials of the government were in attendance.
A dramatic feature of the ceremony was the formal unfurling of the Filipino flag amidst the cheers of the people. At the same time, the Philippine National Anthem was played by the band. Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista solemnly read the "Act of the Declaration of Independence" which he himself wrote. The declaration was signed by 98 persons. One of the signers was an American, L.M. Johnson, Colonel of Artillery
2. IS THE SEPERATION THE CHRUCH AND STATE NECESSARY AS MENTIONED IN THE MALOLOS CONSTITUTION?
*The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and the State.
*."Church and state are separate, the effects are happy, and they do not at all interfere with each other: but where they have been confounded together, no tongue or pen can fully describe the mischief’s that have ensued."
*One of the most ironic aspects of the current assault on separation of church and state is that the apostles of religious correctness have managed to obscure the broad and tolerant origins of the godless Constitution, which was written and ratified by a coalition of Enlightenment rationalists and evangelical Christians equally fearful of entanglements between religion and government.
*"It is true that the literal phrase 'separation of church and state' does not appear in the Constitution, but that does not mean the concept isn't there.
*As eminent church-state scholar Leo Pfeiffer notes in his book, Church, State and Freedom, "It is true, of course, that the phrase 'separation of church and state' does not appear in the Constitution. But it was inevitable that some convenient term should come into existence to verbalize a principle so clearly and widely held by the American people....The right to a fair trial is generally accepted to be a constitutional principle; yet the term 'fair trial' is not found in the Constitution. To bring the point even closer home, who would deny that 'religious liberty' is a constitutional principle? Yet that phrase too is not in the Constitution. The universal acceptance which all these terms, including 'separation of church and state”.
3. DISCUSS THE REASON BEHIND THE FILIPINOS-AMERICAN WAR.
* In 1896, the Filipinos broke out in full-scale revolution against the Spaniards. Ah, they had had too much of Spanish oppression, too much of Spanish control, and they had lost virtually their rights and they were living as secondary -- second-class citizens. And, therefore, Filipinos who had held sporadic revolts before 1896, culminated and got together to launch a major nationwide revolution against the Spaniards in 1896. That revolution started in August of 1896 and continued roughly until December, 1897. Ah, the Spaniards had more weapons and they were better trained, they were better organized than the Filipinos. Although the Filipinos had the fighting spirit and the morale and the spirit to fight, they didn't have the arms. They didn't have the organization nor the training and because of this, by Aug -- by December of 1897, ah, Aguinaldo, who was president of the -- who was leader of the revolutionaries at that time, had to yield to the Spaniards and sign a cease fire, which was called the Pact of Biaknabato. And, therefore, by 1898 you have the main-- major leaders of the Philippine revolution outside the Philippines and in Hong Kong. And that was the situation when the Spanish-American War broke out in 1898.
At the start of Spanish-American War, the leaders of the Philippine revolution were actually in Hong Kong as a result of the Pact of Biaknabato, which stopped the major part of the fighting in 1897. While Aguinaldo was in Hong Kong, he met with the American consul there -- actually the first American consul he met was in Singapore, as Aguinaldo was in Singapore when the Spanish-American War was just about to break out. And realizing that the war was about to break out, he got in touch with the American consul there, a certain consul, Pratt, who promised that the American would lend aid to the Filipino revolutionaries should Aguinaldo be able to go back to the Philippines. Consul Pratt also made a very characteristic statement where he said that the Americans would not take over the Philippines, because, he pointed to the case of Cuba, if the Americans had no interest in taking over Cuba, then what more the Philippines, which was thousands of miles away? And when he went back to Hong Kong, he also met with the American consul there, Consul Wildman, and Consul Wildman virtually told him the same thing. So Aguinaldo was buoyed up by the promise of American aid for the Filipinos to win their independence and Aguinaldo believed that the Americans would pull out after independence was achieved.
4. WHAT WERE THE CULTURAL CHANGES BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE AMERICANS TO THE FILIPINOS?
Filipino culture is strongly influenced by both Western and Eastern traditions. It is a mix of native (Austronesian), Spanish, Mexican, American, Negrito and Chinese cultures.
Before the Spanish arrived, the Filipinos did not think of themselves as one people. The Spaniards came in 1565, and brought with them Spanish culture. They soon spread to the islands making forts and schools, preaching Christianity, and converting the native peoples to the Catholic religion. When the United States colonized the islands in 1898, the Americans brought with them their culture, which has the strongest influence up to now. This makes the Philippines the most Westernized country in eastern Asia.
Each year major festivities called barrio fiestas are held. They commemorate the Patron saints of the towns, villages and regional districts. The festivities includes church services, street parades, fire works, feastings, dance contests and cockfights.
5. HOW DID THE MILITANT GROUPS IN THE COUNTRY OPERATE DURING THE AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION?
In his press conference at the White House last night, United States
President Bush said his administration has already had success rooting
out members of Osama bin Laden’s al Qaida network from nations other
than Afghanistan - referring to terrorist arrests in France and
Germany - and that it would be looking for al-Qaida cells around the
world.
The question uppermost in the minds of Malaysians is whether there are
al-Qaida cells in Malaysia.
This is because Malaysia has shot into international prominence and
"black-list" as one of the countries in Southeast Asia used by
al-Qaida operatives to carry out their terrorist designs, frequently
cited by the Western media, whether New York Times on Wednesday (as
the likely targets of future US covert and overt actions) or the
latest Time Daily on-line reporting on proposals by the United States
to expand its operations against Al-Qaida in places as far-flung as
the Philippines and Malaysia which "underscore the global reach of
Osama Bin Laden’s networks".
This sudden notoriety of Malaysia was further aggravated by CNN’s
round-the-clock coverage yesterday of the arrests of "six more
Afghan-trained KMM members" in Malaysia under the Internal Security
Act (ISA) - reinforcing the international impression that the country
has become a hub of terrorism, especially when countries like New
Zealand included Malaysia among the countries it is advising its
nationals against travelling to.
In reply to the statement by the United States Secretary of State
Colin Powell about al Qaeda network in Malaysia, Indonesia and the
Phillipines, Deputy Prime Mminister and Home Minister, Datuk Seri
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi could only ask for more information from the
United States - with the US Ambassador promising to fill in with the
latest available data.
This is most unsatisfactory, as it is the Malaysian government which
should be the final authority to know whether there are al-Qaeda cells
in the country or not, and not to have to depend on information from
American intelligence.
Could it be true that Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network, which
had used their training camps in Taliban Afghanistan as a kind of
international university of terrorism, extended their tentacles to
Malaysia by establishing cells in the country - to the total
ignorance of the government or had the Malaysian authorities closed
their eyes to the movements of such al Qaeda operatives so long as
they were "birds of passage"?
On Wednesday, the government detained six more persons, including a
PAS Youth leader, under the ISA alleging that they were Kumpulan
Militant Malaysia (KMM) members.
In Parliament yesterday, Abdullah said a large number of KMM members
were found to be Opposition supporters operating in its Terengganu and
Kelantan networks and that KMM was also active in Perak, Johor,
Kedah and Selangor.
Abdullah alleged that KMM was an underground movement established on
Oct 12, 1995, by Zainon Ismail, a former mujahidin in Afghanistan and
that it was taken over in early 1999 by Nik Adli Nik Abdul Aziz, the
son of the Kelantan Mentri Besar, Nik Aziz Nik Mat.
Although the revulsiion, fears and concerns from the September 11
terrorist attacks have created the conditions where Malaysians are
prepared to give the authorities greater benefit of doubt about the
necessity for draconian pre-emptive security measures, the fact is
that the government has failed to offer any concrete evidence in the
past two months to satisfy Malaysians of the actual existence of the
KMM.
When the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Norian Mai first
announced on 3rd August 2001 the arrest of eight persons under the ISA
for being members of a local militant religious group with
international terrorist links, he identified KMM as Kumpulan
Mujahideen Malaysia - on the ground that "they had previously
undergone military training with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan or
have actually fought in the jihad wars there".
When Nik Adli, was detained the next day under the ISA, the
authorities as well as the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir
Mohamad openly associated him with the Kumpulan Mujahideen Malaysia.
In Parliament, during the emergency debate on the ISA arrests on 8th
August 2001, the Deputy Home Minister, Datuk Zainal Abidin Zin
specifically alleged that Nik Adli was the head of the Kumpulan
Mujaheedin Malaysia and that it was
linked with several cases of robberies and violence.
On 9th August, Abdullah himself said that the police were
investigating whether the Kumpulan Mujaheedin Malaysia received
support from foreign sources, including financing for their
activities.
When a former Institut Teknologi Mara (ITM) graduate from Johore,
Taufik Abdul Halim, 26, was arrested by Indonesian police over the
bombing of two churches and a shopping mall in Jakarta, he was linked
to the Kumpulan Majaheedin Malaysia although his subsequent denial
was virtually ignored by the mainstream media.
Ten days after Norian Mai’s first "revelation" about the Kumpulan
Mujaheedin Malaysia, however, the term suddenly disappeared from
official usage, as KMM underwent an unannounced change of identity to
become "Kumpulan Militant
Malaysia"!
What was the reason for this sudden change of identity and the
charade of police and government pretence that this change of identity
of the KMM had never taken place - compounding the problem of the
government’s credibility?
The much-promised White Paper on the KMM must be tabled in the current
meeting of Parliament to present the government’s case for the ISA
detentions of 19 persons for involvement with the KMM.
The Foreign Minister, Datuk Syed Hamid Albar said in August that the
number of militant groups in Malaysia was small and they did not
affect the image or security of the nation as the government knew
about their existence and was taking stern action against those
involved in militant activities.
6. HOW DID PRESIDENT MANUEL L. QUEZON IMPLEMENT THE SOCIAL JUSTICE PROGRAM UNDER HIS ADMINISTRATION?
President Manuel L. Quezon believed in the worth and significance of the common man. This belief is at the heart of his campaign for social justice which he championed throughout his presidency.
President Quezon sought to achieve social justice by protecting the rights of laborers through legislation and personal projects, and by creating more jobs for the common man. He believed that work is the measure of a man therefore man must be allowed to improve his lot and the government must help him. He empowered the disenfranchised: women were given the right to vote, tenants a chance to own land, laborers protection from ill working conditions. He put in place an effective educational system and provided the poor with knowledge and skills to better themselves.
He strove to protect our country from dangerous class wars, a danger that persists to this day. He envisioned a country united despite differences in social class and creed, and a time when this campaign for social justice would no logger be necessary. He appealed to each Filipino’s moral impulse to protect his fellowman.
This exhibit traces one man’s efforts to ensure justice for all and to unite them all under one nation. Let it be a testament. Let it be a lesson to all generations.
7. DISCUSS THE GREWSAME PICTURE OF THE PHILIPPINE DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR.
War came suddenly to the Philippines on Dec. 8 (Dec. 7, U.S. time), 1941, when Japan attacked without warning. Japanese troops invaded the islands in many places and launched a pincer drive on Manila. Macarthur’s scattered defending forces (about 80,000 troops, four fifths of them Filipinos) were forced to withdraw to Bataan Peninsula and Corregidor Island, where they entrenched and tried to hold until the arrival of reinforcements, meanwhile guarding the entrance to Manila Bay and denying that important harbor to the Japanese. But no reinforcements were forthcoming. The Japanese occupied Manila on Jan. 2, 1942. MacArthur was ordered out by President Roosevelt and left for Australia on Mar. 11; Lt. Gen. Jonathan Wainwright assumed command.
The besieged U.S.-Filipino army on Bataan finally crumbled on Apr. 9, 1942. Wainwright fought on from Corregidor with a garrison of about 11,000 men; he was overwhelmed on May 6, 1942. After his capitulation, the Japanese forced the surrender of all remaining defending units in the islands by threatening to use the captured Bataan and Corregidor troops as hostages. Many individual soldiers refused to surrender, however, and guerrilla resistance, organized and coordinated by U.S. and Philippine army officers, continued throughout the Japanese occupation.
Japan's efforts to win Filipino loyalty found expression in the establishment (Oct. 14, 1943) of a “Philippine Republic,” with José P. Laurel, former Supreme Court justice, as president. But the people suffered greatly from Japanese brutality, and the puppet government gained little support. Meanwhile, President Quezon, who had escaped with other high officials before the country fell, set up a government-in-exile in Washington. When he died (Aug., 1944), Vice President Sergio Osmeña became president. Osmeña returned to the Philippines with the first liberation forces, which surprised the Japanese by landing (Oct. 20, 1944) at Leyte, in the heart of the islands, after months of U.S. air strikes against Mindanao. The Philippine government was established at Tacloban, Leyte, on Oct. 23.
The landing was followed (Oct. 23–26) by the greatest naval engagement in history, called variously the battle of Leyte Gulf and the second battle of the Philippine Sea. A great U.S. victory, it effectively destroyed the Japanese fleet and opened the way for the recovery of all the islands. Luzon was invaded (Jan., 1945), and Manila was taken in February. On July 5, 1945, MacArthur announced “All the Philippines are now liberated.” The Japanese had suffered over 425,000 dead in the Philippines.
The Philippine congress met on June 9, 1945, for the first time since its election in 1941. It faced enormous problems. The land was devastated by war, the economy destroyed, the country torn by political warfare and guerrilla violence. Osmeña's leadership was challenged (Jan., 1946) when one wing (now the Liberal party) of the Nationalist party nominated for president Manuel Roxas, who defeated Osmeña in April.
HISTORY 1 Prof. Delia Maglaqui
Ivy Von A. Ortiz 1:00-2:30 pm
1. What is the significance of the proclamation of Philippine Independence?
-Proclamation of Philippine Independence. June 12, 1898.
General Emilio Aguinaldo proclaimed Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite. During the event, Marcha Nacional Filipina, which what would become the National Anthem composed by Julian Felipe, was played by the band of San Francisco de Malabon and the Philippine national flag was hoisted in public. The proclamation of Philippine Independence was, however, promulgated on August 1 when many towns had already been organized under the rules laid down by the Dictatorial Government.
2. Is the separation of the Church and State necessary as mentioned in the Malolos institution? Depend your answer.
-No, because the partisians won by only one vote-that of Pablo Tecson. Thus the Caldeon project of making Catholicism the state religion was defeated. The provision on the subject of state religion was then amended to real, the Article 5. The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religious, as well as the separation of the church and state.
3. Discuss the reason behind the Filipino-American war.
-It begins with the suspicious and doubts of the Filipino to the Americans. Aguinaldo wondered why that in spite of the fact that the Spaniards were then at the mercy of the Filipino troops, American reinforcements continued to pour on in numbers. His suspicions of ultimate American intentions, however, he kept to himself. But then the other Filipino leaders were harboring the same suspicions and expressed his doubts as to American intentions and warned Aguinaldo to be careful because it seems that the Americans want to fool them and they suggested that batteries be mounted in certain places to prevent the Americans from passing through them. But then the American and the Filipino fight.
4. What where the cultural changes brought about the American to the Filipinos?
-the cultural changes brought about by the Americans to us are Progress in Education, the greatest contribution of the United States to Philippine Civilization is the system of the public education. Public Health Welfare, introduction of scientific program of public health and welfare. Trade, Commerce and Industry, Transportation and communication, Individual freedoms, Political consciousness and Language and Literature.
5. How did the militant groups in the country operate during the American administration?
The First Philippine Republic, which was the rightful goal of the Revolution against Spain, was inaugurated in January 23, 1899. Less than two weeks later, the infant Republic became involved in the Filipino-American War. America, which came projecting itself as an ally was exposed in the Treaty of Paris for having entered into an agreement with Spain that nullified the gains of the Filipinos. This treaty became America's legal claim for sovereignty in the islands.
A longer and bloodier war ensued for more than three years. This is glaring evidence that the infant Republic enjoyed the full support of the populace. The invaders minimized this into a Philippine Insurrection against the United States. Part of the strategy to minimize Filipino resistance was the establishment of a civil government in the pacified areas. Positions in the provincial and municipal government lured many of the leaders to collaborate with the Americans. The Philippine Commission, established by the Americans as the civil counterpart of the invading military, legislated the Sedition Law in 1901. This prohibited the advocacy of independence in the occupied areas. Superior forces and discipline of the enemy led to the surrender of Aguinaldo two years later. Some Filipino generals continued the fight but by May of the next year, Miguel Malvar who was the last leader with official links to the Republic also surrendered.
6. How did President Manuel L. Quezon implement social justice program under his administration?
-His main concerns were directed at bringing about political stability, and strengthening an economy extremely dependent upon the United States. His presidency was notable for taking executive and legislative action to implement his "social justice" program aimed at the underprivileged. Quezon promoted the settlement and development of the large southern island of Mindanao, and fought graft and corruption in the government.
7. Discuss the gruesome picture during the Second World War.
-the Philippines was look like a dungeon, because of the war and there is so many killings and our economic condition was very low.
Lea Joy Belinario
BSBA Bangking Ang Finace
TF 1:00pm-2:30pm
I-A6
1. What is the significant of the proclamation of the philippines on 1898?
Answer:
Emilio Aguinaldo is the one that declare independence in the philippines on 1898 the significant of the proclamation was the inspire the people to fight there friidom, rights and more eagerly against the spaniards and at the sametime lead the foreign countries to recognize the independence of the country.
2. Each the separation of the church and state necessary as mention in malolos constitution state your answer or depend your answer why?
Answer:
Yes. it is necessary to have a separation of the church and state the malolos constitution. Because according to artisle 5,the state recognize the freedom and equality of all religions as well the separation of the church and state. It means some filipinos who voted for the separation of the church and state, want to show not only thier rationalism and democratic orentation but also their keen sence of history. As the help of this article,filipino can felt the freedom for themselves and for our country.
3.Discuss the reason behind the filipino-american war?
Answer;
The reason behind the filipino and american war is the continuing struggle of the american for the independence of the filipinos. some americans specially bourgeouisie they dont want the filipinos have a freedom to their rights and also to their wants. americans want the filipinos to be their aliping sagigilid. As the of General Emilio Aguinaldo, the filipino-american war ended as far as the united states and filipino elites were concerned.
4.What the cultural changes brought about by the american to the filipinos during their administration.
Answer:
The cultural changesthat brought by the americans to the filipinos is the cultural communities, their cultural are opened the path to an understanding policy through schools, religious missions, their specially, medecal sork.
5.How did the militants groupsin the country operate during the american administraion.
Answer:
The filipino troops were poorly trained, pooly armed, poorly fed, and had the no discipline.
6. How did the President Manuel L. Quezon impliments the social justice during his administration.
Answer:
Quezon had to commit himself and his nationalista party to a platform that emphasized justice for the tao.
7. Discuss the grousome picture of the filipino during the 2nd world war.Imadgination.
Answer;
During the war, the filipino was waiting for the hour he would be arrested and turtured there was no safety, there were no only fears.
Rizal's Life in London
By: R.M. Sonza
Jose Rizal came to the United States on April 28, 1888. Because he was a “man of truth”, he had good and bad impression in that country which he wrote. The fine sides were (1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; (2) the drive and energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; and (5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. One dire side that Rizal saw was the lack of racial equality. It made Rizal avowed that America “is the land of par excellence of freedom but only for the whites.”
After he visited United States, he went back to London. He chose this city to be his second home for three reasons: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Filipinas, a rare copy which heard to be available in the British Museum and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish oppressions.
While he was in London, he had romance to Gertrude Beckett. Rizal called her affectionately as “Gettie”. He got attracted to her because he found exhilarating joy in Gertrude’s company. On cold winter morning, she had always a sunny smile for him. During family picnics, she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days, she helped Rizal in mixing colors for his painting and assisted in preparing the clay for sculpturing. But Rizal ended their romance because he realized that he could not marry her for he has to finish his mission.
To fulfill his urge to annotate Morga’s Sucesos, he happened to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character, he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British museum.
When he annotated Morga’s Sucesos, he spent many days reading in the room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines, such as those written by Fr. Chirino, Fr. Colin, Fr. Argensola, Fr. Plasencia, etc.
After the annotation of Rizal to the book which become a success, Blumentritt commended him but censured Rizal for two things which reveals the latter’s errors, namely: (1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and (2) Rizal’s attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
In this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. They had clothes, government, laws, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. He thus blasted the historical heresies of the Spanish writers who claimed that the early Filipinos were savages and was low mentality.
Early in September 1888, Rizal went to Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibilioteque Nationale. Then, he went to Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms.
While Rizal was busy in his historical studies in London, he learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusades for reforms because in that country, they have the freedom to express their opinions even in the government. It was inaugurated on December 31, 1888 with the following officers: Graciano Apacible, president Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice- president; Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
While Rizal was busy in hi research studies, he still had writings while he in London. They are: La Vision del Fray Rodriguez; Letter to the Young Women in Malolos; Specimen of Tagal Folklore; and Two Easter Fables.
Rizal's Life in London
By: R.M. Sonza
Jose Rizal came to the United States on April 28, 1888. Because he was a “man of truth”, he had good and bad impression in that country which he wrote. The fine sides were (1) the material progress of the country as shown in the great cities, huge farms, flourishing industries, and busy factories; (2) the drive and energy of the American people; (3) the natural beauty of the land; (4) the high standard of living; and (5) the opportunities for better life offered to poor immigrants. One dire side that Rizal saw was the lack of racial equality. It made Rizal avowed that America “is the land of par excellence of freedom but only for the whites.”
After he visited United States, he went back to London. He chose this city to be his second home for three reasons: (1) to improve his knowledge of the English language, (2) to study and annotate Morga’s Sucesos de las Filipinas, a rare copy which heard to be available in the British Museum and (3) London was a safe place for him to carry on his fight against Spanish oppressions.
While he was in London, he had romance to Gertrude Beckett. Rizal called her affectionately as “Gettie”. He got attracted to her because he found exhilarating joy in Gertrude’s company. On cold winter morning, she had always a sunny smile for him. During family picnics, she gave him all her attention. And in rainy days, she helped Rizal in mixing colors for his painting and assisted in preparing the clay for sculpturing. But Rizal ended their romance because he realized that he could not marry her for he has to finish his mission.
To fulfill his urge to annotate Morga’s Sucesos, he happened to know Dr. Reinhold Rost, the librarian of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an authority on Malayan languages and customs. Dr. Rost was impressed by Rizal’s learning and character, he gladly recommended him to the authorities of the British museum.
When he annotated Morga’s Sucesos, he spent many days reading in the room of the British Museum poring over the pages of this book and laboriously reading the old histories of the Philippines, such as those written by Fr. Chirino, Fr. Colin, Fr. Argensola, Fr. Plasencia, etc.
After the annotation of Rizal to the book which become a success, Blumentritt commended him but censured Rizal for two things which reveals the latter’s errors, namely: (1) Rizal commits the error of many historians in appraising the events of the past in the light of present standards and (2) Rizal’s attacks on the Church were unfair and unjustified because the abuses of the friars should not be construed to mean that Catholicism is bad.
In this historical work, Rizal proved that the Filipinos were already civilized before the advent of Spain. They had clothes, government, laws, literature, religion, arts, sciences and commerce with neighboring Asian nations. He thus blasted the historical heresies of the Spanish writers who claimed that the early Filipinos were savages and was low mentality.
Early in September 1888, Rizal went to Paris for a week, in order to search for more historical materials in the Bibilioteque Nationale. Then, he went to Madrid and Barcelona. He contacted his compatriots and surveyed the political situation with regards to the agitation for Philippine reforms.
While Rizal was busy in his historical studies in London, he learned that the Filipinos in Barcelona were planning to establish a patriotic society which would cooperate in the crusades for reforms because in that country, they have the freedom to express their opinions even in the government. It was inaugurated on December 31, 1888 with the following officers: Graciano Apacible, president Graciano Lopez Jaena, vice- president; Manuel Santa Maria, secretary; Mariano Ponce, treasurer; and Jose Ma. Panganiban, accountant.
While Rizal was busy in hi research studies, he still had writings while he in London. They are: La Vision del Fray Rodriguez; Letter to the Young Women in Malolos; Specimen of Tagal Folklore; and Two Easter Fables.
The American Occupation
Bulusan Lake. Photographed by Julie Dato
Color is everywhere in the Philippines. Photographed by Juliette Louis-Servais
A mosaic of all shades of green.
Water Buffalo-The most hardworking asian animal
Secluded cove on the way to Calapan
or go to the photo album
Also in History of the Philippines:
Pre-Spanish Period
The Spanish Colonial Period
The Heroic Filipinos
Important Events in Philippine History
With the assurance of the Americans’ promise to free the country, General Aguinaldo, a municipal mayor and the commander of the Philippine forces, declared the Philippine independence on June 12, 1898. He confirmed the establishment of Philippine Republic on January 23, 1899 with himself as president.
The Spanish rule in the islands ended when Spain and the United States signed the treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898. It was an agreement between the two countries to pass the possession of the Philippines to the United States in exchange of $20 million. Not being able to consult the Filipinos, this arrogant settlement resulted to a new resistance and battle for freedom.
By the time the treaty of Paris was ratified, conflict between Filipino forces and Americans had broken out due to strong resistance of the Filipinos against the US sovereignty over the islands and the uncertain grant of independence. Aguinaldo led the revolutionary movement and fought the Americans for two years. His capture in March 1901 ended the resistance and gave the US a clear course on setting out their colonial establishment in the country. William Howard Taft was the one chosen to handle the position of presidency and at the same time as chief justice.
The invasion of the Americans moved the Filipinos to a more unfamiliar authority. English was chosen to be the official language of instruction in businesses and schools, the economy flourished and the country’s economy begun relying on the US. Under the supremacy of Governor Taft, systems were regulated in most districts. New government organizations were established along with the general establishments of schools and other related institutions. Construction of roads, highways, and ports were prioritized to consolidate more business all over the country.
Despite the growth of industrialization, the Filipinos never gave up their desire for independence. In early 1900’s Filipinos were given the opportunity to participate in politics. This gave them the chance to hold positions in the government and express themselves more liberally. It was during the proclamation of Manuel L. Quezon in 1935 as the president of the Philippine Commonwealth under the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 that assured the Filipinos of freedom and self reliance. This act however, didn’t fully grant the country of complete autonomy. The US, under what they called the transition period, retained power on national defense and foreign affairs before granting the Philippines its absolute independence. This transition period took ten years more.
Summary Report of Chapter 5
By: R.M. Sonza
Mon-Wed 11:30-1:00
After Rizal had finished the first course in Philosophy and Letters, he transferred in medical school in the University of Sto. Thomas, he became loyal to the Ateneo by participating in extra-curricular activities where he completed his course in surveying. As a Thomasian, he won more literary laurels, had romances with pretty girls and fought the Spaniards.
After he graduated in Ateneo, his mother opposed him to go to Sto Thomas for higher education. Rizal was surprised that her mother opposed with regards to education. His mother is afraid that Rizal might end like what happened to the Gom-Bur-Za.
When he entered in Sto. Thomas, he took Philosophy and Letters because of two reasons: (1) his father liked it and (2) he is still uncertain of what course to pursue. He asked the advice of father Ramon Pablo and the latter said that he should take medical course.
Rizal finishes the course of surveying having the title of perito agrimensor. He also obtained gold medal in agriculture and topography. He had several romances while studying in Sto. Thomas which are: (1) Miss L, (2) Leonor Valenzuela, and (3) Leonor Rivera.
When Rizal was a medical student, he became a victim of Spanish Officer’s brutality. When he complained, nothing happened because of the fact that he is an Indio.
Rizal made a literary poem entitled To the Filipino Youth which won first in a literary contest. The Council of the Gods which he wrote also won first in another literary contest.
While Rizal was in Sto. Thoma, he built a society of Filipino students which he called Companerismo which fought Spaniards students.
Ater Rizal finished his medical course; he pursued his higher education by deciding to study abroad.
Pre finals mw 11:30 am – 1:00 pm
1) What evidences were used by the Spanish to charge Rizal with the crime complex reflection through illegal association? Where these evidences sufficient to warrant communism of the different crime? Support your answer.
Answer:
He admitted that he wrote the Constitution of the La Liga Filipina which was merely a civic association. And pleaded not guilty to the crime of rebellion. The power in that time is in the Spaniards, even though evidences were not sufficient still Rizal was accused.
2) Who defended Rizal during his trial in the military court? How did he defend Rizal?
Answer:
The only right given to Rizal by the Spanish authorities was to choose his defense counsel. A list from 100 first and second lieutenants in the Spanish Army was presented to Rizal. It was Don Luis Taviel de Andrade. He gladly accepted the task.
3) How did Rizal defend himself when he was given opportunity by military court to do so?
Answer:
When Lt. Taviel de Andrade took his seat, the court asked Rizal whether he had to say anything to say. Rizal then read a12 point supplement to his defense which he wrote in his prison cell.
4) Why was Rizal’s trial a clear case of mistrial?
Answer:
The trial of Rizal was an eloquent proof of Spanish injustice and misrule. Being a civilian, he was tried by a military court composed of alien military. The military court met not to give him justice, but to accuse and condemn him.
5) How did Rizal spend his last 24 hours on earth? If you’re Rizal will you do the same?
Answer:
He was busy meeting visitors, including Jesuit priests, Josephine Bracken and members of family, a Spanish newspaper correspondent, some friends, and secretly finishing his farewell poem.
6) What values did Rizal manifest in the letter he wrote prior to his execution? Support your answer.
Answer:
The love he had for his country.
He asked for the forgiveness for all the pain he cause for his family.
7) In your opinion, how did Rizal’s had influence the history of our nation?
Answer:
Nowadays, Rizal was an idol to every youth. The sacrifices he made were proven not a waste. You can see most of his works and monuments in the Philippines. And even outside the country, proving that even outside the country Rizal is still recognize to be a national hero.
8) What evidences and arguments and acted by those who believe Rizal, retracted his Masonic views before he died by these who believes otherwise?
Answer:
??
9) In your opinion, did Rizal died a catholic or a man, justify your answer.
Answer:
For me, Rizal died a man with a reason. Because he fulfilled his dreams to open the eyes of many Filipino people.
10)Who made Rizal a national hero? What are the evidences that can be proof that Rizal as deserving to be a national hero.
Answer:
He is considered to be a national hero and martyr of our nation. Because, as a towering figure in the propaganda campaign, he took an “admirable part” in that movement which roughly covered the period from 1882 to 1896. He made many writings which lead to the patriotism of Filipino people.
Post a Comment