site banner
Soriek  11mo ago (text post)   1330 thread views

Transnational Thursdays 28

Apologies if this is a double post. I posted the original earlier but was told it appears as deleted to other users. Here's hoping it works this time.

This is a weekly thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or IR history. I usually start off with coverage of some current events from a mix of countries I follow personally and countries I think the forum lives in or might be interested in. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Philippines

During the Japanese occupation of the Phillipines, communist rebels called the Hukbalahaps played a large role in fighting off the occupiers. When the conflict ended they expected to have a large say in the newly decolonized country, which was naive of them considering independence was being granted by not just any colonial master, but the United States of America. Instead, the US empowered Manuel Quezon on a deal that partially included him completely marginalized the Hukbalahap. Well communist insurgency didn’t stop there, it came back in the 68 (on Mao’s 75th Birthday) and spread until the 72 when Fernando Marcos (at America’s encouragement) put the country under martial law for fourteen years. There have been various attempts at reconciliation in the successive administrations but nothing concrete.

Marcos’ son Bongbong (no, seriously) is in power now. So it is some irony that his government is finally meeting with the Communists to sit down in Norway and try to negotiate a peaceful end to the conflict. If successful, this would end one of the longest insurgencies in the world (I believe the Naxalites in India are longer, but probably not much else), one that has cost over 150,000 lives.

communist rebels called the Hukbalahaps played a large role in fighting off the occupiers.

And their liberators. Not suprisingly, the US preferred to empower factions which didn't shoot at them.

Perhaps, but as a half-Pinoy, I'm under the impression that American authority in Southeast Asia rested more with Gen. McArthur than with the elected government of the US.

Given your ancestry, you might be able to help answer a question that’s been at the back of my mind for awhile. All the Filipinos and half-Filipinos I know were and remain very pro-Marcos (the dictator, not the current president, though they like him too). Assuming you’re Filipino-American, do you have any sense as to how widespread that attitude is among Filipino immigrants? Was there some sort of selection effect, such that only the more pro-Marcos folks came to this country, or is my small sample size just not very representative?

I can't say, unfortunately; I would assume mildly anti-Marcos (my dad came over during the Marcos admin, the Marcos regime forced his dad to give up his guns, my dad was also Duterte-critical) in general.

ETA: The thing is, though, as much as that may have existed, it was probably outweighed by the opportunity afforded by immigrating to America in terms of motivation.

Thanks for the reply. I’ve found my own personal experience a bit interesting, since if anything, I’d have expected the more pro-Marcos people to stay and the more anti-Marcos to emigrate. You’re probably right that the economic prospects of immigrating to the States likely outweighed everything else.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats