Login/Sign up

World Association of International Studies

PAX, LUX ET VERITAS SINCE 1965
Post on "Enslaving" the Philippines
Created by John Eipper on 07/08/13 6:20 AM

Previous posts in this discussion:

Post

on "Enslaving" the Philippines (Bienvenido Macario, USA, 07/08/13 6:20 am)

Randy Black wrote on 7 July:

"If Bienvenido Macario is making the case, as John Eipper suggests in his reply to Bienvenido in his 6 July comments, that the United States enslaved the Filipinos by granting them independence, would not the same reasoning be true for the Soviet Union and all of its 'abandoned' former territories?

"If the Filipinos are enslaved as the result of the USA's granting independence, why is not the same concept true of the Baltic States, the Caucasus, Ukraine and the rest of the former Soviet territories/satellite states?"

I really appreciate Randy Black's questions, because it gives me the opportunity to clarify the issues. First, it is the oligarch-traitors who are enslaving the majority of the Filipinos. The US allowed this by granting the Philippines independence and making greedy oligarchs immune from federal prosecution while at the same time providing US taxpayer funds to be looted via the World Bank. Is this not obvious?

Second, there are no similarities between the Philippines being granted independence by the US and the USSR's conquered territories, which were actually FDR's gift to Uncle Joe Stalin. I don't think FDR ever knew what kind of a monster Stalin really was. This unfamiliarity with foreign relations will always plague a Democrat in the White House. Look what's happening to Egypt, the Iraqi oil and unemployment in the US. Instead of awarding the contract to a UK or US firm or GSE that will hire US and UK veterans, the US gave it [the oil contracts?--JE] to China. If US veterans are discriminated against by their government to cater to China, what more with Filipinos?

Randy Black should compare the status or plight of Filipinos with the different Native American tribes. Or with Puerto Rico and Guam, which were bought from Spain in 1898 for $20 million, along with the Philippines, just like Florida was bought from Spain in 1819 for $5 million. Also, there is the case of Alaska. There were indigenous people in Florida, as well as Hispanics.

We should compare the Philippines with Puerto Rico and Guam, the other islands the US bought but did not abandon. The climate on Guam is the same as the Philippines. Guam is only 2,567 km or 1,595 miles from Manila.

"The US ultimately paid Spain 20 million dollars for possession (ownership, property, not colony) of the Philippines. The islands of Puerto Rico and Guam were also placed under American control, and Spain relinquished its claim to Cuba. The treaty was signed on December 10, 1898."

Link: http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/1898/treaty.html

Puerto Rico and Guam also sought independence, but were these territories abandoned to their fates or granted independence? No!

Let's say that even if there was no anomaly in granting the Philippines independence when it needed US administration the most, why did Washington agree to hand it over to traitors and collaborators?

This is discrimination pure and simple. I don't understand why JE won't publish my accusation that the US government, in fact, has been discriminating against us Tagalogs, Bicols, etc., and non-oligarchic families and favoring oligarch-traitors since 1946. With Native American status, the Department of Interior could better care for the Philippines' environment and natural resources. What is wrong with that?

If this is not discrimination, I don't know what is. I've sought Native American status, freely associated state and withdrawal of US recognition of the so-called 1946 republic founded on lies, treason and dishonor. But no action is being taken or even a reply.

Is it alright then to seek help elsewhere?

JE comments:  The Philippines presently has 94,000,000 inhabitants, compared to less than 4 million for Puerto Rico and under 200,000 for Guam.  The proportions were more or less similar in 1898 and 1946.  One can imagine the world outcry if the US continued to administer the Philippines as a colony, "free associated state," or other.  Note that the UK relinquished control of a comparable colony, India, during the same immediate postwar period.

Bienvenido Macario's position is probably held by very few, but how exactly does he suggest the US go about withdrawing its recognition of Philippine independence?


SHARE:
Rate this post
Informational value 
Insight 
Fairness 
Reader Ratings (1)
100%
Informational value100%
Insight100%
Fairness100%

Visits: 47

Comments/Replies

Please login/register to reply or comment: Login/Sign up

Trending Now



All Forums with Published Content (41958 posts)

- Unassigned

Culture & Language

American Indians Art Awards Bestiary of Insults Books Conspiracy Theories Culture Ethics Film Food Futurology Gender Issues Humor Intellectuals Jews Language Literature Media Coverage Movies Music Newspapers Numismatics Philosophy Plagiarism Prisons Racial Issues Sports Tattoos Western Civilization World Communications

Economics

Capitalism Economics International Finance World Bank World Economy

Education

Education Hoover Institution Journal Publications Libraries Universities World Bibliography Series

History

Biographies Conspiracies Crime Decline of West German Holocaust Historical Figures History Holocausts Individuals Japanese Holocaust Leaders Learning Biographies Learning History Russian Holocaust Turkish Holocaust

Nations

Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Argentina Asia Australia Austria Bangladesh Belgium Belize Bolivia Brazil Canada Central America Chechnya Chile China Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark East Europe East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador England Estonia Ethiopia Europe European Union Finland France French Guiana Germany Greece Guatemala Haiti Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran (Persia) Iraq Ireland Israel/Palestine Italy Japan Jordan Kenya Korea Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latin America Liberia Libya Mali Mexico Middle East Mongolia Morocco Namibia Nations Compared Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North America Norway Pacific Islands Pakistan Palestine Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Polombia Portugal Romania Saudi Arabia Scandinavia Scotland Serbia Singapore Slovakia South Africa South America Southeast Asia Spain Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Thailand The Pacific Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan UK (United Kingdom) Ukraine USA (America) USSR/Russia Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam West Europe Yemen Yugoslavia Zaire

Politics

Balkanization Communism Constitutions Democracy Dictators Diplomacy Floism Global Issues Hegemony Homeland Security Human Rights Immigration International Events Law Nationalism NATO Organizations Peace Politics Terrorism United Nations US Elections 2008 US Elections 2012 US Elections 2016 Violence War War Crimes Within the US

Religion

Christianity Hinduism Islam Judaism Liberation Theology Religion

Science & Technology

Alcohol Anthropology Automotives Biological Weapons Design and Architecture Drugs Energy Environment Internet Landmines Mathematics Medicine Natural Disasters Psychology Recycling Research Science and Humanities Sexuality Space Technology World Wide Web (Internet)

Travel

Geography Maps Tourism Transportation

WAIS

1-TRIBUTES TO PROFESSOR HILTON 2001 Conference on Globalizations Academic WAR Forums Ask WAIS Experts Benefactors Chairman General News Member Information Member Nomination PAIS Research News Ronald Hilton Quotes Seasonal Messages Tributes to Prof. Hilton Varia Various Topics WAIS WAIS 2006 Conference WAIS Board Members WAIS History WAIS Interviews WAIS NEWS waisworld.org launch WAR Forums on Media & Research Who's Who