6 ms·

A bit sentimental, but on holidays we can accept that. The bigger problem with this historical account is that it is incomplete. We Americans like to pretend th

A bit sentimental, but on holidays we can accept that. The bigger problem with this historical account is that it is incomplete. We Americans like to pretend that this story begins with WWII, when the evil Empire of Japan invaded those bucolic isles of the Philippines, whose brave residents were inspired by MacArthur to rise up against colonialism. In reality, this history began in 1898. Americans pretended to ally with the Filipinos against the Spanish, when in reality they only wanted to replace the Spanish as colonial overlords. In the ensuing conflicts and decades of exploitation, hundreds of thousands died. There was no reason for any of this. America at the turn of the century had no interests in the western Pacific Ocean. American intelligentsia agreed with Mark Twain that the barbarity shamed all of us. Sure, some American sugar companies made some money, and the particular Filipinos favored by American imperialists made some money. I feel an awful precedent was set. Previously our worst barbarities had been limited to the South and the Frontier. At a stroke, they were unleashed on the World. (Seen any news stories about Libya recently?) The event described in TFA seems a small consolation.

magicsmoke 6y ago
The interesting thing is that despite what America did to these Filipino soldiers, they still chose to be American and sacrificed the majority of their life to do so. American immigration really is the ultimate test of loyalty. Makes you wonder how many natural-born Americans would still choose to be American if they had to go through the immigration experience first. Now that's an idea. People aren't born American citizens but as probationary citizens, and they only become full citizens after fulfilling a series of trials. Imagine what kind of society would emerge from the other end.
- plasticchris 6y ago
  This is part of the premise for starship troopers (heinlein)
  - logical_proof 6y ago
    I always reflect on this right here when the subject comes up. I first read Starship Troopers as a high schooler in 1999. It impacted me greatly and I took what I wanted to from the book thinking it made me wiser. Upon reflection now 20 years later I think the book is a strong warning against incentivizing civic duty. A strong sense of civic duty and a respect for law must be value enough without reward for a democracy to remain healthy. I am open to the notion that 20 years from now I will think that 2020 me was equally foolish to 1999 me.
    - jessaustin 6y ago
      It has been some decades now, but that warning also escaped me on first reading. I certainly appreciated the film adaptation, which was a bit less subtle...
      - logical_proof 6y ago
        “I’m doing my part” - yeah that movie nailed it in a way that I think was subtle the other direction.
      - mudita 6y ago
        The film has very little to do with the novel, actually. Verhoeven, the director, hated the book: “I stopped after two chapters because it was so boring … It is really quite a bad book. I asked Ed Neumeier to tell me the story because I just couldn't read the thing. It's a very right-wing book.” The film is basically intended as parody of fashism, while the book is much more positive about the military and an exploration of an alternative society, where everyone has to do voluntary military service before having the right to vote and hold office (later Heinlein claimed that 95% of the Federal service is civil service, but the book itself seems to imply it’s mostly military). Personally I find the book much more interesting than the film. While the film is a parody its message is actually not that complex and in my memory seems to me to boil down to “Fashism is bad, mkay”. In contrast to this, the book is partly deeply problematic, but contains much more original though and interesting world-building with a political system, which is somewhat orthogonal to the established political dimensions of thinking. Which leads to criticism, when people like Verhoeven lazily project it down to the dimensions, they are familiar with. It’s a bit like a weirdtopia instead of an utopia or dystopia: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cWjK3SbRcLkb3gN69/building-weirdtopia https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cWjK3SbRcLkb3gN69/building-w... Personally in my mind I group this book somewhat together with non-fiction book “Shake Hands with the Devil “ by Lieutenant-General Roméo Dallaire. As a German the thought that you could have pride in being part of a military felt foreign and distant, for example routinely thanking soldiers for their service is still unthinkable for me and these two books in very different ways made me have more empathy with a perspective where being a soldier for a democratic society is something you can be proud of. By the way, somewhat fittingly for the original blog post, the main character in the book is implied to be of Filipino descent (but played by a white in the film).
- filleduchaos 6y ago
  > American immigration really is the ultimate test of loyalty. Frankly, more and more people are starting to wake up to the fact that it's a bullshit test. Partly because immigration really doesn't have to be all that, and partly because of the global...decline of the United States' image since the turn of the century. When I was a kid moving to the US was the goal, now only a handful of people I know have it at the top of their relocation list (and some have lost interest in even visiting). Canada and the EU are much more popular destinations for people looking to move to a western country.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    Canada is great. It’s virtually indistinguishable from America for the typical person. I don’t know where you’re from, but as a Bangladeshi immigrant to the US, but I wouldn’t emigrate to the EU. 76% of Americans say that a naturalized citizen is a “real American” and just 13% disagree: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-06/the-inclusiveness-of-nationalities-ipsos-global-advisor.pdf https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/.... In France it’s 55-28. In Italy it’s 41-36. There is no place in the world more welcoming to immigrants than America. Look at what’s happening in the EU. America has been dealing with huge levels of illegal immigration for decades and for the most part we’re still very positive on legal immigration. Europe accepted some refugees from the Middle East like five minutes ago and already right-wing nationalist parties are winning elections left and right.
    - throwaway0891 6y ago
      If you have a look at "legal immigrant that lived here their entire lives is a real <demonym>" the US goes say down in support. It's clear they see it as a purely legal status, not necessarily as acceptance in a society. That survey probably conflates ethnicity and nationality, as many countries use the same word for both. Like Hungary for example. PS: There's no way 50% of Brits think gaining citizenship doesn't make you British, unless they don't speak English. That's what the word means!
      - pjc50 6y ago
- vore 6y ago
  That's literally fascism. Creating a society of citizens around who passes an arbitrary test of "are you really American" is as clear-cut of a definition of fascism as you can get.
  - kergonath 6y ago
    Yeah, the whole thing sounds dangerous and deeply disturbing. Surely, we need less nationalism and more understanding, not the other way around. Blind loyalty tests are just a way of controlling people and apply peer pressure. It is a perfect description of an abusive relationship, as well as the standard totalitarian play book. Try: - ”you aren't born my son but as probationary son, and you only become my real son after fulfilling a series of trials (that I decided arbitrarily to satisfy my arbitrary sense of how you should be)”. - “you are my probationary spouse, and you only become my real spouse after fulfilling a series of trials.”
- marcus_holmes 6y ago
  adding racial purity to the test for citizenship in 5...4....3..
missedthecue 6y ago
The story began in 1898? Are you certain about that?
- jessaustin 6y ago
  I'm not aware of atrocities we committed in Philippines before that time?
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  The US went to war against Spain in 1898 and took the Philippine away from Spain. The US promised the Filipinos independence and then reneged on it and fought brutal war against the Filipinos for 14 years.
  - 082349872349872 6y ago
    The occupation both gave the german language a word: "Amokläufer", and caused the US army to switch from .38 to .45 caliber sidearms.
    - realityking 6y ago
      Do you have a source on the relation of “Amokläufer” to the Spanish-American war? All the sources I can find claim it originates from Malay/Indonesian culture.
      - 082349872349872 6y ago
        You're right, now that I look into it there doesn't seem to be anything more than circumstantial happenstance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine–American_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine–American_War https://www.dwds.de/wb/Amok https://www.dwds.de/wb/Amok "amok ‘rasend, wütend, verzweifelt (im Kampf)’, im 19. Jh. vor allem in Lexika bezeugt, im 20. Jh. auch häufiger in literarischen Werken. Ein Frühbeleg findet sich (um 1660) in einer Reisebeschreibung („Amoc welches so viel ist als courage, oder schlag todt“). Amoklauf m. Amokläufer m. (Anfang 20. Jh.)." vgl die Wortverlaufskurve ab 1600. Checking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1800–1899 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1800–1899 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1900–1944 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1900–1944 reveals the Semantan War, the Mat Sellah Rebellion, the South Sulawesi expedition, the 1906 and 1908 Dutch Interventions in Bali, and various too-small-for-wikipedia Dutch-Indonesian actions as possible other popularisers in the 1890-1910 period.

magicsmoke 6y ago

The interesting thing is that despite what America did to these Filipino soldiers, they still chose to be American and sacrificed the majority of their life to do so. American immigration really is the ultimate test of loyalty. Makes you wonder how many natural-born Americans would still choose to be American if they had to go through the immigration experience first. Now that's an idea. People aren't born American citizens but as probationary citizens, and they only become full citizens after fulfilling a series of trials. Imagine what kind of society would emerge from the other end.

plasticchris 6y ago
This is part of the premise for starship troopers (heinlein)
- logical_proof 6y ago
  I always reflect on this right here when the subject comes up. I first read Starship Troopers as a high schooler in 1999. It impacted me greatly and I took what I wanted to from the book thinking it made me wiser. Upon reflection now 20 years later I think the book is a strong warning against incentivizing civic duty. A strong sense of civic duty and a respect for law must be value enough without reward for a democracy to remain healthy. I am open to the notion that 20 years from now I will think that 2020 me was equally foolish to 1999 me.
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    It has been some decades now, but that warning also escaped me on first reading. I certainly appreciated the film adaptation, which was a bit less subtle...
    - logical_proof 6y ago
      “I’m doing my part” - yeah that movie nailed it in a way that I think was subtle the other direction.
    - mudita 6y ago
      The film has very little to do with the novel, actually. Verhoeven, the director, hated the book: “I stopped after two chapters because it was so boring … It is really quite a bad book. I asked Ed Neumeier to tell me the story because I just couldn't read the thing. It's a very right-wing book.” The film is basically intended as parody of fashism, while the book is much more positive about the military and an exploration of an alternative society, where everyone has to do voluntary military service before having the right to vote and hold office (later Heinlein claimed that 95% of the Federal service is civil service, but the book itself seems to imply it’s mostly military). Personally I find the book much more interesting than the film. While the film is a parody its message is actually not that complex and in my memory seems to me to boil down to “Fashism is bad, mkay”. In contrast to this, the book is partly deeply problematic, but contains much more original though and interesting world-building with a political system, which is somewhat orthogonal to the established political dimensions of thinking. Which leads to criticism, when people like Verhoeven lazily project it down to the dimensions, they are familiar with. It’s a bit like a weirdtopia instead of an utopia or dystopia: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cWjK3SbRcLkb3gN69/building-weirdtopia https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cWjK3SbRcLkb3gN69/building-w... Personally in my mind I group this book somewhat together with non-fiction book “Shake Hands with the Devil “ by Lieutenant-General Roméo Dallaire. As a German the thought that you could have pride in being part of a military felt foreign and distant, for example routinely thanking soldiers for their service is still unthinkable for me and these two books in very different ways made me have more empathy with a perspective where being a soldier for a democratic society is something you can be proud of. By the way, somewhat fittingly for the original blog post, the main character in the book is implied to be of Filipino descent (but played by a white in the film).
filleduchaos 6y ago
> American immigration really is the ultimate test of loyalty. Frankly, more and more people are starting to wake up to the fact that it's a bullshit test. Partly because immigration really doesn't have to be all that, and partly because of the global...decline of the United States' image since the turn of the century. When I was a kid moving to the US was the goal, now only a handful of people I know have it at the top of their relocation list (and some have lost interest in even visiting). Canada and the EU are much more popular destinations for people looking to move to a western country.
- rayiner 6y ago
  Canada is great. It’s virtually indistinguishable from America for the typical person. I don’t know where you’re from, but as a Bangladeshi immigrant to the US, but I wouldn’t emigrate to the EU. 76% of Americans say that a naturalized citizen is a “real American” and just 13% disagree: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-06/the-inclusiveness-of-nationalities-ipsos-global-advisor.pdf https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/.... In France it’s 55-28. In Italy it’s 41-36. There is no place in the world more welcoming to immigrants than America. Look at what’s happening in the EU. America has been dealing with huge levels of illegal immigration for decades and for the most part we’re still very positive on legal immigration. Europe accepted some refugees from the Middle East like five minutes ago and already right-wing nationalist parties are winning elections left and right.
  - throwaway0891 6y ago
    If you have a look at "legal immigrant that lived here their entire lives is a real <demonym>" the US goes say down in support. It's clear they see it as a purely legal status, not necessarily as acceptance in a society. That survey probably conflates ethnicity and nationality, as many countries use the same word for both. Like Hungary for example. PS: There's no way 50% of Brits think gaining citizenship doesn't make you British, unless they don't speak English. That's what the word means!
    - pjc50 6y ago
vore 6y ago
That's literally fascism. Creating a society of citizens around who passes an arbitrary test of "are you really American" is as clear-cut of a definition of fascism as you can get.
- kergonath 6y ago
  Yeah, the whole thing sounds dangerous and deeply disturbing. Surely, we need less nationalism and more understanding, not the other way around. Blind loyalty tests are just a way of controlling people and apply peer pressure. It is a perfect description of an abusive relationship, as well as the standard totalitarian play book. Try: - ”you aren't born my son but as probationary son, and you only become my real son after fulfilling a series of trials (that I decided arbitrarily to satisfy my arbitrary sense of how you should be)”. - “you are my probationary spouse, and you only become my real spouse after fulfilling a series of trials.”
marcus_holmes 6y ago
adding racial purity to the test for citizenship in 5...4....3..

missedthecue 6y ago

The story began in 1898? Are you certain about that?

jessaustin 6y ago
I'm not aware of atrocities we committed in Philippines before that time?
Gibbon1 6y ago
The US went to war against Spain in 1898 and took the Philippine away from Spain. The US promised the Filipinos independence and then reneged on it and fought brutal war against the Filipinos for 14 years.
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  The occupation both gave the german language a word: "Amokläufer", and caused the US army to switch from .38 to .45 caliber sidearms.
  - realityking 6y ago
    Do you have a source on the relation of “Amokläufer” to the Spanish-American war? All the sources I can find claim it originates from Malay/Indonesian culture.
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      You're right, now that I look into it there doesn't seem to be anything more than circumstantial happenstance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine–American_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine–American_War https://www.dwds.de/wb/Amok https://www.dwds.de/wb/Amok "amok ‘rasend, wütend, verzweifelt (im Kampf)’, im 19. Jh. vor allem in Lexika bezeugt, im 20. Jh. auch häufiger in literarischen Werken. Ein Frühbeleg findet sich (um 1660) in einer Reisebeschreibung („Amoc welches so viel ist als courage, oder schlag todt“). Amoklauf m. Amokläufer m. (Anfang 20. Jh.)." vgl die Wortverlaufskurve ab 1600. Checking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1800–1899 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1800–1899 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1900–1944 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1900–1944 reveals the Semantan War, the Mat Sellah Rebellion, the South Sulawesi expedition, the 1906 and 1908 Dutch Interventions in Bali, and various too-small-for-wikipedia Dutch-Indonesian actions as possible other popularisers in the 1890-1910 period.