Anda di halaman 1dari 10

The American Colonization in

the Philippines
1. A PHOTO ESSAY BY LILIE MANNA ANDMADISON MAY
2. . The Philippines were a Spanish colony for nearly three hundred and thirty years,
and the locals had been crying for independence for decades. Finally independence
was granted to the colony in 1898.Expecting support from other countries such as the
United States, thePhilippines were celebrating their newly found independence.
Ruled By Spain
3. . This is a political cartoonthat was published in thus. in 1898. The cartoonshows
President McKinleytaking the savage (ThePhilippines) and debatinghow to handle
the country.There was nothing left forus to do but to take them alland to educate
the Filipinos,and uplift, and civilize, andChristianize them, saidPresident McKinley.
TheU.S. took the Philippines astheir personal responsibility.What to do
withPhilippines?
4. Treaty of Paris
5. Soon after the Treaty of Paris was signed two battles broke outbetween the
Americans and the Filipinos, the first was betweenthe Moros (or Muslims) in
Mindanao and lasted until 1912. TheAmericans set up a government with no regard
to the Morosculture and religion which caused a war to break out.War Breaks
Out!
6. Filipino leader Emilio Aguinaldo began guerrilla war tactics againstthe American,
hiding in bamboo thickets and bushes; both armiescommenced war through
guerrilla tactics. By the end of 1902 seventhousand Americans had been killed and
more than two hundredthousand Filipinos had died.War Tactics
7. Under Americas rule theFilipinos were deniedemployment and whiteinhabitants
had more rights.The Filipinos were upset withAmerica because they thoughtAmerica
was going to supportthem in their independence;however America did not
trustthem. These Anti-Filipinofeelings resulted in raids andrevolts and
overallunhappiness. This was anewspaper published on March23rd, 1899, and it was
notuncommon to see titles like thisone.Anti-Filipino Attitudes
8. Though there were many things that were seen as negative for theFilipinos,
America also tried to help them as best they could. Theyadapted college or higher
level education in the colony and taught thembetter ways to survive.America Begins
toBenefit
9. During Americas era of control, Filipinization was allowed. Filipinizationwas a
compromise that allowed colonial authorities some government action.Elite citizens
in the colony were elected as a member of the PhilippineCommission, which was
allowed to draft acts and have a potential say in thegovernment. Taken in 1914, this
photo shows the Philippine Commission, andmany mayors of different
villages.Filipinization
10. At the Manila Grand Opera House, the Filipinos established theirwant for
independence. President Theodore Roosevelt addressedthe Philippine Assembly and
addressed their fellow delegates andproclamation, and the path to independence
had started.Road to Independence
11. On July 4th, 1946, the UnitedStates Government restoredfull independence in
thePhilippines. After battlingdifferent imperial powers foryears, the Filipinos
finallyachieves their dreams. Theywere ahead of other countriestrying to gain their
freedomfrom the beginning, and that iswhy they were successful.Freedom At Last!

12. Proclamation of Philippine Independence. 1898. National Liberation, Painting.
Accessed June12, 2013. http://www.padidioni.wordpress.com/.What Will He Do?.
1898. The Eyes of the World are upon him- William McKinley. Cartoon.Accessed on
June 10, 2013. http://www.authorama.com/true-version-of-the-philippine-
revolution-1.htmlFrances Johnston John Hay Signs the Treat of Paris. April, 11 1899.
Photograph. Accessed onJune 11, 2013.
http://archive.org/details/harperspictorial00milerichA Long Buried War with the
Moros 1913. Painting. Accessed on June 10,
2013.http://endeavors.unc.edu/win2006/feature_04.phpArnaldo Dumindin.
Philippine-America n War. 1899. Americans engaging Filipinos inBamboo thicket.
Photograph. Accessed on June 10,
2013.http://philippineamericanwar.webs.com/guerillawarfare1899.htmAnti-Filipino
Feelings Flare Up in Raids. 1898. Newspaper. Accessed on June 10,
2013.http://jgasampop.blogspot.com/2009/12/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-
none.htmlPictography
13. American Education in the Philippines. 1901. Photograph. Accessed on June
10,2013. http://www.authorama.com/true-version-of-the-philippine-revolution-
1.htmlFilipinization. 1914. Allowing colonial authorities some government action
whileAmerica had complete control. Photograph. Accessed June 11,
2013.http://www.morolandhistory.com/03.PG-
Americans/4.americans.htmEstablishing the Philippine Assembly. 1902. William
Taft addresses the newassembly. Photograph. Accessed June 11,
2013.http://www.manilagrandopera.com/content/pre-world-war-ii/Filipino
Independence. July 4, 1946. Resetoration and recognition ofindependence.
Photograpg. Accessed June 11,
2013.http://philippineamericanwar.webs.com/aguinaldo19021964.htmPictography
Continued
https://www.slideshare.net/liliemanna/the-american-colonization-in-the-philippines

"MANIFEST DESTINY" - The Rationale for


American Expansion, Military Intervention
and Imperialism
Manifest Destiny - The Intangible of American History

American history was built on a chronological record of significant events, each


event having a cause and subsequent effect on another event. Historical events are
presented in history as being tangible, being tied to a date, or an exact happening.
Manifest Destiny on the other hand, is a phenomenon. It can not be tied to a date,
event or even a specific period of time. Manifest Destiny existed and still exists as the
philosophy that embraces American history as a whole. Manifest Destiny is an
intangible ideology that created American history. In its simplest form, Manifest
Destiny can be defined as, "A Movement." More specifically, it would be the
systematic body of concepts and beliefs that powered American life and American
culture.
Coining the Phrase

In 1845, a democratic leader and influential editor by the name of John L.


O'Sullivangave the movement its name. In an attempt to explain America's thirst for
expansion, and to present a defense for America's claim to new territories he wrote:

".... the right of our manifest destiny to over spread and to possess the whole of the
continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great
experiment of liberty and federative development of self government entrusted to
us. It is right such as that of the tree to the space of air and the earth suitable for the
full expansion of its principle and destiny of growth." (Brinkley 352)

Manifest Destiny became the rallying cry throughout America. The notion of
Manifest Destiny was publicized in the papers and was advertise and argued by
politicians throughout the nation. The idea of Manifest Destiny Doctrine became the
torch that lit the way for American expansion.

A Movement as Old as America Itself

Although the movement was named in 1845, the philosophy behind Manifest Destiny
always existed throughout American History. For example, in 1818 Andrew Jackson,
while taking a broad interpretation of vague instructions from President Monroe,
led military forces into the Floridas during the Florida crisis. In a systematic and
ruthless way, he punished the Seminal Indians for taking up arms with the Spanish,
destroyed Spanish forces, and captured several cities and forts. (Demkin, Chapter
8). Americans, who had moral reservations about the rough tactics of Jackson,
soothed their consciences with a familiar, but not yet named philosophy. Their
reasoning, the Floridas were part of American territory; therefore, destiny intended
that America should have them.

The reason why Americans where in Florida in the first place, is yet another example
of Manifest Destiny. The people of the Deep South, wanting more fertile land,
exercise what they considered to be their right. The planter class, without any
political approval or permission, just took over and started settling and planting the
Florida territories. This move was an example of the arrogance that the Americans
had towards expansion. Americans believed that they had a right to any land they
wanted.

First used in 1845, the term Manifest Destiny conveyed the idea that the rightful
destiny of the US included imperialistic expansion. This idea certainly contributed to
several wars. For example, in 1846 the United States declared war on Mexico and
proceeded to win much of what is now the Southwestern United States. The war with
Mexico was just one out of a series of aggressive acts that can be tied to America's
Manifest Destiny.

Manifest Destiny emerged naturally and inevitability out of fundamental want and
need to explore and conquer new lands and establish new borders. With this growth
came moral, cultural, social ideological and economical differences between people,
states and countries. Were these differences not the reasons why America fought for
their independence in the Revolutionary War? Were these differences not the
primary cause for the American Civil War?

The Religious Influence

To some, the Manifest Destiny Doctrine was based on the idea that America had a
divine providence. It had a future that was destined by God to expand its borders,
with no limit to area or country. All the traveling and expansion were part of the
spirit of Manifest Destiny, a belief that it was God's will that Americans spread over
the entire continent, and to control and populate the country as they see fit.

Many expansionists conceived God as having the power to sustain and guide human
destiny. "It was white man's burden to conquer and Christianize the land" (Demkin,
Chapter 8). For example, the idea that the Puritan notion of establishing a "city on
a hill"was eventually secularized into Manifest Destiny--a sort of materialistic,
religious, Utopian destiny.

A Sense of A Mission

While some were driven by what they considered God's will, others saw Manifest
Destiny as the historical inevitability of American domination of North America
from sea to sea. It was an altruistic way to extend American liberty to new realms.
North West expansion started with the American fur trappers. In their search for
new reserves of beaver, they blazed new trials and passages through the mountains.

In doing so, they traversed new and fertile valleys of the Far West.
Their exaggeratedstories and accounts of their travels publicized the newly found
region of the West and aroused interest in people contemplating agricultural
possibilities. It also gave the land an air of romance and adventure.

By the 1840's, expansion was at it highest. The Santa Fe Trail went from
Independence to the Old Spanish Trail, which went into Los Angeles. The Oxbow
Route headed from Missouri to California. Others headed out on the Oregon Trail to
the Pacific Northwest. In 1845, approximately 5,000 people traveled the Oregon
Trail to Oregon's Willamette Valley. The Oregon Trail was the longest of the pioneer
trail that went West. It traversed more than 2,000 miles' trough prairie, desert, and
rugged mountain land from Independence, Missouri to the Northwest. In its short
life, 300,000 settlers traveled this trail, marking their path by the landmarks first
identified by Lewis and Clark.

Thirty thousand graves mark the trial of these pioneers. In the wake of continual
death and hardship the allure of Manifest Destiny continued to drive
expansionist interests. Beginning with the first wagon in 1831, to the formation of the
territorial government in 1848, Manifest Destiny was responsible for making America
grow.

Manifest Destiny was the reason for the revived interest in territorial
expansion. With a sense of mission, people were tempted by the boundless tracts and
sparsely settled land lying just beyond the borders of their country. There was also
the growing desire to develop trade with the Far East. Going West would eventually
open new trade routes. Last but not least, there was a renewed fear that the security
of the United States might be impaired by foreign intervention in areas along its
borders. The easiest way to conquer those fears was to conquer land beyond its
borders and expand American territories.

http://www.thefilipinomind.com/2005/11/manifest-destiny-philosophy-that_14.html

A Collaborative Philippine
Leadership
Philippines Table of Contents

The most important step in establishing a new political system was the successful
coaptation of the Filipino elite--called the "policy of attraction." Wealthy and
conservative ilustrados, the self-described "oligarchy of intelligence," had been
from the outset reluctant revolutionaries, suspicious of the Katipunan and willing
to negotiate with either Spain or the United States. Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, a
descendant of Spanish nobility, and Benito Legarda, a rich landowner and
capitalist, had quit Aguinaldo's government in 1898 as a result of disagreements
with Mabini. Subsequently, they worked closely with the Schurman and Taft
commissions, advocating acceptance of United States rule.

In December 1900, de Tavera and Legarda established the Federalista Party,


advocating statehood for the islands. In the following year they were appointed
the first Filipino members of the Philippine Commission of the legislature. In such
an advantageous position, they were able to bring influence to bear to achieve
the appointment of Federalistas to provincial governorships, the Supreme Court,
and top positions in the civil service. Although the party boasted a membership of
200,000 by May 1901, its proposal to make the islands a state of the United States
had limited appeal, both in the islands and in the United States, and the party
was widely regarded as being opportunistic. In 1905 the party revised its program
over the objections of its leaders, calling for "ultimate independence" and
changing its name to the National Progressive Party (Partido Nacional
Progresista).

The Nacionalista Party, established in 1907, dominated the Philippine political


process until after World War II. It was led by a new generation of politicians,
although they were not ilustradosand were by no means radical. One of the
leaders, Manuel Quezon, came from a family of moderate wealth. An officer in
Aguinaldo's army, he studied law, passed his bar examination in 1903, and
entered provincial politics, becoming governor of Tayabas in 1906 before being
elected to the Philippine Assembly the following year. His success at an early age
was attributable to consummate political skills and the support of influential
Americans. His Nacionalista Party associate and sometime rival was Sergio
Osmea, the college-educated son of a shopkeeper, who had worked as a
journalist. The former journalist's thoroughness and command of detail made him
a perfect complement to Quezon. Like Quezon, Osmea had served as a
provincial governor (in his home province of Cebu) before being elected in 1907 to
the assembly and, at age twenty-nine, selected as its first speaker.

Although the Nacionalista Party's platform at its founding called for "immediate
independence," American observers believed that Osmea and Quezon used this
appeal only to get votes. In fact, their policy toward the Americans was highly
accommodating. In 1907 an understanding was reached with an American official
that the two leaders would block any attempt by the Philippine Assembly to
demand independence. Osmea and Quezon, who were the dominant political
figures in the islands up to World War II, were genuinely committed to
independence. The failure of Aguinaldo's revolutionary movement, however, had
taught them the pragmatism of adopting a conciliatory policy.

The appearance of the Nacionalista Party in 1907 marked the emergence of the
party system, although the party was without an effective rival from 1916 for most
of the period until the emergence of the Liberal Party in 1946. Much of the
system's success (or, rather, the success of the Nacionalistas) depended on the
linkage of modern political institutions with traditional social structures and
practices. Most significantly, it involved the integration of local-level elite groups
into the new political system. Philippine parties have been described by political
scientist Carl Land as organized "upward" rather than "downward." That is,
national followings were put together by party leaders who worked in conjunction
with local elite groups--in many cases the descendants of the principala of
Spanish times--who controlled constituencies tied to them in patron-client
relationships. The issue of independence, and the conditions and timing under
which it would be granted, generated considerable passion in the national
political arena. According to Land, however, the decisive factors in terms of
popular support were more often local and particularistic issues rather than
national or ideological concerns. Filipino political associations depended on
intricate networks of personalistic ties, directed upward to Manila and the
national legislature.

The linchpins of the system created under United States tutelage were the village-
and province-level notables--often labeled bosses or caciques by colonial
administrators--who garnered support by exchanging specific favors for votes.
Reciprocal relations between inferior and superior (most often tenants or
sharecroppers with large landholders) usually involved the concept of utang na
loob (repayment of debts) or kinship ties, and they formed the basis of support for
village-level factions led by the notables. These factions decided political party
allegiance. The extension of voting rights to all literate males in 1916, the growth of
literacy, and the granting of women's suffrage in 1938 increased the electorate
considerably. The elite, however, was largely successful in monopolizing the
support of the newly enfranchised, and a genuinely populist alternative to the
status quo was never really established.

The policy of attraction ensured the success of what colonial administrators called
the political education of the Filipinos. It was, however, also the cause of its
greatest failure. Osmea and Quezon, as the acknowledged representatives, were
not genuinely interested in social reform, and serious problems involving land
ownership, tenancy, and the highly unequal distribution of wealth were largely
ignored. The growing power of the Nacionalista Party, particularly in the period
after 1916 when it gained almost complete control of a bicameral Filipino
legislature, barred the effective inclusion of nonelite interests in the political
system. Not only revolution but also moderate reform of the social and economic
systems were precluded. Discussions of policy alternatives became less salient to
the political process than the dynamics of personalism and the ethic of give and
take.
http://countrystudies.us/philippines/17.htm

"FORMS OF FILIPINO RESISTANCE TO


AMERICAN RULE "
1.Many rebel leaders had the support of peasants who believed that their leaders
possessed supernatural powers. These movements were also a struggle against the local
clite who oppressed the peasants.
2.Salvador Felipe, popularly known As: Apo Ipe organized a movement called Santa
Iglesia or Holy church .
3. Ruperto Rios established his own municipal government in Quezon,. He claimed to be
the son of god and gave his men amulets to make them invulnerable.
4.After the Negros elite sided with Americans , Papa Isio who supported the elite against
the Spanish continued the struggle. His group, the babaylanes or pulahanes, burned
haciendas owned by pro-american elite.
5.In the first two decades of American rule,pulahan movements emerged in Panay,
Cebu, Leyte and Samar (called Dios-dios).
6.Armed disturbances Resistance with Nativistic Features
took place in Mindanao, especially in Surigao and Misamis.

Resistance of the Muslim and other cultural group


1.While American forces were busy fighting in Luzon and the Visayas, American policy
was to neutralize Muslim resistance. American strategist decided that the Muslim should
not be provoked into joining the rebellion at least until their victory 1 in Luzon was
assured. This was asserted that "sovereignty of the US over the archipelago of Jolo and
its dependencies be declared and acknowledge." The right of the Sultan and his datus
would be respected and they would be given monthly salaries.The treaty further
provided that no one would be persecuted for his religious beliefs. Actually, the US had
no intention of acknowledging Muslim authority in Mindanao and Sulu. It unilaterally
abolished the Bates Treaty citing the reason that the sultan was ineffective in controlling
the muslims.
2.Resistance prevailed in many areas in Mindanao and Sulu . In Cotabato
,Maguindanao and Lanao, Muslim leaders continued to resist the Americans.
However,some Lanao Sultans and datus had earlier accepted the American officer of
peace and political position in the local government.
3.The lumad (natives occupying the mountainous areas) like the Mandayas and
Subanons also rose against the American government.
Colonial Politics
Nature/Characteristics of Colonial Politics
1.Political parties emphasized independence as platform to insure political survival.
Parties used its stance as means of getting votes.
2.There were no ideological differences among parties. Alliances were based on family
ties, friendship,regionalism and political necessity.
3.There were turncoatism,coalitions and party slips.
4.Political parties took care of individual and class interest.
5. A discrepancy in the public abd private views of Filipino officials with re

Former Officers to the Revolutionary Arm


Miguel Malvar y Carpio (September 27, 1865 October 13, 1911) was a Filipino general
who served during the Philippine Revolution and subsequently during the Philippine
American War. He assumed command of the Philippine revolutionary forces during the
latter conflict following the capture of Emilio Aguinaldo in 1901. According to some
historians, he could have been listed as one of the presidents of the Philippines but is
currently not recognized as such by the Philippine government.
General Miguel Malvar
Vicente Lukbn y Rilles or Vicente Lucbn Rilles (February 11, 1860November 16, 1916),
was a Filipino officer in Emilio Aguinaldo's staff during the Philippine Revolution and
the politico-military chief of Samar and Leyte during the Philippine-American War. The
Americans credited him as the mastermind of the famous Balangiga massacre, in which
more than forty American troopers were killed.[1] Later investigations by historians,
however, disclosed that Lukban played no actual part in the planning of the attack.
Vicente Lukban
Luciano San Miguel was a Katipunero connected with the Magdiwang faction (led by
Gen. Mariano Alvarez). San Miguel became one of General Aguinaldo's best generals
during the Filipino-American War. In 1902, he established the Bagong Katipunan--a
rebel unit that fought the Americans in Rizal and Bulacan. Among the three generals,
San Miguel was the only active one during that time.
General Luciano San Miguel
They led the resistance forcers in the Rizal-Cavite-Laguna-Batangas Area. They
organized also the Tagalog Republic with Sakay as a President
Macario Sakay, Julian Montalan and Cornelio Felizardo Simen Ola y Arboledalast
general to surrender to American forces during the Philippine-American War. Together
with Lazaro Toledo led the resistance in Bicol.
Simeon Ola
Artemio Ricarte y Garca (October 20, 1866 July 31, 1945) was a Filipino general
during the Philippine Revolution and the PhilippineAmerican War. He is regarded as
the Father of the Philippine Army, though the present Philippine Army grew out of the
forces that fought in opposition to, and defeated the Philippine Revolutionary Army led
by General Ricarte.[1] Ricarte is also notable for never having taken an oath of
allegiance to the United States government, which occupied the Philippines from 1898 to
1946.
Artemio Ricarte
Beginings
1.In the early years of their rule, Americans suppressed the existence of nationalist
political parties, allowing only the Federal Party which favored annexation of the
Philippines.
2.In 1906, the ban was lifted and the Nacionalist Party was established, with its
majoruty of seats (59 out of 80) in the Philippine Assembly which was established in
1907.
3. The Federation reorganized themselves and called their party Partido Nacional
Progresista with "eventual independence" as their platform.
4.In 1914, a small group of nationalistas broke away from the party in protest againts
"very personal and autocratic government" under the Nacionalista.The new party later
merged with the Progresista, resulting in the formation of Partido Democrata which
became the opposition party until 1951.
The Osmea-Quizon Rift
In 1924, Quezon and Osmea reconciled and joined forces in what was denominated the
Partido Nacionalista Consolidado against the threat of an emerging opposition from the
Democrata Party. The reunited Nacionalista Party dominated the political scene until
the second break-up when the members polarized into Pros and Antis in 1934. Quezon
and Osmea again reconciled for the 1935 Presidential Election. In 1935 Quezon and
Osmea won the Philippine's first national presidential election under the banner of the
Nacionalista Party. Quezon obtained nearly 68% of the vote against his two main rivals,
Emilio Aguinaldo and Bishop Gregorio Aglipay.[citation needed]
They were inaugurated on November 15, 1935. Quezon had originally been barred by
the Philippine constitution from seeking re-election. However, in 1940, constitutional
amendments were ratified allowing him to seek re-election for a fresh term ending in
1943. In the 1941 presidential elections, Quezon was re-elected over former Senator Juan
Sumulong with nearly 82% of the vote. Re-elected in 1941, Osmea remained vice
president during the Japanese occupation when the government was in exile. As Vice-
President, Osmea concurrently served as Secretary of Public Instruction from 193540,
and again from 194144.
The outbreak of World War II and the Japanese invasion resulted in periodic and drastic
changes to the government structure. Executive Order 390, December 22, 1941 abolished
the Department of the Interior and established a new line of succession. Executive Order
396, December 24, 1941, further reorganized and grouped the cabinet, with the functions
of Secretary of Justice assigned to the Chief Justice of the Philippines.
https://prezi.com/tploegtgtwga/forms-of-filipino-resistance-to-american-role/